East Coast states want to tax drivers’ travel, not their gas

[cpzilliacus]

Washington Post: East Coast states want to tax drivers' travel, not their gas

A group of East Coast states wants to help overhaul the way America pays for its decaying roads, and it's starting with Monopoly money.

Delaware, Pennsylvania, Connecticut and New Hampshire are proposing pilots to figure out how they might charge motorists a fee for the miles they travel – rather than taxing their gas, as state and federal officials do today.

The I-95 Corridor Coalition, which represents transportation officials from 16 states and the District of Columbia, applied for a federal grant last month to test the idea.

Officials would stitch together the policies and technologies needed to count the miles driven by 50 recruits from each of the four states, including state legislators, transportation officials or other willing guinea pigs. They would send out "faux invoices"  monthly. And they would collect the data that legislatures – and the driving public – would require to decide if the change makes sense.

[mariethefoxy]

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

[jwolfer]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

[MisterSG1]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

Incredibly ironic when you consider New Hampshire is in on this and what it says on their license plates......

[jeffandnicole]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

Which they have numerous methods to do already.

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

But good for people who travel just a few miles to work.

If they're already driving far distances to work, they're buying a lot of gas and already paying a lot in taxes.

[Sykotyk]

Whether it's stated or not, tracking you IS one of the quietly hidden benefits of such a system. Because the first thing it needs is confirming, for a fact, that you've crossed state lines. Which would mean GPS tracking of some kind. Once they have that, it's not hard to prove where you are within that state as your 'marker' is always reported properly.

It also adversely affects the idea of trying to get fuel saving cars. If your tax, which in PA is now exorbitant, for fuel doesn't decrease due to efficiency, it doesn't give as much weight in the decision on whether to get the Suburban or the Prius. Even though the rest of the fuel price rises or fall, cutting out the state tax doesn't.

Secondly, there's an 'out-of-sight-out-of-mind' aspect to fuel tax. The reason W-2 earners don't pay taxes quarterly and instead rely on employer deductions is because if they had to write that check every quarter, there's a good chance either they'll have spent it on necessities or not factored in the expected cost when the bill is due, OR they would revolt if they had to sign over the sum of money the government was requesting.

When you pay at the pump, the taxes are all included, and you simply 'bought gas'. If you now don't pay the state tax (the federal tax is still another issue), then you run into the issue of people seeing a Taxi-Meter like aspect of driving not previously contemplated. That each mile driven becomes another few cents adding up.

Thirdly, unless it were nationwide, you run into 'cross-over'. If you're in this Eastern Bloc of states and fuel outside those states, you're paying tax to one jurisdiction and then driving it in your jurisdiction where you're getting charged by the mile. If you buy fuel in one jurisdiction that charges by the mile, your per-gallon gas is tax-free, and you then can drive it back in your home state at a marked discount.

And fourthly, this brings up the hidden cost of compliance. Now you have invoicing and billing. Collections. What penalties are there for non-payment? Maintaining proof of payment? Now millions of people filing their 'gas tax' every month or quarter.

The old system: A few thousand gas stations and fueling centers simply calculating how many gallons they sold that month and then sending the check to the appropriate agency in that state. No 'shorting miles' on an odometer, no false claims of out-of-state driving, etc. And no privacy concerns by the general public about when and where they drive.

This goes back to the 'starve the beast' attitude a lot have with politics. They can't implement the changes they want directly, so they simply starve the beast until the only 'reasonable option' is the draconian measure they wanted in the first place. Want to get rid of Social Security or Medicare? Just make sure it's underfunded until the potential cost of keeping up with it is so untenable that the 'prudent thing to do is just get rid of it or cut it'. Can't maintain roads? The prudent thing to do is up the charge by the same mechanism they've been charging the public. But, keep saying 'a gas tax hike is not going to pass' and then slap an even higher 'mileage tax' that also adds in the cost of compliance and the cost of your rights.

Two simple fixes to the gas taxes: COLA and CAFE adjustments quarterly. As the cost of repairing and maintaining and building new roads go up, the COLA aspect (cost of living adjustment) raises or lower one metric, and then CAFE standards (average fuel mileage of cars on the road) raise or lower. As the general public buys more fuel efficient vehicles, the tax raises per gallon. Better the efficiency (or zero cost for all electrics), better the price. Want to drive the big pickup or ancient gas guzzling 1983 Buick LeSabre? You'll pay more in tax because your MPG dictates it.

The first complaint that comes up is "As people ditch gas for electric, the revenue goes down". Not necessarily. It just makes owning the gas (or diesel) vehicle that less economical.  As more are replaced, the burden is put more on the gas/diesel vehicle owners. Once you've reached a culture shift away from gas/diesel and toward electric, THEN you can start calculating how to tax for roads. Which, given the government, would be a blanket tax on energy consumption overall once electric vehicles reach 60-70% of the market share.

And for those thinking that's onerous, here's the numbers:

If 100% of the vehicles are gas/diesel, they pay 100% of the fuel tax (let's say 24cpg for the average state). If 78% of the vehicles are gas/diesel, they pay 100% of the fuel tax (.24/.78), or now 30.76cpg. If 19% of the vehicles are gas/diesel, they pay 100% of the fuel tax (.24/.19) or $1.26 per gallon tax. The higher the turnover to electric, the greater the burden on those holding on to the ancient technology. This doesn't even factor the cost increase in gas/diesel as more consumers move away from it. The fewer gallons sold, the heavier the cost of the infrastructure needed to produce, refine, and ship that much gas and diesel nationwide would result in price increases. Regardless of supply.

There's some industries where switching to electric will probably not be feasible. Such as long-haul trucking. A diesel engine is still highly efficient for moving upwards of 45,000 pounds of payload per pound from singular location to singular location. Trains can do bulk very well, but, unless it's from one facility capable of hosting a train to another facility capable of hosting a train, there's going to be off-loading, re-loading, and transporting on local trucks to and from the rail yard. Which ups the transportation cost considerably.

And that's forgetting produce and meat, which move on refrigerated trucks and really aren't much for train traffic, as the shelf-life is already ticking the moment it's picked or butchered and the additional stop to and from a refrigerated train car just adds to the days available to sell it (Lettuce, for instance, goes bad quickly).

In the end, we ALL use roads. Even if we never drive a car on one. We're all responsible for paying for them because we all benefit from their existence. Everything you buy from a store comes there in some form of transportation. We can either all figure out a way to pay for it in the least intrusive and cheapest overhead way possible, or we can simply go back to the pony-express and horse carriages for the wealthy and rural folks and everyone else walks.

[Sykotyk]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

Which they have numerous methods to do already.

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

But good for people who travel just a few miles to work.

If they're already driving far distances to work, they're buying a lot of gas and already paying a lot in taxes.

Depending on if that state has an excise tax (such as MA). Where the excise tax far exceeds any state gas taxes they'll pay if they're driving just a few thousand miles a year.

In MA, you pay $25 for every $1000 your car is worth (list price), based on a percentage on how old it is. 90% for new, 60%, etc, until year 5 and beyond is 10%. So, if you buy a $20,000 car, your excise tax is ($25*20*.9) $450 for just the first year you own it. $300 for Year 2 (60%), $200 for Year 3 (40%), $125 for Year 4 (25%) and $50 for Year 5 and every year after (10%).

So, if you buy a car and keep it eight years, valued at $20,000 list price, you'll pay $1,275 for eight years of ownership. If you drive it 5,000 miles a year (low mileage driver) and get 25mpg (figure with city driving predominantly), you'll buy 1600 gallons over 8 years. At MA gas tax rates of 25.64cpg, you'll pay $424.64 in eight years of gas tax. Drive 10,000 miles, you'll pay 849.28. Get better mileage? Your rate goes down.

But, not that excise tax. And with the Mass Pike tolls AND excise tax, MA still raised their fuel taxes a few years ago because they couldn't pay for roads (manual labor must be expensive in areas with high costs of living... who knew). But, it's obvious that some states get way more money from registration/excise fees than they do fuel taxes for most drivers.


From end of July 2016 (when I bought my car) until today, I've put just under 22,000 miles on it. Though I've driven all over, based on the 38mpg I tend to get in it, at Ohio's 28cpg fuel tax, I've paid $162 for state tax and $106 for federal gas tax. It's not really a high expense when you think of it (and registration in my county/township isn't unreasonable, it was less than $70 I remember right, when I renewed it at my birthday (thanks Ohio!)). So, grand total, I spent about $350 (not counting tolls, which I generally try to avoid) for the year for the roads I drive on. Which seems rather pathetic when you think about it. And that's not counting local roads that aren't funded through state/federal gas taxes but general funds of the cities (also why some of them are in horrible disrepair).

In the end, gas taxes could double, and that $268 I paid last year, on average, wouldn't really affect me any more at $536. And I'm probably in the upper level of annual drivers out there (I believe the nationwide average is about 12,000 miles per year).

[SteveG1988]

Trucks have to log miles in each state for IFTA already.

From Wikipedia

"As commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) buy fuel, any fuel taxes paid to the states is credited to that licensee's account. At the end of the fiscal quarter, the licensee completes their fuel tax report, listing all miles traveled in all participating jurisdictions and lists all gallons purchased in the same. Then the average fuel mileage is applied to the miles traveled to determine the tax liability to each jurisdiction. Three states–Kentucky, New Mexico, and New York–have "weight-mile" taxes in addition to the standard fuel tax. Oregon has just a weight-mile tax. Any amount of fuel taxes due (or refund due) is then paid to (or 'by' in the case of a refund) the base jurisdiction who issued the license. The member jurisdictions then take care of transferring the funds accordingly. Audits are conducted only by the base state and fuel bonds are rarely required."

[SteveG1988]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

Which they have numerous methods to do already.

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

But good for people who travel just a few miles to work.

If they're already driving far distances to work, they're buying a lot of gas and already paying a lot in taxes.

Depending on if that state has an excise tax (such as MA). Where the excise tax far exceeds any state gas taxes they'll pay if they're driving just a few thousand miles a year.

In MA, you pay $25 for every $1000 your car is worth (list price), based on a percentage on how old it is. 90% for new, 60%, etc, until year 5 and beyond is 10%. So, if you buy a $20,000 car, your excise tax is ($25*20*.9) $450 for just the first year you own it. $300 for Year 2 (60%), $200 for Year 3 (40%), $125 for Year 4 (25%) and $50 for Year 5 and every year after (10%).

So, if you buy a car and keep it eight years, valued at $20,000 list price, you'll pay $1,275 for eight years of ownership. If you drive it 5,000 miles a year (low mileage driver) and get 25mpg (figure with city driving predominantly), you'll buy 1600 gallons over 8 years. At MA gas tax rates of 25.64cpg, you'll pay $424.64 in eight years of gas tax. Drive 10,000 miles, you'll pay 849.28. Get better mileage? Your rate goes down.

But, not that excise tax. And with the Mass Pike tolls AND excise tax, MA still raised their fuel taxes a few years ago because they couldn't pay for roads (manual labor must be expensive in areas with high costs of living... who knew). But, it's obvious that some states get way more money from registration/excise fees than they do fuel taxes for most drivers.


From end of July 2016 (when I bought my car) until today, I've put just under 22,000 miles on it. Though I've driven all over, based on the 38mpg I tend to get in it, at Ohio's 28cpg fuel tax, I've paid $162 for state tax and $106 for federal gas tax. It's not really a high expense when you think of it (and registration in my county/township isn't unreasonable, it was less than $70 I remember right, when I renewed it at my birthday (thanks Ohio!)). So, grand total, I spent about $350 (not counting tolls, which I generally try to avoid) for the year for the roads I drive on. Which seems rather pathetic when you think about it. And that's not counting local roads that aren't funded through state/federal gas taxes but general funds of the cities (also why some of them are in horrible disrepair).

In the end, gas taxes could double, and that $268 I paid last year, on average, wouldn't really affect me any more at $536. And I'm probably in the upper level of annual drivers out there (I believe the nationwide average is about 12,000 miles per year).

In New Jersey if you buy a new car, or a used car, you pay 7% sales tax to the MVC directly.

I bought my 1996 thunderbird, it cost 2000 dollars. Thanks to being 19 years old when i took it there, they did not check to see the true value of it. They take your word for it.

On a newer car they would go "so you really paid 1000 bucks for a 2010 Kia?"

[Sykotyk]

Trucks have to log miles in each state for IFTA already.

From Wikipedia

"As commercial motor vehicles (CMVs) buy fuel, any fuel taxes paid to the states is credited to that licensee's account. At the end of the fiscal quarter, the licensee completes their fuel tax report, listing all miles traveled in all participating jurisdictions and lists all gallons purchased in the same. Then the average fuel mileage is applied to the miles traveled to determine the tax liability to each jurisdiction. Three states–Kentucky, New Mexico, and New York–have "weight-mile" taxes in addition to the standard fuel tax. Oregon has just a weight-mile tax. Any amount of fuel taxes due (or refund due) is then paid to (or 'by' in the case of a refund) the base jurisdiction who issued the license. The member jurisdictions then take care of transferring the funds accordingly. Audits are conducted only by the base state and fuel bonds are rarely required."

I'm well aware of how fuel taxing in trucks work. It's still based on MPG and the tax per gallon in each state. That wouldn't change how taxing in my proposal would work. IFTA just makes it impossible for a truck to fuel (and pay tax) in one state, and then drive in another state and skirting their fuel taxes (especially with trucks capable of 200-300 gallons of diesel at once, and driving 6-7mpg, they could get from Oklahoma City to Boston in one tank of fuel. IFTA ensures that the fuel is taxed 'where it's burnt' not where it's 'bought'.

[Sykotyk]

Just an excuse for government track our travels

Which they have numerous methods to do already.

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

But good for people who travel just a few miles to work.

If they're already driving far distances to work, they're buying a lot of gas and already paying a lot in taxes.

Depending on if that state has an excise tax (such as MA). Where the excise tax far exceeds any state gas taxes they'll pay if they're driving just a few thousand miles a year.

In MA, you pay $25 for every $1000 your car is worth (list price), based on a percentage on how old it is. 90% for new, 60%, etc, until year 5 and beyond is 10%. So, if you buy a $20,000 car, your excise tax is ($25*20*.9) $450 for just the first year you own it. $300 for Year 2 (60%), $200 for Year 3 (40%), $125 for Year 4 (25%) and $50 for Year 5 and every year after (10%).

So, if you buy a car and keep it eight years, valued at $20,000 list price, you'll pay $1,275 for eight years of ownership. If you drive it 5,000 miles a year (low mileage driver) and get 25mpg (figure with city driving predominantly), you'll buy 1600 gallons over 8 years. At MA gas tax rates of 25.64cpg, you'll pay $424.64 in eight years of gas tax. Drive 10,000 miles, you'll pay 849.28. Get better mileage? Your rate goes down.

But, not that excise tax. And with the Mass Pike tolls AND excise tax, MA still raised their fuel taxes a few years ago because they couldn't pay for roads (manual labor must be expensive in areas with high costs of living... who knew). But, it's obvious that some states get way more money from registration/excise fees than they do fuel taxes for most drivers.


From end of July 2016 (when I bought my car) until today, I've put just under 22,000 miles on it. Though I've driven all over, based on the 38mpg I tend to get in it, at Ohio's 28cpg fuel tax, I've paid $162 for state tax and $106 for federal gas tax. It's not really a high expense when you think of it (and registration in my county/township isn't unreasonable, it was less than $70 I remember right, when I renewed it at my birthday (thanks Ohio!)). So, grand total, I spent about $350 (not counting tolls, which I generally try to avoid) for the year for the roads I drive on. Which seems rather pathetic when you think about it. And that's not counting local roads that aren't funded through state/federal gas taxes but general funds of the cities (also why some of them are in horrible disrepair).

In the end, gas taxes could double, and that $268 I paid last year, on average, wouldn't really affect me any more at $536. And I'm probably in the upper level of annual drivers out there (I believe the nationwide average is about 12,000 miles per year).

In New Jersey if you buy a new car, or a used car, you pay 7% sales tax to the MVC directly.

I bought my 1996 thunderbird, it cost 2000 dollars. Thanks to being 19 years old when i took it there, they did not check to see the true value of it. They take your word for it.

On a newer car they would go "so you really paid 1000 bucks for a 2010 Kia?"

In OH (and PA, for that matter) you still pay sales tax on the vehicle. Amongst family, I've bought and sold many cars for $100 and paid the $6 or $7 sales tax on it. Though both states DO allow direct transfer between direct family members (parent to child, brother to sister, etc) without paying tax. It's not based on vehicle value (like an excise tax). Though anything from a dealer to a person must show the sales receipt for tax purposes. Though, a new car dealer handles that all for you already (and registers and temp tags the car as well, such as my new car).

The tax is also rolled into your loan, as well. Which makes it a 'hidden tax' just as the payroll and gas taxes currently are. It'd be much different if someone went to be a $30,000 car and had to sign a check to the state for $2,100 right then and there for the sales tax.

[mariethefoxy]

also worth mentioning, Delaware and New Hampshires' main limited-access highways are tolled (Route 1, Delaware Turnpike, Everett Turnpike, Spaulding Turnpike, NH Turnpike) so theyre already hitting you with an extra fee to use them.

[US 41]

None of this will ever pass, at least not for a very long time. Notice how none of these ideas ever gain traction. A mileage tax would be very unpopular among regular (most) citizens in this country that care little to none about roads. Just raise the gas tax a few cents and be done with it. It's so much easier that way. I don't understand what is so hard about paying the tax when you pay for the gas.

Also I don't believe that the mileage tax will substitute the gas tax. The mileage tax will end up being another tax you pay on top of the gas tax. Anyone who actually believes that the mileage tax will replace the gas tax is crazy. I drive 25,000 miles per year on average and I don't have the money to pay an additional $750 per year (if the mileage tax was 3 cents per mile). I also don't like the fact that the government would be tracking me with GPS. If we lived in communist China it would be okay, but we live in a free America.

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

[LM117]

None of this will ever pass, at least not for a very long time. Notice how none of these ideas ever gain traction. A mileage tax would be very unpopular among regular (most) citizens in this country that care little to none about roads. Just raise the gas tax a few cents and be done with it. It's so much easier that way. I don't understand what is so hard about paying the tax when you pay for the gas.

Also I don't believe that the mileage tax will substitute the gas tax. The mileage tax will end up being another tax you pay on top of the gas tax. Anyone who actually believes that the mileage tax will replace the gas tax is crazy. I drive 25,000 miles per year on average and I don't have the money to pay an additional $750 per year (if the mileage tax was 3 cents per mile). I also don't like the fact that the government would be tracking me with GPS. If we lived in communist China it would be okay, but we live in a free America.

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

Agreed. This mileage tax idea is a crock of shit, IMO. I hope the idea crashes and burns.

[1995hoo]

Minorities should be up in arms about the concept due to the need for location tracking. "Mr. Stewart, you're black, so why were you in that mostly-white neighborhood when the crime was committed?"

[DeaconG]

Minorities should be up in arms about the concept due to the need for location tracking. "Mr. Stewart, you're black, so why were you in that mostly-white neighborhood when the crime was committed?"

As if they don't already have enough excuses to pull that on a regular basis.

One thing that none of you have touched on in the housing situation and how it would change under a mileage tax vs gas tax scenario.

In a mileage tax scenario anyone who lives in the exurbs OR anyone who works a second or third shift job is going to have a major problem over time.  Why the hell would I want to buy this beautiful house 30 or 40 miles away from downtown if it's going to cost me significantly more to get back and forth to work, especially when in most major cities with transit systems they either quit running routes or run on a reduced schedule on evenings and nights? Telling your employer that you've been late for work because the bus/light rail/subway didn't run on time is an invitation to find yourself unemployed.

Not to mention that if you have to leave the area and sell your home, the only buyers you're going to have for it will be people who work within a reasonable distance from your home...and you know they're gonna jawbone you down on the cost; unless you intend to be an absentee landlord with all those potential headaches.

Yep, what's that saying about "no good deed goes unpunished?"

[jeffandnicole]

One thing that none of you have touched on in the housing situation and how it would change under a mileage tax vs gas tax scenario.

It was touched on about 9 hours prior to your post:

NO! This is bad for people who drive long distance to work and others that travel by car to destinations.

In a mileage tax scenario anyone who lives in the exurbs OR anyone who works a second or third shift job is going to have a major problem over time.  Why the hell would I want to buy this beautiful house 30 or 40 miles away from downtown if it's going to cost me significantly more to get back and forth to work, especially when in most major cities with transit systems they either quit running routes or run on a reduced schedule on evenings and nights? Telling your employer that you've been late for work because the bus/light rail/subway didn't run on time is an invitation to find yourself unemployed.

I don't understand how this rant has anything to do with a gas or mileage tax.  Today, it's nearly impossible to find good public transit to a location 30 or 40 miles away already and would take incredibly long to travel anyway. This isn't going to change just because of a mileage based gas tax.

[kalvado]

well, when gas tax idea was born, most vehicles had MPG dependent on their weight, and gas tax was somewhat proportional to road wear.
Now if you drive a very heavy car, like GMC Yukon or Tesla, you still pay more tax for Yukon, but zero for Tesla...
And being able to afford a new high MPG car does entitle owner to pay less for gas used for driving same mileage - not for free groceries for a year, discounted road use rates for life, or poor people kissing Great Guy ass for saving their environment.
Realistically, I would say integrate some tamper proof mileage counters, and base charges on that. Not GPS, except for,maybe, checking which state car is driving.   Especially for plug-in and all-electric cars. Those are newer, and those can be factory installed without extra hassle, and there are no gas taxes paid

[cpzilliacus]

also worth mentioning, Delaware and New Hampshires' main limited-access highways are tolled (Route 1, Delaware Turnpike, Everett Turnpike, Spaulding Turnpike, NH Turnpike) so theyre already hitting you with an extra fee to use them.

Agreed.  My  preference is more overtly tolled roads as an alternative to taxing with GPS or something else.

[cpzilliacus]

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

Not only that, but some municipalities (I can name several in Maryland and nearby) will find imposing an extremely high per-mile tax on motorists (especially non-resident motorists) to be irresistible, much in the style of the Hopewell, Virginia speed trap operation on I-295.

[hotdogPi]

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

Not only that, but some municipalities (I can name several in Maryland and nearby) will find imposing an extremely high per-mile tax on motorists (especially non-resident motorists) to be irresistible, much in the style of the Hopewell, Virginia speed trap operation on I-295.

That won't work because towns that have more cars passing through, even if the road is unimportant to them, (example: a freeway has one mile of roadway in the town, but no exit is nearby) will get much more revenue than others.

[kalvado]

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

Not only that, but some municipalities (I can name several in Maryland and nearby) will find imposing an extremely high per-mile tax on motorists (especially non-resident motorists) to be irresistible, much in the style of the Hopewell, Virginia speed trap operation on I-295.

That won't work because towns that have more cars passing through, even if the road is unimportant to them, (example: a freeway has one mile of roadway in the town, but no exit is nearby) will get much more revenue than others.

Well, at rates of about 2 cents/mile - which is most likely what we're talking about - town would have too much pain billing passing motorists 5 cents each...

[vdeane]

The idea of a mileage tax is a big one in urban planning circles, and we all know that urban planners want to discourage driving.  I wouldn't be surprised if the factor discouraging driving if people got invoices for their tax instead of having it be invisible is, in fact, an intended "benefit".

In a mileage tax scenario anyone who lives in the exurbs OR anyone who works a second or third shift job is going to have a major problem over time.  Why the hell would I want to buy this beautiful house 30 or 40 miles away from downtown if it's going to cost me significantly more to get back and forth to work, especially when in most major cities with transit systems they either quit running routes or run on a reduced schedule on evenings and nights? Telling your employer that you've been late for work because the bus/light rail/subway didn't run on time is an invitation to find yourself unemployed.

I don't understand how this rant has anything to do with a gas or mileage tax.  Today, it's nearly impossible to find good public transit to a location 30 or 40 miles away already and would take incredibly long to travel anyway. This isn't going to change just because of a mileage based gas tax.

Except nobody cares right now.  They will care a lot when they're trying to avoid tax invoices.

Lastly this new revenue will go in a general fund and not to the roads. Once again, anyone who believes otherwise is crazy. When was the last time that Social Security hasn't been used for something else, but Social Security?

Not only that, but some municipalities (I can name several in Maryland and nearby) will find imposing an extremely high per-mile tax on motorists (especially non-resident motorists) to be irresistible, much in the style of the Hopewell, Virginia speed trap operation on I-295.

That won't work because towns that have more cars passing through, even if the road is unimportant to them, (example: a freeway has one mile of roadway in the town, but no exit is nearby) will get much more revenue than others.

But that's exactly why they want want to jack up the tax: to get more revenue.  What town has ever said "no, we can't do that, we'd get too much money relative to the other towns"?  NONE!!!  Here in NY, we have towns claiming private driveways as public roadways just to try to get a little more of the pot of money given to the municipalities for highway paving each year!

[cpzilliacus]

The idea of a mileage tax is a big one in urban planning circles, and we all know that urban planners want to discourage driving.  I wouldn't be surprised if the factor discouraging driving if people got invoices for their tax instead of having it be invisible is, in fact, an intended "benefit".

Three thoughts:

(1) Not everyone in that field believes in that as passionately as some;

(2) The unions that represent hourly transit workers see this as a jackpot for their members
(an unlimited and dedicated funding source for them); and

(3) Along with the transit unions, small and smaller municipalities would love this as a way to collect a lot of money from drivers passing through, even if those drivers never drive one milimeter on streets or roads maintained by that municipality.

[bzakharin]

As far as location tracking, why can't it be like the income tax? You self-report how much you drive in each state. They can audit you occasionally, and get a reasonable estimate of how often you visit each state and for how long.