9 ms·

This is a common misinterpretation of who pays for roads. Effectively roads are paid for by gas tax. Gas used to be a great proxy for how many miles you drive a

This is a common misinterpretation of who pays for roads. Effectively roads are paid for by gas tax. Gas used to be a great proxy for how many miles you drive and where you drive those miles. Now, freight and commercial trucks are effectively the biggest contributor to this tax plus they have to pay for weight. Consumers are the ones getting freebies (especially electric, hybrid etc.)

TulliusCicero 10y ago
It's a myth that roads are just paid for by gas tax. Roads are also paid for by general funds at the federal, state, and local level.
guelo 10y ago
"highway “user fees” pay only about half the cost of building and maintaining the nation’s network of highways" http://www.frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themselves#sthash.3OlYPNX5.dpuf http://www.frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themsel... https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2015/05/road_myth_fig3/846377220.jpg https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2015/05/r... And of course that doesn't take the environmental externalities into account.
- ch4s3 10y ago
  Closer to 40%
TeMPOraL 10y ago
> Now, freight and commercial trucks are effectively the biggest contributor to this tax plus they have to pay for weight. That makes sense, since the road wear increases superlinearly with the vehicle weight - so commercial trucks are also the one generating most road maintenance costs.
msandford 10y ago
> Now, freight and commercial trucks are effectively the biggest contributor to this tax plus they have to pay for weight. Consumers are the ones getting freebies (especially electric, hybrid etc.) I couldn't disagree more! Wear on roads is to the fourth power of pressure. And while trucks might have 10x the contact patch your car does, they might weigh 30x as much. So the pressure might be 3x and thus the wear 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 = 81 times as much. If you look at road costs as largely maintenance then cars are subsidizing trucks because one truck could do orders of magnitude more damage, but have to buy orders of magnitude more fuel. Why is that? Because past a certain point fuel consumption is dominated by drag, and thus, frontal area. 8-10 MPG for an 18-wheeler is reasonable. That's not 81 times worse fuel consumption, perhaps only 2x or 3x compared to modern cars. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test
- jaf656s 10y ago
  Some things to consider: Trucks pay fuel tax on diesel fuel (can be higher rate than gasoline), surcharges on fuel tax in some states, weight-distance tax in some states, and heavy vehicle use tax. The federal weight limit for a truck--including the weight of the truck and trailer--is 80,000 pounds (without special permits), but they rarely haul that much. 8-10 MPG for a truck under real-world conditions is extremely uncommon. Typical efficiency falls in the 5-8 range, depending on the type of cargo + weight, geographic area, etc.
  - odbol_ 10y ago
    Comparing MPG between cars and trucks is not appropriate. It should be weight per mile per gallon or something accounting for the massive amount of supplies the truck is carrying.
    - linkregister 10y ago
      In this case MPG is being used as a proxy for the amount of tax paid. Since weight was already accounted for during the analysis of the road wear per truck, it isn't meaningful for this comparison.
  - msandford 10y ago
    Fair point! Thanks for bringing a more accurate estimate.
- dmurray 10y ago
  > Wear on roads is to the fourth power of pressure. This isn't quite right. The pressure on the outside of the tire is the same as the pressure on the inside, and truck tires aren't inflated to 3x the psi of car tires - they might be 55 psi instead of 35. If pressure were really the issue, bicycles would be much more damaging to the road. Racing bikes are typically inflated to 100-150 psi. As your link points out, the correct relationship is linear in the fourth power of the weight per axle. Your conclusion is correct of course.
FireBeyond 10y ago
Yes and no. They contribute more to the tax because they are bigger, more powerful, potentially less efficient. They have to pay for weight because the increased weight has a direct correlation in actively shortening the life of the road, above and beyond "vehicle-miles covered".
vvanders 10y ago
> (especially electric, hybrid etc.) Not really the case any more, I just renewed my tabs on our EV and there's now a $150 EV tax per year in WA state.
Pxtl 10y ago
In many countries gas taxes cover most or all of the expense of maintaining the roadway. However, within the USA gas taxes are comparatively small, so no, it does not.
masklinn 10y ago
> This is a common misinterpretation of who pays for roads. Effectively roads are paid for by gas tax. Gas used to be a great proxy for how many miles you drive and where you drive those miles. Except the number of miles driven (or where you drive them) has very little relation to how much damage you do to the road, and thus how much of the maintenance costs you generate.

TulliusCicero 10y ago

It's a myth that roads are just paid for by gas tax. Roads are also paid for by general funds at the federal, state, and local level.

guelo 10y ago

"highway “user fees” pay only about half the cost of building and maintaining the nation’s network of highways" http://www.frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themselves#sthash.3OlYPNX5.dpuf http://www.frontiergroup.org/reports/fg/do-roads-pay-themsel... https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2015/05/road_myth_fig3/846377220.jpg https://cdn.theatlantic.com/assets/media/img/posts/2015/05/r... And of course that doesn't take the environmental externalities into account.

ch4s3 10y ago
Closer to 40%

TeMPOraL 10y ago

> Now, freight and commercial trucks are effectively the biggest contributor to this tax plus they have to pay for weight. That makes sense, since the road wear increases superlinearly with the vehicle weight - so commercial trucks are also the one generating most road maintenance costs.

msandford 10y ago

> Now, freight and commercial trucks are effectively the biggest contributor to this tax plus they have to pay for weight. Consumers are the ones getting freebies (especially electric, hybrid etc.) I couldn't disagree more! Wear on roads is to the fourth power of pressure. And while trucks might have 10x the contact patch your car does, they might weigh 30x as much. So the pressure might be 3x and thus the wear 3 x 3 x 3 x 3 = 81 times as much. If you look at road costs as largely maintenance then cars are subsidizing trucks because one truck could do orders of magnitude more damage, but have to buy orders of magnitude more fuel. Why is that? Because past a certain point fuel consumption is dominated by drag, and thus, frontal area. 8-10 MPG for an 18-wheeler is reasonable. That's not 81 times worse fuel consumption, perhaps only 2x or 3x compared to modern cars. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AASHO_Road_Test

jaf656s 10y ago
Some things to consider: Trucks pay fuel tax on diesel fuel (can be higher rate than gasoline), surcharges on fuel tax in some states, weight-distance tax in some states, and heavy vehicle use tax. The federal weight limit for a truck--including the weight of the truck and trailer--is 80,000 pounds (without special permits), but they rarely haul that much. 8-10 MPG for a truck under real-world conditions is extremely uncommon. Typical efficiency falls in the 5-8 range, depending on the type of cargo + weight, geographic area, etc.
- odbol_ 10y ago
  Comparing MPG between cars and trucks is not appropriate. It should be weight per mile per gallon or something accounting for the massive amount of supplies the truck is carrying.
  - linkregister 10y ago
    In this case MPG is being used as a proxy for the amount of tax paid. Since weight was already accounted for during the analysis of the road wear per truck, it isn't meaningful for this comparison.
- msandford 10y ago
  Fair point! Thanks for bringing a more accurate estimate.
dmurray 10y ago
> Wear on roads is to the fourth power of pressure. This isn't quite right. The pressure on the outside of the tire is the same as the pressure on the inside, and truck tires aren't inflated to 3x the psi of car tires - they might be 55 psi instead of 35. If pressure were really the issue, bicycles would be much more damaging to the road. Racing bikes are typically inflated to 100-150 psi. As your link points out, the correct relationship is linear in the fourth power of the weight per axle. Your conclusion is correct of course.

FireBeyond 10y ago

Yes and no. They contribute more to the tax because they are bigger, more powerful, potentially less efficient. They have to pay for weight because the increased weight has a direct correlation in actively shortening the life of the road, above and beyond "vehicle-miles covered".

vvanders 10y ago

> (especially electric, hybrid etc.) Not really the case any more, I just renewed my tabs on our EV and there's now a $150 EV tax per year in WA state.

Pxtl 10y ago

In many countries gas taxes cover most or all of the expense of maintaining the roadway. However, within the USA gas taxes are comparatively small, so no, it does not.

masklinn 10y ago

> This is a common misinterpretation of who pays for roads. Effectively roads are paid for by gas tax. Gas used to be a great proxy for how many miles you drive and where you drive those miles. Except the number of miles driven (or where you drive them) has very little relation to how much damage you do to the road, and thus how much of the maintenance costs you generate.