# Mileage Tax: Is it such a bad idea? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [February 21, 2009, 3:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810 "2009-02-21T03:09:57Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 5
**Author:** ![NinetyWt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/cc9497/32.png) [@NinetyWt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinetyWt)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2009, 11:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/81 "2009-02-26T23:36:22Z")
Here’s a [link](http://financecommission.dot.gov/commissionlegislation.htm) to the authorizing legislation. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/82 "2009-02-27T00:25:00Z")
I totally don’t get it. No one has really provided a case that this is even a remotely good idea. ---
**Author:** ![NinetyWt](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/cc9497/32.png) [@NinetyWt](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/NinetyWt)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 4:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/83 "2009-02-27T04:17:01Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I totally don’t get it. No one has really provided a case that this is even a remotely good idea. [Here](http://financecommission.dot.gov/Documents/NSTIF_Commission_Final_Report_Advance%20Copy_Feb09.pdf) is their report. I have not read it, so I don’t have an opinion about the idea yet. ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 5:19am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/84 "2009-02-27T05:19:09Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > I totally don’t get it. No one has really provided a case that this is even a remotely good idea. Their discussion goes like this: The current system is underfunding highway maintenance. It isn’t even close. As a result our infrastructure is turning into a shambles. So how to raise the money in a system that will continue to raise enough money in future years including a future that may have cars running on something other than gas? They want to make a system that will work for the long term. They figure a user fee is the best way and want to make one that actually adequately reflects the value of what is being used. Adding a percentage sales tax adds to much volatility. Increasing the gas tax as a fixed amount is not a good long term solution because- > [@](#): > > Cons > \*Sustainability issues: in short term, fixed-rate structure of motor fuel tax leads to > reduced purchasing power; in long term, shift to high efficiency and alternative fuel > vehicles will reduce motor fuel consumption > \*Strong public opposition to motor fuel tax increases (particularly when oil price > spikes occur) > \*Limited relationship between tax revenues and infrastructure investment, thus does not encourage sound investment practices > \*Comparatively regressive tax > \*Tax only indirectly related to use—that is, closely related to the amount of use (tax > cost per mile) but not to type of facility or time-of-day choices; further, poor proxy for pavement damage costs since there is no weight-based characteristic to the motor fuel tax charge except for poorer fuel efficiency (e.g., for heavy trucks) or for congestion costs > \*Adverse geographic equity considerations, since people in rural areas generally travel more … > > … fuel tax revenues are becoming increasingly inadequate to > meet investment needs. This inadequacy will likely be exacerbated as improved fuel > efficiency and the development of alternative fuel vehicles reduce fuel consumption. > Moreover, the public’s willingness to pay for the required investments through an increase in motor fuel taxes appears to be weak and may be declining. At the same time, the growing need to maintain and adequately fund a national transportation system will heighten the importance of developing a funding approach that will meet future system improvement and maintenance needs. In urban congested areas, it is possible that charging users of the system more directly will not only raise revenues but also influence driver behavior and lead to reductions in both congestion levels and the investment that is needed. The bottom line conclusion of the Commission is that motor fuel taxes are currently the most viable federal funding source for surface transportation investment and will likely remain so or several years. The inability of these taxes, particularly at current rates, to meet future investment needs, however, clearly raises questions about their long-term sustainability. A host of other options are also considered by them: dedicated income taxes, tire taxes, etc etc. None are too satisfactory by their analysis. OTOH they see some advantages, long term, to mileage fees. > [@](#): > > In the past, annual registration fees and fuel taxes collected from a few large wholesalers were justified because of their tamper-proof simplicity, low cost to collect, and convenience to the public. As information technology has evolved, however, new ways to price the use of roads, bridges, and tunnels are becoming a practical alternative to indirect taxes. By investing in a new generation of direct fee revenue collection systems, transportation infrastructure agencies can protect themselves from significant revenue losses caused by more fuel-efficient vehicles whose drivers pay less tax. In congested metropolitan areas, meanwhile, agencies can shift > demand for travel to off-peak hours by changing user fees throughout the day, which > may stimulate economic productivity and environmental quality by making travel > times shorter and more reliable while reducing pressure to add capacity to handle > congestion. And by charging heavy vehicles on the basis of axle weight and the type > of road they are on, direct price signals can help reduce pavement damage. They address privacy concerns: > [@](#): > > Key system considerations that relate to privacy include: how information about where and when a vehicle traveled would be identified and recorded, who would physically own and control this information, and how and in what form the information would be communicated to the administering