Utah and Oregon Now Require GPS Trackers on EVs, Tax Drivers by the Mile(pjmedia.com)
pjmedia.com
Utah and Oregon Now Require GPS Trackers on EVs, Tax Drivers by the Mile
https://pjmedia.com/news-and-politics/benbartee/2023/08/13/techno-hell-utah-and-oregon-now-require-gps-trackers-on-evs-in-lieu-of-registration-fee-tax-drivers-by-the-mile-n1718751
52 comments
Even easier, if the intent is to charge a tax per mile, simply record the mileage every year for inspection and registration renewal and charge based on the difference.
GPS trackers are a massive privacy overreach and people should not be okay with them. They are not necessary to levy road usage taxes.
GPS trackers are a massive privacy overreach and people should not be okay with them. They are not necessary to levy road usage taxes.
> The underlying facts of road maintenance are that basically all of road maintenance (except that attributable to erosion of the roadbed) repairs damage caused by heavily-loaded trucks.
Maintenance costs for existing road surfaces are caused by trucks. But the majority of costs for roads are still new construction, and things like intersections and traffic revisions. All of which are prompted by driver traffic.
And besides, trucks already have additional taxes that they are assessed based on their load weight.
Maintenance costs for existing road surfaces are caused by trucks. But the majority of costs for roads are still new construction, and things like intersections and traffic revisions. All of which are prompted by driver traffic.
And besides, trucks already have additional taxes that they are assessed based on their load weight.
It is true that new construction accounts for a large fraction of the total cost. But the extra truck tax revenue is far, far below the proportional cost of damage trucks cause.
Everyone benefits from roads' existence and from the freight delivered by truck, with or without owning a car. So tying taxes artificially to any selective use factors is inherently flawed. Tying it to GPS logs is worse.
Everyone benefits from roads' existence and from the freight delivered by truck, with or without owning a car. So tying taxes artificially to any selective use factors is inherently flawed. Tying it to GPS logs is worse.
The vast, vast majority of roads are never touched by a freight truck. If you think of all of the roads built to support every house, apartment, suburban intersection they may cost upwards of a million dollars a mile to build but require little maintenance once built.
So if you are only looking at who is incurring repair/maintenance cost, you are still only caring about a tiny cost center overall of DOTs.
I'm not arguing that GPS is a good idea, but tying road income to overall road usage is a good positive incentive that we don't want to axe completely.
So if you are only looking at who is incurring repair/maintenance cost, you are still only caring about a tiny cost center overall of DOTs.
I'm not arguing that GPS is a good idea, but tying road income to overall road usage is a good positive incentive that we don't want to axe completely.
Power utility bill as well for home charging.
For those interested about CA & fed taxes not being paid, from another thread about EVs I posted this breakdown of CA gas taxes:
1. 54 cents in state excise tax
2. 18.4 cents in federal excise tax
3. An average of 3.7% in state and local sales taxes
4. 23 cents for California's cap-and-trade program to lower greenhouse gas emissions
5. 18 cents for the state's low-carbon fuel programs
6. 2 cents for underground gas storage fees
4, 5, and 6 are not applicable to EVs. In California EVs are avoiding ~$15 per full charge in taxes (according to comparison of my 18 gallon ICE car @ $3/gal (pre-tax gas)). Not intending this to be anti-ev, just noting the tax avoidance benefits of EVs.
source: https://www.cbs8.com/article/traffic/gas-prices/gap-between-...
1. 54 cents in state excise tax
2. 18.4 cents in federal excise tax
3. An average of 3.7% in state and local sales taxes
4. 23 cents for California's cap-and-trade program to lower greenhouse gas emissions
5. 18 cents for the state's low-carbon fuel programs
6. 2 cents for underground gas storage fees
4, 5, and 6 are not applicable to EVs. In California EVs are avoiding ~$15 per full charge in taxes (according to comparison of my 18 gallon ICE car @ $3/gal (pre-tax gas)). Not intending this to be anti-ev, just noting the tax avoidance benefits of EVs.
source: https://www.cbs8.com/article/traffic/gas-prices/gap-between-...
Is me not smoking and therefore not paying an excise tax on cigarettes considered tax avoidance? Surely using less fuel and therefore avoiding the excise tax on it is the entire point of applying it to fuel in the first place.
Taxes 1-3 are for funding of roads, schools, etc. This isn't a valid comparison since EV users still use roads and schools but are no longer paying for them. Taxes 4,5,6 would be comparable to quitting smoking. Hence not needing to pay them and why I didn't include them in the calculation.
1, 2, and 3 still function as (and, even taken with the others, are still insufficient as, given the externalities involved) Pigovian taxes on the harms of fossil fuel consumption and so are equally inapplicable to EVs.
So when everyone drives an electric vehicle, who's going to pay for road maintenance EV users are now expecting to use for free?
Both of these programs are currently voluntary. The service Utah utilizes requires a GPS device. The Oregon program has 3 milage accounting programs EV owners can choose from. 2 of these require using a GPS device. 1 of these is working to eliminate the GPS device requirement. The provider which currently doesn't require a GPS device is the Oregon Department of Transportation.
EV's in each of these states pay a higher registration fee than non-EV vehicles. By enrolling in these programs EV owners pay the same registration fee as for non-EV vehicles and then pay per mile up to the amount of the normal EV registration fee.
There was a Oregon senate bill introduced this year to make participation mandatory for EVs but the bill died in committee.
EV's in each of these states pay a higher registration fee than non-EV vehicles. By enrolling in these programs EV owners pay the same registration fee as for non-EV vehicles and then pay per mile up to the amount of the normal EV registration fee.
There was a Oregon senate bill introduced this year to make participation mandatory for EVs but the bill died in committee.
Was this lobbied for by the fossil fuel industry in order to sabotage sale of EVs?
If I have to have a GPS tracker to own and operate a vehicle, I am not buying that vehicle.
Not sure why this requires GPS rather than odometer reading/reporting. IIRC NZ did (does?) odometer reading based taxation on diesel vehicles because so many diesel vehicles are off road only.
That's fundamentally the same problem: you're ostensibly taxing road users to cover road maintenance (except fuel taxes don't cover the whole amount), and EV vehicles aren't paying those taxes but are clearly using the roads.
That's fundamentally the same problem: you're ostensibly taxing road users to cover road maintenance (except fuel taxes don't cover the whole amount), and EV vehicles aren't paying those taxes but are clearly using the roads.
NZ has the advantage that all vehicle miles travelled are within their jurisdiction. US states, Canadian provinces, and EU countries all have drivers travelling significant distances out of jurisdiction, likely resulting in inefficient taxation. With a simple odometer reading Utah would collect taxes on road miles that took place in Colorado, whereas Colorado has no mechanism to collect taxes on the wear and tear on its road network by Utah citizens.
On the other hand, the idea of having a government tracker in my car all the time is beyond icky. I'd much rather overspend a little via a simple annual odometer reading than have a government agency with access to detailed location logging.
A federal annual odometer reading that then distributes funds to states based on vehicle miles travelled and road network size solves the jurisdiction problem, but would never fly in the US as federal overreach.
On the other hand, the idea of having a government tracker in my car all the time is beyond icky. I'd much rather overspend a little via a simple annual odometer reading than have a government agency with access to detailed location logging.
A federal annual odometer reading that then distributes funds to states based on vehicle miles travelled and road network size solves the jurisdiction problem, but would never fly in the US as federal overreach.
Farmers, construction, etc are required to keep their non-taxed vehicles off the road, if they're caught on the road with them they can be required to pay any taxes on the entirety of the odometer since the last sale.
The cross-state-borders could simply require you to report your odometer readings on exit and entry to the state. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that the majority of drivers would not care about a few dollars "extra" from some cross-state adventures, and those that do care can do the extra couple of minutes of working.
Another alternative would be to require all car chargers (including those connected to personal solar) include meters internally and require the owners to pay taxes on those (which would be trivially integrated with pricing on commercial chargers, but there are plenty of non-commercial deployments).
The cross-state-borders could simply require you to report your odometer readings on exit and entry to the state. I don't think it's unreasonable to say that the majority of drivers would not care about a few dollars "extra" from some cross-state adventures, and those that do care can do the extra couple of minutes of working.
Another alternative would be to require all car chargers (including those connected to personal solar) include meters internally and require the owners to pay taxes on those (which would be trivially integrated with pricing on commercial chargers, but there are plenty of non-commercial deployments).
> Not sure why this requires GPS rather than odometer reading/reporting.
The argument that they're making is that they only want to tax for miles driven inside the state, not for miles driven elsewhere -- and that requires location information.
It's an argument that makes no sense to me at all.
The argument that they're making is that they only want to tax for miles driven inside the state, not for miles driven elsewhere -- and that requires location information.
It's an argument that makes no sense to me at all.
It’s a bizarre overreach. There are simpler, less invasive solutions than a GPS tracker. Maybe someone is getting rich off the scheme?
It would be easier and make more sense to just enact a road tax on tires.
License plate readers and variable rate tolling on all roads seems like the most effective solution.
Or tax the chargers, just like they already do for the pumps.
For 80% of users [1], a "charger" is any 240V drier outlet.
This would require making "unmetered" plugs illegal.
