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]
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Insightful)
There's another really nice tool that has the advantage that EVERY car already has one:
Odometer [wikipedia.org]
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Funny)
Think of the government lobbyists, you insensitive clod!
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I try not to. The doctor said not to get my blood pressure up that high.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:4, Informative)
List is in the lower right here. [dot.gov]
I did not see Binky, Shakes, or Crusty in the list.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:4, Insightful)
It does if the states decide to piggyback off the service as well, and you can rest assured that they'll want to. Since federal fuel taxes are dropping it means state fuel taxes are also declining for the exact same reasons. They'll likely want to use this system to tax drivers on their state roads, and to do that you need the accuracy & tracking that GPS provides.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Agreed. It would be so much cheaper to just raise the fuel tax. The mechanism is already in place (gas stations collect it, just change the amount if you need more money) and by taxing fuel not miles, it encourages fuel economy. I just don't get it. Unless of course the real reason is to track everyone.
Re: (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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes, its called TOLL ROADS. They exist. Once again a solution looking for a problem. Why is it so hard to simply raise the fuel tax? Or better yet, why is it so hard for the government (federal / state / local) to live within their means?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
And you don't think the Feds wouldn't think of this sort of thing? They'll likely design the thing to compare what the GPS records with your odometer (and tampering with that is already a federal offense), require both to be inspected on a regular basis, and also back the whole thing up with federal legislation making any sort of tampering illegal and subject to a nice long stay at Club Fed.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
what if my odometer is defective?
my old car's odo specifically has a fairly predictable amount of slippage. It shouldn't be too hard to slip the same amount. or you have a disconnect between the wheels and odo that kicks in at the same time you enable the brass mesh...
seriously, this will be hacked.
it would be prohibitively expensive to retro to older cars.
it won't work in certain areas...
etc.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I had a car (an old sunbird circa 1986) that had a funny odometer. Sometimes the odometer would roll backwards. And when it would, it would go about 5 times as fast as it would go forward. It would probably happen once every month or two & usually do it for about a day.
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm, the data is coming off a GPS unit, all they have to do (and trust me they have this in mind already) is say, Oh, we need to know where you go so we know where to send the tax money and suddenly they have a "legitimate" and "reasonable" reason to track each persons vehicular movements.
To think that that data would not be subject to the same "mission creep" that every other government collection of anything is subject to is ludicrous.
Even if the initial legislation explicitly forbids any other uses they
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that it doesn't matter where people drove, but you're over-thinking the allocation.
Just divide up the money by population and give occasional bonuses to tourist destinations. If you do that, you'll be pretty close to the same allocation without the fundamental invasion of every individual's privacy. Want more accurate allocation data? That's what traffic counters are for. There's no reason to believe that this will result in any improvement over the current system beyond what could be gained by
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Also, having worked in computer security, I've learned that there
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
It matters, because that gasoline tax is part Federal, part local. If you just base it on mileage, some states would complain they're not getting their fair share of the actual revenue. So, I live in Jersey and work in Philly.. that's about 60% Jersey, 40% Pennsylvania on a typical commute. Driving a Prius (500+ mile range), I never buy the more expensive petrol in PA, but I could, and I'm sure many do... there's a heavy South Jersey to PA commute. If it was simply based on mileage, Jersey would get to appl
Re: (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 die
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You misunderstood the point of having a tax system: The people collect money, which is then invested in the public interest. As a result of this, some win, some lose. Tough luck if you're on the losing end when it comes to road tax; you'll probably benefit in other areas.
Also, just because you do not travel on certain busy broken roads, it doesn't mean that you're not USING those roa
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I think I would get a sense of a couple things from this project; how much data is used to completely document a single humans daily life, and how much of
Re: (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 dange
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Your odometer can report how much of your mileage was on public roads? Cool!
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (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 re
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Informative)
- fining for running red lights
- fining for failing to stop
GPS will not be able to do any of things passively. For example, my GPS units constantly gets confused when I drive the freeway near my house, becuase there is a side street that parallels the freeway, and in some sections, is only separated from the freeway with a simple concrete barrer. If the GPS thinks you are on the side-street when you are on the freeway, it will think the speed limit is 35 instead of 65. I know of several residential areas that are built on loops that branch off an arterial street, and run parallel and reconnect at the end of the subdivision. This street is often separated from the main street with a simple curb. If GPS thinks you are on the loop that runs parallel it will think the speed limit is 25 instead of 45.
Likewise, there are several intersections in our metro area, where there is a protected lane that bypasses the signals, as it's separated with fixed cones. If the GPS doesn't know you are in the protected lane, it will think you are running a red light.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
How much of your mileage isn't on public roads? For most people, I'd guess almost none (up and down the driveway doesn't account for much for my trip into work each day). So, tough shit. No system is going to be perfect.
And if 99% was good enough, you'd be missing a paycheck every two years.
Re: (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 k
That you would even consider... (Score:3, Insightful)
..GPS tracking by the government shows how far apart we are just in general principles as per my above first reply about how far we are into a full police state and how people have been slowly conditioned to accept it and not even see it. I remember saying the same thing about electronic computerized voting way back here before it even started, when it was a lot more popular in concept because it was "computerized', high tech, so it just must be mo' bettah. I called shenanigans then as well, because I could
That's not a good replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
There's another really nice tool that has the advantage that EVERY car already has one: Odometer
So who gets the money from that?
Currently if I am driving in a state the state usually gets some percentage of the gas tax.
If you are just checking the odometer, my home state gets all the money even if I travel out of state often?
I don't like the GPS idea one bit, I'm just saying checking the odometer does not solve the problem.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So who gets the money from that?
The Feds at least since the federal commission was first talking about a federal tax. In the case of state taxes
Currently if I am driving in a state the state usually gets some percentage of the gas tax. If you are just checking the odometer, my home state gets all the money even if I travel out of state often?
Yeah but so what? They can set their state tax to whatever they want, and set up whatever revenue sharing deals with other states that they want. Since the major co
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:That's not a good replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
Raising the gas tax is far cheaper, impossible to turn into Big Brother, and localizes the the state and community pretty well, on average.
Re:That's not a good replacement (Score:5, Insightful)
Wow, you missed the point entirely.
The reason for the tax is because I can now buy production electric cars which don't use any gas. So you could put whatever amount of tax on gas you wanted and the government wouldn't get a cent.
This then leads to:
SUV owner pays a lot of tax.
Trucking Industry collapses.
Daily commuter pays near the same tax due to fuel economy.
Hybrid owner pays low tax.
EV owner pays no tax.
All use the same roads, but are now taxed at different rates.
My solution: Tax tires. It has a direct correlation to road usage and all vehicles use tires. If you drive hard you do more damage to the road and your tires, meaning you'll need to replace both sooner. If you drive like a granny your tires will last longer and so will the roads.
I'll remove any GPS unit they try and put in my car. I may soon be spending a great deal of time in jail.
Re: (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,
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
There's another really nice tool that has the advantage that EVERY car already has one: Odometer
That would be all well and good if a mileage tax was really what they were after. It should be obvious to anyone who is familiar with the events over the past decade or so, however, that this is hardly the case. Now that they have identified where everybody is going on airplanes, cars are an unknown variable. This system, pawned off as a "tax" is like using the "drinking age" to get everybody to carry ID. It identifies cars -- and by extension their drivers -- with locations constantly. It is just one
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Why not tax fuel?
- consumption is proportional to milage!
- promotes fuel efficiency!
- collection is easy!
- big brother not included!
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Insightful)
Right now we don't need anything to discourage moving toward electric / hybrid / high mileage vehicles. The environmental benefits and economic benefits of removing the need for foreign oil would far outweigh whatever revenue the government would receive.
Eventually they could probably come up with an electric metering system for plug-ins which would be far less intrusive than having a GPS watching you all the time.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Informative)
*brrrring!*
Hello?
Ah, it's for you, fellow named William Jevons [wikipedia.org] calling.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
How do you get $75? Hell, how can you get 50 cents for 100 miles?
2 cents/mile = $0.02/mile, therefore
See a pattern yet? In 15,000 miles you'll be paying $300 in taxes.
Re:Do we really need GPS to track mileage ? (Score:5, Insightful)
"the Prius drivers have more of an impact on the roads because they can drive much further (and cause much more wear on the roads) than the Hummer drivers."