agency for billing and collection purposes. More research is needed on this, but most road pricing designs either currently in place or being discussed suggest that these considerations can be adequately addressed. Specifically, these designs center on the use of an on-board unit (one in each vehicle) that would contain a GPS receiver that receives satellite signals enabling it to calculate vehicle > location in real time and a computer that calculates the associated VMT charge. The key point is that the satellite signal is only a one-way signal “telling” the car receiver where it is, and therefore outside the vehicle there is no tracking of where individuals travel. In essence, this receiving function of a VMT system would function like the GPS devices that millions of Americans have already installed in their cars without worry of privacy loss. > The more critical question related to privacy is what happens to the travel information that is stored on the on-board unit. The Commission believes that such a system can and should be designed so that the information transmitted to the administering agency would only relate to the bulk charges due and would not include specific information about trip origins and destinations, routes, or time of travel. In other words, the administrating agency would only receive information that a particular vehicle owes a particular amount each month… such a system would provide considerably more privacy than other information technology systems in our society, such as credit card and cell phone system They conclude > [@](#): > > Direct user charges in the form of mileage-based user charges are the most viable and sustainable long-term “user pay” option for the federal government to raise adequate and appropriate revenues to provide the federal share of funding for the system. Both real-world examples and academic research demonstrate that VMT fee systems have the capacity not only to raise needed revenues but also to provide additional benefits, including more efficient use of transportation infrastructure, reduced environmental and social externalities, and ancillary benefits to users in the form of information for drivers. Critically, a VMT fee system is the only option the Commission evaluated that, in addition to raising revenues, could actually reduce the amount of necessary additional capacity by improving the efficiency of current capacity use. The VMT chapter is 1:125 to 1:159. It covers the subject very well. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 5:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/85 "2009-02-27T05:44:33Z")
To address the document quoted by DSeid: > [@](#): > > \*Sustainability issues: in short term, fixed-rate structure of motor fuel tax leads to > reduced purchasing power; in long term, shift to high efficiency and alternative fuel > vehicles will reduce motor fuel consumption How does a milage tax not lead to “reduced purchasing power”? Either way the goal is to get people to pay more tax based on their driving. Fuel consumption reduction can be directly offset by raising the taxes. > [@](#): > > \*Strong public opposition to motor fuel tax increases (particularly when oil price > spikes occur) Do they think a government-mandated GPS on all cars is going to stir up less public opposition? Additionally, people are dumb with taxes - tax them invisibly a little bit at a time and they accept it. If they take a few hundred dollars a week from you, you gripe and accept it. However, if income taxes were demanded at the end of the year as a lump sum, people would realize how much they’re paying and riot. Either way, you’re paying the same thing - it’s a matter of perception. So when people need to start shelling out $5, $20, $100 dollars, whatever it may be, at their periodic gas tax checkups, it’s going to piss them off more than relatively less conspicuously adding gas taxes. > [@](#): > > \*Limited relationship between tax revenues and infrastructure investment, thus does not encourage sound investment practices I’m not quite sure what this means or how it relates to the merits of either type of tax. > [@](#): > > \*Comparatively regressive tax The only case I can see here was, as mentioned, poor people may have older, less fuel efficient vehicles. I’m not sure - some of the old econoboxes that aren’t loaded with 1500 pounds of safety equipment get better milage than our more advanced, but heavier modern cars. > [@](#): > > \*Tax only indirectly related to use—that is, closely related to the amount of use (tax > cost per mile) but not to type of facility or time-of-day choices; further, poor proxy for pavement damage costs since there is no weight-based characteristic to the motor fuel tax charge except for poorer fuel efficiency (e.g., for heavy trucks) or for congestion costs Gas taxes seem to have a fairly elegant relationship to infrastructure maintenance - heavier vehicles use more gas and raise maintenance cost. In this case, if Escalades pay the same tax as Priuses, it’s hard to make the case that the tax will be more related to use. > [@](#): > > \*Adverse geographic equity considerations, since people in rural areas generally travel more … I don’t understand this one. If they drive more, they pay more gas tax or more milage tax - either way, they take the hit. I also don’t buy the way they brush off privacy concerns. Once you give government an inch, they take a mile. Once we’re accustomed to having these units in our cars, they’ll eventually start using them to database the travel habits of everyone. Incidentally, couldn’t you address the variable nature of gas tax fluctuating with gas prices by tying it to a per-dollar spent on fuel rate, rather than per gallon? Anyway, you made the case of why people think it’s a good idea. I appreciate that. I strongly disagree - it disincentivizes good behavior (driving fuel efficient vehicles), is too invasive of privacy (even if it’s billed not to be that way at first, it will be eventually, and has greater implementation costs than the current system. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 8:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/86 "2009-02-27T08:10:58Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > To address the document quoted by DSeid: I think you’re interpreting it incorrectly. For instance: > [@](#): > > How does a milage tax not lead to “reduced purchasing power”? Either way the goal is to get people to pay more tax based on their driving. > > Fuel consumption reduction can be directly offset by raising the taxes. No – from what I gather, from the perspective of the article, the reduced purchasing power applies to highway maintenance. As **DSeid** summarized, the issue is that “_The current system is underfunding highway maintenance. It isn’t even close._” Couple that with the fact that the more fuel-efficient a vehicle is, the less money will be generated for said maintenance and we have a rather large and pressing issue. After all, for the highways that can’t be (or aren’t) maintained, there can’t be any highway driving. I think that if you take the different perspective, you’ll mostly answer your own objections. Perhaps I should note that I **abhor** the idea of mandated GPS (or anything similar), so the only way I’d even consider supporting a mileage tax is if it was absolutely impossible to do anything more than obtain a total mileage count. And even then, I’d need some serious convincing that implementing the overhead wouldn’t cost a fortune. So fundamentally, I agree with your final paragraph and your conclusion. Nonetheless, the core idea of a mileage tax makes a certain amount of sense to me – just at a greater cost (in a variety of ways) than I’m willing to support. ---
**Author:** ![E-Sabbath](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/e19adc/32.png) [@E-Sabbath](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/E-Sabbath)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 11:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/87 "2009-02-27T11:49:19Z")
And, of course, that implies that GPS will work everywhere. I pass through three locations on my daily commute that cause the GPS to think I’m either 100 miles off, or lost signal. This is apparently _not uncommon_, judging from some reports I’ve seen before of cars apparently exceeding 500 MPH on GPS tests. Not to mention, of course, the cost of installing a GPS that ‘just works’ in any weather for the life of a car in _every car_ in the US. ---
**Author:** ![ralph124c](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/8797f3/32.png) [@ralph124c](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ralph124c)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 5:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/88 "2009-02-27T17:08:10Z")
I find it amazing that the liberals (who bitterly oppose the NSA monioring terrorist phone calls from Pakistan) are fine with the government monitoring your every movement by car! Will this apply to government officials? like senators? Suppose we find that a certain well-known senator has been elsewhere (whils claiming to be in the Senate0-will the information on his whereabouts be public knowledge? ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 5:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/89 "2009-02-27T17:57:06Z")
> [@ralph124c](#): > > I find it amazing that the liberals (who bitterly oppose the NSA monioring terrorist phone calls from Pakistan) are fine with the government monitoring your every movement by car! Hmmm…you know, it _would_ be amazing…if your viewpoint wasn’t warped beyond any recognition of reality. I mean, honestly – “ **terrorist** phone calls from **Pakistan** ”? _That’s_ your go-to equivalence? ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 6:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/90 "2009-02-27T18:19:14Z")
> [@E-Sabbath](#): > > Not to mention, of course, the cost of installing a GPS that ‘just works’ in any weather for the life of a car in _every car_ in the US. Yeah, this seems needlessly complicated. Here in MA we have to have our car inspected each year for emissions compliance. Fine time to record the odometer. ---
**Author:** ![SenorBeef](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/senorbeef/32/2220_2.png) [@SenorBeef](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SenorBeef)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 6:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/91 "2009-02-27T18:25:42Z")
Give people a yearly gas tax bill that comes out to hundreds and they’ll be furious. The key to taxation is to keep it seamless, automatic, and peck people to death. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 6:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/92 "2009-02-27T18:37:02Z")
> [@SenorBeef](#): > > Give people a yearly gas tax bill that comes out to hundreds and they’ll be furious. > > The key to taxation is to keep it seamless, automatic, and peck people to death. Ideally there would be a non-intrusive, unable-to-be-abused system to constantly monitor mileage and tax appropriately, but paying a tax once a year isn’t exactly unprecidented. ---
**Author:** ![scr4](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/59ef9b/32.png) [@scr4](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scr4)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/93 "2009-02-27T19:04:21Z")
By the way, how is the congestion charge system working out in London? I understand they just use CCTVs to record the license plates of cars entering central London, and fine you if you enter without paying the charge first. Perhaps a similar system could be used in the US for freeways and cities, or wherever you want the road use recorded. This has some of the benefits of the GPS system (i.e. they can charge you for where and when you drive, not just how much), and require no additional hardware on each car. ---
