GPS-Based System For Driving Tax Being Field Tested 891
An anonymous reader writes "Apparently, since gas consumption is going down and fuel efficient cars are becoming more popular, the government is looking into a new form of taxation to create revenue for transportation projects. This new system is a 'by-the-mile tax,' requiring GPS in cars so it can track the mileage. Once a month, the data gets uploaded to a billing center and you are conveniently charged for how much you drove. 'A federal commission, after a two-year study, concluded earlier this year that the road tax was the "best path forward" to keep revenues flowing to highway and transportation projects, and could be an important new tool to help manage traffic and relieve congestion. ... The commission pegged 2020 as the year for the federal fuel tax, currently 18.5 cents a gallon, to be phased out and replaced by a road tax. One estimate of a road tax that would cover the current federal and state fuel taxes is 1 to 2 cents per mile for cars and light trucks.'"
Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Interesting)
It seems to me like GPS provides other features than mileage tracking which the government could use.
If we are only concerned about tracking the mileage, there is already nice tool that does just this, couldn't it be used to also display how much it costs us in real time ? ;-)))
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taximeter [wikipedia.org]
Odometer (Score:5, Interesting)
They could just check the odometer during emissions checking.
Plus, if they go through with something like this, then they'd better eliminate the fuel taxes. (fat chance, I know)
GPS Jammer (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Better watch your speed... (Score:5, Interesting)
Most people have an EZ-pass equivalent in their car. We also have license plate reading cameras. Ticketing virtually all speeders, at least on highways, is possible now. They will never, ever do this because if you ticket all speeders, no one will speed. They will lose millions of dollars in fines, on top of creating massive anger and traffic clogs that would result in the speed limit being raised to the speed people actually go anyway.
So it's much too good an idea and will never be done.
Re:Odometer (Score:3, Interesting)
Bill
the government is ran by ninnies (Score:3, Interesting)
We fight this kind of crap every year in California. People insist that hybrid cars are screwing us out of fuel taxes and are unfairly using the road. Well if it's so unfair maybe we should quit giving them a tax credit and put that money into the road budget instead. When everyone use hybrids we should raid the fuel tax to compensate. It's pretty simple, and doesn't require the government to contract an agency to build a $500 secured GPS unit to stick in every car.
Seriously Bad Idea (Score:5, Interesting)
I work for the DoD. There are those of us that work on "black" projects that have covert everything, including travel. It would be absolutely intolerable to have a record of where a car has been, either personal or rental, for an enemy agent to exploit. If there's a meeting of folks hammering out the requirements for a new fighter jet or littoral cruiser, who goes to the meeting, where the meeting was, what time the meeting was, etc. are all way too valuable to be recorded.
No, this idea is a non-starter for National security reasons. We won't even talk about organized crime getting ahold of it in order to track likely kidnap candidates' usual movements.
Re:old/weird cars? (Score:2, Interesting)
Not likely. These are the same fascists who are pushing through a bill that would require you to make your old home "green" before you could sell it.
Regressive tax, will hurt the poor (Score:3, Interesting)
Side effect: it becomes cheaper to drive a gas guzzler, and more expensive to drive an economy engine:
At current gas tax rates, that trip would cost my truck somewhere around $60 in existing gas taxes.
Existing gas tax would be about $10 in a fuel-efficient car.
Small fuel-efficient cars tend to be driven by lower-income people, who will therefore be hardest hit by this as their economy cars will pay a disproportionate amount of tax, based on per mile rather than per gallon.
So -- this is a regressive tax.
Just awful (Score:5, Interesting)
A 'miles driven' tax is exactly the kind of problem that allows people to completely externalize a lot of the public the cost of their fuel-inefficient vehicles (pollution, dependence on foreign oil, etc). We need to force people to pay those costs, in order to provide a disincentive to buying inefficient vehicles.
If we're going to switch to a miles-driven tax instead of a gas tax, then let's put a surchage tax on the purchase of inefficient vehicles. Let's make it $100 per rated mpg under 50.
Here's the math:
Say a pickup truck gets 20 mpg (generous), and will be driven for only 100,000 miles over its life. That's 5,000 gallons of fuel -- at federal excise rate of 18.4 cents/gal, that's $920 in gas taxes over the life of the vehicle.
Now look at a truck that gets 15 mpg. Fuel taxes over the life of the vehicle are $1380 (again, assuming only 100k miles driven).
