KPIX | CBS NEWS BAY AREATranscript
The state says it needs more money for road repairs, and the gas tax just isn’t cutting it. KPIX Five’s Phil Matier reports on Sacramento wanting to take a look at your odometer. Phil.
One of the biggest selling points for electric cars and hybrids is that they save you big money at the pump – but at what cost to the rest of us? If you own an older vehicle that is fueled by gas, you’re paying gas tax to maintain the roads. Someone who has an electric vehicle is paying much less than you but they are still using the roads. And that’s one reason why State Senator Scott Wiener and others are saying that when it comes to road taxes, it’s time to start looking at charging you by the mile rather than by the gallon. “People are going to use less and less gas in the long run,” says Wiener. And less gas means less gas tax and less money for road repair. “We want to make sure that all cars are paying to maintain the roads,” Wiener adds.
One idea would be installing devices that would clock your mileage every time you pull up to the pump or electric car charging station. Or put a tracker on every car. “The reality is that if you have a smartphone the data of where you are traveling is already in existence,” Wiener explains.
None of this is sitting well with Joshua Li, owner of a super hybrid BMW. Matier asks, “How much are you saving by not using gas?” Li responds, “I save around $200 a month.” Matier then asks, “How would you feel if they charged you anyway?” “I’m definitely not happy about that,” says Li.
“If you buy a small car that gets great fuel economy, we don’t get enough money to repair the roads – and there is a pothole right there. But the fact of the matter is, people are buying trucks – like that vehicle there and that vehicle there,” says Randy Rentschler of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. He suggests that the real answer is to raise the gas tax and up the fee for electric cars.
“And what do the people we talked to, tanking up today say?” Matier continues. “I drive all over Northern California for work, so definitely it would be a problem,” says one motorist. “These are all consumption taxes – just taxing poor people,” comments another.
So, assuming a “mileage fee” plan goes ahead, what would happen to the gas tax? Would we still pay that? Thanks, Phil.
Discover more from Watts Up With That?
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
just taxing poor people
The path of least resistance and easily done.
Just drive everywhere in reverse, then they’ll have to pay you
Lookout all you Italians!
Californians that use Gas and Diesel already pay mileage taxes in a roundabout way.
At 68 cents a gallon, this state has the country’s highest gas tax. On July 1, another 2.8 cents was added to each gallon to pay for Senate Bill 1, the $52 billion road repair legislation that has increased gas taxes every year since 2019.
But that’s only at the surface of a problem that goes far deeper.
For instance, the state’s cap-and-trade program now adds 24 cents to a gallon of gasoline, according to the Western States Petroleum Association, while the California Carbon Fuel Standard loads on more than 22 cents per gallon.
68+2.8+24+22+10-15=1.26-1.31
California charges almost $1.31 per gallon in combined taxes. (Sales taxes, road user taxes.etc.) if you travel farther you pay more. If you get 25 mpg you pay 5¢+ per mile already.
Unfortunately the gas 2.8¢ per gallon road repair taxes gathered aren’t paid into a road repair fund they’re paid into the state general fund which is used at the states discretion for whatever the state needs.
EVs pay no road use taxes as there’s no pump. EVs also do more road damage from their heavier weight so charging them a 5¢ per mile fee every time they recharge at a station makes sense. This would require either the elimination of home charging or make the requirement for a separate meter for a home charging station so recharging can be tracked.
Of course while there will still be ways around this for EV owners there’s no way around the CA Gas Taxes for ICVs. They’ll always have to pump to refill. (I suppose you could always siphon from someone else’s tank though.)
So long as its fair, repeal the gas taxes and institute a per mile tax for all vehicles equally. Not sure how they’ll actually track mileage accurately though
Careful what you wish for.
Want them to know exactly how far you drive in a period? Happy if a tracker is put on your car?
“The reality is that if you have a smartphone the data of where you are traveling is already in existence,”
So the reality is Calli doesn’t ‘Pay More for Gas’ than anyone else. Gasoline is a world wide commodity and pricing is set by market forces, and other than added costs for shipment, so payment is the same for all. It’s just Calli has to pay much, much more for their ineffective government.