[1] https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/hybrids-evs/can-electri....
This would require making "unmetered" plugs illegal.
[1] https://www.consumerreports.org/cars/hybrids-evs/can-electri....
That would be much better solution than requiring all EVs to have a GPS tracker that reports to the state.
How long until they decide to start using that data for more than just taxes?
How long until they decide to start using that data for more than just taxes?
> That would be much better solution
No, not from a monetary perspective. It simply wouldn't work, and that can't be ignored.
I think a workable approach might be having two options a person could choose from: 1. GPS (cheaper if you drive out of state often), 2. based on total mileage traveled.
No, not from a monetary perspective. It simply wouldn't work, and that can't be ignored.
I think a workable approach might be having two options a person could choose from: 1. GPS (cheaper if you drive out of state often), 2. based on total mileage traveled.
Why wouldn't that work? We already do it for fuel.
Fuel is metered at the pump. Electricity going into a car can't be metered at every receptacle.
For this to work, the metering would have to be in the car, with some government regulated system included in the power management. I think that's doable, but not for existing cars. A GPS could be easily installed in to any existing car, non-invasively, and mileage is already tracked.
For this to work, the metering would have to be in the car, with some government regulated system included in the power management. I think that's doable, but not for existing cars. A GPS could be easily installed in to any existing car, non-invasively, and mileage is already tracked.
[deleted]
Tires can be obtained via a quick trip out of state.
That’s true of most taxes. People buy gas and cigarettes at Native American reservations all the time. How many people pay sales or income taxes for a private sale? Lots of people do landscaping, farm work, and simple handyman work “under the table” without paying income taxes.
Preventing tax avoidance is a terrible excuse for Big Brother surveillance.
Preventing tax avoidance is a terrible excuse for Big Brother surveillance.
It just means you want a better way to assess tax liability than buying tires. We are not limited to "tires or GPS"; we have myriad other alternatives.
We could always try having more efficient government that doesn’t need to try so hard to squeeze every tax dollar they can out of the middle class.
We wouldn’t even need to touch entitlement programs if we just got rid of wasteful pork spending and streamlined some of the bureaucracy.
We wouldn’t even need to touch entitlement programs if we just got rid of wasteful pork spending and streamlined some of the bureaucracy.
1. There is no middle class remaining. Tax revenue comes principally from the underclass now. You and I are in the underclass. The upper class (>$10M/y) dodge taxes.
2. Roads need to be paid for somehow.
2. Roads need to be paid for somehow.
What is really troubling to me is the possibility of the state selling the data. All of a sudden your insurance company will jack up your rates for your lead foot even though you are accident and ticket free. Miss a car payment and the repo man knows exactly where your car is located. Wife has questions about your fidelity and the private detective can track your every movement.
It's not even law yet here in Michigan and it has already got people talking.
It's not even law yet here in Michigan and it has already got people talking.
Insurance companies already offer discounts for people who opt in to tracked driving.
A lender keeping track of the collateral for their lent money does not seem crazy to me. If anything, it should lower costs for responsible borrowers as the lender’s risk is reduced.
Spouses can also track each other via Find my Friends or similar apps. If there is a lack of trust, then it would already be obvious.
A lender keeping track of the collateral for their lent money does not seem crazy to me. If anything, it should lower costs for responsible borrowers as the lender’s risk is reduced.
Spouses can also track each other via Find my Friends or similar apps. If there is a lack of trust, then it would already be obvious.
These examples are opted into, so it’s not the same thing as this at all.
You can bet every state is looking at this method to tax EV and Plug-In Hybrid users. If there's not any pushback, they will want to have it for all vehicles.
I wonder how they'll even track gas vs EV miles on plugin hybrids. I guess it's also tied into the OBD2 system and is checking? What happens if I block the gps signal? Is my car bricked? Updates later? What if I spoof it to think it's never moving. Or never using EV mode. Crazy.
Hopefully this fails in the inevitable litigation. I could come up with 5 better solutions off the top of my head. Luddite politicians, sigh.
What about a hybrid car like a Chevrolet Volt? I use gas and electricy ??? If I had to pay per mile driven, there are lots of times I'd be double taxed. That wouldn't be fair...
> Owing to the federal government-prodded transition to electric vehicles (EVs) to combat something called “climate change,” ... In this case, said birds are: getting rid of gas-powered cars, inventing for themselves a brand-new revenue generation scheme, and instituting even more tracking power to make sure the peasants behave themselves.
Lol, wtf is this website?
