"California Launching Pilot Program to Charge Drivers for Miles Driven" - Autoblog.com Article dated May 26, 2024

[TXAG]

https://www.autoblog.com/2024/05/26...t-program-to-charge-drivers-for-miles-driven/

California is the nation's biggest EV market by a wide margin, and the relatively high percentage of battery-powered cars is digging a hole in the state's budget because it relies on revenue from its gasoline tax to fund road maintenance. Lawmakers want to replace the gasoline tax with a new mileage-based tax to offset the loss, and they plan to begin testing this system by launching a pilot program in August 2024.

 

[DerekS]

Well that’s more fair than the $200 EV penalty Texas threw on us.

 

[whitex]

Washington has had this type of pilots for a while now. Lots of kinks to work out, including cars which drive out of state, or cars registered out of state which drive in your state, privacy issues, etc, etc. As usual, devil is in the details.

So Washington did it the old fashion way, put a $10 EV fee on the ballot one election (voter approval is required to add new taxes). Once the voters agreed to $10, they raised it to $100 the next year (no need for voter approval to raise taxes), then to $150 the following year, then at one point added another $75 for EV public charging infrastructure. While I don't object to EV's paying road taxes, I find the way politicians do it (get it voted in at $10, then a 10x increase the next year) underhanded and sleazy. They managed to get another proposition by voters who don't understand math too - the proposition was for a "less than 1% increase in registration fees". The catch, the fee was 0.3% before, after the raise it's a 1.2% of the MSRP (depreciated based on a joke depreciation table which claims things like your car is worth 90% of MSRP after 2 years, LOL). Bottom line is my Taycan is running me ~$2K a year in registration fees.

 

[jcroix]

Well that’s more fair than the $200 EV penalty Texas threw on us.

I actually wouldn’t have minded $120/year since TX gas tax is $0.20/gallon. At 20 MPG, that works out to 12K miles, which seems fair. I always felt that EVs should pay for road use when I had an ICE car, so I can’t complain now .

The thing that kills me is that Austin is taking car lanes away from lots and lots of roads to create bike lanes. It’s not that I mind bikes on the road, but increasing congestion on a road for a lane I never see used for a tax-free method of travel? Cars and motorcycles pay for roads, not bicycles that get dedicated lanes. Just my $0.02.

 

[DerekS]

I actually wouldn’t have minded $120/year since TX gas tax is $0.20/gallon. At 20 MPG, that works out to 12K miles, which seems fair. I always felt that EVs should pay for road use when I had an ICE car, so I can’t complain now .

The thing that kills me is that Austin is taking car lanes away from lots and lots of roads to create bike lanes. It’s not that I mind bikes on the road, but increasing congestion on a road for a lane I never see used for a tax-free method of travel? Cars and motorcycles pay for roads, not bicycles that get dedicated lanes. Just my $0.02.

That’s pretty stupid. The weather is either too hot or too cold for cyclists 90% of the year.

 

[daveo4EV]

don't object to "per-mile" charges - roll back the gas tax and then make everyone pay per-mile - and add vehicle "weight" as a factor - heavier vehicles (trucks/EV's) wear the roads faster…

but yeah - they aren't going to that - this will be "incremental" revenue and wont' be spent the way it's supposed to

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

don't object to "per-mile" charges - roll back the gas tax and then make everyone pay per-mile - and add vehicle "weight" as a factor - heavier vehicles (trucks/EV's) wear the roads faster…

but yeah - they aren't going to that - this will be "incremental" revenue and wont' be spent the way it's supposed to

Regressive taxes are not popular.

 

[whitex]

Regressive taxes are not popular.

Which taxes ARE popular?

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

Which taxes ARE popular?

Those which a majority agrees upon. ?
(Like, say, a $10 EV tax..)

 

[whitex]

Those which a majority agrees upon. ?
(Like, say, a $10 EV tax..)

Hmmm… if we live in a democracy, that would imply all taxes and fees have majority support, no?

Of course majority rule has plenty of issues - imagine 9 wolves and 1 sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Or imagine a society voting on new or increased taxes or fees which only apply to 10% of society or less. Now consider that nearly half of Americans (some years over half) pay no federal income tax, but everyone has a vote how much it should be.

To be clear, I have in the past voted for taxes which would apply to me. There are things society needs to prosper. Sadly, most politicians nowadays want to add taxes but will not clearly articulate what those taxes will be spent on, what society will get back in for this money. That and they spend money incredibly inefficiently (or there is just too many politicians taking a cut), like Washington’s project to house homeless people, which last year costed $140K per year per homeless person taken off the street. They of course don’t highlight that number to the public, they hide it well when reporting, but for those who can divide the total spent by total homeless taken off the streets this information is there, just have to dig a little.

 

[WasserGKuehlt]

Hmmm… if we live in a democracy, that would imply all taxes and fees have majority support, no?

Of course majority rule has plenty of issues - imagine 9 wolves and 1 sheep voting on what’s for dinner. Or imagine a society voting on new or increased taxes or fees which only apply to 10% of society or less. Now consider that nearly half of Americans (some years over half) pay no federal income tax, but everyone has a vote how much it should be.

To be clear, I have in the past voted for taxes which would apply to me. There are things society needs to prosper. Sadly, most politicians nowadays want to add taxes but will not clearly articulate what those taxes will be spent on, what society will get back in for this money. That and they spend money incredibly inefficiently (or there is just too many politicians taking a cut), like Washington’s project to house homeless people, which last year costed $140K per year per homeless person taken off the street. They of course don’t highlight that number to the public, they hide it well when reporting, but for those who can divide the total spent by total homeless taken off the streets this information is there, just have to dig a little.

?
I was merely going for a pun - “popular” == general, communal, prevalent -> “of the majority”.
But, to borrow your analogy, the puzzling aspect of this country (and despite its relative low taxation) is that the 9:1 wolves *still* won’t vote “sheep for dinner” because, somehow, one day they, too, will become sheep. ??‍

 

[whitex]

9:1 wolves *still* won’t vote “sheep for dinner” because, somehow, one day they, too, will become sheep. ??‍

They do sometimes. Washington recent capital gain tax, or Massachusetts millionaire tax (which brought in almost 2x the expected income in its first year which is not even over) are recent examples. But there is something to what you’re saying, some wolves aspire to become sheep, but others just want the sheep as a buffer. Once the sheep is eaten, the next vote becomes a popularity contest, or a definition of sheep will be changed to make one of 8 wolves the new sheep. And yet others vote against eating the sheep knowing most of the food will be distributed to the wolves in charge, leaving the rest hungry anyways. ?‍