2 ms·

> Another way you can phrase that is that the lion share of the tax will be on wealthy people, so it's a progressive tax. Thats not what a progressive tax mean

> Another way you can phrase that is that the lion share of the tax will be on wealthy people, so it's a progressive tax. Thats not what a progressive tax means. I understand that you mean poor and middle income will drive less therefor pay less tax. But consider this: would it be a progressive tax if we had a 100% income tax rate on 0-$30,000? Same scenario - poor people would stop making anything therefore not pay taxes yet clearly this is a regressive, not progressive tax, right?

fasthands9 3y ago
That is not plainly not a progressive tax. The average rich person and the average poor person each seeing their taxes go up the same dollar amount is the definition of a regressive tax. That comparison doesn't apply here. The average rich person will pay more taxes due to congestion taxes than the average poor person. I realize the concerns about poor people if they have a car and continue to drive but poor people with a car in southern Manhattan are the exception. Parking already costs $15+ an hour there so it's really just commercial vehicles, tourists, cabs, and wealthy people. Not to mention the policy already has exceptions (admittedly, maybe annoying to file for) for those making under 50k https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/nyregion/nyc-congestion-pricing-tolls-mta.html https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/nyregion/nyc-congestion-p...