7 ms·

remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable. A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a

remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable. A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a similar (>400hp) car I guess.

toomuchtodo 12y ago
That's what happens when externalities are properly priced into vehicles using taxes. Nicely done Norway/Sweden.
- maxerickson 12y ago
  That's a pretty huge assertion you are throwing in there. I think there is a fair chance that some of the tax there is just a simple luxury tax, with accidental relief on the Tesla side (as opposed to a proper pricing of externalities).
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    The tax incentives in question the remove a fair portion of the tax penalty apply to all electric vehicles, not just Tesla. The "relief" for Tesla isn't accidental. I would say you'd be correct if the benefits applied solely to Tesla vehicles, but not in this case.
    - maxerickson 12y ago
      My meaning was more that it depends on how well the laws captured the intent of the societies. The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is).
      - toomuchtodo 12y ago
        > The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is) I could not find the answer to this with some quick googling. I too would be interested in the answer.
- hnnewguy 12y ago
  Costs aren't being added to the gas cars, which would make sense. Instead, normal people are subsidizing luxury cars. That's stupid.
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    The costs are added to all gas cars, and "normal people" are subsidizing all electric cars. The cars that are selling just happen to be the most expensive electric car.
- smackfu 12y ago
  When you just set a bunch of taxes to zero for a few years, it's hard to argue that is "proper pricing."
  - toomuchtodo 12y ago
    If the externalities they're pricing in are oil consumption in the vehicle, and the vehicle doesn't burn oil, setting the taxes to zero is "proper pricing".
    - _delirium 12y ago
      That's not the only externality; another one is wear-and-tear on roads. In most countries, fuel taxes are used in part to pay for road and highway maintenance [1]. Certainly Norway's extensive, mountainous highway system is not free to build and maintain, and imo all road users should pay their share to fund it. You could have a direct per-km tax enforced via some kind of GPS unit, but that has privacy implications. Traditionally the fuel tax was a reasonable proxy, since vehicles used fuel in rough proportion to the amount of road traversed. [1] In the U.S. the link is explicit: almost the entirety of the fuel tax is earmarked for highway construction and maintenance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
      - deleted 12y ago
        [deleted]
      - toomuchtodo 12y ago
        The vast majority of road wear and tear is caused by trucks, not cars: "Heavy trucks obviously cause more road damage than cars, but how much more? According to a GAO study, Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford, road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars (p.23 of study, p.36 of PDF)." http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776/776-roads-handout.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776... With regards to your point to taxes, remove the per-milage tax and charge a flat per-vehicle rate based on vehicle class, distributing the cost to trucks more than to passenger vehicles.

remember -around here(Norway, next to Sweden) taxes on gas and gas cars make Tesla prices look very reasonable. A brand new Tesla is about half the price of a similar (>400hp) car I guess.

toomuchtodo 12y ago

That's what happens when externalities are properly priced into vehicles using taxes. Nicely done Norway/Sweden.

maxerickson 12y ago
That's a pretty huge assertion you are throwing in there. I think there is a fair chance that some of the tax there is just a simple luxury tax, with accidental relief on the Tesla side (as opposed to a proper pricing of externalities).
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  The tax incentives in question the remove a fair portion of the tax penalty apply to all electric vehicles, not just Tesla. The "relief" for Tesla isn't accidental. I would say you'd be correct if the benefits applied solely to Tesla vehicles, but not in this case.
  - maxerickson 12y ago
    My meaning was more that it depends on how well the laws captured the intent of the societies. The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is).
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      > The nice subsidies on expensive electric vehicles may or may not leave a bad taste in the mouth of voters there (I haven't tried to figure out what public sentiment is) I could not find the answer to this with some quick googling. I too would be interested in the answer.
hnnewguy 12y ago
Costs aren't being added to the gas cars, which would make sense. Instead, normal people are subsidizing luxury cars. That's stupid.
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  The costs are added to all gas cars, and "normal people" are subsidizing all electric cars. The cars that are selling just happen to be the most expensive electric car.
smackfu 12y ago
When you just set a bunch of taxes to zero for a few years, it's hard to argue that is "proper pricing."
- toomuchtodo 12y ago
  If the externalities they're pricing in are oil consumption in the vehicle, and the vehicle doesn't burn oil, setting the taxes to zero is "proper pricing".
  - _delirium 12y ago
    That's not the only externality; another one is wear-and-tear on roads. In most countries, fuel taxes are used in part to pay for road and highway maintenance [1]. Certainly Norway's extensive, mountainous highway system is not free to build and maintain, and imo all road users should pay their share to fund it. You could have a direct per-km tax enforced via some kind of GPS unit, but that has privacy implications. Traditionally the fuel tax was a reasonable proxy, since vehicles used fuel in rough proportion to the amount of road traversed. [1] In the U.S. the link is explicit: almost the entirety of the fuel tax is earmarked for highway construction and maintenance, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
    - deleted 12y ago
      [deleted]
    - toomuchtodo 12y ago
      The vast majority of road wear and tear is caused by trucks, not cars: "Heavy trucks obviously cause more road damage than cars, but how much more? According to a GAO study, Excessive Truck Weight: An Expensive Burden We Can No Longer Afford, road damage from one 18-wheeler is equivalent to 9600 cars (p.23 of study, p.36 of PDF)." http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://archive.gao.gov/f0302/109884.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776/776-roads-handout.pdf http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses2/crp776... With regards to your point to taxes, remove the per-milage tax and charge a flat per-vehicle rate based on vehicle class, distributing the cost to trucks more than to passenger vehicles.