Bruzilla
Well-Known Member
http://apnews.myway.com/article/20150520/us--oregon-charging_green_vehicles-eff38a74ea.html
"PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon is about to embark on a first-in-the-nation program that aims to charge car owners not for the fuel they use, but for the miles they drive.
"The program is meant to help the state raise more revenue to pay for road and bridge projects at a time when money generated from gasoline taxes are declining across the country, in part, because of greater fuel efficiency and the increasing popularity of fuel-efficient, hybrid and electric cars.
"Starting July 1, up to 5,000 volunteers in Oregon can sign up to drive with devices that collect data on how much they have driven and where. The volunteers will agree to pay 1.5 cents for each mile traveled on public roads within Oregon, instead of the tax now added when filling up at the pump.
"Some electric and hybrid car owners, however, say the new tax would be unfair to them and would discourage purchasing of green vehicles."
Do these people have any idea what they are setting themselves up for? Any at all?
First, 1.5 cents a mile doesn't sound like much, but it's more than what folks are paying per mile with the current fuel tax (30 cents per gallon). So unless you're driving something that gets less than 20 miles a day, you're volunteering for a tax increase! And while it may be small, it's going to add up over time. Also, once the precedent is set for assessing tax based on mileage, the level of effort required to up that number at any time, for any reason, is little more than a stroke of a pen.
Second, the article also states "Volunteers will still be paying the fuel tax if they stop for gas. But at the end of the month, depending on the type of car they drive, they will receive either a credit or a bill for the difference in gas taxes paid at the pump." A bill for the difference? This means the law has provisions for billing drivers for additional taxes, and that's not a legal precedent any person should ever want to have set. Worse, they're now going to have to bear the administrative burden of keeping track of, and reporting, all the taxes they pay of fuel purchases, and of course the state government will need to spend more money on verifying these as correct, issuing refunds and bills, investigating fraud, and managing all this crap, and that's going to cost even more money that taxpayers are going to have to cover!
Lastly, the article states "For those who use the GPS, the state and private vendors will destroy records of location and daily metered use after 30 days. The program also limits how the data can be aggregated and shared. Law enforcement, for example, won't be able to access the information unless a judge says it's needed.
"This is the government collecting massive amounts of data and we want to ensure the government doesn't keep and use that data for other purposes," Carson said." This is another of those legal precedents you never want set. What a judge says is needed today is likely not what judges will say is needed in the future. This could, and would likely, end up with law enforcement being allowed to use this information to detect violation data on things like speeding. A judge could also order the release of GPS data to a spouse who's suing for divorce. Things like this are always sold to the public with the best of intentions, but once government gets a hold of information there is always someone who wants to justify their job, or more funding, by finding new ways to exploit it for some alleged greater good, and that usually ends up badly.
"PORTLAND, Ore. (AP) — Oregon is about to embark on a first-in-the-nation program that aims to charge car owners not for the fuel they use, but for the miles they drive.
"The program is meant to help the state raise more revenue to pay for road and bridge projects at a time when money generated from gasoline taxes are declining across the country, in part, because of greater fuel efficiency and the increasing popularity of fuel-efficient, hybrid and electric cars.
"Starting July 1, up to 5,000 volunteers in Oregon can sign up to drive with devices that collect data on how much they have driven and where. The volunteers will agree to pay 1.5 cents for each mile traveled on public roads within Oregon, instead of the tax now added when filling up at the pump.
"Some electric and hybrid car owners, however, say the new tax would be unfair to them and would discourage purchasing of green vehicles."
Do these people have any idea what they are setting themselves up for? Any at all?
First, 1.5 cents a mile doesn't sound like much, but it's more than what folks are paying per mile with the current fuel tax (30 cents per gallon). So unless you're driving something that gets less than 20 miles a day, you're volunteering for a tax increase! And while it may be small, it's going to add up over time. Also, once the precedent is set for assessing tax based on mileage, the level of effort required to up that number at any time, for any reason, is little more than a stroke of a pen.
Second, the article also states "Volunteers will still be paying the fuel tax if they stop for gas. But at the end of the month, depending on the type of car they drive, they will receive either a credit or a bill for the difference in gas taxes paid at the pump." A bill for the difference? This means the law has provisions for billing drivers for additional taxes, and that's not a legal precedent any person should ever want to have set. Worse, they're now going to have to bear the administrative burden of keeping track of, and reporting, all the taxes they pay of fuel purchases, and of course the state government will need to spend more money on verifying these as correct, issuing refunds and bills, investigating fraud, and managing all this crap, and that's going to cost even more money that taxpayers are going to have to cover!
Lastly, the article states "For those who use the GPS, the state and private vendors will destroy records of location and daily metered use after 30 days. The program also limits how the data can be aggregated and shared. Law enforcement, for example, won't be able to access the information unless a judge says it's needed.
"This is the government collecting massive amounts of data and we want to ensure the government doesn't keep and use that data for other purposes," Carson said." This is another of those legal precedents you never want set. What a judge says is needed today is likely not what judges will say is needed in the future. This could, and would likely, end up with law enforcement being allowed to use this information to detect violation data on things like speeding. A judge could also order the release of GPS data to a spouse who's suing for divorce. Things like this are always sold to the public with the best of intentions, but once government gets a hold of information there is always someone who wants to justify their job, or more funding, by finding new ways to exploit it for some alleged greater good, and that usually ends up badly.