But hey, someone has to pay for the “Train to Nowhere”.
Are you trying to trick me with Ferris Bueller logic? If I drive backwards I’m reversing my “emissions”?
Except it’s the exact opposite, and a mileage tax would be less regressive. Currently only poor people who don’t have an expensive EV are being taxed via gas taxes, while weathy people driving EVs don’t have to pay for road maintenance and construction at all.
It’s the obvious end game.
The treasury isn’t going to give up however many tens if not hundreds of billions of £$€ without a fight, it can’t tax electricity used for BEVs directly, the only option is to charge by the mile using whatever means they can find.
So look forward to paying more to buy your car, more to run your car, and road charging on top, or more likely a return to the 1970s for most people in terms of transport options.
A good summary, Eric the Idle.
I don’t know what the situation is today, but Italians were previously famed across Europe for driving legions of under-powered Fiats. A big economic driver was a national taxation based upon engine size.
Not many people get to be those driving the Ferraris and Lamborghinis.
And they live in Monaco.
Why can’t they put a tracking device in your charging connection instead of in your car?
What’s to stop me charging from a simple wall socket?
It might take longer, but if you’re a light to moderate mileage driver, you can probably work around that.
What if they try to monitor your mileage using your cell phone? And you throw it in the river? We used to get by without cell phones. *I* could get by without one today!
If they mandate having a tracking device on your charging port, even if it is a simple wall socket, are you going to defy the law and not get one? Avoiding taxes is something that gets the back up on government – it won’t be pretty if they catch you.
They could even mandate that all charging cords be registered and equipped with a monitor – and the cost of buying one would be on you, not the government – just like registering your car.
“The reality is that if you have a smartphone the data of where you are traveling is already in existence,”
Land Of The Free ???????????????
Fuel taxes in California are close to $1 a gallon. So the state takes 20% of the revenue at the pump. So each fossil fueled vehicle is paying $500 per year on average to be on the road in CA. While BEV’s have higher registration fees, they likely cover only a quarter of the fuel tax savings and it would not be hard to levy a registration fee based on battery capacity. That would seem a fair on non-intrusive way to levy this fee particularly since high battery capacity means much more weight.
But the state is broke and woke so expect the fuel taxes to stay while the fees increase on all vehicles, probably by vehicle weight, so the state can keep double taxing the working class.
When potholes reach all the way to China, then maybe they’ll be filled in from the other side.
Even more cool is that BEVs registered in California but driving to neighboring states would still be paying road taxes to California without wear and tear on the roads! It wouldn’t be like gas pump taxes where you pay whichever state you’re refueling in.
In the UK, car owners already pay a hefty annual car registration fee for such purposes.
Does it all go towards road maintenance? Of course not.
Like the fuel taxes, which are far higher than in the US, the government would miss the income sorely. Fossil fuels power governments as well as the rest of modern civilisation.
The House of Commons Public Accounts Committee’s Report ‘Achieving Net Zero: Follow Up’ (Feb 2022) said revenue from Fuel Duty and Vehicle Excise Duty was £37 billion pa
The UK (and most of Europe) has fuel duty and VAT on Petrol, Diesel and LPG, very littleof which if any is used for highway maintenance. On top VED (Vehicle Excise Duty) an annual payment to keep the vehicle on the road. EVs and PHEvs do not pay the Excise duty on electricity and a lower rate of VAT. They were/are exempt from VED until the next financial year. I assume that the situation is similar in California with no excise duty on electricity for car charging.
There’s lost income to be found and a mileage charge seems, to bureaucrats anyway, the solution. Of course ICE drivers will have to pay both in the interests of Net Zero.
From 24/25 ie this year, there is the new premium car tax. If the vehicle costs >=£40K – and most electrics do – there is fat charge on top of VED for the first 5 years of the vehicle’s life.
Find out what is the premium car tax fee
https://www.rac.co.uk/drive/advice/buying-and-selling-guides/car-tax-bands-explained/
I don’t know about California, but here in South Carolina all electricity is subject to sales tax (6% or 7% depending on where), and all vehicles are subject to personal property tax every year. For a $50k car it is about $1500. For a $5k used car it’s about $150.
https://youtu.be/xYCntCKHy6I?t=2
Oversized infrastructure for oversized cars costs.
Over inflated disdain for one’s fellow man and his freedoms.
What Freedom do you have if Big Brother is watching you 24/7 ?
What do you drive? Or do you just ride a bike?
A car centric society focused on big trucks costs, so if you want it you have to pay for it. Or are you entitled to free six lane highways?
We do pay for it – handsomely – via all manner of taxes and charges.
What do cyclists pay for the infrastructure they demand and get? When will speed limits apply to them?
Luser doesn’t pay anything to ride its tricycle around its mummy’s 10m² backyards
Still more storage space than most suvs. And probably faster in car infested cities.
You cannot answer my simple questions with that mighty and righteous intellect?
“What do cyclists pay for the infrastructure they demand and get?“
I’ll tell you. They pay diddly squat. Vehicle taxes and charges pay for it.
I’ve answered you already.
https://wattsupwiththat.com/2024/06/01/california-considers-placing-a-mileage-tax-on-drivers/#comment-3919046
The sad thing is that you actually believe you have answered the question.
The other thing is you are very consistent, every answer involves other people being forced to live as you want them to live and be taxed to pay for the stuff you want.
My SUV has 3 rows and seats 7. The most that tricycle could carry is three. One on the seat doing all the work, one on the handlebars directing the work and one standing on the rear wheel deck supervising. Sounds like the typical union set-up
Wow, have you ever been out of your mom’s basement?
Yes, in big cities there are times when there is gridlock, but there would still be gridlock even if everyone rode in busses.
Except in the largest cities, times of grid lock are short and only happen at rush hours on week days.
You can have your choice of tricycles…
Make a collection of them for your comrades in the chicken-coop
Make everyone pay their fair share.
https://thefifthestate.com.au/urbanism/infrastructure/car-travel-six-times-more-expensive-than-bike/
Make everyone pay their fair share.
OK Basic car tax alone is £195.
Let’s be generous and charge cyclists half at say £100 per year. How many have bikes…. should be a few quid, right?
As you have already been told but cannot grasp, you cannot get musical equipment on the back of a boneshaker.
Some tyrants have good intentions. I’m not sure about him.
It’s his vision of how things should be and everybody should have to ‘suffer’ it, too. Because, somehow, he knows better….
I can’t say I’m surprised by your idea of fair.
Do you really think cyclist are even half the burden on infrastructure and society as cars are?
How much do you think cycle lanes etc cost – and how they are paid for?
Recently you appeared to refuse to accept that cyclists kill. But there’s plenty of proof that they do. And yet, they are exempt from the law.
Vehicle owners cover all the costs, what exactly are you complaining about?
They do, but I remember the argument was them being as dangerous as cars, and that is simply not true.
My question was if you think infrastructure and societal costs of bikes are at least 50% compared to cars.
https://www.cbo.gov/publication/57138
So that’s at least one they don’t cover.
https://earth911.com/living-well-being/the-true-cost-of-car-ownership/
So, what is the real difference between being killed by a car, a bicycle or a mad axe murderer?
Not much when you’re dead.
You come up with some nonsensical stuff when all you really need to say – it’s already understood, anyway – that you just hate cars; and you want everybody else to share that emotion.
The chances of being killed or severely injured are far smaller. And I don’t make a secret out of my distain for cars.
Who Pays for Roads? How the “Users Pay” Myth Gets in the Way of Solving America’s Transportation Problems
https://frontiergroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Who-Pays-for-Roads-vUS_1.pdf
Sorry, the US most certainly does not apply.
Bit of a lame straw man, that.
Apply to what?
The UK of course.
Don’t tell me that you’re going to claim you are ignorant of the fact that the pound (sterling) is the currency of the UK?
Cue a link to Australia….
“my distain for cars.”
Having taken a driving test 15 times, and continually FAILING…
… must be hard for you.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/2101-2199+W+3rd+St,+Santa+Rosa,+CA+95401/@0,0,0a,13.1y/data=!4m6!3m5!1s0x8084382ff0fcdb4d:0x404655802d0b5794!8m2!3d38.4354828!4d-122.752503!16s%2Fg%2F11c65q8ps1
This area of 3rd st in Santa Rosa has 1/3 of the roadway devoted to bicycles and keeping bicyclists safe. It removed 1 traffic lane to put in place. Now bicyclists are safer but still pay nothing for it
There is no societal cost to cars, they are a huge benefit.
Cars completely pay for the infrastructure that both cars and bicycles use.
At the speeds they travel, bicycles are much more dangerous than cars since bicycles offer no protection to their riders.
Have you read any of the links I posted, like
https://frontiergroup.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/05/Who-Pays-for-Roads-vUS_1.pdf
And the pedestrian is surely happy to know the rider is protected in his 3t tank.
If you weren’t always totally toked and riding down the middle of the road on your little tricycle.. you would be a lot safer.
German minister defends spending millions in foreign aid on cycle paths in Peru to fight climate change
Germany’s Federal Development Minister Svenja Schulze has refuted claims by opposition politicians her department has spent over €350 million on the construction of cycle paths in Peru to help fight climate change.
In an interview with Zeit Online, the Social Democrat (SPD) minister admitted that significant funding had been sent to Peru for these projects but claimed the figure was closer to €44 million and stressed the importance of Germany’s continued involvement in such initiatives.
How typical, when asked a question, you immediately run to highly biased propaganda sites instead of trying to use actual data.
So the congressional budget office is now highly biased propaganda.
Their stupid bike lanes take up a lot of room that could be used for people actually doing something.
Yes.. VERY costly.
Cars can travel >6 times farther in a 24 hour period than bicycles can. Cars can carry >6 times the cargo that bicycles can.
Cars can travel >6 times faster than bicycles can.
Cars travel >6 times easier through inclement weather than bicycles can.
Oh and you’re >6 times more likely to be injured or die in an accident on a bicycle than in a car
Do you have a carry-rack for your tricycle, little child??
Take home that bag of “lollies” you bought from the guy on the corner . !
Speed limits used to apply to cyclists around here, I had to get one of my sailors out of jail after he was pinched for speeding whilst under the influence on a ten speed bike.
Everything in your feeble chicken-coop existence is there because of FOSSIL FUELS.
Your whole insipid low-life is totally dependent on them.
The cicken-coop image really traumatized you, didn’t it?
I just thought – YUM!, chicken!
I’m waiting for ‘science’ to produce a chicken that is just comprised of a ball of breast meat covered in crispy skin, with 16 tipless wings sprouting out all around it.
They could call it a ‘Franken-chook’.
Not the least… I’m sure you are quite happy at home.
Drivers already pay taxes, duh. Property taxes, fuel taxes, rental taxes, tire taxes, sales taxes, …
He complains at his free ride! So very Gen Z
Well, here in America we do refer to them as “freeways”. Maybe it’s time to change the terminology to “tax paths”, “arm and a leg thruways”, or possibly “Highway Robbery Highways.”
They didn’t call them “FREEWAYS” in Cali because they thought of them as a revenue stream.
You didn’t answer my question.
Because my mobility doesn’t change reality of infrastructure cost.
If you drive an ICE car, then you’re a hypocrite.
https://www.grammarly.com/blog/appeal-to-hypocrisy/
Not only is he a hypocrite, but he’s proud of it.
Translation, I know that I’m a hypocrite, but I refuse to admit it.
Stick to your tricycle, Luser. !!
Have fun being the traffic jam
Sorry, you’re the traffic jam.
Writing “NO U” would have been shorter 😛
It sucks. But nobody is forced to live in such cities or work there. I don’t and that’s a major reason. America is a huge nation. It can’t have mass transportation as efficient as Europe. And when cities do try to develop mass trans, they do a lousy job of it.
I drive every day, and it’s been years since I’ve been stuck in a traffic jam.
Only a tiny fraction of drives involve being stuck in traffic.
Perhaps if you got out of your mom’s basement more often, you to could have contact with reality.
No traffic jams around here.
Except that little child that occasionally rides his little red tricycle down the middle of the road.
If you think moving everyone from cars to busses will result in fewer roads being needed, you even more delusional than I thought.
One possible solution is to privatise the roads. The state owns the underlying asset, but leases the roads to private “road companies”. The road companies in turn offer memberships to drivers depending on their needs. If you only ever need to drive around your home town, you have a (for example) $5 p/a membership. If you need to travel all over the country, you have a $500 p/a membership. You could even link it to credit card rewards, like air miles.
When it comes to maintenance, the road companies negotiate directly with roadworks companies to get it done for a reasonable price, and any pothole damage or road closures results in compensation for drivers affected.
But, as other people have pointed out, no government willingly gives up tax revenue, forking thieves that they are.
The problem I see there is it’s a natural monopoly, so how do you prevent “Road Corp” from exploiting its monopoly power, and how do you do so without undermining the whole point of privatizing the roads in the first place.
It wouldn’t have monopoly power – similar to the way cellular companies mostly use the same cell towers, you’d have sort of road service providers that pay the lease to the state. Anyone with sufficient capital could set up as one.
The one flaw I see is that I’m not sure how you’d divvy up the bill for repairs, or decide which one of potentially multiple providers would ultimately be responsible for ensuring that they get done.
It is damned if you do, damned if you don’t.
Government run road maintenance has lots of inefficiencies.
Privatized road maintenance bleeds off money for profits.
Take a look at what happened in the UK to water systems – shareholder dividends instead of maintenance.
True enough, but private companies would need to compete for my money – with the water companies in the UK, each effectively has a monopoly on one or more areas, no competition even possible, let alone allowed.
So how will this work with out of state drives, and the nasty ones who turn off their smart phones before filling up?
Perhaps if the state spent less money on frivolous things the roads could be repaired.
Ok could, does not mean will….
I don’t even own a smart phone- just a dumb flip phone. Maybe they’ll make a come back in CA with such a rule. 🙂
All cellphones, even dumb ones, have GPS devices in them whether you realize it or not and have had that capability for decades. Also the cell networks have the ability to pinpoint your location within as little as 35 ft or so just by using cell tower triangulation, and law enforcement uses that capability from time to time, though they are required to get a warrant, ditto with accessing GPS data collected by all cell phones.
Right- forgot about that. Good thing I don’t live in CA. So far I haven’t heard that Wokeachusetts wants to track cars and tax them based on mileage- so far.
This was an issue several decades ago for 911 calls. The cell phone companies were ordered to come up with a method of determining the location of a call.
A faraday pouch will keep any signal from a cell phone from
being tracked..
Headed to Cali next week. Taxes on the rental car increase its cost by around 50%.
California is 10% when you earn it and 10% when you spend it. Plus fees, tariffs and expenses.
If a law that is currently being debated is passed and holds up in court, you will also pay taxes if you try to leave the state and will still have to pay taxes for 5 to 10 years after you have left the state.
Silly question..
You will pay both mileage tax AND gas tax…
The roads will still not be fixed.
Over half of California’s deficit of late can be attributed to programs to end homelessness. Tens of billions spent and homelessness is worse than ever, and state accountants can seem to figure out where the tax money has gone.
ALL of California’s deficit can be attributed to a one party legislature, which has been under one party rule since 1958.
Guess which party.
Where has the money gone, more than likely most of it is in the pockets of politicians, as well as friends and family of politicians. Just as designed.
As the noted philosopher and visionary Waylon Jennings once observed;
“Did you ever notice that all the roads in Hazard County are always being worked on but they never get fixed?”
A mileage tax is far too intrusive, and there are much better ways to charge owners of EVs for their share of road maintenance costs. For example, it is an easy matter to calculate an annual road use tax applicable to all drivers, regardless of what kind of fuel they use. It can be collected at the annual tag renewal for each vehicle. Then drop the gas tax.
There is no rational basis to support road maintenance as a function of miles driven by ordinary passenger vehicles. Passenger vehicles cause virtually no significant wear and tear on roads, as highway engineers are well aware.
The three primary drivers of road degradation are:
1) Poor design or construction (such as improper road sub base and base, drainage, and materials selection)
2) Heavy truck loads (passenger vehicle loads are negligible in determining pavement life)
3) Weathering (sun, rain, freeze-thaw cycles)
Roadway design and construction including materials selection have steadily improved over the decades, and will continue to see marginal improvements. States already charge heavy trucks for their impacts on roads through annual road taxes and special fees assessed at weigh stations. Weather is what it is.
“A mileage tax is far too intrusive, “
It doesn’t need to be. The state could just have you self report your odometer reading once a year and hit you with underreporting penalties if you lie. Like if you’ve been reporting 5k miles a year, and you go to sell the car after five years and it has 200k miles you’ve obviously been cheating. And you already have to report the odometer reading when you sell the car.
You’d have some people cheat by disabling their speedometers, but probably not many.
That’s not how the State would do it – all the talk has been to date of using intrusive measures like installing and monitoring GPS devices … which could then be used for any other purpose the State wants, such as issuing speeding tickets based on GPS speeds, and of course, for “Big Brother” monitoring of everyone all the time. And again, miles driven by passenger vehicles and light trucks has literally nothing to do with road maintenance anyway.
The gas tax gets paid by all those tourists who still visit California. The state is blessed with many natural wonders and beautiful landscapes. In other words, the gas tax isn’t going away.
Tourists already pay tourist taxes (typically assessed on lodging and rental cars) which can be adjusted upwards to cover the fair share of road use.
What of drivers of Human Powered Vehicles? Forester sums up Effective Cycling with what he calls the vehicular cycling (VC) principle: “Cyclists fare best when they act and are treated as drivers of vehicles.”
One more reason for people to leave CA.
So there’s the claim that the total gas tax collected will drop. But, has it dropped? Or has the expense of road maintenance gone up because ever higher energy costs drives up the cost of everything? And of course labor costs are going up, partly due to ever increasing energy costs. How about the costs to run the state’s highway bureaucracies? Are some paid too much? Thrifty people try to do more with less. I guess that’s an obsolete idea with American governments at all levels. Here in Wokeachusetts I know several dozen state and local workers. Not one could earn as much as they get now out in the private sector.
“California Considers Placing a Mileage Tax on Drivers”
One thing an idea such as this needs is some form of technological infrastructure….
“Khan plotting ‘pay-as-you-drive’ scheme using Ulez cameras”
https://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/sadiq-khan-ulez-cameras-payment-charge-scheme-b1064837.html
The cameras are of the obligatory ANPR (automatic number plate recognition) type, and despite the attacks of the blade runners they’re largely in place and functioning. There was a rough patch with a by-election in Uxbridge in which there was perceived pushback to Ulez. For the first time there was some doubt among the elites, but not for long.
Nonetheless, during the 2024 mayoral election campaign we got this
“London Mayor Sadiq Khan rules out Ulez changes – BBC News”
This is Khan code for of course it will happen. Ulez changes? We’ve heard it all before. More weasel words.
Does California have the infrastructure? It isn’t cheap…
Expanding what was already in place up to the circular roads (North and South) cost ~£130 million. Notionally Ulez won’t be changed now or in the foreseeable future, but the method of charging will be.
Just one city.
“One thing an idea such as this needs is some form of technological infrastructure….”
All they really need to do is use the odometers in the cars.
So they call in all cars to fit the tech…..
Sounds inexpensive.
There’s a very simple way for California to raise a large chunk of change right away. Require new license plates every 7 or 8 years.
The first year, except for special plates for antique, historic or other special vehicles, all plates older than 7 years must be replaced. They can take a new, random number or for $2 more can get a new plate with their old number but it’ll take extra time. Same for vanity plates.
All the various ancient plates running around on daily driven, ordinary vehicles? Buh-bye! Off the cars and onto the walls or recycling bins.