A miles-driven tax, where both trucks pay the same amount, completely removes a big incentive to purchasing a fuel-efficient vehicle. And given that the low mpg rating is typical of heavier vehicles that cause more road wear-and-tear, it's only fair that they pay higher taxes.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
alright, other uses; taxing more/less depending on:
- type of road (dirt vs gravel vs concrete vs newly-laid bitumen, etc.)
- congestion statistics
- whether or not you're on a toll road
- traveling speed relative to the speed limits on the road given (i.e. speeding, or slowing everybody else down. You can speed - 'go with the flow of traffic' - in the left lane, but it'll cost you extra. You can also go 60 where the limit is 70.. and it'll cost you extra.)
And... ;)
- fining for speeding
- fining for running red lights
- fining for failing to stop
You're right that no system is perfect, but an odometer doesn't really provide a heck of a lot of information that would allow these things.
On the up side, that also means it's far less open to abuse (tracking your car's whereabouts.. if they want to use it to determine if somebody's a -habitual- red-light-runner, more power to 'm).
Re:Roads/infrastructure need to be paid for (Score:5, Interesting)
There'd probably be a minor resurgence in the odometer-resetting industry, but fact is most people won't bother. Tying it to your annual vehicle licensing sounds good otherwise... until I had this thought:
When I buy gas with cash, I am absolutely anonymous. It doesn't matter if I drive 10 miles or 10,000 miles in a week. No one can know anything about my driving habits.
Now, recall that it is already commonly considered 'evidence of drug trafficking' if you are caught carrying a large amount of cash. What if 'driving a lot of miles' began garnering similar suspicions? I see the next step as confiscating cars (just as they presently do cash) without a hint of due process, just because your odometer mileage was outside of the norm.
"You drove 5,000 miles a week? Must have been running drugs. No one drives that far every week for any legitimate purpose."
It could go both ways, too.... for people like myself who drive very little (about 3,000 miles a year) -- that is ALSO suspicious: "No one who lives near [insert long-commute city here] drives so few miles, you must be getting your odometer reset!!"
So while it's an improvement over the GPS's invasive tracking, there are still problems that can impinge upon our freedoms, by encouraging scrutiny from looking-for-trouble Big Brother types.
Re:Hidden doubling (or more) of taxes (Score:1, Interesting)
I already moderated and had to post as AC. But what I suspect is that they also see that over the next 10 - 15 years there is going to be a shift in the technology used to power cars from gasoline to electric for a lot of people. I drive less than 30 miles day and could get by on an electric car on most days and then have a gas powered hybrid car for longer trips. (it's 210 miles from my front door to my dad's house, just outside of 1 electric charge these days.)
Although I could see them taking away the 18.5 cent gas tax for "roads" and replace it with a 50-cents per gallon CO2 tax or something for "emissions controls" plus the mileage tax, which will go towards "roads".
Re:That's not a good replacement (Score:4, Interesting)
I don't like the GPS idea one bit, I'm just saying checking the odometer does not solve the problem.
I think the problem is a government so out of control with spending and managing people's lives that it requires this much tax.
Re:Hidden doubling (or more) of taxes (Score:3, Interesting)
They certainly did not do so when gas hit $4 a gallon
channelling Instapundit... (Score:3, Interesting)
They told me that if I voted for McCain the government would end up tracking my every move. And they were right!
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
I think that per-mile taxes are the way to go. It more accurately represents usage, which is what you really want to tax in order to keep the system operating. But there are some gotchas like the one mentioned above that need to be worked out first. I'm not really sure how you could keep the system fair without tracking where someone is.
Re:Hidden doubling (or more) of taxes (Score:3, Interesting)
That was my first thought too. I ran the numbers based on the summary and a 12k mi/yr average. With a car that gets 30 mpg, the annual tax comes to $74. With a car that gets 35 mpg, the tax is $63.43. With the distance based tax, the new rate is $120 or $240 per annum with the 1 and 2 cent/mi levies, respectively.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
I don't like the GPS tracking proposal, but I think your argument is wrong. The more info that is collected, the more accurate the analysis should be. Obviously innocent people are going to be near any crime scene. Now, if you were there, AND you had a motive...
A real danger, however, is that the info could be misused. Maybe someone who works in the Office of Vehicle Tracking is a criminal who now knows where his intended victims are at all times. Or maybe he has political connections and spies on one candidate to provide political ammo for another.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, having worked in computer security, I've learned that there is an *awful* lot of information that can be gleaned by analyzing traffic patterns. You can extract all kinds of information, based on your behavior and patterns and networks of locations you visit.
See for example http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/privacy/privacy_pia_ice_icepic.pdf [dhs.gov] (emphasis mine):
Re:Large Tractors (18 wheelers) already do this. (Score:2, Interesting)
I'll second this as I drove a truck and was an Owner-Operator for a while - had to get away from the keyboard. It didn't work.
Every mile driven through every state has to be reported to that state, and the taxes paid, on a monthly basis. You pay taxes at the pump, and those taxes are applied to the miles you travel on state roads. It doesn't matter if it's a highway or not - they assume that if you're driving in the state, it's a taxable highway, because 53' trailers aren't legal on many small roads and city streets. And what's a few cents for local travel? You do get a refund of taxes paid if the balance is positive, though. Each state has different taxes, though, so keeping track of it can be a pain - but if you do it right, and fuel in a high-tax state near the state line but put most of you miles in low tax states, you end up with a net positive at the end of the month - so it's more convenient.
Some states, most notably New York, charge both a road tax and a fuel tax. No road tax for toll roads - in theory, see the above for assumptions - but a fuel tax is still required. Double taxation? But wait, there's more!
There's also the Federal Heavy Vehicle Use Tax (HVUT). That's a $550/yr tax for road funding. Per vehicle. Even if it never sees the interstate.
There's also the 13% Federal Excise Tax for every purchase of a heavy truck or equipment for that truck - including an APU, for instance, which reduces diesel consumption and emissions by eliminating idling. That tax also is allocated to the highway department.
Toll roads charge per axle - so a tractor-trailer will pay 2.5 times more than a car to use the road. But with all this funding coming in, why would you need a toll road?
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
For instance, there is no need to install GPS systems in all existing cars just to tax plug-in electric cars. Do the same thing they did with diesels. Kerosene and diesel fuel are basically the same thing, yet diesel has a road tax. . The government implemented a taxing system and required the two to be different colors so it could be determined if someone was cheating. Anyone that sells diesel collects the tax and forwards it on the feds and state.
Why not the same thing for electric cars?? Why not create a law that says users have to have a special meter installed in their house to plug it in. Get really fancy and require that all electric cars won't recharge unless they sense a special signal from the electrical wiring. If a standard for a fuel pump nozzle can be reached, why not one for electric car recharging plugs. The electric company collects the taxes and forwards them to the state or feds. Do the same thing for all alternate fuels that become commonly used.
On an personal level, I don't think the Federal Government should not be in charge of collecting money and disbursing back to the states to fix state and local roads (or run schools or welfare or a host of other things.) All the federal government adds to such as system is bureaucracy and favoritism. There is a place for the federal government to help maintain the interstate highway system, since that impacts interstate commerce, but not local roads.
A system where EVERY state is receiving money from the federal government is not needed. Lower our federal taxes while lowering disbursements back to states, then let states increase income taxes to make up the difference. Efficiencies will improve somewhat, and people can decide which state they want to live in. Or what states are have better systems and copy them. Today, all states have to agree to the federal government's handout reuirements because federal income taxes are too high to allow states to increase state income taxes to cover saying 'NO' to the federal government's handouts.
But how will poor states fix their roads (or run their schools or welfare)? Grants come to mind, make them ask for it and show a need instead of writing a blank check with attachments to it related to how a state's highway system (or school system or welfare system) will be run. If a state doesn't need the money, then it's free to run it's highways (and schools and welfare system) as it see's fit. And people can decide which state to live in. If you can't run your state, then you have to run it according to the federal government's wishes.
Competition works. Handouts do not.
Re:That's not a good replacement (Score:3, Interesting)
No, I didn't miss the point, not even slightly. The point is government interference, even Big Brother. The point is that if they actually did want to, they could raise gas taxes. Hell, they haven't been raised in years, and inflation is something everybody understands. Peg it to inflation, make the increases automatic. Most people would bitch but still understand.
The added cost of the equipment in each car -- that won't be cheap. The equipment to read it -- does that happen once a year, once a month, at the gas station ... that won't be cheap. The enforcement hassles, everything you can think of is wrong with this. This is ought to be in the dictionary under "Rube Goldberg".
The tire tax is an interesting idea, and it would catch electric vehicles. Especially if it is not a straight percentage tax, but based on type of tire, so it corresponds more closely to wear and tear caused by different types of vehicles.
Or if they insist on a mileage tax, do it by odometer reading when you renew your registration every year. Pretty simple and quick -- drive up, someone sticks his head in the side window, writes it down or even punches it into the computer, done. You could even do it on the honor system, and add it to the things written down when you get a traffic ticket -- most of the people who would lie are also the types to speed, overstay meters, etc, so they would be caught, and a simple $100 or $200 fine in addition, plus enforced inspection at the next couple of reregistrations, would keep that kind of cheating under control.
But this GPS deal is a boondoggle, nothing less, the most horrendously complicated perverse way of collecting tax for roads, and it is all too easy to think there must be ulterior Big Brother motives.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:1, Interesting)
...with your odometer (and tampering with that is already a federal offense)...
The only time "tampering" with an odometer is illegal is when you do so and then sell the car representing the mileage on the odometer as the actual mileage. The easy way around any thing that the "Feds" may think of is to simply replace the instrument panel - when the instrument panel has been replaced, the shop that did the work is required to place a sticker on it stating that it has been replaced and that the mileage may or may not be accurate since there is no way for the shop to know the correct mileage of a vehicle that has a damaged or non-functional odometer. When you sell the car, this has to be disclosed. If you never sell the car it won't matter. And here in the state of Florida, if you sell the car when it is 10+ years old, the mileage is exempt from disclosure anyway, so it doesn't matter if you claim it has 1 mile or 999,999 miles.
The only downside to replacing the panel is that it will lower the value of your car for trade-in, but you could just as easily sell it to a private individual directly, while still disclosing the replaced odometer (unless 10+ years old), and get just as much money, if not more.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:4, Interesting)
I worked at a place where the boss decided installing GPS receivers in all of the work vehicles was a good idea. In theory (and only that) it was a good idea. The boxes decided on were from "GE Security". Basically, a hockey puck went on the dash. That wired to a receiver under the dash that transmitted GPS data over Sprint's network once every 5 minutes. It also reported engine on and off events. Based on the GPS data, it reported speed and direction. Based on their own data, it reported speed violations.
It was horribly flawed. For example, on a local expressway where it is impossible to make a U-turn, one driver was shown to constantly be changing directions, all the while maintaining 65mph. We knew his true direction, because we knew his destination, and we called him to ask "have you turned around at all during this trip?" He said "no".
Some of the drivers didn't like being tracked. The unit itself didn't store anything. If it was unable to transmit, it simply wouldn't send. On the next timed send event, it would attempt a send again. Mileage estimates were vague at best, even when the driver wasn't tampering with the device. A few drivers figured out that they could simply lay a static bag over the GPS antenna, and it either couldn't read the GPS signals, or it couldn't connect to transmit. Either way, they were invisible, and according to our own tracking were sitting at their last reported location. The drivers also knew that if their device appeared to be malfunctioning, we would investigate and have it repaired, so "disabling" it by covering the antenna was reserved for after hours use, or when they were rushing between sites. We had no way to tell if it was an intentional act, or the device simply couldn't send.
I was a bit upset at the purchase. I wanted to purchase one for testing. Instead, the sales rep got them on the entire fleet. {sigh} I wanted to build something more appropriate for our business needs, that wouldn't be as obvious or invasive for the drivers. For example, if the system pushed job information out to the drivers, and provided live driving directions, that would be very useful to them. It would have been a simple matter to store all events to transmit when the device could make a connection, or even a wifi connection when they came to the office to drop off paperwork. They wouldn't have to initiate anything themselves, it would be a simple matter that they drove close enough to the office to establish a wifi connection to one of our AP's, and update the server with the full log. Nope, we got a half-ass solution that didn't serve the bosses intended purpose.
So, $100 per vehicle setup and $50 per vehicle per month on a 2 year contract began. That's why CEO's should leave CIO tasks to the CIO.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:3, Interesting)
This is EXACTLY the reaction the politicians want from you.
Politician A: Let's raise the fuel tax!
Politician B: We can't, the people will revolt!
Politician A: Okay, let's propose installing GPS in every car then- people will be only too happy to accept a higher fuel tax instead!
Re:Roads/infrastructure need to be paid for (Score:1, Interesting)
Here in New Zealand, if you drive, as I do, a Diesel powered vehicle, you already have to pay for your mileage. We buy a sticker at the Post Office that has our current mileage printed on it, and the mileage we are paid up to. For example if buy a new vehicle it comes with a sticiker that covers my first 1000km. If I'm stopped and checked and my mileage is past what I've paid for I get fined. No GPS, no speeding checks, just 3.2c per km. (diesel is about 50c/litre cheaper than petrol so to my mind, this system works)