US Transport Secretary #Buttigieg suggested a vehicle miles tax. And so the usual debate goes on between:
A: "are you mad taxing car use is *obviously* regressive"
B: " No it isn't"
So I am reupping a few threads that I wrote about this question
A: "are you mad taxing car use is *obviously* regressive"
B: " No it isn't"
So I am reupping a few threads that I wrote about this question
https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1072073121065328640
A few caveats. My threads refer to the European situation. The US is more car-dependent which means that more low-income households drive cars, and over longer distances (but fuel prices are lower).
Overall, this exacerbates concerns about the social impact of taxing car use.
Overall, this exacerbates concerns about the social impact of taxing car use.
Caveat no. 2: my threads refer to fuel taxes. A VMT is slightly different. Both are roughly proportional to car use. But you need to consider vehicle efficiency...
IF richer households have less efficient vehicles (as e.g. in the UK, see below) then a VMT will be more 'regressive' than a fuel tax.
BUT if it's low-income households who have less efficient vehicles, then a VMT will be *less* 'regressive'
BUT if it's low-income households who have less efficient vehicles, then a VMT will be *less* 'regressive'
https://twitter.com/giulio_mattioli/status/1134052077485875202
As EV uptake increases, more and more vehicles will pay no fuel tax at all - which I understand is one of the reasons why the US is talking about a VMT.
Since EV-buyers tend to be high income, this situation would advantage higher income households. A VMT would counter that.
Since EV-buyers tend to be high income, this situation would advantage higher income households. A VMT would counter that.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
