Washington State Pay by Mile Tax

[Rukentuts]

And if they have to pay more, then youre going to pay more for just about everything you buy, since they will just pass on the increased cost of hauling on to the customers

Because there's not more than one way to ship something?

Making them take lighter loads, that help the exponential damage weight causes to roads, wouldn't break the system.

[Orlong]

This. I dont give a shit about what new way they find to levy taxes, but I care alot about this and will never install anything in my car thats being used to track me. Id go down fighting before id let that happen.

If you have a car made in the last few years, you already have a "black box" in it that tracks things like speed, braking, mileage, etc that they pull when you have an accident to help determine fault. I wish I knew how to disable/remove it from my car, but I havent figured it out yet

[petej0]

If you have a car made in the last few years, you already have a "black box" in it that tracks things like speed, braking, mileage, etc that they pull when you have an accident to help determine fault. I wish I knew how to disable/remove it from my car, but I havent figured it out yet

Yes but that only records the last 30 seconds or so before a crash.

- - - Updated - - -

It would need to be at least 100x the normal consumer amount.

I think that is excessive. The amount of miles for class 8 trucks alone is close to a hundred billion miles a year.

[Rukentuts]

I think that is excessive.

It's actually lower than the amount of damage they cause compared to a car.

Edit:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/091116/03.htm

The need for road surface maintenance is greatly attributable to the heaviest vehicles. Based on the findings of the American Association of State Highway Officials (AASHO) road test, damage caused by heavy trucks was long thought to increase with approximately the fourth power of the axle load. This means that one axle of 10 tons on a heavy truck was 160,000 times more damaging to a road surface than an axle of 0.5 tons (car scale).

Should we use this number instead?

[petej0]

It's actually lower than the amount of damage they cause compared to a car.

Edit:

https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/policy/091116/03.htm

Should we use this number instead?

I am not arguing the damage trucks do to roads. What we are discussing is the amount trucks should be taxed. If the cost to replace a road every 5-10 years is $20 million then that should be the amount of taxes taken in to repair that road. There is no sense taxing $75 million to replace a $20 million strech of road.

I would also beg to differ on HOW they determine road damage. If a road sees mostly passenger car traffic like most residential roads. A pot hole developed during the winter will get larger faster due to 100 daily passenger car traffic hitting it then 1 class 8 truck passing over it weekly.

[Tinykong]

Should we use this number instead?

From a little further down:

"In recent years, however, it was determined that the relationship between axle weights and pavement damage is complex and varies based on numerous variables, including environmental factors, type of terrain and roadway design. The National Pavement Cost Model (NAPCOM), which is the pavement model currently used by FHWA, estimates that for some types of pavement deterioration, doubling the axle load causes 15 to 20 times as much damage; for other types of deterioration, doubling the load only doubles the damage."

[Xenryusho]

It's a good idea overall. When you drive a car, it damages roads that need repair, it takes up road/parking space on the streets and also it damages ecology. All these factors are directly related to how much you drive annually.

Do you honestly believe that the blacktop we use now is the best material for the job? It's a joke to keep the road workers employed, even in areas with the budget to replace worn roads opt to replace despite the long term costs. Not to mention that certain vehicles create disproportionate wear on the roads and that union work schedules and procedure inflate the price for to complete a repair. This is just another push to squeeze as much money from the tax payers as possible, they finally have people driving fuel efficient vehicles and they're seeing the consequence of such on their coffers and those of their lobbyists... It's the death of the electric car all over again.

[Khoranth]

So the government of that state wants to punish people who take long, interstate type roads to work, and reward people who drive through busy, city areas?

[Rukentuts]

If a road sees mostly passenger car traffic like most residential roads. A pot hole developed during the winter will get larger faster due to 100 daily passenger car traffic hitting it then 1 class 8 truck passing over it weekly.

Residential roads are largely paid for by property/city taxes iirc.

[petej0]

Residential roads are largely paid for by property/city taxes iirc.

Yes, maybe so. Even if it was a rural county road, my point still stands. Hell the Garden State Parkway in NJ and the Taconic State Parkway in NY ban truck traffic and these roads are in horrible shape. I am not discounting the damage potential of trucks, but cars in large numbers can do just about as much damage.

I am fine with taxing trucks more, but 100x more is a bit much and is only born out of emotion and no thought on the effect to consumers. Like I said, if it cost $20 million there is no sense taxing any multiple more then that.

[Tradewind]

I see weed legalization has started taking its toll on lawmaker decisions!

[Rukentuts]

I am fine with taxing trucks more, but 100x more is a bit much and is only born out of emotion

No, it's born out of the proportion of the damage they cause.

and no thought on the effect to consumers. Like I said, if it cost $20 million there is no sense taxing any multiple more then that.

Then we can cut the amount on private citizens. And if one of these effects is shipping moves more onto trains, then good riddance.

[Cthulhu 2020]

I see weed legalization has started taking its toll on lawmaker decisions!

You're assuming they weren't using it before its legalization!

[Tradewind]

You're assuming they weren't using it before its legalization!

*pffffffffffffffffff*

"what if...the roads were taxes"

[zolok2.0]

What?

Unless you're saying all wealthy people drive sports cars far in excess of the speed limits, this is a nonsense phrase. Older cars get worse mileage per gallon, but they're fully capable of driving the same speed as more modern vehicles.

And shifting from a mileage tax to a distance tax is, explicitly, a shift to a less regressive option.

Clearly he meant MPG, not MPH......... Nice job catching that >_>

[petej0]

No, it's born out of the proportion of the damage they cause.

Yes, but when you look at the cost of replacing or repairing it doesnt make sense to tax that amount. So it falls back to emotion. "Err....they should pay!" <wave fist>

Then we can cut the amount on private citizens. And if one of these effects is shipping moves more onto trains, then good riddance.

If you want to cut the amount citizens pay and raise the amount truckers and truck companies pay, that is a different argument and I may be on board with that. You still have to get the product from the rail yard to its final destination. We would have to increase the rail network to handle increased traffic etc.. These all have problems of their own from environmental studies (we all know how environmentalists can be) to citizen NIMBY's (try getting a new rail line through or around towns and cities) Not only that, it could increase the amount of time to ship items.

[Hey There Guys its Metro]

I've never been more excited about something before in my life!

[Papagiorgio]

Small personal use vehicles (cars, trucks, SUVs) do not damage roads compared to semi trucks, tanker trucks, and other super heavy vehicles. However, the Chamber of Commerce and truck driver union/lobby groups will ensure everyone in their Prius pays to repair the roads damaged by heavy trucks.

[Rukentuts]

These all have problems of their own from environmental studies (we all know how environmentalists can be) to citizen NIMBY's (try getting a new rail line through or around towns and cities) Not only that, it could increase the amount of time to ship items.

Considering that trains can move cargo insane distances at vastly superior fuel economy, and that trucks are one of the larger contributors of greenhouse gases, any one using their brain would likely be on board.

[petej0]

Considering that trains can move cargo insane distances at vastly superior fuel economy, and that trucks are one of the larger contributors of greenhouse gases, any one using their brain would likely be on board.

On the face of it yes and I agree with you. However environmentalists will block, delay or have construction shifted to other areas because a new rail line will endanger a special rare plant life or old stand of trees. Or animal rights activists claim a rare albino turtle lives in the river that construction will impact. Lets also not forget how people love to not have increased rail traffic citing "for the children" safety concerns or home values. Look I agree, but these groups always come out of the wood work when it comes to major construction programs.