The Prius weighs in at just over 3000 lbs, the Hummer H3 at just over 6000. How is the Prius with it's smaller wheels and less weight going to do MORE damage to roads no matter how far they drive? Seems like the way to measure the damage is per mile right, not vehicle range?
C.
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3)
You're probably joking but I can think of a couple of inventive (and fun!) ways to abuse this. The first way to save yourself some money if this actually becomes a reality would be to simply remove the GPS device and leave it in your garage somewhere. Obviously it would have to still be functional for this to work, but I'm sure some hackerish type will figure that out.
The second (devious and more fun way) would be a great way to get revenge on someone. Remove their GPS device from their vehicle and attac
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Much simpler to just put a bit of tinfoil over the antenna. Remove it on Sundays to rack up a little mileage, and at inspection time.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I just happen to REALLY like tunnels.
Re:Great (Score:4, Informative)
You would be looking at paying $300.00 in taxes annually based on a 15,000 mile a year average, if it is set at a $0.02 per mile level. Opposed to a $0.185 per gallon tax now.
Say your vehicle holds 13 gallons and goes 30 miles per gallon. You are currently paying $2.775 in taxes for those 390 miles. Stretch that out to 15,000 miles and you are paying $106.73 a year in taxes. That is quite a leap from $106.73 to $300.00.
Re:Great (Score:5, Insightful)
You're assuming they'll drop the gasoline tax. I'm betting it's more like a leap from $106.73 to $406.73.
Re:Great (Score:4, Informative)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Great idea, Comrade. Now report to Gitmo for your manditory citizen re-education training and seminars and stop criticising the Holy Government.
Better watch your speed... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
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.
faraday cage anyone? (Score:2)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Faraday_cage [wikipedia.org]
Or, since the antenna would need to be somewhat exposed, just make a "sleeve" that blocks RF?
Just as a show of good faith, leave it off for trips to work and pop it on during long trips? Or just leave it on and claim you're a hermit?
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
GPS can also be fairly easily jammed. In a number of areas (particularly with cheaper devices), it's very difficult to get reliable GPS signals, so blocking reception wouldn't be all that suspicious.
Tracking vs. billing (Score:2)
Keep your fucking GPS trackers out of my life.
old/weird cars? (Score:2)
So I guess they will have exemptions for older cars, cars that have value in original condition and adding/changing something will reduce value, etc.
For example - what would happen to the value of my all original '65 Porsche 356 if a hole was cut in the dash, another in the body for the antenna, etc? Not to mention running whatever they design off of a 44+ year old 6v electrical system...
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
So I guess they will have exemptions for older cars, cars that have value in original condition and adding/changing something will reduce value, etc.
They're politicians, they don't care a whit about you or your car. They care about getting reelected and getting more of your money to spend.
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)
Re:Odometer (Score:5, Insightful)
They already do write down the mileage when you get the emissions checked. Not for the safety check I think. The info is in the DMV database. maybe the DMV database is so screwed up that the tax people do not want to touch it.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
Bill
Re:Odometer (Score:5, Funny)
Also, in Indiana, they don't verbs.
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
They already do in many states so they could easily use this to track taxes. On cars built after 1992 they check your odometer against rollbacks. If the odometer has been rolled back, it is reported on your title. They just want to be able to track you in more detail, see when and where you are speeding (automatic speeding tickets), see where you were the night of the murder, which protests you attended, what church you belong to etc. etc.
Great Idea (Score:5, Insightful)
GPS would be infinitely useful for governments. In addition to tracking mileage they can automatically charge tolls and even issue speeding tickets.
Why not just continue to raise the fuel taxes to generate revenue? That would serve to continue to reduce fuel consumption which would be a good thing.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
hy not just continue to raise the fuel taxes to generate revenue? That would serve to continue to reduce fuel consumption which would be a good thing.
Well the funny thing is that this isn't about being green and reducing fossil fuel consumption. For that, a gas tax does work much better. No, this is about ensuring revenue for the federal highway fund and for the states' road funds continues to come in even as fuel economies go up and alternative fuel vehicles become more popular.
