Oregon Looks At Taxing Mileage Instead Of Gasoline

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS

RYAN KOST | January 2, 2009 09:27 PM EST | AP

Compare other versions »
I Like ItI Don’t Like It
Jim Wierson of Clackamas, talks about the idea of a mileage tax as he stands next to his pick-up in Portland, Ore., Wednesday, Dec. 31, 2008. Facing the possibility of lower tax revenue from gasoline sales, the state is considering a tax not on the number of gallons purchased, but on the number of miles driven. (AP Photo/Greg Wahl-Stephens)

PORTLAND, Ore. — Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to install GPS monitoring devices in 300 vehicles. The idea first emerged nearly 10 years ago as Oregon lawmakers worried that fuel-efficient cars such as gas-electric hybrids could pose a threat to road upkeep, which is paid for largely with gasoline taxes.

"I'm glad we're taking a look at it before the potholes get so big that we can't even get out of them," said Leroy Younglove, a Portland driver who participated in a recent pilot program.

The proposal is not without critics, including drivers who are concerned about privacy and others who fear the tax could eliminate the financial incentive for buying efficient vehicles.

But Oregon is ahead of the nation in exploring the concept, even though it will probably be years before any mileage tax is adopted.

Congress is talking about it, too. A congressional commission has envisioned a system similar to the prototype Oregon tested in 2006-2007.

The National Commission on Surface Transportation Infrastructure Financing is considering calling for higher gas taxes to keep highways, bridges and transit programs in good shape.

But over the long term, commission members say, the nation should consider taxing mileage rather than gasoline as drivers use more fuel-efficient and electric vehicles.

As cars burn less fuel, "the gas tax isn't going to fill the bill," said Rep. Peter DeFazio of Oregon, a member of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

Story continues below

The next Congress "could begin to set the stage, perhaps looking at some much more robust pilot programs, to begin the research, to work with manufacturers."

Gov. Ted Kulongoski has included development money for the tax in his budget proposal, and interest is growing in a number of other states.

Governors in Idaho and Rhode Island have considered systems that would require drivers to report their mileage when they register vehicles.

In North Carolina last month, a panel suggested charging motorists a quarter-cent for every mile as a substitute for the gas tax.

James Whitty, the Oregon Department of Transportation employee in charge of the state's effort, said he's also heard talk of mileage tax proposals in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Florida, Colorado and Minnesota.

"There is kind of a coalition that's naturally forming around this," he said.

Also fueling the search for alternatives is the political difficulty of raising gasoline taxes.

The federal gas tax has not been raised since 1993, and nearly two dozen states have not changed their taxes since 1997, according to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association.

In Oregon's pilot program, officials equipped 300 vehicles with GPS transponders that worked wirelessly with service station pumps, allowing drivers to pay their mileage tax just as they do their gas tax.

Whitty said the test, which involved two gas stations in the Portland area, proved the idea could work.

Though the GPS devices did not track the cars' locations in great detail, they could determine when a driver had left certain zones, such as the state of Oregon. They also kept track of the time the driving was done, so a premium could be charged for rush-hour mileage.

The proposal envisions a gradual change, with manufacturers installing the technology in new vehicles because retrofitting old cars would be too expensive. Owners of older vehicles would continue to pay gasoline taxes.

The difference in tax based on mileage or on gasoline would be small _ "pennies per transaction at the pump," Whitty said.

But the mileage tax still faces several major obstacles.

For one, Oregon accounts for only a small part of auto sales, so the state can't go it alone. A multistate or national system would be needed.

Another concern is that such devices could threaten privacy. Whitty said he and his task force have assured people that the program does not track detailed movement and that driving history is not stored and cannot be accessed by law enforcement agencies.

"I think most people will come to realize there is really no tracking issue and will continue to buy new cars," Whitty said, noting that many cell phones now come equipped with GPS, which has not deterred customers.

Others are worried that a mileage tax would undermine years of incentives to switch toward more fuel-efficient vehicles.

"It doesn't seem fair," said Paul Niedergang of Portland, that a hybrid would be taxed as much as his Dodge pickup. "I just think the gas tax needs to be updated."

Lynda Williams, also of Portland, was not immediately sold on the idea but said it was worth consideration.

"We all have to be open-minded," she said. "Our current system just isn't working."

PORTLAND, Ore. — Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to instal...
PORTLAND, Ore. — Oregon is among a growing number of states exploring ways to tax drivers based on the number of miles they drive instead of how much gas they use, even going so far as to instal...
 
Comments
521
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (18 pages total)
- dmthurman I'm a Fan of dmthurman 2 fans permalink

Here's how i see it working someday when the technology is capable which i have doubts that it currently does.
1.All roads are mapped, separating private and public funded roads. You are only charged for traveling on public roads.
2. Privacy is addressed. the device simply tracks your location and mileage calculates that without transmitting location.
3.Depending on vehicle it's set to the total weight of your vehicle. PU trucks are set to full weight.
4.Fixed income people can get certain limited exemptions reductions on a per case basis.
5.Farm equipment is exempt, and or limited to zones and personal usage. No driving your tractor to wal-mart.
6. Roads are variable in pricing in that urban heavily traveled roads are lower in relationship to rural roads.. The device could monitor this variable pricing. It probably could tell you what the current pricing is for traveling particular roads.
8. Fuel mileage improvements should be encouraged so the rates for a prius type vehicle should be lower than for say a dodge 1 ton supercharged rig. But weight is of critical importance in determining road wear.
7. Motorcycles/scooters are exempt......:D I had to throw my own self interest into the mix since i think everyone should be riding one when ever possible. My Harley get's nearly 50 mpg. on the highway with a 85 year old engine configuration. Suck that Prius owners..

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:03 AM on 01/03/2009
- HMDMSR I'm a Fan of HMDMSR 58 fans permalink
photo

This would require devices to installed in all vehicles, and satellites to do the monitoring. Whys make and maintain all of those devices. The issue under discussion is related to the wider energy problem. We need to reduce miles traveled. Through planning at the at federal level, and on down, we need to improve how cities are connected. Within cities we need to optimize the flow of traffic in and through them. Mass transit addresses these issues. As always, foot traffic is the preferred way of getting from point "A" to point "B". Road repair is just another aspect of this issue, because different modes of transportation affect how much repair is needed.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 AM on 01/03/2009
- dmthurman I'm a Fan of dmthurman 2 fans permalink

My point is that the current system subsidizes rural road and the ever increasing road building projects by placing a burden of the cost on area's such as Portland (where i live). It makes no sense that Urban environments get the heaviest road usage, collect the largest percentage of taxes, then kick those funds the the general state funds only to have a smaller percentage returned so that rural areas can have their roads subsidized. Right now there is discussion of building a new bridge over the Columbia, The suburban rural side (Washington county residents) do not want a light rail aspect to the bridge. The urban (Portland side) is insisting on it. Personally, I say keep it the way it is but hey what do i know.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:32 PM on 01/03/2009
photo

Oh, but Halliburton wouldn't make any money off of the devices. . . .

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 03:09 PM on 01/03/2009
- dmthurman I'm a Fan of dmthurman 2 fans permalink

I had to add a few comments here from some of the more recent posts.

1. Fuel taxes are not used (in at least my previous state Washington and now Oregon) for anything but roads. That's actually what pays for roads believe it or not. I could be wrong about this but please include a link if i'm wrong on that point. I"m pretty sure that i'm right, if not that needs to be fixed.

2. We currently have a toll system. you pay a toll (at the pump), it's then redistributed subsidizing lightly traveled roads. This system will balance that out.

3.The big brother problem and is always a concern, but it's technologically feasible to limit that. The flip side of that, why are those of you concerned about big brother knowing where you are and at the same time find the suspension of your habeas corpus not a problem?

4. And to the poverty stricken lady living in the boondocks whose husband pays taxes and is below the poverty level oh please give me a break on that one.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:43 AM on 01/03/2009
- Foohog I'm a Fan of Foohog 12 fans permalink

" And to the poverty stricken lady living in the boondocks whose husband pays taxes and is below the poverty level oh please give me a break on that one."

Said someone who obviously doesn't have to live on an $800 or $900 social security check while the local school takes more and more of their money to pay the coach and build the gymn.

wake up. there's a real world out here and you ain't the focal point.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:37 PM on 01/03/2009
photo

Wow, you are overdosing on government. What happened to less government intrusion on out personal lives?
The genral idea , in all public servioces , is that some use it more than others; we all kickj in the kitty for the common good.
I never had children, but I have kicked in for public schools' I haven't used a public libary in 40 years, but I don't mind kicking in.
Many people have never had the unfortunate pleasure of utiling the court system, but yet they kick in.
Parcing out our highways, based on private use (not for profit) is just counterinutive to our founding father concept.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 02:38 PM on 01/03/2009

As if Big Brother could really resist turning it into a tracking device! Have you learned NOTHING from the past eight years?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:54 PM on 01/04/2009

to address a few of your points:
2: "without transmitting location" HA!
8: The reason they thought this up is because a prius, and other future vehicles, will use less gas, and hence generate less gas tax revinue.Fuel efficiency is therefore set up as the enemy of highway maintainence funding.
7: why is this out of order?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 12:59 PM on 01/03/2009

There are no "true" leaders! We need more people who are progressive and powerful like this man!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/coyote2012/3161750403/

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:02 AM on 01/03/2009

Gas taxes are regressive and hurt the poor more than the rich. I would not support such taxes.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:58 AM on 01/03/2009

If our leaders used our money wisely, we would not need this discussion. Our local, state and federal governments are tanking because of poor leadership.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:55 AM on 01/03/2009

Am a little confused?!?!?
Aren't we supposed to rid ourselves of our oil dependence within a decade or so?
This law, if passed, assumes gas powered cars are here to stay.
As for the privacy issue, many people seem to be more accepting of having theirs invaded, especially with all the war on terror hocus pogus.
What's next? a tax on the number of toilet flushes? Sure go ahead, install a microchip on my 8utt cheek.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:51 AM on 01/03/2009

All Democrats always talk about "taxing the rich"..... yet every gas tax , mileage tax, liquor tax, cigarette tax, sales tax , user fee, phone , water , electricity et al are all taxes that attack those that can least afford it... How about clauses in all politicians salary/pension / expense funds that are based on merit.... Do you know if Roland Burris sits one day in the senate he will receive a full pension?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:50 AM on 01/03/2009
- Mahi Joe I'm a Fan of Mahi Joe 53 fans permalink

It is as if we get punished for going green and getting a fuel efficient car now. So if they charge per mile rather than fuel useage then people would just buy any old car.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:48 AM on 01/03/2009

Mark my words, after more gas guzzlers are sold (oil prices low and mileage instead of gas tax) there will be a major switch back to high gas prices and taxing per gallon at even higher rates.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:54 AM on 01/03/2009

Pay your fair share, Liberal!!!!!!!

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 11:19 AM on 01/03/2009
- Mahi Joe I'm a Fan of Mahi Joe 53 fans permalink

Typical necon. And how do you know what I pay? You don't but you seem to be pleased with yourself to speak from a typical ignorant viewpoint.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 01:01 PM on 01/03/2009
- lvogt I'm a Fan of lvogt 26 fans permalink

Stupid idea. Unenforceable, intrusive and counter productive. You want to stop using certain fuel not mobility. This does nothing to encourage better mileage only less mileage. Bad idea.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:45 AM on 01/03/2009
photo

Seems as if no one likes this idea, save a few.

One thing no one has mentioned, that I've seen, is how this would affect self-employed individuals who have to drive long distances for work. My husband does construction and we already pay quite a bit in self-employment tax and local taxes, despite still being under the federal poverty level. We would likely get socked with a tax like this, as well....

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:43 AM on 01/03/2009
- quiviran I'm a Fan of quiviran 29 fans permalink

This approach would convert every road in America to a virtual toll road, with a very privacy invasive toll booth. It would be OK, if the tolls were spent on the roads actually used to generate the tolls, but they will not be. The travelers on popular routes will be forced to subsidize maintenance of roads that are less frequented. And the collection of the tolls would be the same process as we currently use for house arrest of criminals.

I get confused, is it liberals or conservatives who object to invasion of privacy? Since the rich have clearly benefitted more from our society, is it conservatives or liberals who object to them paying an amount more proportional to the benefits they derive?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:34 AM on 01/03/2009
- SimJack I'm a Fan of SimJack 75 fans permalink
photo

Better management by local and state governments - getting the most from taxpayer money, living within a budget, prioritizing societies necessities, being efficient - rather than simply throwing a tax increase on individuals should be included in the equation too. Due to poor management, lack of oversight and inefficiency, a large number of towns and cities have terrible credit ratings. If lenders won't give them loans, how can we be assured that they will spend any additional tax revenue so we get a reasonable ROI?

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:29 AM on 01/03/2009
- HMDMSR I'm a Fan of HMDMSR 58 fans permalink
photo

What we're talking about is really a giant engineering problem. Things can be done in a much smarter way. A change in mind set is needed. In order to get to a more efficient system, we'll have to start controlling how investments, both public and private, are made.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:15 AM on 01/03/2009

I live in RI. We're one of the nation's poorest states and there are SO MANY problems. Isn't it brilliant to think about taxing people MORE? If we are going to be taxed for mileage, I suggest that we also tax people for walking on sidewalks and riding their bikes on streets.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:10 AM on 01/03/2009
- Rudderman I'm a Fan of Rudderman 43 fans permalink
photo

Not that it matters, but I hate this mileage tax idea on countless levels. A gas tax increase however is long overdue. In most of the industrialized world, including Europe and Japan, pump prices can be 3X higher than here at home. The difference is almost entirely due to taxes which help maintain infrastructure and, above all, discourage consumption.

Americans on average are taxed just 15% for gasoline...the lowest by far of any industrialized country. Three direct results of this are 1) America's addiction to giant, wasteful vehicles; 2) Detroit's crummy record with fuel-efficient cars--can you say bailout?--and 3) massive pollution.

US consumers and industries have lived in gas la-la land far too long. Meanwhile, roads and bridges are in collapse, states are looking for bailouts. An increase in the gas tax is totally equitable and years overdue...to force conservation, pay for existing bills and repairs as well as those down the road.

Given all the angry, short-sited resistance to a gas tax, we’re all in for a rough (and wasteful) ride.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:09 AM on 01/03/2009

This proposal also unfairly penalizes those who, like my husband and myself, live in rural areas with extremely limited public transportation (about to become more limited since the one bus company that operates in the region is having serious financial problems) and few or no services (bank, post office, doctor, grocery store) convenient to our household. Just commuting to work puts 3,000 miles per month on our vehicle, and that's not driving that we can avoid without losing our livelihood. The income from tht employment is already taxed, as is the vehicle itself to the tune of several hundred dollars per year, and we pay gas taxes. Enough already.

    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:08 AM on 01/03/2009
Page: « First ‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 Next › Last » (18 pages total)
Comments are closed for this entry

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect