Gas tax vs. mileage tax

[kent]

It looks like CA is entertaining a tax based on miles driven (Oregon concept) rather than a tax per gallon.

What could possibly go wrong? There are privacy concerns, the impact on truckers, etc.

While it sort of "makes sense" to charge a "per mile tax," these idiots haven't bothered to address the shortfall in CA revenues since 1994 ("due to political opposition") - 20 damn years! Mark my words, if this comes to pass there will be annual increases tied to COLA, the number of people on welfare, the annual rainfall, the number of Smelt or some other metric that would allow increases to be AUTOMATIC so no need for a politician to "go on record" supporting a tax increase. You can take that to the bank so to speak.

Before I could even think about supporting something like this, I'd like to know EXACTLY how much revenue the state receives and EXACTLY where CURRENT highway tax revenue is going. My bet is that a significant portion goes anywhere BUT to road maintenance and repair.  Given there's talk about raising federal gas taxes as well, I'd like the same revenue/spending info - I really don't want to hear the equivalent "shovel ready" type of BS again.

As noted in the article:

Meanwhile, Oregon's transportation department announced this month it has signed a contract with a San Jose company, Azuga, that makes GPS tracking devices that plug in below a vehicle's dashboard.

Being somewhat cynical I can't help but wonder if there's might be any "connection" between this company and some politicians.  My guess is "somebody" is going to profit nicely.   

www.mercurynews.com/science/ci_27387446/california-considering-plan-replace-gas-tax-charge-per

[Politically_Incorrect12]

I would think there would be some privacy issues there, and how exactly would they know that all the mileage was driven within the state.  It's not like people don't drive elsewhere on vacation and I would think this would be extremely important on an industry like truck drivers who drive from coast to coast.

[Angel!]

There should be automatic annual increases tied to inflation of construction and maintenance costs. Those costs per lane mile go up every year, so should the revenue paying for those things. Then we wouldn't run into what we have now where gas tax hasn't been increased in my state for 20 years and federal is around 20 years as well. As a result roadway spending is significantly under funded, especially when it comes to bridges.

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 13:59:50 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

I would think there would be some privacy issues there, and how exactly would they know that all the mileage was driven within the state.  It's not like people don't drive elsewhere on vacation and I would think this would be extremely important on an industry like truck drivers who drive from coast to coast.

GPS tracks if you are in state. They could also set it up to track if you are on a public road vs a private road. So if you have a large property you could cruise around and pay no taxes for it.

Just depends on how they set it up. I've heard so many different proposals from very simple to complex.

[Politically_Incorrect12]

Jan 25, 2015 14:05:17 GMT -5 Angel! said:

Jan 25, 2015 13:59:50 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

I would think there would be some privacy issues there, and how exactly would they know that all the mileage was driven within the state.  It's not like people don't drive elsewhere on vacation and I would think this would be extremely important on an industry like truck drivers who drive from coast to coast.

GPS tracks if you are in state. They could also set it up to track if you are on a public road vs a private road. So if you have a large property you could cruise around and pay no taxes for it.

Just depends on how they set it up. I've heard so many different proposals from very simple to complex.

You have no issue with people being tracked like that?

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 14:06:27 GMT -5 Politically_Incorrect12 said:

Jan 25, 2015 14:05:17 GMT -5 Angel! said:

GPS tracks if you are in state. They could also set it up to track if you are on a public road vs a private road. So if you have a large property you could cruise around and pay no taxes for it.

Just depends on how they set it up. I've heard so many different proposals from very simple to complex.

You have no issue with people being tracked like that?

No. Two reasons:
- The proposals I have seen don't actually record location, just use it to record the correct mileage.
- You are naive if you think you can't already be tracked. Between cell phones, onstar and other gadgets, if people want to track you they can. So it is silly to think this is somehow different IMO.

[zibazinski]

Another way to screw the productive and pay for the unproductive.

[sesfw]

There is a very simple way for a mileage tax.

At emissions testing the odometer reading is recorded. This happens each year so there is an official record. Each year at the time of vehicle licensing this mileage fee is added to the tag fee.

Every vehicle registered in the state would be subject to this tax.

[EVT1]

Jan 25, 2015 17:29:17 GMT -5 sesfw said:

There is a very simple way for a mileage tax.

At emissions testing the odometer reading is recorded. This happens each year so there is an official record. Each year at the time of vehicle licensing this mileage fee is added to the tag fee.

Every vehicle registered in the state would be subject to this tax.

I would add vehicle weight into the calculation.

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 16:53:08 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Another way to screw the productive and pay for the unproductive.

I think this is the exact opposite. With this system people pay for exactly what they use. No paying less because you have a low mpg car. No paying more because they live in a really expensive house or have a high income.

I can't think of a fairer system than paying for what you actually use when it comes to driving. It doesn't matter how productive or unproductive, you drive, you pay to maintain the roads.

[zibazinski]

Taxes are already levied to pay for roads. Stop diverting it.

[Deleted]

I like the idea of a "mileage tax", but hate the thought of how it would be collected, short of having every (and I do mean EVERY) vehicle wired up with some sort of tracking device, and getting a monthly or bi-weekly bill.

Imagine the bill at the end of the year? What if the money wasn't available (for whatever reason)...

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 19:20:22 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Taxes are already levied to pay for roads. Stop diverging it.

They haven't raised the taxes in 20 years. This isn't an issue of diverting, there just isn't enough revenue to cover the inflation in construction costs. They have to fund the highway trust fund with other money because the gas tax doesn't bring in enough revenue.

[Deleted]

My husbands truck and trailer put a lot more wear and tear on a road than a fiat would... Same miles traveled.

[zibazinski]

Start trimming those fat budgets. Americans are expected to live within their means while supporting those who don't bother supporting themselves. Why is it taxpayers always have to pay and pay and pay. Enough paying. Stop spending on a lot of nonsense and spend wisely. Stop taxing and start cutting those budgets. Michigan tried to tax for roads. Shot down fast. Enoughs enough

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 20:43:50 GMT -5 zibazinski said:

Start trimming those fat budgets. Americans are expected to live within their means while supporting those who don't bother supporting themselves. Why is it taxpayers always have to pay and pay and pay. Enough paying. Stop spending on a lot of nonsense and spend wisely. Stop taxing and start cutting those budgets. Michigan tried to tax for roads. Shot down fast. Enoughs enough

It may be hard to believe, but that money actually pays for stuff. I suppose we could just close bridges instead of replacing them as they reach the end of their life.

[zibazinski]

I think if tax dollars were managed better people who pay those taxes wouldn't be so adamant about no more taxes. Hard to convince taxpayers to keep finding more spending when the money collected isn't spent wisely.

[zibazinski]

Funding

[tallguy]

Doesn't make a whole lot of real sense to me.  The gas tax should work well enough.  True, smaller cars that get better gas mileage pay less per mile travelled but then they also cause a lot less damage to roads.  If you need to raise the gas tax, raise the gas tax.  It is effectively a user fee in that people who use more and create more damage end up paying more.  Far more fair than other alternatives.

And yes, it does give electric car owners a break, but then they also tend to be smaller and lighter so cause less damage and also don't pollute with carbon monoxide.  Fair enough as a tradeoff.

AND, there are no privacy concerns about tracking. 

[cronewitch]

Governments aren't wise enough to know people find ways around these things and are creative. If you only put tracking in cars licensed in CA people would either disable the tracking or borrow cars from out of state people especially near the borders. They are starting to put tracking in cars here for toll bridges and if you want to use a bridge and don't have one they take a picture of your license plate and mail a bill at a higher price.
The government people need to be more sneaky thinking to make something like this work or make it so cheap it isn't worth cheating to avoid it.
How much money to they want to collect? Assuming 10 cents a mile so about $1,200 a year if you drive 12,000 miles they could do an even billing and adjust at year end. Use tracking devices and check at emission time to see if reasonable so if your tracking shows you drove 8,000 when you car shows 18,000 you would need to explain maybe showing gas was bought several states away a few times a year or something.

[marvholly]

I KNOW odometers are 'supposed' to be non-adjustable but I suspect if a mileage tax was enacted some enterprising person(s) would figure out a way. Makes a GREAT case for possible fraud.

I do believe in user fees. That is why I DO have an Ipass for toll roads in my area. I drive a full size car w/pretty much average mileage/gal BUT do a LOT of city stop & go driving so only get about 2/3 of the estimated mileage.

[Angel!]

Jan 25, 2015 21:07:36 GMT -5 tallguy said:

Doesn't make a whole lot of real sense to me.  The gas tax should work well enough.  True, smaller cars that get better gas mileage pay less per mile travelled but then they also cause a lot less damage to roads.  If you need to raise the gas tax, raise the gas tax.  It is effectively a user fee in that people who use more and create more damage end up paying more.  Far more fair than other alternatives.

And yes, it does give electric car owners a break, but then they also tend to be smaller and lighter so cause less damage and also don't pollute with carbon monoxide.  Fair enough as a tradeoff.

AND, there are no privacy concerns about tracking. 

They could just raise the gas tax. And really should if they do nothing else. There are a lot of reasons they are looking into a mileage type tax. First is the percentage of electric & hybrid cars on the road is just going to increase. My state already instituted an increase registration fee (~$150/yr I think) for electric vehicle to combat this, but I don't see the feds doing the same.  Then you could vary charges based not only on weight, but also number of axles, so those that tear up the road more pay more.  

Also, you could collect based on actual road use.  I am not sure about all jurisdictions, but here we only have state & federal gas taxes. Counties & citiies collect road taxes via property taxes & sales tax.  These type of taxes are exactly what Zib should be upset about.  Those with the biggest house or most spending pay the most regardless of their driving habits.  With this system you could charge people & collect based on if they are on a city road, county road, state highway, or interstate.  Money goes to the group that actually pays for the roadway rather than coming from a variety of tax sources & trickling in by applying for state or federal grants.

Lastly, you could charge based on time of day.  The ideal roadways & intersections are designed to run sufficiently even at the peak hour.  In some places this just isn't possible if an area has excess congestion & limited space.  But in other places we are building 6 lane roadways when they only need to be that size 1-2 hours per day.  Make the people that choose to drive during the peak hours pay extra because it is due to them that the roadways cost more to build & maintain.  Some view this as a way to try to provide financial incentives to change habits, which you may or may not agree with.  This may sound extreme, but is probably preferable to what London did, which is to just charge everyone a fairly high fee for driving within a certain boundary during business hours (around $15/day).