Pay-per-mile vs Gas Tax

[Shock96]

The biggest issue is that WA state will not regulate the increases in any meaningful way. They will continue with a high gas tax and just increase the per mile charge as well. The fund all sorts of crazy stuff. There would be no guarantee that the funds would be only for roads. It will end up in the general fund.

The WA state constitution prohibits an income tax. It can only be considered if it is equally applied to all residents regardless of income but they still keep trying to push through an income tax on "the rich". So far it has been shot down but they keep changing the wording to make it anything but an income tax.

WA state is purely blue and has been democrat run for decades so taxes are high and there is no end to their appetite for more of our cash. With no regulation or control on these particular taxes, it will skyrocket and make it impossible to drive here. Boeing already has one foot out the door and other major businesses will start to look elsewhere as the taxes increase.

Also, the citizens of WA state have passed a $30 car tab initiative which was shot down due to the single subject rule. The $30 car tab proposal has been passed, I think, 7 times and the legislature has ignored it and it has never been implemented.

It is one of the highest overall taxed states in the union even without an income tax. Excise taxes, property taxes etc etc. It is tough to live here.

We are moving to Idaho in about 30 months when my wife retires.

Sponsored

 

[Jeff D.]

That is the big one. 90%+ of vehicle caused road wear is coming from big rigs/heavy duty vehicles. It's exponential. Think of it like your couch. Your 40lb dog can lay on that couch 100 times and not have anywhere near the effect of your 400lb friend sitting on it once for the Superbowl...............

Chris, I can undestand you couch anology, and it makes sense. I don't have any data on the amount of damage done by increased weight but believe your idea is correct. I might've used a park bench instead of a couch, though. a 400lb person on a couch is very near/over the limit, but within reasonable range for a park bench.

I hope it didn't come across that I was advocating for cars to pay the same as semi trucks. I believe what should be paid should corrolate to the amount of use (miles) and damage a vehicle does (GVWR).

If partially calculated by weight, the GVWR tax would have to be adjusted to accurately (as is possible) reflect that. Using your anology, cars would pay very little (weight tax) and trucks more. I like it because it's easy to calculate as the GVWR number is known and it's done one time per year.

I wouldn't pretend to know the best path forward, but thought a tax by GVWR could, maybe should be part of the final solution, along with other metrics (damage per trip X number of trips).

This is an interesting discussion. It's giving my brain some exercise, lol.

 

[Suzukiridr14]

So how would that work - when you do yearly tag renewal they confirm your mileage - confirm what you drove past year, and do some makeup tax?
Do that for everyone actually?
That should make DMV lines interesting.

Because I don't see how they would know what MPG someone is getting.

That's as bad as the increased annual tag/registration fee attempting to do the same thing.
I can see the need, just an odd way of doing it.
We have PHEV pricing, and BEV pricing.

And yes - the heavier battery vehicles buying less gas are indeed paying less for the roads - so it is a problem as it shifts more to the gas-only vehicles.
Now usually bad MPG can mean heavier vehicle tearing up road more - so buying more fuel giving more taxes for road repair somewhat makes sense.
But they will find a way to get the funds they need - or people will scream about the bad roads.
Could be interesting how they figure to replace lost revenue if not thru something auto-related.

I agree with you about money needed for road repairs, if you live ina state with harsh winters that produce creater size pot holes, (I'm from N.Y.) aluminum wheels are a big problem, and costly to replace. They have to figure out a way that is fair for all vehicles to fund this problem.

 

[Suzukiridr14]

Chris, I can undestand you couch anology, and it makes sense. I don't have any data on the amount of damage done by increased weight but believe your idea is correct. I might've used a park bench instead of a couch, though. a 400lb person on a couch is very near/over the limit, but within reasonable range for a park bench.

I hope it didn't come across that I was advocating for cars to pay the same as semi trucks. I believe what should be paid should corrolate to the amount of use (miles) and damage a vehicle does (GVWR).

If partially calculated by weight, the GVWR tax would have to be adjusted to accurately (as is possible) reflect that. Using your anology, cars would pay very little (weight tax) and trucks more. I like it because it's easy to calculate as the GVWR number is known and it's done one time per year.

I wouldn't pretend to know the best path forward, but thought a tax by GVWR could, maybe should be part of the final solution, along with other metrics (damage per trip X number of trips).

This is an interesting discussion. It's giving my brain some exercise, lol.

Your idea is what is needed, the problem with heavy trucks is, 90% of the trucks ruining our roads, have out of state plates, so there's no way to get reinburst from there damage.

 

[Jeff D.]

Commercial vehicles that operate interstate (across state lines) have what's called an "apportioned plate". The registration $$ is suposed to be distributed to the states you operate by the % you operate in those states.

An example, if I operated 50% in MN., 25% in WI., 20% in IA, and 5% in SD., my registration $$ is distributed to those states in the same %.

If I only operate in MN., like I did my dump trucks, I got a MN plates only, and they get 100%. I couldn't operate in WI then.

That's how it's set up, but that may not be enough to offset the damage done to the roads in other states, or maybe a company doesn't follow the law and does operate a GA. plated truck in FL.

Those GA. guys!



The heavy highway use tax is Federal. Not sure how that is distributed?

ON EDIT: The apportioned plate idea might seem fair, but is a crazy amount of recordkeeping. The general public would never follow thru with doing it.

Also, the registration fee is chump change compared to fuel tax, and that is a problem. From 1998 to 2001 I had a dedicated run from Duluth MN to Aberdeen SD. Three round trips per week. Most of my miles were in MN. I bought almost all my fuel at the Coffee Cup truck stop in Summit SD. Approx $1600 per week. I doubt MN was provided the benifit of that tax as much as SD, which over a year far exceeded the cost of my plate. There was no incentive for me to buy my fuel anywhere in particular, other than what it cost me at the pump.*

*Inaccurate info. I was a leased owner operator for my interstate operations so fuel tax distributions was calculated by the company I leased, too. It was done, but not by me, personally. My own authority was MN only, so IFTA was not required.

 

[jb_cb900]

So when a semi crosses state lines and swings into the weight station (or uses the electronic reader), it's that fee being collected used to maintain roads?

 

[Jeff D.]

So when a semi crosses state lines and swings into the weight station (or uses the electronic reader), it's that fee being collected used to maintain roads?

No. There's no cost there, unless you get a fine. They're only checking your weight, usually. When I did it they could ask you for your logbook, or registration, but mostly it was making sure you weren't overweight. I don't know they use paper logbooks anymore, so maybe they can read the electronic logbooks somehow, now?

 

[jb_cb900]

Well, live and learn. Thanks for the explanation.

 

[slashsnake]

Chris, I can undestand you couch anology, and it makes sense. I don't have any data on the amount of damage done by increased weight but believe your idea is correct. I might've used a park bench instead of a couch, though. a 400lb person on a couch is very near/over the limit, but within reasonable range for a park bench.

I hope it didn't come across that I was advocating for cars to pay the same as semi trucks. I believe what should be paid should corrolate to the amount of use (miles) and damage a vehicle does (GVWR).

If partially calculated by weight, the GVWR tax would have to be adjusted to accurately (as is possible) reflect that. Using your anology, cars would pay very little (weight tax) and trucks more. I like it because it's easy to calculate as the GVWR number is known and it's done one time per year.

I wouldn't pretend to know the best path forward, but thought a tax by GVWR could, maybe should be part of the final solution, along with other metrics (damage per trip X number of trips).

This is an interesting discussion. It's giving my brain some exercise, lol.

It is a neat discussion. Most of the sources I've seen are hit and miss but here's one that references a GAO study.

The Relationship between Vehicle Weight, Road Damage, and You | DENENA | POINTS

"A study by the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) determined that the road damage caused by a single 18-wheeler was equivalent to the damage caused by 9,600 cars. (GAO: Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford) The study seems to have based its calculations around the number of axles per vehicle. The study found that essentially, road damage was related to the 4th power of the relative loads. That means that if one vehicle carries a load of 1,500 pounds per axle and another carries a load of 3,000 pounds on each axle, the road damage caused by the heavier vehicle is not twice as much, but 2 to the 4th power as much (2x2x2x2 = 16 times as much road damage as the lighter vehicle). "

But it kind of gets into the weight part of it. The difference between a small car and a light duty pickup (anything under 8500lbs) is pretty small. It's the difference between your 30lb dog vs. your neighbors 60lb dog.

And I didn't think you were advocating higher on cars, don't worry. Heck, I don't think I really have one either, outside of that splitting hairs of light duty vehicles or miles traveled really isn't a causation there. I guess for me they should figure the numbers first.

Say 10% comes from tickets and special license plates (vanity plates and such).
30% from semi's.
30% from passenger vehicles
30% from income taxes.

All made up numbers but whatever those are is where the meat of the convo is for me. That's really where the decision is. After that, just take the budget, figure 30% of that and charge each driver their piece of the pie in registration.

Now, there are other options from there, mileage and GVWR don't really have a big effect here, remember those cars are paying quite a bit more than their fair share, but maybe add caps. Vehicles under $15k get their fee capped at 2% of the value of their vehicle or something. So the kid out of HS with a $4k car isn't priced out of driving. Make it up on the vehicles costing over $75k, or the vehicles getting under 22mpg or something maybe?

Policing all that brings another thing to think about. And paying 10 cents a gallon of gas or whatever is less painful than a big one time bill.

Yeah a person could excercise their brain a lot on that one.

 

[scotty]

90% if folk in my area don’t even have license plates, all they care about is black tint, giant wheels, despite bumpers and stuff being held together with duck tape

wish they’d be impounded. They don’t pay their fees. Almost got hit by one few days ago, driving at night no lights on.

90%

 

[mechgingeneet]

Haven't read all the replies here, but figured I'd chime in with how this works in Indiana - there's a surcharge applied at the time of registration each year for Hybrid or Electric vehicles to supplement the gas tax you're "not paying" when you drive. For my 2025, it was $77.

The state is refreshingly honest that this tax purely exists because it means you'll pay less in gas tax - but of course, it has the annoying effect of making you pay more when you bought a more fuel-efficient vehicle. Also, if you've driven in Indiana, you know that this tax definitely isn't going to improving our roads, despite whatever the marketing folks at INDOT would like you to believe!

Pay-per-mile is intriguing, but I can tell you that with how complicated our state gas tax is already, there's no chance such a complicated notion would get passed here anytime soon.

 

[pigsareus]

Haven't read all the replies here, but figured I'd chime in with how this works in Indiana - there's a surcharge applied at the time of registration each year for Hybrid or Electric vehicles to supplement the gas tax you're "not paying" when you drive. For my 2025, it was $77.

The state is refreshingly honest that this tax purely exists because it means you'll pay less in gas tax - but of course, it has the annoying effect of making you pay more when you bought a more fuel-efficient vehicle. Also, if you've driven in Indiana, you know that this tax definitely isn't going to improving our roads, despite whatever the marketing folks at INDOT would like you to believe!

Pay-per-mile is intriguing, but I can tell you that with how complicated our state gas tax is already, there's no chance such a complicated notion would get passed here anytime soon.

is there also a surcharge for those econoboxes that get 40mpg? And if not has your state had a robust conversation with the politicians as to 'why not'?

 

[Maverick Man]

As far as I know, it's just Hybrids get the $75 year fee for saving gas. I'm guessing all electric cars get a hire tax as well.

 

[pigsareus]

Nope - on both counts!

I don't want to sound like I'm complaining - I pay very little in state income tax and am quite happy about that. But the relative state of our roads & infrastructure, when our gas tax and these bogus surcharges are high in comparison, is frustrating.

well they need to be asked that and provide a real logical answer - there's nothing magical about a hybrid where they should be slapping a tax on that and not on some ICE Toyota or Honda - if they're serious about this then they would tax both - if they cast the net to capture high MPG ICE rides, they'd be able to decrease your surcharge . I don't know how they get away with this. One thing is for sure - the longer they do push these surcharges and other taxes, the more they're going to go after in the future unless they are called out on it.

 

[MinntoMich]

Whatever each state or government entity decides to do with taxation, rest assured it will seem unevenly applied. I fully agree with those who believe themselves being penalized for efficiency, especially onerous since it is advanced by government. I also fully agree with those not driving an EV who have lengthy commutes. In my home state (Minnesota) the DMV surcharges EV owners $75.00 annually upon renewal of their registration. Hybrid and plug-in hybird drive trains are exempt but an attempt was made in 2021 to raise that rate to $229 and extend it to plug-in hybrids and presumably electric motorcycles as well. There was also talk of indexing that rate to an inflation or price index.
At any rate, infrastructure and taxes to pay for it are both important, but so is not only what you spend of taxpayer dollars but how you spend them as well. This is something Minnesota is excellent at IMO... waste. For years we had a growing budget surplus which we were told could not be spent as it was considered a "rainy day" fund for a possible future downturn. Eventually it grew to about or in excess of $18 billion but somehow last year or the year before, the majority party and governor, with little or no input, spent it all in a matter of about two weeks. Poof, and its gone. On top of that, we are now facing a potential budget shortfall, had our taxes increased, and received a several hundred dollar "rebate" from the state that was so poorly worded that the IRS considered that rebate or refund as income. The irony of paying a tax on a tax.

It doesn't matter what or how you feel. As a threat, government always seems to punish public safety first in a budget crisis. If they need more funds, they will tax or surcharge their way into new funds. Like your county and the mil rate.... they will just raise the rate, actual property value notwithstanding.

Sponsored