raynewman
Active Member
The fuel tax, of course, has nothing to do with road maintenance.EV's already get free use of public roads whilst paying zero fuel tax.
You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
The fuel tax, of course, has nothing to do with road maintenance.EV's already get free use of public roads whilst paying zero fuel tax.
Look at "supply charge" on your electricity bill.GST on electricity as well as ICE fuel. So it's the same.
Not sure how you get to 20%
Much the same here; ICE users pay fuel tax, EV users don't.All government subsidies to individuals or families should always be means tested, to avoid the “poor subsidising the rich” argument.
I like the Norway approach of taxing ICE rather than subsidising EVs since polluters pay, but this has its critics too (does it disproportionately impact the less well off?)
No easy answers here.
The fuel tax, of course, has nothing to do with road maintenance.
The fuel tax, of course, has nothing to do with road maintenance.
The big question is where does the 19 Billion dollars in Fossil fuel subsidy go?
( As reported by our government to the IMF )
What would you call low/no interest loans to coal miners and infrastructure for their exclusive use?Fossil fuels are not subsidised. I continue to see this myth promulgated and it's completely wrong. Unlike renewables which need gobs of taxpayer money to keep them going.
Fuel tax credits (diesel rebate) are available for needy coal miners at about 42c per litre..Fossil fuels are not subsidised. I continue to see this myth promulgated and it's completely wrong. Unlike renewables which need gobs of taxpayer money to keep them going.
Fossil fuels are directly subsidised in a variety of ways, even if you think it’s a “myth”. See the table at the bottom of this article for direct tax concessions: Tax-based subsidies | Market ForcesFossil fuels are not subsidised. I continue to see this myth promulgated and it's completely wrong. Unlike renewables which need gobs of taxpayer money to keep them going.
What would you call low/no interest loans to coal miners and infrastructure for their exclusive use?
Maybe reconfigure luxury car tax, and charge it on ICE vehicles only over a certain thresholdAll government subsidies to individuals or families should always be means tested, to avoid the “poor subsidising the rich” argument.
I like the Norway approach of taxing ICE rather than subsidising EVs since polluters pay, but this has its critics too (does it disproportionately impact the less well off?)
No easy answers here.
Ummm no, my EV is only filled with solar power. I’ve even ceased using the city supercharger just to ensure my tesla’s only run on sunlight.How does coal provide petrol to ICE cars.
If anything it provides cheaper electricity to those driving EVs and not signing up for a green plan.
There are some subsidies for diesel for transport and rural, but not much for a petrol vehicle.
The fuel tax, of course, has nothing to do with road maintenance.
Tesla owners pay (very high) taxes on their initial purchase like 30% LCT over $70,000.Road maintenance is paid for by taxes.
ICE owners pay (high) taxes on fuel in proportion to the miles travelled.
Tesla owners pay (very high) taxes on their initial purchase like 30% LCT over $70,000.
What would you call low/no interest loans to coal miners and infrastructure for their exclusive use?
Fossil fuels are directly subsidised in a variety of ways, even if you think it’s a “myth”. See the table at the bottom of this article for direct tax concessions: Tax-based subsidies | Market Forces
There is no argument that the fuel tax credit scheme is a taxpayer subsidy for fossil fuels and is by far the biggest line item at nearly $8 Bn per year. Most of the things below that are concessions generally available and so are a stretch (e.g the FBT ones listed would also apply if the vehicles concerned were electric) so I wouldn't have included them.
But, there are also public funds directed towards fossil fuels: Direct contributions | Market Forces where, for example, the Low Emission Technologies for Fossil Fuels (LETFF) program’s National Low Emissions Coal Initiative had received $233 million of its allocated $500 million funding and the Carbon Capture and Storage (CCS) Flagships program had received $217 million of its allocated $2 billion. Don’t need CCS for renewables!
Now while renewables have also been subsidised, they perform a public good in reducing air pollution. Air pollution (which is mostly caused by burning fossil fuels) is estimated to cause 3000 premature deaths every year in Australia as well as negatively impacting people’s quality of life, so these subsidies may even pay for themselves in reduced Government health costs.
And of course we are rapidly approaching the point where renewables will not require any form of subsidy any more as prices continue to drop.