Jeff Strickland wrote:
>
> "Mike Hunter" <mikehunt2@lycos/com> wrote in message
> news:n9GdndZjb_THDPvUnZ2dnUVZ_szinZ2d@ptd.net...
>> Lets see if I understand this. I live in Oregon and I have two
>> vehicles, one weighs 2,000 LB, the other weighs 3,000 LB. one gets 20
>> MPG, and the other gets 35 MPG, doing 60 MPH on the interstate. I
>> pay MORE in gas taxes for the one than the other, per 100 miles
>> driven, right?
>>
>
> You currently pay more in one than the other by virtue of one needing
> more gas than the other to get where you want to go.
>
> The problem for the state is that if the vehicle fleet becomes more
> efficient and the CAFE (for lack of a better illustration) goes from
> 17.5 to 22.5, then there will be fewer taxes collected. (I pulled those
> numbers out of my ass, what the numbers are and what they go to does not
> really matter. All that matters is our cars are getting more efficient,
> so fewer gas taxes are being collected.)
>
> If they go to a GPS-based taxation system, then presumably all motorists
> will be taxed on the distance they travel, not the gas it takes to get
> there -- as is the current tax model. Part of the current consumer
> motivation to move toward fuel efficient cars is causing the state to
> collect fewer taxes.
>
> If gas taxes are $0.20 per gallon, and your Suburban gets 15 mpg while a
> Yaris gets 30 mpg, the Surbuban will pay $1.33 in gas taxes to go 100
> miles, the Yaris will pay $0.67. With a GPS-based system, all drivers
> can be forced to pay $1.33, defeating (at least in part) the whole
> purpose of buying a Yaris.
Right, and if we want to encourage people to who don't need Suburbans to
drive Yarises, this is a bad idea. Far better to simply raise gas taxes
until the required revenue for infrastructure maintenance is collected.
Then, if someday we find that a significant portion of the fleet is
running on fuels that aren't taxed, we should revisit this discussion.
Until then, no need to make it any more complex than it has to be.
nate
(you do realize you were replying to Mike Hunt, right?)
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel