Does The Government Really Care How Much Gas We Burn?

[Trusting]

It's been a while, and I don't recall all the details, but remember the plan to get the old gas guzzlers off the roads? You know, I think it was back in the first year of this administration.

If I remember correctly the net result was that people got paid a stupidly high price for their old junky gas burner so they could go out and get a new junky gas burner on the cheap. Real good plan....

If I could have arranged to play "Fuhrer for a Day" and call the shots for the government, this is what I would have done instead. It's not complicated.

1. Create federal sales tax rates for cars based on their mileage. The lower the mileage the more the tax. Let's say from $10.000,00 down to $0.
2. Collect all that cash from the Hummer, giant SUV etc., buyers.
3. Use that tax money to subsidize the cost of manufacture of high mileage cars.

So, the guy who wants to toodle around in his Hummer would have paid $10,000.00 tax on it and the guy driving his Elio would have bought it with no tax and $1,000.00 cheaper because of the subsidy. Somehow I think there would be more economical cars and fewer gas guzzlers on America's roads. Net result, we use less gas.

Detroit would hate it.
Ok, tell me why it wouldn't work.


political reference edited

 

[aahz]

How about instead of paying Billions to the banks and auto industry, they pay off the mortgage and auto loans of the American people. Wouldn't that have gone straight to the Banks And Auto industry? Thereby giving the American people more cash to use elsewhere???

 

[Gas-Powered Awesome]

What about people like my sister, who has to own a giant, gas-guzzling conversion van with a wheelchair lift to transport my handicapped nephew? It sucks down more gas than a Hummer.

If you say "oh, we make an exception", then your off into the weeds and before long you have a 1000-page tax code just for sales tax on cars.

It won't work.

 

[Gas-Powered Awesome]

You also might want to look up Jevon's Paradox: The more efficient you make cars, the more gasoline we will use.

The only thing that causes gasoline consumption decline is economic disaster. So let's just have a depression. That will really save some gas.

 

[Buckeyejake]

Does the government really care?

If it doesn't put money into their reelection coffers …hell no!

 

[Ty]

It's been a while, and I don't recall all the details, but remember the Obama plan to get the old gas guzzlers off the roads? You know, I think it was back in the first year of his administration.

If I remember correctly the net result was that people got paid a stupidly high price for their old junky gas burner so they could go out and get a new junky gas burner on the cheap. Real good plan....

If I could have arranged to play "Fuhrer for a Day" and call the shots for the government, this is what I would have done instead. It's not complicated.

1. Create federal sales tax rates for cars based on their mileage. The lower the mileage the more the tax. Let's say from $10.000,00 down to $0.
2. Collect all that cash from the Hummer, giant SUV etc., buyers.
3. Use that tax money to subsidize the cost of manufacture of high mileage cars.

So, the guy who wants to toodle around in his Hummer would have paid $10,000.00 tax on it and the guy driving his Elio would have bought it with no tax and $1,000.00 cheaper because of the subsidy. Somehow I think there would be more economical cars and fewer gas guzzlers on America's roads. Net result, we use less gas.

Detroit would hate it.
Ok, tell me why it wouldn't work.

At least try to get the facts straight. At least for your own knowledge. While I wasn't a fan of Cash for Clunkers, the rules were that the trade in car had to be less than 25 years old and in return, you received $5,000 towards either the purchase or a 5 year lease of a NEW car. PLUS, the old car had to get bad gas mileage and the new one had to get good mileage...

• Vehicle must be less than 25 years old on the trade-in date.

• Only the purchase or 5 year minimum lease of new vehicles qualify.

• Generally, trade-in vehicles must get a weighted combined average rating of 18 or fewer miles per gallon (some very large pickup trucks and cargo vans have different requirements).

• Trade-in vehicles must be registered and insured continuously for the full year preceding the trade-in.

• Trade-in vehicles must be in driveable condition.

• The program ran from July 1, 2009 until August 24, 2009

• The program requires the scrapping of the eligible trade-in vehicle and that the dealer disclose to the customer an estimate of the scrap value of the trade-in. The scrap value, however minimal, will be in addition to the rebate, and not in place of the rebate.

• The new car bought under the plan must have a suggested retail price of no more than $45,000, and for passenger automobiles, the new vehicle must have a combined fuel economy value of at least 22 mpg.

• "Car Allowance Rebate System - Helpful Q&As for Consumers - Formerly Referred to as "Cash for Clunkers"". CARS.gov. Archived from the original on 2009-07-27. Retrieved 2009-08-22.

One other thing. This One month program effectively increased the US overall efficiency of all cars on the road by between 0.6 and 0.7 MPG. (That isn't a whole lot but it IS something)

 

[Ty]

By decreasing the amount of oil we use, it gives us a little more wiggle room when working with foreign states. IF we didn't need oil at all (I know that won't happen any time soon if ever), how much effort would we really need to put into policing everyone else?

