Like TURF
Follow TURFCBO: Milege tax "practical option" to raise taxes on driving
The Texas Transportation Commission commissioned a similar study last year. It's being prepared for state lawmakers to consider. "Revenue enhancement" is, of course, code for TAX HIKE. Instead of spend our road taxes where they're supposed go, they want taxpayers to bail them out with higher taxes. The proposed Texas House budget will DOUBLE gas tax diversions (up from $1.2 billion to over a billion dollars more than last biennium...now $2.3 billion) to pay for things like state employees' benefits and pension funds, not roads.
Lawmakers also raided the Texas Mobility Funds to pay for low income Texans' Voter Identification in the Voter ID bill. The way they did it was unconstitutional. They are not able to dip into the fund without replacing it with another source of revenue. Yet all 101 House Republicans who tell you they're for ending gas tax diversions and for fiscal discipline just did. Federal lawmakers have the same problem, as this article below demonstrates. There were 400 comments to this story online at the above link. Looks like all of them are negative. Until lawmakers CUT spending like we have to in our family budgets, they're NEVER gonna get buy-in for higher taxes, much less government tracking.
CBO: Taxing mileage a 'practical option' for revenue enhancement
By Pete Kasperowicz
The Hill
03/24/11
The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) this week released a report that said taxing people based on how many miles they drive is a possible option for raising new revenues and that these taxes could be used to offset the costs of highway maintenance at a time when federal funds are short.
The report discussed the proposal in great detail, including the development of technology that would allow total vehicle miles traveled (VMT) to be tracked, reported and taxed, as well as the pros and cons of mandating the installation of this technology in all vehicles.
"In the past, the efficiency costs of implementing a system of VMT charges — particularly the costs of users' time for slowing and queuing at tollbooths — would clearly have outweighed the potential benefits from more efficient use of highway capacity," CBO wrote. "Now, electronic metering and billing are making per-mile charges a practical option."
The report was requested by Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad (D-N.D.), who held a hearing on transportation funding in early March. In that hearing, Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood said the Obama administration is hoping to spend $556 billion over the next six years, much of which would go to federal transportation improvement projects.
Conrad said in response that federal funds are tight, and in asking for recommendations on how to raise that money, he noted the possibility of a VMT tax as a way to solve the problem of collecting less in taxes as people move to more fuel-efficient vehicles.
"Do we do gas tax?" Conrad asked. "Do we move to some kind of an assessment that is based on how many miles vehicles go, so that we capture revenue from those who are going to be using the roads who aren't going to be paying any gas tax, or very little, with hybrids and electric cars?"
Conrad argued some recommendation should be made by his committee on these issues when the Senate considers a transportation spending bill later this year.
CBO's report stressed it was making no recommendations but seemed to support a VMT tax as a more accurate way of having drivers pay for the costs of highway maintenance. The report said miles driven is a larger factor in highway repairs than fuel consumption and suggested that having drivers pay for the real costs of highways "would involve imposing a combination of fuel taxes and per-mile charges."
But CBO's assessment of "costs" was broader than just those costs associated with maintaining highway systems.
"Any given driver’s highway use also imposes costs on other users, on nearby nonusers, on the environment, and on the economy in the form of congestion, risk of accidents, noise, emissions of greenhouse gases and pollutants that affect local air quality, and dependence on foreign oil," CBO said.
On how to implement the idea, CBO said it is unclear how much it would cost to "install metering equipment in all of the nation's cars and trucks."
"Having the devices installed as original equipment under a mandate to vehicle manufacturers would be relatively inexpensive but could lead to a long transition; requiring vehicles to be retrofitted with the devices could be faster but much more costly, and the equipment could be more susceptible to tampering than factory-installed equipment might be," CBO said.
The report added that VMT taxes could be tracked and even collected at filling stations. "If VMT taxes were collected at the pump, each time fuel was purchased, information would be sent from a device in the vehicle to a device at the filling station," it said.
CBO also suggested different VMT tax rates might be assessed to different vehicles because heavier vehicles do more road damage, and rates might change depending on whether miles are driven at peak use times or during less congested hours.
CBO did acknowledge that privacy concerns may be a hurdle to implementing a VMT tax because electronic tracking of miles driven might provide too much personal information to the government. However, CBO noted that some have proposed restricting the information that would be transmitted to the government.