Six states testing pay-as-you-drive system ...
Drivers test paying by mile instead of gas tax

Shelley Snow drives last year with a dashboard device that tracks her mileage as part of an Oregon pilot project.
By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY
Beginning early next year, drivers in six states will begin testing a new way to pay for roads and transit: Commuters will be charged for the miles they drive rather than paying taxes on gasoline purchased.
Researchers from the University of Iowa Public Policy Center will install computers and satellite equipment in the vehicles of 2,700 volunteers — 450 each from Austin, Baltimore, Boise, San Diego, eastern Iowa and the Research Triangle region of North Carolina.
Over the next two years, the drivers will get sample monthly bills for the number of miles they've driven. They can compare what they now pay in gasoline taxes with what they would have paid in per-mile fees.
"We want to assess the public's attitudes and acceptance toward a system like this," says Jon Kuhl, principal investigator on the $16.5 million Road User Charge Study and chairman of the University of Iowa Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
The nation is reassessing the way it pays for roads and transit. Since 1956, the Highway Trust Fund, financed by the federal tax on gasoline, has been a primary source of money for highway projects. But the National Governors Association and other groups and planners involved in road building have concluded that this method, supplemented by state gasoline taxes, no longer is adequate.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Oregon | Department of Transportation | University of Iowa
Americans are driving cars that get better mileage, and more are driving vehicles that use fuels taxed at lower rates than gasoline, such as ethanol, or making their own fuel and not being taxed. That means gas tax revenue isn't growing nearly as fast as the number of miles driven.
In addition, the costs of road construction materials have skyrocketed because of heavy demand from India and China. Congress and many state legislatures are reluctant to increase gas taxes, especially at a time of high prices at the pump. The federal gas tax of 18.4 cents a gallon has not been increased since 1993; 24 states have not raised their gas taxes since 1997, according to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association.
That has made a mileage fee more attractive to some agencies. The University of Iowa study is funded by the Federal Highway Administration and 15 state departments of transportation.
Elsewhere:
•Oregon this year finished a year-long experiment that tested a "virtual tollway" system that could eventually replace the state gas tax with a road-user fee. Volunteers drove vehicles equipped with state-installed Global Positioning System (GPS) devices and odometers that kept track of the miles they drove. When they gassed up, the drivers paid for their gas as well as 1.2 cents for each mile driven since their last fill-up; they did not pay the 24-cents-a-gallon state gas tax.
•Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty says part of his state's plan for dealing with declining gas tax revenues is a mileage tax or fee. He wants a test project this year.
•Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter appointed a 32-member commission in March to explore long-term options, including mileage fees.
Some transportation experts believe that mileage fees will replace the gas tax within the next 15-20 years. "At some point, in some metro areas, market-based pricing using the latest technology will supplant the fuel tax revenues," says Joseph Giglio, a professor at Northeastern University who has written extensively on transportation financing.
Privacy advocates worry about the use of satellite navigation technology to track drivers' movements. "Where you go is something that, for the most part, people consider private," says Lee Tien, an attorney who specializes in privacy issues for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The second point is, it's the sort of thing we do to the bad guys. Where do you hear a lot about GPS tracking? It's for prisoners or people who are out on probation."
James Whitty, who headed the Oregon experiment, says some of the 260 volunteers initially had privacy concerns, but those worries faded. He says that 91% of those surveyed said they would pay a mileage fee if the program were expanded statewide.
Leroy Younglove, a participant in the Oregon study, says he had no privacy concerns and that the mileage fee is fairer than the gas tax. "I thought it was an interesting alternative to the method we have now and one that might have ways of obtaining tax revenues as different types of fuel options become available," says Younglove, 63, who manages real estate.
"It's not a question of if this is viable," says Iowa's Kuhl. "It's a question of when it becomes politically and socially viable to make such a large-scale shift."

Shelley Snow drives last year with a dashboard device that tracks her mileage as part of an Oregon pilot project.
By Larry Copeland, USA TODAY
Beginning early next year, drivers in six states will begin testing a new way to pay for roads and transit: Commuters will be charged for the miles they drive rather than paying taxes on gasoline purchased.
Researchers from the University of Iowa Public Policy Center will install computers and satellite equipment in the vehicles of 2,700 volunteers — 450 each from Austin, Baltimore, Boise, San Diego, eastern Iowa and the Research Triangle region of North Carolina.
Over the next two years, the drivers will get sample monthly bills for the number of miles they've driven. They can compare what they now pay in gasoline taxes with what they would have paid in per-mile fees.
"We want to assess the public's attitudes and acceptance toward a system like this," says Jon Kuhl, principal investigator on the $16.5 million Road User Charge Study and chairman of the University of Iowa Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering.
The nation is reassessing the way it pays for roads and transit. Since 1956, the Highway Trust Fund, financed by the federal tax on gasoline, has been a primary source of money for highway projects. But the National Governors Association and other groups and planners involved in road building have concluded that this method, supplemented by state gasoline taxes, no longer is adequate.
FIND MORE STORIES IN: Oregon | Department of Transportation | University of Iowa
Americans are driving cars that get better mileage, and more are driving vehicles that use fuels taxed at lower rates than gasoline, such as ethanol, or making their own fuel and not being taxed. That means gas tax revenue isn't growing nearly as fast as the number of miles driven.
In addition, the costs of road construction materials have skyrocketed because of heavy demand from India and China. Congress and many state legislatures are reluctant to increase gas taxes, especially at a time of high prices at the pump. The federal gas tax of 18.4 cents a gallon has not been increased since 1993; 24 states have not raised their gas taxes since 1997, according to the American Road & Transportation Builders Association.
That has made a mileage fee more attractive to some agencies. The University of Iowa study is funded by the Federal Highway Administration and 15 state departments of transportation.
Elsewhere:
•Oregon this year finished a year-long experiment that tested a "virtual tollway" system that could eventually replace the state gas tax with a road-user fee. Volunteers drove vehicles equipped with state-installed Global Positioning System (GPS) devices and odometers that kept track of the miles they drove. When they gassed up, the drivers paid for their gas as well as 1.2 cents for each mile driven since their last fill-up; they did not pay the 24-cents-a-gallon state gas tax.
•Minnesota Gov. Tim Pawlenty says part of his state's plan for dealing with declining gas tax revenues is a mileage tax or fee. He wants a test project this year.
•Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter appointed a 32-member commission in March to explore long-term options, including mileage fees.
Some transportation experts believe that mileage fees will replace the gas tax within the next 15-20 years. "At some point, in some metro areas, market-based pricing using the latest technology will supplant the fuel tax revenues," says Joseph Giglio, a professor at Northeastern University who has written extensively on transportation financing.
Privacy advocates worry about the use of satellite navigation technology to track drivers' movements. "Where you go is something that, for the most part, people consider private," says Lee Tien, an attorney who specializes in privacy issues for the San Francisco-based Electronic Frontier Foundation. "The second point is, it's the sort of thing we do to the bad guys. Where do you hear a lot about GPS tracking? It's for prisoners or people who are out on probation."
James Whitty, who headed the Oregon experiment, says some of the 260 volunteers initially had privacy concerns, but those worries faded. He says that 91% of those surveyed said they would pay a mileage fee if the program were expanded statewide.
Leroy Younglove, a participant in the Oregon study, says he had no privacy concerns and that the mileage fee is fairer than the gas tax. "I thought it was an interesting alternative to the method we have now and one that might have ways of obtaining tax revenues as different types of fuel options become available," says Younglove, 63, who manages real estate.
"It's not a question of if this is viable," says Iowa's Kuhl. "It's a question of when it becomes politically and socially viable to make such a large-scale shift."
.
I can't see this working in the U.S. at any price due to privacy concerns.
I can imagine if this were done in Mexico, the politicans, police, other individuals would use such a system for their own purposes.
If you want to add more toll plazas, then do that. Florida has been considering doing just that to bring in more revenue. In addition, they encourage the purchase of fuel efficient vehicles by offering certain vehicles use the HOV lanes as a reward.
I can imagine if this were done in Mexico, the politicans, police, other individuals would use such a system for their own purposes.
If you want to add more toll plazas, then do that. Florida has been considering doing just that to bring in more revenue. In addition, they encourage the purchase of fuel efficient vehicles by offering certain vehicles use the HOV lanes as a reward.
This is stupid. It's only going to add overhead, complication, and expense and in turn serve to add expense to those who drive a lot but drive environmentally friendly fuel efficient vehicles, and benefit those that drive fuel-sucking smog producing heavy vehicles like commercial vehicles, and I don't doubt for a second that the commercial vehicles do FAR more damage and require far more money to be put into the development and repair of roads than a little honda civic does.
Not only is this a bad idea, it is simply another way to tax the poor. It is a known fact that housing costs is higher near larger cities or towns, and those that can't afford the higher cost of housing have to go further and further out. That means they have to drive further and further miles to work. The punishment is if you cant afford to pay the price to live closer to work, the government will make you pay another way. In this case by the miles you drive to get to work.
Not every city has good public transportation. Living out in the country where I grew up you had to walk nearly 1 mile to get to the nearest bus stop. Not too mention buses shut down at about 11PM. There is no public transportation when you work the late or over night shift.
Trending Topics
Doesn't this say "tax more someone who has better fuel efficient vehicle?"
I'll do some quick math. Lets say you put 15gal in your car and you save $3.60 if state tax is 24 cents per gallon. For $3.60 you can only go exactly 300 miles if they charge you 1.2 cents per mile, which is also equivalent of exactly 20MPG of car fuel consumption.
Today a lot of vehicles are capable of 20+MPG which means they will pay more taxes. So the ones that really save money are Lambo owners.
I'll do some quick math. Lets say you put 15gal in your car and you save $3.60 if state tax is 24 cents per gallon. For $3.60 you can only go exactly 300 miles if they charge you 1.2 cents per mile, which is also equivalent of exactly 20MPG of car fuel consumption.
Today a lot of vehicles are capable of 20+MPG which means they will pay more taxes. So the ones that really save money are Lambo owners.
Doesn't this say "tax more someone who has better fuel efficient vehicle?"
I'll do some quick math. Lets say you put 15gal in your car and you save $3.60 if state tax is 24 cents per gallon. For $3.60 you can only go exactly 300 miles if they charge you 1.2 cents per mile, which is also equivalent of exactly 20MPG of car fuel consumption.
Today a lot of vehicles are capable of 20+MPG which means they will pay more taxes. So the ones that really save money are Lambo owners.
I'll do some quick math. Lets say you put 15gal in your car and you save $3.60 if state tax is 24 cents per gallon. For $3.60 you can only go exactly 300 miles if they charge you 1.2 cents per mile, which is also equivalent of exactly 20MPG of car fuel consumption.
Today a lot of vehicles are capable of 20+MPG which means they will pay more taxes. So the ones that really save money are Lambo owners.
I can see an extension of this GPS device used for the fee system to also monitor things like speeding and say if you ran through a red light. There are some parts of big brother I don't want. It is better that humans police the humans, not machines policing the humans.
The above posts are all valid. Taxing the gas at the pump is already equivalent to taxing how much you drive as well as giving you a credit for a more fuel-efficient vehicle. The overhead costs for our current system are far below what it would be to have to monitor and tax the end user by miles driven.
If the governments are crying about not having enough tax revenues then they should raise the gas taxes. If they're complaining about alternate-fuel vehicles draining revenues then raise the tax on those fuels at the pump as well.
This method is just one step away from being able to regulate how much we drive and that is a scary thought.
If the governments are crying about not having enough tax revenues then they should raise the gas taxes. If they're complaining about alternate-fuel vehicles draining revenues then raise the tax on those fuels at the pump as well.
This method is just one step away from being able to regulate how much we drive and that is a scary thought.
In Mexico, they are going to raise the gas prices come 2008 due to continued shortfalls in revenues. Having gas prices that run already for me about $3.60 USD a gallon premium down here certainly have a tangible effect on what and how you drive.
Not only is this a bad idea, it is simply another way to tax the poor. It is a known fact that housing costs is higher near larger cities or towns, and those that can't afford the higher cost of housing have to go further and further out. That means they have to drive further and further miles to work. The punishment is if you cant afford to pay the price to live closer to work, the government will make you pay another way. In this case by the miles you drive to get to work.
Not every city has good public transportation. Living out in the country where I grew up you had to walk nearly 1 mile to get to the nearest bus stop. Not too mention buses shut down at about 11PM. There is no public transportation when you work the late or over night shift.
I guess they'll have some kind of 'credits' for poor people, but regardless, the whole idea is awful.
The govt will then know when you go, where you go, and how you go. No they wouldn't use that data for other purposes, right?

But I will love it since I drive so little.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
1QWKGS4
Car Chat
19
Mar 5, 2013 08:57 AM
Gojirra99
Car Chat
8
Sep 19, 2007 11:05 AM
Overclocker
Car Chat
4
Jul 19, 2007 09:24 AM











