• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Oregon launching new program to tax drivers per mile

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Jaepheth said:
Increase the annual vehicle registration fee.

Or tax tires; if you want to maintain a more user-pay weighted system.
Click to expand...

this is what Colorado did. my 2004 camry just came down to $89.00 to renew the tags. my 2000 sienna is about 75 and my 2011 sienna is just about 300.
 
OutHouse said:
this is what Colorado did. my 2004 camry just came down to $89.00 to renew the tags. my 2000 sienna is about 75 and my 2011 sienna is just about 300.
Click to expand...

Kentucky has had property taxes on cars for years. These drop in value as the car ages so it doesn't reflect road usage or lack thereof.
 
ivwshane said:
Like I said, there are pros and cons.

How about this for a compromise?; those that wish to keep their privacy will simply pay the average plus xx% for a vehicle in their class.
Click to expand...


All the privacy a person can pay for?

Someone will out bid me...

.
 
So, how will GPS use in older cars be enforced, especially if drivers are forced to pay for them. And what's stopping me from hacking the GPS or rolling back the odometer to reduce the miles read.

Unless this tax function is built into all cars, I don't see this as an enforceable law.
 
next on the oregon agenda is to meter solar panel KW with mandatory metering and charge a fee / tax.
 
ivwshane said:
At first I thought wtf! But then after thinking about it the question (which their proposal tries to address), is; how will states handle the cost of maintaining roads as cars become more fuel efficient and the income from gas taxes gets smaller?

Do any of you have any solutions?
Click to expand...

Ya, here's a hint quit spending money on stupid shit.

O look at this nice road, hey I got it since a lot of people travel down it. Lets go ahead and redo it so it looks like we're doing something.
 
dmcowen674 said:
They can't, the Governor already signed it into law.
Click to expand...

And if the vast majority of the populace flat-out refuse it? What you going to do, jail the entire state? I'm just saying there could be a LOT of backlash over something like this and could easily lead to political suicide, especially since it isn't taking effect immediately.
 
Engineer said:
Kentucky has had property taxes on cars for years. These drop in value as the car ages so it doesn't reflect road usage or lack thereof.
Click to expand...
Iowa does too, though ours has two components. There's a property tax component which starts high and drops over the years. There's also a road impact component based on the gross vehicle weight. It does not drop as the vehicle gets older. For state income tax purposes, the property tax component can be deducted as an itemized deduction while the road impact component is treated as a usage fee and is not deductible.
 
cubby1223 said:
What backlash?

People willingly desire tracking devices so long as it is incentivized:
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/25/b...e-drivers-accept-monitoring-devices.html?_r=0
Click to expand...
I have said this exact thing for years:
“Today, the better drivers are the ones who are opting in” to user-based insurance, says Shamik Lala, a manager at A.T. Kearney, the consulting firm. In five years, when he expects the industry to view such insurance as standard, insurers will treat those who don’t opt in as bad risks, he predicts.
Click to expand...

It is inevitable. People who refuse to partake in this and also have a high performance car will pay through the nose with insurance because the insurance company will know that in most cases such a person is driving quickly a lot of the time. I really think that high performance cars are going to lose their mystique in the fairly near future. Their horsepower will be ever more pointless and impossible to use on public roads due to increased monitoring of driving behaviors.
 
ivwshane said:
I hear what you are saying but I think we have to look at the original intent of the gas tax, which was to pay for roads and maintenance.

Two identical vehicles that travel the same distance and differ only in mpg, don't use the road any differently than the other, so why would one have to pay a higher tax than the other? The gas tax wasn't intended as a consumption tax but people see it like that now a days.
Click to expand...

Gee, wouldnt a tax per gallon also be a de facto environmental tax? The gas guzzler pays more to drive the same distance under the tax per gallon model. Under this new system a fuel efficient cars pays the same as an 8-12 mpg truck or SUV.
 
brocks said:
EagleKeeper said:
Pilot project is [voluntary].
2015 is not.
Click to expand...

No, you misread. From the Fox story:

"The program, springing out of a recently signed bill, is expected to launch in 2015 on a volunteer basis."
Click to expand...


This is where I got my impression.
1 year testing using volunteers and then full implementation

Oregon is purportedly considering several tracking methods for the pilot project’s 5,000 volunteers ahead of the 2015 start date.
Click to expand...

Punctuation makes it confusing
 
Doppel said:
I have said this exact thing for years:


It is inevitable. People who refuse to partake in this and also have a high performance car will pay through the nose with insurance because the insurance company will know that in most cases such a person is driving quickly a lot of the time. I really think that high performance cars are going to lose their mystique in the fairly near future. Their horsepower will be ever more pointless and impossible to use on public roads due to increased monitoring of driving behaviors.
Click to expand...

yeah i agree. i think we had a big conversation about this before. IF the govenment forces you to have a GPS for gas tracking there will be a huge backlash. but if they offer it as a "reduction" then people will flock to it. (kinda like how insurance company's are doing now).

Insurance company's are leading the way. they have for cars for cheaper insurance. soon rates without it are going to skyrocket so you HAVE to have one. then it will be adopted into every new car as a cutesy. I say in about 12 years.
 
eskimospy said:
Gasoline taxes exist mostly to repair roads. What does fuel efficiency have to do with how much wear a car creates on the road? (outside of perhaps the fact that less efficient cars will likely be heavier)
Click to expand...

Outside of the fact? That's ignoring the largest factor, besides weather, which has absolutely nothing to do with cars at all, in road repair.

http://www.vabike.org/vehicle-weight-and-road-damage/ (pdf from GAO inside)

road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars
Click to expand...

I really doubt there was much highway/road engineer input on trying to fairly tax drivers based on road wear and tear they cause.

To be as fair as possible the miles driven would need to be on a sliding scale that penalizes the heavier vehicles. Weather tax would need to be allotted on a flat miles driven basis I would say.
 
I see a lot of the other issues with the law have already been addressed (Out of state drivers, vehicle weight etc)

ivwshane said:
They are testing multiple systems, all have pros and cons. Some are gps based, some are odometer based.

A Gps based system would address questions A,B,C, and E. vehicle registration could address D.
Click to expand...

And you think a GPS device tracking your activities is ok why? Odometer based would be better but how do they collect that data?
 
ivwshane said:
At first I thought wtf! But then after thinking about it the question (which their proposal tries to address), is; how will states handle the cost of maintaining roads as cars become more fuel efficient and the income from gas taxes gets smaller?

Do any of you have any solutions?
Click to expand...

That's exactly why they are doing it. In my state the Govner wants to raise the state tax by 10 cents for the same reason.

I don't know about Oregon but the tax unfortunately does not just go to fix the roads. If it did here I might not object to it as much.

But, goolly geewiz, at least we don't have a state income tax.
 
Last edited:
Genx87 said:
Gee, wouldnt a tax per gallon also be a de facto environmental tax? The gas guzzler pays more to drive the same distance under the tax per gallon model. Under this new system a fuel efficient cars pays the same as an 8-12 mpg truck or SUV.
Click to expand...

I have no idea what your point is. Are you saying that the gas tax is an environment impact tax? I don't believe it is and it certainly was never pushed as such.
 
Exterous said:
I see a lot of the other issues with the law have already been addressed (Out of state drivers, vehicle weight etc)



And you think a GPS device tracking your activities is ok why? Odometer based would be better but how do they collect that data?
Click to expand...

What part of "all have pros and cons" did you not understand?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top