Gps's To Be Used To Taxed Drivers....?

February 15, 2005

Intersesting news item.

How some states are toying with the idea of equipping cars with gps units so motorists can be taxed by the mile.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/02/14/...ain674120.shtml

"The new tax would be charged each time you fill up. A computer inside the gas pump would communicate with your car's odometer to calculate how much you owe. ""

just plain evil.

Edited February 15, 2005 by jollybgood

February 15, 2005

Fill a 5 gallon gas can, pour it in your car ... repeat ...

February 15, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

20.7k · February 15, 2005

Sounds like a good reason to buy a used car.

February 15, 2005

That ain't gonna' happen. While reading the article so many problems with getting and keeping a system like that working came to my mind. Can one even begin to see what kind of government infrastructure it would take to run that.

But the one thing I did find noteworthy -- this is being studied in Oregon. There they are in the news again, what is going on in that part of the country?

February 15, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

Because if you replace your car with something more fuel efficient, you'd still be travelling the same distance but paying less (gas) tax.

yup that looks like something big brother would do

And why stop there? Why couldn't the GPSr show your "maximum speed" at specific locations to the pump as well? That way the cops could e-mail you a speeding ticket without ever bothering to stop you.

2.2k · February 15, 2005

Break out the vasoline because good ol Uncle Sam is going to f*** us again.

38.2k · February 15, 2005

this is being studied in Oregon. There they are in the news again, what is going on in that part of the country?

I think Oregon wants to be like Taxachussetts and New Jersey.

2k · February 15, 2005

Makes no sense whatsoever. The gas hog, road ripping Expedition/Suburban/H2 would pay the same price per mile as the enviro friendly Little Hybrid.

Sounds like it will come to pass.

February 15, 2005

Break out the vasoline because good ol Uncle Sam is going to f*** us again.

My self-edit functions are red-lining

3.8k · February 15, 2005

I ride a bicycle.

February 15, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

Because with this plan you'll be paying BOTH ways. You don't really think they'll remove any of the existing gas taxes do you?

February 15, 2005

Sorry... I admit I didn't read the article. Now it makes sense. I guess it really doesn't matter how they take it from us. If the gov't decides they need more money they'll do it one way or another. How dare we find legal ways to not pay so much tax?

2.5k · February 15, 2005

Big deal, this was foretold a long time ago.

Let me tell you how it will be

There’s one for you, nineteen for me

’cause I’m the taxman, yeah, I’m the taxman

Should five per cent appear too small

Be thankful I don’t take it all

’cause I’m the taxman, yeah I’m the taxman

If you drive a car, I’ll tax the street,

If you try to sit, I’ll tax your seat.

If you get too cold I’ll tax the heat,

If you take a walk, I’ll tax your feet.

Don’t ask me what I want it for

If you don’t want to pay some more

’cause I’m the taxman, yeah, I’m the taxman

Now my advice for those who die

Declare the pennies on your eyes

’cause I’m the taxman, yeah, I’m the taxman

And you’re working for no one but me

Lyrics and music by George Harrison

1.6k · February 15, 2005

I have an aluminum foil hat just for these sorts of occasions.

Big brother will NEVER find me!

2.1k · February 16, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

Because if you replace your car with something more fuel efficient, you'd still be travelling the same distance but paying less (gas) tax.

yup that looks like something big brother would do

And why stop there? Why couldn't the GPSr show your "maximum speed" at specific locations to the pump as well? That way the cops could e-mail you a speeding ticket without ever bothering to stop you.

yes - but those who get 5 gallons to the mile in their Hummers will still be paying the same tax as the guy in the hybrid. So what sense does it make? He pays by the mile now - only he pays more by the mile than the hybrid.

In reality we already to pay by the mile - the more miles we drive the more gallons we burn the more tax we pay.

---

assumes that we will lose the current gas/gallon tax. Ya thnk? Ha!?

Edited February 16, 2005 by CompuCash

9.5k · February 16, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

It's added to the tax you already pay.

1.5k · February 16, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

It's added to the tax you already pay.

I propose a new law... Any tax that a legislator votes to impose on the public will be paid DOUBLE by the legislator.

2.2k · February 16, 2005

Ive always thought a law that required a voter referendum for any new tax or tax increase would be good.

11.3k · February 16, 2005

What's the difference If I have to pay by the mile or pay by the gallon (which we currently do)?

:mad: The gas tax is used for road repairs (among other highway-related expenditures). The vehicles that do the most damage to the roadways are the heavier ones.

If someone pays a premium to purchase a fuel-efficient hybrid car, they shouldn't be penalized by being made to pay the same tax per mile as the road-destroying Hummer that weighs three times as much.

Conservation should be encouraged.

I don't want anyone tracking my travel and taxing me that way. That is too much of an invasion of privacy . . . IMHO.

1.1k · February 16, 2005

Like TeamK-9 said, Tin foil over the antenna. This car only get 1/2mile to the gallon. :mad:

February 16, 2005

They say history repeats itself...but I never thought we'd be reverting back to horse & buggy!

GIDDYE UP!!!

LOL :mad:

February 16, 2005

Same folks who are up in arms over the government's ability to snoop on library cards apparently have no problem with its potential ability to track people's movements.

The motivation for this proposal is that the state derives a lot of tax revenue from gasoline sales. If people actually switch from the hated SUVs to higher-gas-mileage vehicles, the state's revenue drops. What to do? Tax 'em by the mile. Of course, this reduces the incentive to buy higher-gas-mileage vehicles.

If it weren't the birthplace of Geocaching, I'd swear that the Pacific Northwest were under some kind of neural-damping field with subliminal Robert Mugabe economics indoctrination.

7.2k · February 16, 2005

If you're short on road repair cash why not just increase the tax charged on the gas? That only makes sense.

Why not? Because gas companies want Americans to continue to buy gas guzzling vehicles. If you pay by the miles driven there is no incentive to use less fuel to drive those miles. Gas company profits stay high. Gas companies are already worried about hybrids and alternative fuel vehicles.

Also, auto makes make more profit on SUVs than any other vehicle type. They don't want to discourage the purchases of these hugh profit makers. SUVs are still in vogue and margins on these things will continue to stay high until the next "new thing" comes along.

In short, simply follow the money and you will see where the influence is coming from. By increasing the tax on a gallon of gas the fuel costs on inefficient vehicles will go even higher suppressing profits garnered from them.

Yep, just follow the money.

Edited February 16, 2005 by CoyoteRed

February 16, 2005

The percentage of hybrid car sales is very, very small still, so this has to be further away than we can imagine.

Plus, if EVERY car has to have a GPS for this, and it's not fair if every car doesn't, then we either have to wait for every citizen of a state to buy a new car that has GPS enabling built int or some gov't agency is going to dole out millions to purchase GPS tracking devices, fronting the money they aren't making now in order to make more later ?

:mad:

2.6k · February 16, 2005

If you're short on road repair cash why not just increase the tax charged on the gas? That only makes sense.

Yeah, especially since the gas is so cheap there in the US.

February 16, 2005

Hmmm.... :huh:

That's the sort of piece that's designed to grab a headline. All of which makes me wonder what else the legislatures in question might be up to while everyone's attention is distracted elsewhere. It sure sounds like a red-herring to me... :mad:

February 16, 2005

And why stop there? Why couldn't the GPSr show your "maximum speed" at specific locations to the pump as well? That way the cops could e-mail you a speeding ticket without ever bothering to stop you.

They already do that around here in NC (certain parts of NC), they set up cameras and clock you (also for running red lights) and send you the ticket in the mail. Doesn't matter if you ket your friend borrow your car - the car owner gets the ticket.

Edited February 16, 2005 by Eswau

February 16, 2005

you guys and your conspiracy theories....I'm beginning to think the "p" in GPS stands for Paranoia........

(and p.s. if/when the feds or states enhance tax/per/gal with tax/per/mile, then this wouldn't require a high-tech high-cost approach like GPS units on every vehicle......just make everyone check in on a periodic basis for an odometer read update - it ain't rocket science....!)

11.3k · February 16, 2005

......just make everyone check in on a periodic basis for an odometer read update - it ain't rocket science....!)

Sorry, this is a terrible idea. :huh:

I live out in the country and would be really offended to have to drive my car extra miles to some checkpoint in the nearest city.

If conservation is reducing income from gas taxes, I suggest the license fees for the heavier vehicles, which do the most damage to roads, be increased.

There are so few of these high-mileage vehicles on the road, I cannot quite believe they are floating this idea now. For every Prius I see, there are at least two or more Hummers . . . :mad:

2.2k · February 16, 2005

Perhaps they should charge a tax per pound of the vehicles weight or per horsepower.

February 17, 2005

......just make everyone check in on a periodic basis for an odometer read update - it ain't rocket science....!)

Sorry, this is a terrible idea.

I live out in the country and would be really offended to have to drive my car extra miles to some checkpoint in the nearest city.

If conservation is reducing income from gas taxes, I suggest the license fees for the heavier vehicles, which do the most damage to roads, be increased.

There are so few of these high-mileage vehicles on the road, I cannot quite believe they are floating this idea now. For every Prius I see, there are at least two or more Hummers . . .

This wouldn't require extra miles and a checkpoint, just piggyback it onto an existing regulatory system that already requires periodic checks (like annual emmission control check, re-licensure, at every point of vehicle purchase/sale, etc.). Believe me, there's a lot more cost-efficient way for the feds/states to squeeze these extra bucks out of drivers without resorting to "a GPS on every vehicle" data-capture strategy....

and i agree, the "taxation target" should maximally hit the primary cause or source of the disproportionate "societal burden".....if the issue is roads maintenance, then tax the heavier vehicles (and higher users) more to offset that cost (like they already do, with semi truck/transport drivers).....if the issue is emmissions/pollution control or import/subsidy costs, then a tax/per/gallon will target higher consumption users.....

(and p.s. to WH: don't they already do this "higher buck per bang", via car registration?)

February 17, 2005

Read the article, but one thing I find missing from this entire discussion is that a GPS unit would be mounted inside my vehicle somewhere. That bothers me.

It bothers me because I enjoy my freedom.

I'm not interested in Uncle Sam knowing where me and my vehicle have been. I'm not interested in being a blip on someone's computer screen and being able to be identified and background-checked with the click of a mouse.

GPS was a great invention for a lot of different uses; this isn't one of them. If GPS tracking systems become a required feature on our vehicles and some unknown government agency is running the show then we should just call it a day and change our nations motto from the 'Land of the Free' to 'Land of the Tracked.'

11.3k · February 17, 2005

This is exactly what I am wondering about. There are too few high-mileage hybrid vehicles on the road right now to make this system necessary or a reality . . . unless they have other nefarious reasons for wanting to put a GPS tracking system in my car.

It would be too easy for them to track you speeding, or driving anywhere you happen to drive.

I just don't like that idea.

24.7k · February 17, 2005

Part of the problem is that all vehicles get better MPG so revenue is dropping.

Or course SUV's pay more per mile than hybrids which they say don't pay their 'share'.

Then the flip side is that some places want to tax SUV's extra for being bigger and doing more damage to the roads.

If they are looking at it now, don't look for it to be implemented in anthing less than 10 years other than a trial basis on some town or another.

Edit: I've read at least two states looking at it, maybe three.

Edited February 17, 2005 by Renegade Knight

Gps's To Be Used To Taxed Drivers....?

Recommended Posts

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Link to comment

Join the conversation