You are not logged in.
The federal gas tax has been stuck at 18.4¢ for 20 years.
It ought to be raised and then indexed to inflation, but that'll never happen.
Offline
And they complain that higher mpg cars are the reason there is less money going into this fund.
Americans are paying little for gasoline in the big picture.
Last edited by rich00 (2013-10-13 17:29:32)
Offline
Yeah, reminds me of when a federal bridge collapsed somewhere, and Republican lawmakers tried to say we didn't have the money to maintain the bridges because of all the money we were spending on bicycle projects (as though that amount was any more than a drop in the bucket).
A report from ITEP shows that the increase in construction costs (because of inflation) is 3.5x more important than fuel efficiency increases in eroding the purchasing power of the gas tax. I mean, duh: Congress hasn't raised the gas tax in 20 years, but somehow all of the blame is supposedly from fuel efficiency gains. Who's gonna fall for that? Well, the Fox News crowd, I guess, so never mind.
Offline
Yeah, don't let them fool you with the increased MPGs argument. Efficiency has gone up but is still only about 20% above what it was six years ago. 20% added to 18.4 cents still isn't much. Problem is so many legislators have taken the no tax pledge that they have to resort to tolls, fees, etc. to make up the difference. Problem is with raising the vehicle registration fees is that it is not tied to how many miles are driven - your grandma who drives 3,000 miles a year gets hit with the same increase as the 40,000 mile super commuter from Marble Falls. Not fair at all.
http://www.autoblog.com/2013/09/12/aver … -24-9-mpg/
Last edited by badgnome (2013-12-16 23:22:19)
Offline
If so many more miles are being driven in the Austin area, where is the additional tax revenue going? It should correlate well with traffic congestion/volume. Clearly there must be more gas tax money coming in. I just wonder it goes. Has spending increased for road projects, accordingly?
Same with property tax in Austin. As a business, COA must be raking it in with the population and new construction and rising taxes. The model should prove that there is a surplus for every additional person moving here, overall.
Offline
If so many more miles are being driven in the Austin area, where is the additional tax revenue going? It should correlate well with traffic congestion/volume. Clearly there must be more gas tax money coming in.
I think you might have missed the point of the OP. Gas tax revenues are effectively down, because they haven't been raised to account for inflation.
Offline
rich00 wrote:If so many more miles are being driven in the Austin area, where is the additional tax revenue going? It should correlate well with traffic congestion/volume. Clearly there must be more gas tax money coming in.
I think you might have missed the point of the OP. Gas tax revenues are effectively down, because they haven't been raised to account for inflation.
I understand, I just brought up another topic.
Offline
the federal tax would be pretty difficult to raise due to political gridlock in washington.
But the state and local ones ( which together are bigger than the federal ) , might be possible.
If you told texans we need to raise it slightly to build better roads or get rid of toll roads, it might be a winner.
But I doubt they would ever raise it enough to truly discourage driving, even California's is not enough for that :(
Offline
[ Generated in 0.017 seconds, 9 queries executed - Memory usage: 546.04 KiB (Peak: 546.66 KiB) ]