There would be a huge income boost for roads and other vehicular infrastructure the first year, and an ongoing annual supply as plates pass their 7th year.
Idaho does this and it’s really a straight up money grab wrapped in the guise of “safety” under the claim that the plates “lose reflectivity”. Idaho also has a higher registration fee for pure electrics, plug in hybrids, and electric vehicles with a built in range extender engine.
Hybrids like the regular Prius pay the same rate as normal ICE vehicles.
There are vehicles running in California with various old plates that aren’t reflective at all.
The tricky bit in California would be preventing their politicians from running to that initial huge revenue chunk like pigs to a tough of fresh slop, siphoning off most of it to various porkbarrel projects rather than fixing the roads.
How about not supporting sluggards for generations and inviting the entire third world in for free $hit?
The root cause is simple — The State of California doesn’t have enough money.
California citizens and residents get to keep too much money. They can afford to own private vehicles so they shouldn’t be surprised to be asked to
paygive more.Sacramento needs to implement a credits program that combines carbon credits and social justice credits.
– You’re a minority? That’s a credit.
– You self-identify as male? There’s a debit.
– You own an EV? Credit.
– You charge your EV? Debit.
– You buy an ICE vehicle? Debit.
– You buy gas? Double debit. Etc, etc. You get it.
The real fun comes from setting values for each of the above examples, creating a new bureaucracy and independent credit exchange clearing houses.
Ha! There’s no such thing as “enough money.” Give me an amount of money that California couldn’t possibly spend plus 70% more on top of it. Can’t do it. They could tax away the entire earnings of all Californians for a year and easily spend it all on things nobody asked for, and still increase the deficit.
Absolutely false. The root cause is simple — California spends more than it takes in as revenue.
IOW, for us common folk it’s known as the simple fact of living within a budget.
California needs to look no further than the UK for a “user pay” solution to maintain the roads and protect the electrical grid.
The UK is ahead of most of the world by having users pay for road maintenance and a new grid! The UK is setting up Separate Meters for the EV charging and protecting its grid with Smart Chargers.
Facing billions of revenue losses from diminishing use of gasoline and diesel fuels to maintain the 400,000 miles of roadways, California may be looking at revenue to be derived from the charging of EV’s, i.e., “user pays”!
This was recently put forth in Michigan as one of several ways to increase tax revenue for road repair. But if they stopped using road repair money for bicycle paths, trains, and stop all grant money maybe they wouldn’t need the higher taxes.
That may be true, but to conclude that the only source of revenue for road repairs is from this hypothetical “gas tax funded” is wrong headed. California also has vehicle registration and miscellaneous fees, 22% of the gasoline taxes goes towards CHP and DMV bureaucracy. Much of the gasoline tax goes into high speed rail and public transit. Furthermore, its the municipal taxes that go into surface streets within the city and county. This is why bicyclists are also paying road taxes because it comes from general revenue. Bicyclists aren’t permitted to ride on highways and other roads not paid for, in part, with local general revenue.
This lie that gasoline taxes only go to road repair, and only gasoline taxes pay for road repair is the garbage propaganda fed daily by politicians, activists and stupid people who see life as a series of simple univariable equations.
How much?
Any amount is too much.
In WI, I am charged a $100. annual “EV Fee” on top of the registration fee for my HYBRID vehicle (non plug in).
ALL of the energy my car uses originates in gasoline run through the tank. Nevertheless, the justification is that I am somehow evading taxation.
Government scumbags.
But taxing the wrong people is always the Democrats’ mistake
From the last sentence in the above article:
“So, assuming a “mileage fee” plan goes ahead, what would happen to the gas tax? Would we still pay that?”
Is that a serious question?
ROTFL!
The California legislature would pass a breathing tax if they thought they could get away with it.
Good luck collecting that tax. No one will pay.
Wiener thinks cars pay taxes. He also thinks businesses pay taxes. Neither could be further from the truth. People pay taxes and since California duplicates the functions of the Federal government in all agencies, they pay the highest taxes in the nation.
Pay, pay and pay. Then pay more, more and more and give it to foreign nationals.