Florida toll and tax hikes because too many hybrid vehicles on the road

Florida is by far not the only state considering this. There have been several threads on this subject.

NC is studying this also since in the past the gas tax supports our DOT highway budgets. The combination of reduced overall consumption, high gas price swings and more efficient vehicles has reduced the amount of tax funds available since the tax is based on per gallon. At the same time the need for such things as bridge maintenance work, routine highway maintenance and new highway construction has increased.

In NC I would not have a problem paying a per mileage tax as long as the additional funds continued to go directly to the DOT highway fund.

 

The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Galaxy Nexus ? 2

 

Key words as long as the funds go directly to road projects. Can we all believe that will happen? I have my doubts but you never know. I personally would benefit from a per mile road tax. As long as the gas tax is eliminated, I would be for it. I drive 6k-8k miles a year.

Mike

 

Yes they are key words but up until now all of the gas tax has gone to the DOT funds so I cannot see this changing. NC is also considering toll roads for new road construction projects beyond their budgets. Personally I would rather pay a mileage tax than to pay toll fees each time I use a toll road.

On the flip side, though, with the toll fee then people outside of NC would help subsidize our road constructions projects like we do in neigboring states.

 

Just raise gasoline taxes and then electricity taxes.

 

What's a "toll road?

Hey.....if you believe that a per-mile tax will be spent exclusively on DOT projects then that's fine. I work evenings/nights, and sometimes I have to resort to listening to George Noory's show, when there's nothing interesting on the BBC or other venues. There's lots of folks there that believe in things that are just as implausible.
Personally, I have mixed feelings about a per-mile tax. On the positive side of the ledger, we're all going to have to pay. Rich, poor, EV drivers, Hummer owners, and folks that use mass transit.....unless you choose not to buy anything that has to be driven to the point of sale.
On the negative side of the ledger.....we're all going to have to pay. Rich, poor, EV drivers, Hummer owners, and folks that use mass transit. This means of course that the government can wham EV drivers and gas burners alike. Diesel and biodiesel are now on the same tax playing field! Much as I despise most Prius snobbery, I'm aware that there are ecological benefits to folks that are trying to beat the man out of his fuel tax.
The gasoline tax is supposed to be used for roads, bridges, etc. If you think that it is, or that they're going to stop collecting the gas tax in lieu of a new "mileage" tax (the former being a national program, and the latter being, for now, a state by state brain fart!)....well....I guess that's what you're going to believe. Mr. Noory's show runs from 0100-0500(EST). You might want to give his show a tumble.

Drive Carefully.

 

Until the revenues from these fuel and mileage taxes rise to level that the various DOTs are already spending on transportation, does it really matter?

 

you could hit me (and a million others) on the way to florida and back on 95. it's funny, we pay tolls all the way thru the northeast and into baltimore. and then, clear sailing all the way to orlando.

 

I build highways in NC. I don't like the idea. If they need more money they should raise the gas tax. Problem solved.

 

Lets see, Florida, now on list of places not to retire to!

 

Very true. I am sure this has been in the discussions.

 

That would be fine with me since I drive fuel efficient vehicles. It is the ones driving the big SUV's and trucks that are having the problem with this solution.

 

Maybe increase the gasoline tax and reduce some other tax (maybe income taxes) such that the majority would be in favor.

 

The 'problem' is that gas tax is per gallon, if it was a sales tax, a percentage of price, then the states would be rich at this point.

 

I am normally not in favor of additional taxes but in this case I do not have a problem paying my "fair share" in order to see our highways and bridges maintained and new highway projects completed in a more timely manner than what we are achieving with the current gas tax per gallon rate. I understand that I am paying a smaller gas tax price by driving the Prius the same miles/year as my previous Jeep GC.

The toll road fee on I-95 is one solution. We need a new bridge in to Wilmington but the timing is years away. To speed up the process a toll road option was discussed which I am not in favor of. I would rather pay additional taxes, one way or another, than to designate a local highway as toll fee.

 

A mileage-based user fee is an invasion of privacy, especially if it uses GPS. It will cost consumers more money. Yes, I'd rather have a higher gasoline tax (since we hybrid drivers use LESS gas). Let's say I happen to drive twice as many miles per year in my Prius as the guy next door in his Dodge Ram pickup. I'm still consuming less gas than he does. I should be considered the good guy and he should be considered the villain, not vice versa. The government should be rewarding hybrid drivers for putting less strain on our natural resources, not punishing us.

If we're making proposals here, why not a WEIGHT-BASED user fee? Don't get me wrong, I don't want any new fees, but at least vehicle weight correlates to actual wear and tear to the road. Look at semi-trucks. "According to a government study, one 40-ton truck does as much damage to the road as 9,600 cars" (see the source below). In many states, more permits are being granted to overweight trucks, which increases the damage. I would like to see a return to rail systems for major shipping.

Overweight trucks damage infrastructure - USATODAY.com

 

There are plenty of taxes on fuel in California. It's almost as highly taxed as cigarettes, and taxed in every kind of way. And the highways are all falling apart because the state doesn't ever spend the money the way they said they would.

Or perhaps to be more accurate, they love to build more roads than they can ever maintain.

Every city in the state is only too eager to allow new developments out in the middle of nowhere, with no consideration for the road maintenance, utilities, emergency services, flood control, etc. If a developer wants to turn 1000 acres into 10,000 homes, and they fall all over each other to approve it, with no consideration but the initial graft it took to get things rolling. All of a sudden, the sprawl sparks congestion that requires new roads, new traffic signals, more lanes on formerly 2 lane roads to nowhere, bridges, drainage, etc., all while 'downtown' and established parts of the same city rot because all of the development money is going into spreading the city around and multiplying every kind of maintenance expense. And the utilities, especially the water/sewer tend to hike rates to cover the expense of laying pipe out to the middle of nowhere, too. They borrow money to do it, and the interest adds up quick.

 

Out of all the ridiculous taxes this world shall impose, one thing remains true. There will always be a loop hole, a work around, a hack, or an evil genius to evade such ridiculousness.

There is simply no way to force every car driver (used vehicles & new) to have some device installed in their vehicles unless it is required by law to re-register or re-inspect your car that you have it installed.

Anything that can be installed, can be hacked, jacked, blocked, removed, or otherwise cheated.

How exactly does the government intend to stop people from tampering with such a device? By threatening punishment? Nobody cares.

Rest assure if this isn't canned before it goes into effect, it will be defeated in other ways.

 

I thought the US fleet average fuel economy has remained pretty constant ? These guys are either using Prius hate to rationalize more taxes, or are worrying about future increases in mandated CAFE.