REALLY!!! $200 gas tax.

[MikeinPA]

I am learning a lot too. Do fuel taxes actually pay for the roads? Not according to Bloomburg

And I am struggling to understand why a properly designed GPS data collection process would be a) signifigantly more invasive than the current level of private data collection b) can't be designed to completely protect the vehicles owner's information. With respect to the latter, it should be relatively simple to create a multi part approach where the driving data is processed securely into a simple dollar value before ever leaving the vehicle. For example, take any GPS unit with a complete road map in it, and just add values to road information on the GPS unit. X miles on this road, times the value for that section of road, equals the bill for that road.

 

[Drew21]

I agree that no tax is perfect.

The gas tax as currently implemented works OK for ICE vehicles, although we have pretty much all agreed that it has not been indexed to keep up with road maintenance costs. In our polarized political environment, I can't see either political party voluntarily stepping forward to propose increasing the gas tax to a level that would both catch up on the road maintenance backlog and provide a fund for future maintenance. Maybe bipartisanship will prevail... ha!

Adopting an analogous system for EVs makes perfect sense, but I don't see how it would be easily implemented, especially for existing vehicles. Any ICE vehicle I buy, whether new or 100 years old, will be subject to the gas tax because the tax happens at the pump, which is administered by some manner of regulatory agency. The same can't be said for our current patchwork charging infrastructure.

How will the energy usage of my 2014 Leaf be tracked? Even if some manner of onboard EV energy usage/recording/reporting is mandated and implemented going forward, it's going to be a loooong time before my budget puts me in an automobile produced in 2025. Alternatively, if the usage/recording/reporting happens via the EVSE, does that mean we all have to buy new hardware for home charging? Does the existing public charging infrastructure have to be completely retrofitted to facilitate such reporting?

I understand and agree with the concerns about GPS tracking, logging of activity, etc. Heck, I've never even owned a mobile phone and this forum is the closest I get to participation in social media. But, as the previous post (which just popped up while I'm being way too verbose) says, there are ways to make GPS data collection safe(r) for the indentity of the user.

Having said that, I still feel like a road usage fee based on annual miles driven and vehicle size/weight class is:
1) simple to understand: drive more = pay more
2) relatively equitable for all drivers
3a) simple to implement and manage (although my mind is still blown that many states apparently don't do regular safety inspections)
3b) so, let's say potentially simple to implement and manage after mandating annual safety inspections (or perhaps recording mileage as part of the vehicle registration/renewal procedure, or something like that)

As some have pointed out, there are persons who might struggle to pay a lump sum annual fee. That is a valid concern, but I would reserve judgement until someone (smarter than me) figures out how much the road usage fee would cost the average driver. How much does the gas tax bring in each year? How much more would be required to adequately fund road maintenance? How does that break down per mile driven and scaled by vehicle size/weight class? Further, we have all sorts of minimum income provisions in our tax system, so why not have a minimum income provision associated with the road use fee?

There are also concerns about road usage fees being applied in the states where the driving occurs. Why? I guess when it comes to these United States, I long for a bit more "united" and a bit less "states." Why couldn't a road usage fee be collected nationally and then distributed based on the miles of road in each state? If road condition starts to lag here or there, you can correct the distribution formula over time. I can't see the roads I drive on getting any worse...

I don't think we're going to figure out anything here, but it's interesting having the conversation.

 

[MikeinPA]

If vehicles were being charged a per mile fee representing their share of road maintenance costs, several things would happen:

• Passenger vehicle miles could decline as people used their miles more efficiently
• The costs of over-the-road transport would rise to represent actual costs
• Rail would get more use--and that is a huge improvement in greenhouse gas emissions
• Federal, state and local dollars would flow more appropriately to things taxpayers value
• Vehicle fuel use would drop and for this reason the fossil fuel companies will vigorously oppose anything like pay per mile
• Transparency of government spending improves and this is always good for democracy

Edit: If vehicle owners were paying the real cost of fuel, which is much higher than what is payed at the pump, several more things would happen:

• Suddenly that EV is going to look very economical
• Fuel efficiency would move towards the value seen in the EU
• Rail would see even more use
• Tax dollars aren't subsidizing fossil fuel use
• Green house gas emissions would drop
• Health car costs related to burning fossil fuels drop

 

[Drew21]

If vehicles were being charged a per mile fee representing their share of road maintenance costs, several things would happen:

• Passenger vehicle miles could decline as people used their miles more efficiently
• The costs of over-the-road transport would rise to represent actual costs
• Rail would get more use--and that is a huge improvement in greenhouse gas emissions
• Federal, state and local dollars would flow more appropriately to things taxpayers value
• Vehicle fuel use would drop and for this reason the fossil fuel companies will vigorously oppose anything like pay per mile
• Transparency of government spending improves and this is always good for democracy

Edit: If vehicle owners were paying the real cost of fuel, which is much higher than what is payed at the pump, several more things would happen:

• Suddenly that EV is going to look very economical
• Fuel efficiency would move towards the value seen in the EU
• Rail would see even more use
• Tax dollars aren't subsidizing fossil fuel use
• Green house gas emissions would drop
• Health car costs related to burning fossil fuels drop

Lots of great points.

Whenever I hear anyone (usually a real 'Murican driving a lifted SUV/truck with fat, efficiency-sucking tires sticking out well past the fenders) complaining about the cost of gas I suggest they check out prices in Australia or Europe.

Regarding trains in the US: If they were subsidized at anything close to the levels that the airline industry has enjoyed for decades we would have high-speed rail across the country. About 10 years ago I took a train about halfway across China at 300 km/h (~180 mph). I wish we could have that here.

 

[cornbinder89]

I hope this will be my last post on the subject, as I think it has been well hashed out.
I am not so concerned about where I drive but that is an issue, It would be possible to learn a lot from when and where you go, Political party/political leanings, position on issues (go to a pro choice rally/ gun show etc) and it wouldn't be hard to pull that data from your movements.
The way our system is set up, people can "voice their opinion" at the ballot box, but if GPS is used, you can be taxed, not even knowing what the tax is, and have no say.
Chicago and other muni's had a tax sticker you had to pay for once a year and affix to your windshield. It was a cumbersome tax to enforce as it required sweeps to see where the vehicle was registered and cite untaxed vehicles that were registered somewhere a window sticker was required. If you were registered outside of Chicago you were ok, but inside you had to have the sticker. That is ok because you could voice your opinion to your elected official.
GPS opens time a place taxation that the taxed have no voice in. We already see that in "toll commuter lanes" where they are active at one time of day and not others. That is ok, as you can decide to use them or not. GPS would open that to all roads, for all people without giving them a say at the ballot box over the issue or rate.
Tolls are a form of taxation for all that use the toll road, regardless of where they live. GPS data allows for "tolling" everywhere, at variable rate, without the taxed having input if they live outside the area.
I can choose to take a toll road and pay the toll or take other roads and just pay the fuel tax. With GPS that goes away.
If you read the linked info, this is exactly one of the points the writers are pushing.
While it is true, if as an Iowian, I drive in Illinois I have no say on their fuel tax, but I do know what it is, and I do know that when I buy fuel it is paid, it doesn't matter when I drive, it doesn't matter if I drive through Chicago to get to Indiana, the fuel tax is the same and covers my duty to Illinois. But if GPS is used, I can be taxed at a higher rate for the time of day and the fact I drove in greater Chicago to get beyond. I have no say and with variable rate, no idea what I am taxed at just the moneys will be "deducted' from my pre-paid account.
That is the real fear I have of a GPS system of taxation. I don't fear that my info will be sold, I don't even fear (may be I should) that my interests and political positions will be known. I do fear wildly fluctuating taxes that I have no say in or no way to keep track of being imposed. It would be open to "locals" paying less and "out of area" users paying more, locals wouldn't object at the ballot box and out of area have no say.
If you don't think this is possible or an issue, as someone who ran a trucking company decades ago, states had all kinds of tax structures to tax trucks from out of jurisdiction more. It took the "commerce clause" in the constitution and
the Supreme Court to end the practice, but the' commerce clause doesn't apply to individuals (at least that is how I understand it).
We already have taxes that are aimed at "out of towners" that locals are unlikely to have to pay. Hotel/Motel taxes for example. These are legal as they tax anyone renting a room, although it will be most likely those from out of town that do so. I am not for adding road use taxes to that. With a few computer key strokes, where and when can be tailored to do the same. It WILL be promoted as a "way to reduce congestion' with out addressing the root cause of it. Those who don't know or can't adjust (people traveling through) will pay the highest rates.
In short it goes from taxing to maintain the roads, to taxing as form of movement control. Afterall, the wear, I as a single vehicle, place on the road, doesn't vary with where that road is or what time I am on it.
Basically going from a tax for road maintenance to a "movement" tax that is used to control where and when you move and revenue used for other things. we already have fuel tax used to fund commuter rail and bike paths, while worthwhile causes, not part of maintaining roads. I think this is a good part of the reason the graph at the top of this page shows a drop in fuel tax funding road, it is being diverted to other projects.