The article mentions the C
Except They Won't Issue Speeding Tickets (Score:3, Insightful)
toll? (Score:2)
GPS Jammer (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:GPS Jammer (Score:4, Funny)
I guess I no longer have to worry about the signs in Virginia which alert me that "Speed limits enforced by aircraft." I always figured they'd just hit you with a SAM and be done with it, though I can see how this might hurt the revenue angle. :-)
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Nah, SAMs [wikipedia.org] go the other way around. Besides they'd just damage the road, and then who'd fix it?
The airplanes are just there to alert the Land forces if you need a TOW [wikipedia.org]. ;)
What about Oklahoma? (Score:5, Funny)
Or... (Score:3, Insightful)
Hidden doubling (or more) of taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
See, the people will revolt if we suddenly double or triple the gas tax, which is 18.5 cents a gallon.
But, since we're going to mandate that all cars get 35 miles per gallon, and then we charge 1 to 2 cents (and it'll be two cents, if not four by the time it gets passed), then that means we've effectively upped the gas tax to between 35 and 70 cents a gallon (or $1.40 by four cents a mile). And the great part is that, just like income tax, they won't see the per gallon increase, they just get a bill at the end of the month that they have to pay.
Way to double, triple, or more the gas tax without looking like it.
Also, by the law of unintended consequences, by removing the tax from the gas, it makes it more cost effective to buy an older, cheaper gas guzzler, than a new, expensive, hybrid car. Thanks for destroying the environment, morons.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yet another symptom of how the government has forgotten it exists to SERVE We The People; contrary to the direction of current policies, We The People don't exist solely to be the government's revenue stream!!
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
They certainly did not do so when gas hit $4 a gallon
Re: (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.
Bad idea (Score:4, Insightful)
Positive Change (Score:3, Insightful)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yes we can!
2 year commission. Just concluded.. Hmm...
Think about it.
Then stfu.
And this encourages conservation how??? (Score:3, Insightful)
Like it or not, a direct result of higher fuel prices is a drop is demand. Regardless of your views on oil production/drilling/exploration, it seems like it would be in everyone's best interest to use less fuel.
There was once--many years ago--talk of taxing motor fuel to reduce consumption. While I never personally agreed with the proposal, the idea of removing taxes from gasoline (which would make it appear cheaper to consumers) seems like a step in the wrong direction.
I wonder who is advising the "federal commission" on the options available to them? Why on earth would they decide a massive new taxation infrastructure was the "best path forward" unless they were being advised by someone who would benefit in some way from the massive purchase of new GPS tracking equipment?
Call me a curmudgeon, but I'd really like to know...
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.
Finally (Score:5, Insightful)
Something that might get more Americans to ride bicycles.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
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.
It will be both taxes (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no way in hell that the government will remove any gas taxes, they will just add the per mile tax.
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!
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.
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.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think that's a very good question... a survey of what they drive might be very enlightening. Anecdotally, I've observed they tend toward the Hummer Experience.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
Lets see:
-Doubtless the system will be abused, all systems are. The question is will it be abused more than the benefit it provides. My feeling is that it would not provide the benefit expected.
-Tax Money never goes where I hope it will, the US government spends trillions of dollars maintaining a military killing people in far flung lands. I didn't sign up for that.
-If you can't afford quadrupling $0.005/Per Mile tax, you can't afford to drive.
-I don't give a fuck if you "feel the need to drive 'excessive
Re: (Score:3, Informative)
Anybody who is getting better than 18.5 miles per gallon will LOSE money if this happens.
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: (Score:3, Insightful)
Yeah you're right. The gubmint should just stop building and maintaining roads. Let them all fall apart and we can just switch to commuting on mountain bikes.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I dunno. For someone like me, who doesn't use highways very often, it would be nice to be relieved of a tax burden and have it put back on the people who actually benefit from the highway system.
Right... because no one uses the highway to deliver your packages or goods to the stores from which you purchase things... so none of those prices will go up, either.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
My guess is it's the rich idiots driving 10 mpg SUVs that think global warming is a myth pushing for this. Odd, the SUV owners all whine "but I need a big car to haul a bunch of people" but I rarely see one of these monstrosities with more than one person in it.