Here's something that will have to be figured out though. Road tax is based on fuel consumption. Sure, we could just raise that to punish the lower mileage offenders but that punishes some who don't have a choice (see Van comment above a few posts) and the whole transportation industry. Rather, if the costs were somehow figured out based on ENERGY usage, it could include gas, diesel, electric, propane, compressed air, magic magnet drive, unobtainium, and nuclear powered vehicles.

Under the current system, should half of the people switch to electric, yay. But, the other half would be paying all the road taxes through fuel sales and thus be paying for the roads. Electric vehicle owners should also pay for the roads we all drive on. Heavier vehicles do more damage than light vehicles. Therefore, people like me should pay more road taxes than people in light cars. That sucks for me but it would be fair. People should pay for what they use.

Fuel is almost always sold by computerized pumps... too bad it can't assess what vehicle is being fueled and thus be able to assign appropriate taxes right there at the pump. The pump could be like "This is an F-350. It gets the high tax rate for weight and mileage penalties"... (but the electrics are still an issue)

 

[Rickb]

A government cares thread? Should simply delete this political thread now. Yes, some in government care about encouraging the development of high mpg and alternative energy vehicles.

When the numbers of electrics are high enough to warrant it, government will tax those vehicles accordingly and owner's will pay their fair share. Hopefully, whatever the tax scheme, I hope it's fair and equitable to all the people.

Ty, thanks for the fact check.

 

[Rob Croson]

Here's something that will have to be figured out though. Road tax is based on fuel consumption. Sure, we could just raise that to punish the lower mileage offenders but that punishes some who don't have a choice (see Van comment above a few posts) and the whole transportation industry. Rather, if the costs were somehow figured out based on ENERGY usage, it could include gas, diesel, electric, propane, compressed air, magic magnet drive, unobtainium, and nuclear powered vehicles.

Under the current system, should half of the people switch to electric, yay. But, the other half would be paying all the road taxes through fuel sales and thus be paying for the roads. Electric vehicle owners should also pay for the roads we all drive on. Heavier vehicles do more damage than light vehicles. Therefore, people like me should pay more road taxes than people in light cars. That sucks for me but it would be fair. People should pay for what they use.

This is a very important issue that many jurisdictions are trying to deal with. Electric cars are great for smog, but they beat the crap out of the roads. A Ford Fusion weighs about 3,400 lbs. A Tesla Model S weighs anywhere from 4400 to almost 5,000 lbs! That's a LOT of extra wear and tear on the roads. The Model X is even worse: 5300-5400 lbs. That's about 1,000 lbs more than my minivan.

How you tax should be based on what type of behavior you want to promote. If you want to promote fuel efficiency and a switch to electrics, then you tax gasoline. You don't need to vary that tax based on the fuel efficiency of the vehicle. Low efficiency vehicles use less fuel and thus pay less taxes. Alternative fuel vehicles such as hydrogen, natural gas, etc., could be taxed at different rates depending on how much you want to promote or discourage their use. Electric vehicles completely skip this tax, of course.

The purchase of new vehicles is (supposedly) already covered by gas guzzler taxes. Unfortunately they only cover cars, and not trucks, SUVs, or crossovers. Close that loophole and you'll see a lot of those vehicles become a lot more expensive.

There are CAFE penalties for selling low efficiency fleets, but they are mostly minimal, especially when the vehicles that don't meet the standards are generally already luxury vehicles, and the extra penalty barely registers on the sticker price. "Currently, the CAFE penalty is $55 USD per vehicle for every 1 mpg under the standard." So your $80,000 luxury car missed the mark by 5 mpg? That'll cost you $275. That'll make you think twice, huh? NOT!

But then you still need to account for wear and tear on the roads. This could be done by taxing at the tiume of registration based on the vehicle weight. This is where electric vehicle owners would get hit harder, as their vehicles will weight more (sometimes a LOT more!) then comparable ICE vehicles.

I understand that some jurisdictions have been researching charging tax based on the mileage driven. But how do you do it? Some places have proposed GPS tracking, but that raises all kinds of security concerns. Have your odometer read and pay a mileage tax every time you renew your registration? I just renewed my registration for five years. Five years from now will I have to pay a fee covering all the miles I've driven for the past five years? Ouch!

 

[W. WIllie]

That brings up the fact that people who live in rural areas HAVE to drive more miles than the people living in surbuban or city areas. So we get taxed more for miles driven. The Ins. companies are looking at that way of driving now for rates.
I drive the car with the best mpg and I get penalized for the miles driven.