Based on a study of a 10-mile (16km) stretch of the 91 Express Lanes tollway, which features four lanes for the exclusive use of drivers pre-registered with transponders. The charges to use the reserved lanes are variable and based on demand and time of day, while the remaining lanes are free. By comparing the usage patterns with income levels and correlating that with the effects of tax or toll-based revenue generation on income, the study came to its conclusion.
The reason tolls are more equitable is that they impact poor less harshly than taxes. Because transport projects must be funded, there's no way to avoid needing either tolls or taxes, but the study bolsters the idea that usage-based payment is fairer than sales-tax-based payment, because flat-rate taxes form a larger portion of the total income for the poor compared to the wealthy, whereas the wealthier road uses are the predominant express-lane users, according to study data, reports Green Car Congress.
Historically, flat-rate charges such as sales taxes and road tolls have both been subject to the same criticism of regressiveness, or having a heavier impact on the poor than the wealthy. Proponents of the study's findings, however, think that in this case, the toll is less regressive since it is use-based, whereas the tax impacts the poor regardless of whether they own or drive cars.
Reader Comments
Fri Aug 22 2008 2:52 PM
autoque says
Isn't this obvious even without the study?
Fri Aug 22 2008 3:41 PM
chris says
to hell with tolls or taxes.
the simplest and most representative way to tax the public for their appropriate share of road use is to tax the gas. thats it. tax the friggen gas. if i use 100$ of gas in one year, 5$ should go to road work. that way, if i own a small trucking company and i need $100,000 in gas every MONTH.. i'm paying my fair share as well.
on the flip side,.. if i live in an appartment in manhattan, and i've never driver a car in my life.. why the hell should i have to pay for your infrastructure?
taxing the crap out of gas will also be a nice incentive for people to invest in hybrid tech (disclaimer: todays hybrids suck hard, i know this, but they are a starting point into a more efficient future). if i knew i was screwing the man by buying a hybrid.. that would be just more incentive to do so. besides.... americans seem to forget the "osama hates my prius" argument.
Fri Aug 22 2008 3:50 PM
Laz says
Chris, we already are taxed by the feds and state on the gas we buy...
Sun Aug 24 2008 5:52 AM
carsinamerica says
Since most people own cars, and many of the rest use some sort of bus, and everybody wants roads maintained well enough that emergency services can come to their aid in case of need, the road network is pretty much a universal need. So, even a poor person without a car uses the infrastructure and services that rely upon roads.
Given that, I still prefer a tax-based system. I agree with the study's authors that a flat-tax is more unfair in this regard than tolls. Therefore, it seems to me that the best choice to maximize benefits and minimize impact is the use of progressive means of taxation, such as income and property taxes, rather than flat or even regressive taxes. That way, the people who don't drive but still use what the roads provide are contributing, but the burden on the poor is somewhat reduced, particularly if the income tax liability threshhold can be raised a bit higher.
Mon Aug 25 2008 11:33 AM
NaBUru38 says
Both toll and fuel taxes are fairer than non-transport taxes. Old-school tolls slow the traffic, though not anymore in places like Portugal. So I can't find equality differences between both.
Leave a Comment
Login or register to leave comments.
Please keep your comments on topic. Your involvement is governed by our Privacy Policy and Terms.