If you go to read the actual reporting, the Oregon administrators are much more even-keeled about the thing:
> "I understand that concern, but anybody that has a cell phone — the ability is already there for it to be tracked," Lively said. "Your cell phone is probably the most trackable device we own and almost everybody has one. But there are several options. We made options that people could just annually, monthly turn in their mileage. So they can tell us where the mileage started, where the mileage didn't, so that's one way they can report versus reporting from the car — so there's several ways in which people can report their mileage.
> "But the key in doing it automatically is the systems now in place allow us to know whether they're driving on state highways or private roads, because our goal isn't to charge you for driving on private roads but only when they're using the state transportation system."
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/odot-gas-ta...
Lol, wtf is this website?
If you go to read the actual reporting, the Oregon administrators are much more even-keeled about the thing:
> "I understand that concern, but anybody that has a cell phone — the ability is already there for it to be tracked," Lively said. "Your cell phone is probably the most trackable device we own and almost everybody has one. But there are several options. We made options that people could just annually, monthly turn in their mileage. So they can tell us where the mileage started, where the mileage didn't, so that's one way they can report versus reporting from the car — so there's several ways in which people can report their mileage.
> "But the key in doing it automatically is the systems now in place allow us to know whether they're driving on state highways or private roads, because our goal isn't to charge you for driving on private roads but only when they're using the state transportation system."
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/local/the-story/odot-gas-ta...
> Your cell phone is probably the most trackable device we own and almost everybody has one
This is legitimately one of the stupidest arguments that could be made for systems like this. First, owning a cell phone is optional, and even if you do own one, it's not that uncommon for people to shut them down for privacy reasons.
"You already put up with this device doing a bad thing, so you should be OK with other devices doing the bad thing as well" is a very weak argument.
This is legitimately one of the stupidest arguments that could be made for systems like this. First, owning a cell phone is optional, and even if you do own one, it's not that uncommon for people to shut them down for privacy reasons.
"You already put up with this device doing a bad thing, so you should be OK with other devices doing the bad thing as well" is a very weak argument.
Sure, but this is a pilot program (not a requirement yet as the linked article wrongly states) and it should be somewhat positive that they are at least thinking about that.
Also, the quote makes it pretty clear that this program IS optional if people would rather just report their mileage manually.
Also, the quote makes it pretty clear that this program IS optional if people would rather just report their mileage manually.
I was specifically calling out that argument because I see it deployed for all sorts of privacy-invading things. I think it's high time people start calling BS on it when it pops up.
Misleading. Programs appear to be trial and voluntary. Title states "require".
track private vehicles at all times to enforce taxation+ .. what could go wrong?
Already happens on toll roads pretty much everywhere.
And I am sure they are using a 3rd party vendor that has in their TOS the ability to sell that information.
This is going to be abused to hell and back.
A much simpler and privacy minded solution is to tax the chargers, just like taxing the gas pumps.
This is going to be abused to hell and back.
A much simpler and privacy minded solution is to tax the chargers, just like taxing the gas pumps.
Maybe I’m projecting my own personal experience, but I doubt public chargers are a significant percentage of most people’s charging.
Before buying an EV, I was super concerned with public charging infrastructure.
Now as an owner, I’ve only used public charging enough to verify it works. With 300+ miles of range it just isn’t a concern, I either have enough to go and return, or am staying long enough to charge the car enough to return (I visit family 200 miles away at least monthly).
I’ve owned the car for 2.5 months and 5,200 miles. 12% of my charging has been public, and 43% of that was in the first 3 days because the car didn’t come with a charger and it took a week to arrive.
So based on my own experience, I’d expect public charging to be a negligible single digit %.
Before buying an EV, I was super concerned with public charging infrastructure.
Now as an owner, I’ve only used public charging enough to verify it works. With 300+ miles of range it just isn’t a concern, I either have enough to go and return, or am staying long enough to charge the car enough to return (I visit family 200 miles away at least monthly).
I’ve owned the car for 2.5 months and 5,200 miles. 12% of my charging has been public, and 43% of that was in the first 3 days because the car didn’t come with a charger and it took a week to arrive.
So based on my own experience, I’d expect public charging to be a negligible single digit %.
From a cost perspective, I’d take this deal. Would save me over $120 / year
Somebody else suggested taxing tires, but that would be hard as tires are obtainable out of state.
The underlying facts of road maintenance are that basically all of road maintenance (except that attributable to erosion of the roadbed) repairs damage caused by heavily-loaded trucks. Objectively, road damage goes exponentially with axle load. Cars' axle loading is so far below that of laden trucks as to to be wholly negligible. Thus, the justifiable taxation for road usage, if any, should fall on truck operators.
Car owners benefit from truck traffic about equally with non-owners, however many cars they have, but moreso if their income is higher. So, the legitimately defensible way to pay for roads is straight from the general fund.