 

[Skippy]

New Jersey just passed a new EV Tax on vehicle registrations: $250/year, raising to $290/year in 2028. They also removed the incentive of no sales tax on purchases, so add another 6.625% on new car purchases. Plus we have a high income tax, and all sorts of other taxes (like my $18,500/year property tax).

Hence our state unofficial tag line: "New Jersey: Live here, work here, retire someplace else"

 

[MikeinPA]

New Jersey just passed a new EV Tax on vehicle registrations: $250/year, raising to $290/year in 2028. They also removed the incentive of no sales tax on purchases, so add another 6.625% on new car purchases. Plus we have a high income tax, and all sorts of other taxes (like my $18,500/year property tax).

Hence our state unofficial tag line: "New Jersey: Live here, work here, retire someplace else"

First, let your elected representative know this is too much taxation.

Which would you prefer going forward if you had a choice?

• Annual fee similar to a registration fee, but not tied to miles driven, and set by the state--what you just explained but perhaps more in line with actual average costs
• A per mile charge based on your actual mileage obtained from registration records, with a one year pay ahead just like registrations, but with adjustments thereafter, and with the caveat that every vehicle gets charged this way based on miles and vehicle weights including fossil fuel vehicles.
• A per kwh fee charged variously at public charging stations and by your home charging that is like current sales taxes--but most likely would not be accompanied with an equal tax level for fossil fuel users. That is, various reasons could be found to tax electric fuels differently (higher or lower) than fossil fuels due to politics, lobbying etc such as "transmission lines congestion" etc.
• A per mile fee based on miles driven, where driven, and what driven, for all road users including fossil fuelers, that is based on gps data, but with complete safe guarding of data--ie location data does not leave the vehicle owner's possession.

I like the last one because I mostly drive on local and county roads, and as little as possible. I dislike number three in that taxing fuels made sense 100 years ago, but we can do better now, refine the process by charging road-users for the funds to maintain the roads they are using, and send clearer economic signals for the high costs of certain routes versus other types of transporation.

 

[cornbinder89]

I go in order of preference
3,2,1,4
I have given my reasons elsewhere in this thread, so will not repeat here.
2 would be a compromise, and has problems with "pay as you go" but is preferable to the other two choices.

 

[rsbrax]

First, let your elected representative know this is too much taxation.

Which would you prefer going forward if you had a choice?

• Annual fee similar to a registration fee, but not tied to miles driven, and set by the state--what you just explained but perhaps more in line with actual average costs
• A per mile charge based on your actual mileage obtained from registration records, with a one year pay ahead just like registrations, but with adjustments thereafter, and with the caveat that every vehicle gets charged this way based on miles and vehicle weights including fossil fuel vehicles.
• A per kwh fee charged variously at public charging stations and by your home charging that is like current sales taxes--but most likely would not be accompanied with an equal tax level for fossil fuel users. That is, various reasons could be found to tax electric fuels differently (higher or lower) than fossil fuels due to politics, lobbying etc such as "transmission lines congestion" etc.
• A per mile fee based on miles driven, where driven, and what driven, for all road users including fossil fuelers, that is based on gps data, but with complete safe guarding of data--ie location data does not leave the vehicle owner's possession.

I like the last one because I mostly drive on local and county roads, and as little as possible. I dislike number three in that taxing fuels made sense 100 years ago, but we can do better now, refine the process by charging road-users for the funds to maintain the roads they are using, and send clearer economic signals for the high costs of certain routes versus other types of transporation.

If #4 were an option, I would opt in for at least 1 electric vehicle if there were a significant saving.
I do not get #3 additional tax for at home charging since there is already a tax on home electric bill.

 

[Burt]

What a complicated mess! You have to step back and say “what are we trying to accomplish and what is politically possible?”

Currently we have a gas tax on ICE’s that hasn’t been raised in thirty years plus we pay tolls on some roads so that is double dipping.

When States hit EVs with high fees they’re not just making up for their lost gas tax but grabbing some of the lost federal gas tax as well. Plus as pointed out state and local taxes may be collected on electricity consumption.

Also note that the gas tax tends to be interstate based while EVs only pay to the state of registry and nothing to states they travel through.

So what is the goal? Taxation parity with ICEs? On a combined state and federal basis? Does ease of collection outweigh political expediency?

Life and taxes aren’t fair but this issue isn’t going away as more electric cars get on the road.

 

[cornbinder89]

Some states charge sales tax on fuel, (New York comes to mind) You may or may not know it. Taxing a quick charge station would take care of the interstate travel, just like fuel tax does.
In my somewhat ideal world the car would communicate with the power company how many Kwh was used to charge an EV and that power would be road taxed. The Power company here already breaks out different taxes and charges on the bill, it would just be one more line.
No, it would not work on how the chargers on current cars work but could be added, those not currently capable would pay another way (Flat tax?) but as the number grows and older cars fade from use, it will not take long for almost the whole EV population to have the ability.
This is exactly how emission controls are phased in, I don't have to retro-fit my 1942 with everything today's cars have (I do retrofit PCV systems) and older EV's would not need a retro. I may be easily and cheap to retro-fit a device anyway. If my EVSE can read Kwh it wouldn't take much to transmit that over the power line like my "smart meter" does already.
Those on "flat tax" could apply yearly for a refund of taxes paid at fast chargers on the road. This is how it is done with companies that have both on road and off road equipment that are fueled from the same bulk tank.
Road taxes were never about "just the roads you use", like all taxes they are collective for a state, and used to repair/upgrade any road in the state. Some rural roads my not see enough traffic to pay for the repairs, plowing etc if just the people who drove those roads had to pay for it. Same is true for some urban roads but for another reason, they see far more traffic, but fewer miles. Government is always about collective good, not individual. Even on toll roads, the tolls collected are used where needed, not just the section "you" drove.
I tried to not post more, but see I haven't succeeded.

 

[Yodrak]

First, let your elected representative know this is too much taxation.

Which would you prefer going forward if you had a choice?

• A per mile charge based on your actual mileage obtained from registration records, with a one year pay ahead just like registrations, but with adjustments thereafter, and with the caveat that every vehicle gets charged this way based on miles and vehicle weights including fossil fuel vehicles.

This. It's just as simple to implement as the flat fee but is related to actual road use and thus more 'fair' even though not perfectly so. It can, and should, be applied to all vehicles regardless of fuel type (which should correspondingly reduce the daily price of the other fuels to the consumer).

The other alternatives, being more complex, will be more costly to implement and thus more expensive to the consumer. Fine-tuning 'fairness' will come at an additional cost to all. No thank you.

 

[bmartinpe]

With the caveat that for something as widespread as excessive EV taxation, class action lawsuits are also a remedy.
Edit: From this report https://www.atlasevhub.com/data_story/ev-drivers-in-36-states-pay-a-surplus-of-fees-each-year/ , the following:

This map needs updating. Tennessee's tax for EVs is now $200, and hybrids have a tax of $100, in addition to the normal registration fees. This means that an EV with a vanity tag pays nearly $300 per year for the privilege of driving Tennessee's roads. This $200 premium adds about two pennies ($0.017) to my cost per mile assuming 12,000 miles per year. My battery cost at $1000 per year (ten year change-out) adds $0.083 for a total of one dime ($0.10) before we add electricity at about $0.12 per KWH. I am getting 4 miles to the KWH for a cost of $0.03 per mile. My total cost per mile is now $0.13.

This compares favorably to a hybrid averaging 30 mpg whose fuel cost per mile is $0.12 ($3.59 per gallon) and whose tax premium adds another penny for a total fuel consumption of $0.13 per mile. My hybrid calculation neglects the replacement cost of the battery which could add another dime per mile to the fuel cost for a total cost of $0.23 per mile.

