Print 71 comment(s) - last by ebakke.. on Jan 8 at 12:32 PM

Oregon drivers getting at least 55 MPG may have to pay a driving tax

Everyone who drives a gasoline or diesel powered vehicle on the streets in the United States pays taxes that go towards keeping the roads around the country and within your local community in good condition. We pay these taxes at the pump when we buy fuel.
However, one of the side effects to the Obama administration's push to get Americans to buy more fuel-efficient electric or hybrid vehicles is that the amount of money raised in fuel taxes by states is decreasing. The Oregon state legislature is reportedly considering a bill that would require drivers of vehicles getting at least 55 mpg to pay a tax on each mile driven after 2015.
The bill would also give drivers the option of paying a flat tax amount annually. Currently, taxes on fuel within the state of Oregon are 30 cents per gallon.

“Everybody uses the road and if some pay and some don’t then that’s an unfair situation that’s got to be resolved,” said Jim Whitty, manager of the Oregon Department of Transportation’s Office of Innovative Partnerships and Alternative Funding.

Oregon isn't the only state considering charging drivers of fuel-efficient vehicles attacks on the miles they drive; Nevada and Washington are also looking at per mile charges. Drivers of electric vehicles in Washington will begin paying an annual fee in March.

Automotive manufacturers and dealers see this proposed per mile tax as a significant hindrance to the mass adoption of hybrid and fully-electric vehicles.

Sources: Statesman Journal, Southern California Public Radio

Comments     Threshold

This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Dolts
By michaelheath on 1/4/2013 10:55:07 AM , Rating: 2
Learn from Europe, maybe?

• Close tax loopholes for oil companies. Put the proceeds towards infrastructure.
• Regulate costs on fuel refineries. A lot of the cost per gallon to the consumer isn't due to cost of delivery.
• Raise taxes on gasoline. Put proceeds towards infrastructure.
• Higher gas prices drives people towards fuel efficient vehicles. Part of the taxation on vehicle purchases goes towards (you guessed it) infrastructure.

The idea is to find a balance that impedes our reliance on fossil fuels - because we consume a ridiculous amount of fossil fuels - and pays for our [expected] lifestyle. (Once people become used to a certain lifestyle, they believe they are forever entitled to it regardless of how untenable it may be to sustain.)

RE: Dolts
By ebakke on 1/4/2013 12:06:38 PM , Rating: 5
Close tax loopholes for oil companies
I'd like you to list the tax loopholes for oil companies please. I'd also like an explanation as to how the rules differ from other industries and how the oil companies are getting special treatment.
Regulate costs on fuel refineries. A lot of the cost per gallon to the consumer isn't due to cost of delivery.
The largest cost in a gallon of gasoline after the crude is already taxes.
Raise taxes on gasoline. Put proceeds towards infrastructure.
We could take the 40% of federal gas taxes not going to bridges/roads and [gasp] spend it on bridges/roads.

The idea is to find a balance that impedes our reliance on fossil fuels
The idea is that central planning doesn't work. Stop trying to drive the market to do one thing or another. All you end up with is a pile of unintended consequences.

RE: Dolts
By Netscorer on 1/4/13, Rating: 0
RE: Dolts
By ebakke on 1/4/2013 12:46:26 PM , Rating: 2
No! You don't get to decide what other people need, want, or can purchase. Claiming you can because "you're looking out for us" is just a feeble attempt to disguise the fact that you're a tyrant.

Punishing some behavior and rewarding other behavior should never be the role of government, unless the punishment is due to unjust force. Said differently, unless I'm harming someone, the government has no right to influence my actions.

It totally baffles me that those who try to use the power of governmental force to dictate their way upon others attempt to do claim the moral high ground when doing so. There's nothing moral about taxing the bajeezus out of someone because you don't like what they're doing.

RE: Dolts
By Ringold on 1/5/2013 1:45:37 AM , Rating: 1
we live in a society and have to first and foremost do what is best for the whole

That's "reformed Marxism", at best, right there.

Which is fine, that seems to be what the people vote for these days. I'd just make the point that that is not what the nation was founded to be; it was founded and intended to be the total opposite.

I wish liberals would just drop the pretense and cut to the chase: a public debate, followed by a referendum on keeping the current constitution, or a new one with more expansive powers for the state. All this sneaking around and death-by-a-thousand-cuts strategy towards the current constitution is just cowardly.

By the way, ask you average Greek how unlimited government ends. Considering a lot of them voted for parties that'd of made it much worse by leaving the Euro, they might not comprehend what went wrong, but they'll be able to tell you it sucks.

Or your average Spaniard, or anyone in France or Italy that looks nervously at bond markets and praying the politicians don't knock over the house of cards.

RE: Dolts
By ritualm on 1/4/2013 2:34:18 PM , Rating: 2
The road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Much of what you said sounds good in theory, but counterproductive in practice.

"And boy have we patented it!" -- Steve Jobs, Macworld 2007

Copyright 2016 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki