3 ms·

This makes sense if the tax is used to cover the costs of road maintenance, since heavier vehicles cause more road damage. It's also a somewhat progressive tax

This makes sense if the tax is used to cover the costs of road maintenance, since heavier vehicles cause more road damage. It's also a somewhat progressive tax since heavier cars may be more expensive. A regressive aspect is that this also means that public transportation pay more taxes, and poor people rely more on public transportation. Also, trucks pay more taxes and trucks are used to transport food, so this has an impact on food prices, affecting the poor disproportionately. Likewise diesel vehicles pay more tax, and public transportation & commercial transport usually runs on diesel (and will thus make this stuff more expensive) So I think that it makes sense for taxes to separate personal vehicles from the rest.

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago
> A regressive aspect is that this also means that public transportation pay more taxes, and poor people rely more on public transportation. Also, trucks pay more taxes and trucks are used to transport food, so this has an impact on food prices, affecting the poor disproportionately. Likewise diesel vehicles pay more tax, and public transportation & commercial transport usually runs on diesel (and will thus make this stuff more expensive) In all these cases, the operating costs of the vehicles are distributed across a number of payers, quite unlike personal vehicles.
- nextaccountic 3y ago
  > In all these cases, the operating costs of the vehicles are distributed across a number of payers, quite unlike personal vehicles. Yeah but it affects more the poor, collectively.
Zigurd 3y ago
It is also regressive in that personal vehicles, even 3 ton SUVs, account for a small amount of road wear and pollution per vehicle compared with heavy trucks. Public transport in Europe is seldom all diesel busses.
SoftTalker 3y ago
Public transportation consumes taxes, it does not pay them.
- nextaccountic 3y ago
  It depends on the place. But generally speaking if there are tickets to be paid (that is, if riding the bus isn't completely free to the rider) you can assume the operation is at least partially funded by the people that use the service. Which statistically tend to be poorer than people that ride private cars

PaulDavisThe1st 3y ago

> A regressive aspect is that this also means that public transportation pay more taxes, and poor people rely more on public transportation. Also, trucks pay more taxes and trucks are used to transport food, so this has an impact on food prices, affecting the poor disproportionately. Likewise diesel vehicles pay more tax, and public transportation & commercial transport usually runs on diesel (and will thus make this stuff more expensive) In all these cases, the operating costs of the vehicles are distributed across a number of payers, quite unlike personal vehicles.

nextaccountic 3y ago
> In all these cases, the operating costs of the vehicles are distributed across a number of payers, quite unlike personal vehicles. Yeah but it affects more the poor, collectively.

Zigurd 3y ago

It is also regressive in that personal vehicles, even 3 ton SUVs, account for a small amount of road wear and pollution per vehicle compared with heavy trucks. Public transport in Europe is seldom all diesel busses.

SoftTalker 3y ago

Public transportation consumes taxes, it does not pay them.

nextaccountic 3y ago
It depends on the place. But generally speaking if there are tickets to be paid (that is, if riding the bus isn't completely free to the rider) you can assume the operation is at least partially funded by the people that use the service. Which statistically tend to be poorer than people that ride private cars