I have number 9559 off the assembly line in Japan with a 24 KWH battery. Therefore my battery replacement cost will be lower than those who have a longer range battery. Because I use my LEAF for in-town driving, I consider the smaller battery a blessing at replacement time.

 

[rsbrax]

In my somewhat ideal world the car would communicate with the power company how many Kwh was used to charge an EV and that power would be road taxed. The Power company here already breaks out different taxes and charges on the bill, it would just be one more line.

My monthly electric bill shows a break out for EV charging, heating, etc. However, it does not seem accurate. Anyone know how these metrics are determined and if they could be accurate?

 

[MikeinPA]

My monthly electric bill shows a break out for EV charging, heating, etc. However, it does not seem accurate. Anyone know how these metrics are determined and if they could be accurate?

The data is there if the meter is sampling current at a high enough frequency: https://www.bidgely.com/technology/disaggregation/ https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0378778824000069

 

[cornbinder89]

My monthly electric bill shows a break out for EV charging, heating, etc. However, it does not seem accurate. Anyone know how these metrics are determined and if they could be accurate?

If your power company is like mine, with a smart meter, it looks at use profile and makes educated guesses on what is using power based on time of day, how much is being used, is the current steady? etc.
Since the meter is being sampled over time and the data sent to the power company over the powerlines, theoretically, any data can be sent. This can be used not only for total power used (flat billing) but for time of day, or other info for variable rate billing.
You can have the appliance report to the power company, although most now do not.
It is not 100% accurate if just a sampling profile is used, but it can be if the device is question is reporting its use, and there is not reason that can't be done.

 

[Yodrak]

My monthly electric bill shows a break out for EV charging, heating, etc. However, it does not seem accurate. Anyone know how these metrics are determined and if they could be accurate?

Same here, my monthly electric bill shows an inaccurate breakdown of usage. My utility has interested customers fill out a form to get information about the house that feeds into algorithms, as cornbinder described, to estimate a breakdown of usage among major electricity-using items.

I correctly expected that my EV usage would be incorrect because I have two rather different EVs and my utility's form only provides for one EV.

 

[Drew21]

I don't want to move the conversation on a tangent here, but will just note that anyone concerned about GPS tracking of vehicles or mobile phones should probably read up on all the new "smart" appliances and other connected devices (e.g., Alexa) that many people happily bring into their homes.

Back on topic: when we got our Leaf I called our power company (National Grid) to ask about off-peak charging and they basically said "we don't know nothin' about nothin' like that" which surprised me since EVs are very common in MA.

 

[Bombastinator2]

How much TN income tax did you pay? States with income tax can (and do?) use that to repair roads and infrastructure.

This was a problem Minnesota had many years ago. They put an end to it back then in the Ventura administration. It’s actually leftover down-low racism. The deal is poor people, and most black people are poor, can’t afford to pay that kind of lump sum, but have to drive anyway. So the cops will randomly stop them for not paying the fee. It’s easy because that’s the tab fee. All they have to do is look for tabs that are the wrong color. They very possibly do the same to gas cars. If they don’t, it’s a political thing designed to punish ev owners. The question is how is it done? It could be of course that it’s just a luxury issue because Audi. Dunno. A single point of reference isn’t real useful. They did a study in Minnesota and like 80% of the people stopped for bad tabs were black. They lowered the fee and did another test and the disparity went away. Institutionalized veiled racism done as classism. Effectively a DWB law. An EV only thing would be an attempt to keep black people (or poor people, but it amounts to the same thing) out of EVs. They could put a meter on chargers and tax that, but people would just charge phase1 out of a standard electrical outlet (it’s slower but it works fine and a person sleeps for 8 hours) so they don’t. That solution clearly has bigger problems though. Maybe take it off the tab fee and cut it up monthly instead of a lump sum once a year?

 

[KazooBruce]

While I prefer the odometer based fee, you outlined the problem with the application. But this is similar to the issue with insurance. It's costly and therefore a larger percentage of low incomes. Pay as you go for gas works because if you don't pay, you don't go.

I had a thought, tax on odometers could be prepaid monthly though ATM or online like utility bills. The reconciled at the time of registration .

It's a tough problem. But the roads need to be maintained. And we generally agree that the users should pay for it.