**Author:** ![Cilantro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/43a26b/32.png) [@Cilantro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cilantro)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/94 "2009-02-27T19:09:05Z")
Yes, a bad idea, especially in this economic climate. Yes, it will affect the poor greater than others, but one big issue I’ve not seen anyone bring up is the impact it will have upon the Transportation industry. I noticed many people do not stop to think or consider the effects switching to a mileage based tax has upon those companies whose business supplies a vast majority of the necessities required by us all; namely food and clothing. Especially for those of you who live in a large city, where you shop at the local supermarket for your food, all of that is delivered exclusively by commercial transportation carriers. If we were to start taxing by the mile, their taxes will increase dramatically. That means they raise their rates to their customers (the supermarket/grocery stores) who will raise their prices which gets passed on to us folks working hard just to make ends meet now. I work for a transportation company (no longer as a driver thankfully), and I’ve seen many people out there attempting to sell their trucks already due to the surge in gas prices this last year. Those that survived are struggling because the work just isn’t as available, and if you increase taxes in fuel, or change to taxing by the mile, there is a great chance even those will fold. Sure, the arguement is they use the roadways more, they should pay more, but that also means you and I pay more in the end. We pay with more expensive products as supply drops and demand increases, and we’ll pay as we too must go out there and pay for those miles we drive everyday. Not to mention, I don’t want a GPS unit on my car so Big Brother can know where I go and when, but I don’t think there will be any avoiding that due to the benefits it has with gas mileage, accident reports, traffic conditions, and even emergency assistance. The company I work for has installed GPS units on trucks and already has increased fuel economy and productivity of the fleet, not to mention helping us in times of accidents. Not sure I want the government to have that kind of control, but it will happen soon. ---
**Author:** ![erislover](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/71e660/32.png) [@erislover](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/erislover)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/95 "2009-02-27T19:12:25Z")
Yes, of course we shouldn’t create some kind of use-tax for the industry that uses roads the most. Why didn’t I think of this obvious result? ---
**Author:** ![Sinaijon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/dc4da7/32.png) [@Sinaijon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sinaijon)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/96 "2009-02-27T19:29:37Z")
I think its a bad idea. The whole idea shows a basic problem in using taxes as social engineering. 1. Govt’ decides a behavior is bad and starts taxing it. 2. People resist the tax, continue behavior. 3. Gov’t gets big influx of money, starts misc. programs. 4. People eventually start getting a hint, and reduce the taxed behavior. 5. Gov’t revenue starts falling short, needs more revenue to keep programs. 6. Gov’t finds new ‘bad’ behavior to tax. So, in the end, if this idea floats, eventually people will work to reduce their mileage, and then suddenly politicians will start complaining about their revenue stream drying up. ---
**Author:** ![Digital\_Stimulus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/aeb1de/32.png) [@Digital\_Stimulus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Digital_Stimulus)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2009, 7:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/97 "2009-02-27T19:43:03Z")
> [@Sinaijon](#): > > I think its a bad idea. The whole idea shows a basic problem in using taxes as social engineering. > > 1. Govt’ decides a behavior is bad and starts taxing it. > … But your first step is in error and renders the rest of your causal chain inapplicable. You get that, right? ---
**Author:** ![DSeid](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dseid/32/20194_2.png) [@DSeid](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DSeid)\ **Post date:** [February 28, 2009, 2:03am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/98 "2009-02-28T02:03:12Z")
**scr4** per the Report London’s system is working modestly well. They call that system “cordon pricing” and in London it has been coupled with more bus lanes. The result has been tremendously improved mass transit times and not much real improvement on passenger vehicle congestion otherwise. The Report also discusses a pilot program in Oregon in which volunteer vehicles worked with particular gas stations and vehicles were charged on a mileage rather than a gas tax basis. It allowed for pay at the pump just like now but calculated automatically at the pump based on the vehicles on board computer report of miles traveled. Privacy was protected. They’ve also calculated what the fees would need to be keeping the same proportions paid by light duty vehicles (LDV) and freight traffic as they pay now: 0.9 for LDV and 5 cent/mile for trucks at a flat rate to pay for the whole system as currently funded; 2.3 and 13.2 if funded to improve the system; and 1.9 and 10.6 to actually have enough to just maintain the system. They acknowledge that paying these fees may be a burden for truckers but point out no more so than raising the gas tax enough to fully fund the system would. In fact it might be less, since cars are likely to go part grid electric powered before trucks come up with any alternative to diesel; keeping with the gas tax only would leave them holding more of the bag. They discuss a variable charge based on peak and off peak use and on vehicle weight as well. They further discuss the potential public opinion issues against it but note that London’s system had a majority against it before it started (only 39% approval) and enjoyed a 60% approval rating once it began. ---
**Author:** ![Saint\_Cad](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/saint_cad/32/18907_2.png) [@Saint\_Cad](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Saint_Cad)\ **Post date:** [March 1, 2009, 12:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810/99 "2009-03-01T12:26:04Z")
Do I get to exempt the miles I drive to work so I can pay 40% of my income to the governments? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/mileage-tax-is-it-such-a-bad-idea/486810.md?page=4)