Welcome to Tesla Motors Club
Discuss Tesla's Model S, Model 3, Model X, Model Y, Cybertruck, Roadster and More.
Register

State based EV road user charge (Overturned 18/10/23)

This site may earn commission on affiliate links.
@Vostok I'd say it's because we disagree on what you call "retrospectivity" that this could be a case for the courts to decide. I believe my argument is one possible legal angle to get it thrown out.

But as @ICUDoc says, the real crime and offense here is that those who have taken it upon themselves to pay a 30%-50% premium over an ICE car to largely benefit the Australian public (i.e. us EV owners), are now slapped with a further disincentive for the privilege of not killing our compatriots with exhaust fumes. I don't think any of us really care about the money this is going to cost us. It's the principle that is shameful.

At what point can politicians be held criminally responsible for laws they introduce that knowingly contribute to causing physical harm to many Australians? There must be some accountability somewhere?
 
suggest, however, that risking the considerable punishment that might attach to this (could they do you for fraud?) in order to save $500-$1000 a year or whatever is not rational. There's all kinds of ways they might find out eventually - say when you sell the car, and the new owner reports the odometer on transfer...

Not if you sell it interstate or to a wholesaler. To be honest I wonder what happens if you just don't put in your odometer readings.
 
@Vostok I'd say it's because we disagree on what you call "retrospectivity" that this could be a case for the courts to decide. I believe my argument is one possible legal angle to get it thrown out.

But as @ICUDoc says, the real crime and offense here is that those who have taken it upon themselves to pay a 30%-50% premium over an ICE car to largely benefit the Australian public (i.e. us EV owners), are now slapped with a further disincentive for the privilege of not killing our compatriots with exhaust fumes. I don't think any of us really care about the money this is going to cost us. It's the principle that is shameful.

At what point can politicians be held criminally responsible for laws they introduce that knowingly contribute to causing physical harm to many Australians? There must be some accountability somewhere?
It’d be great if a lawyer in VIC or SA wanted to challenge this pro-bono, it would be an interesting test case. But I doubt any successful challenge would be based on any notion of ‘certainty’ or ‘retrospectivity’ but on whether a state can attempt to replace a federal tax with a state one, given that’s the rationale the states themselves have offered up for doing it.

As for what I will do, I will write to the NSW Premier, NSW Treasurer and NSW Energy and Environment Minister (Matt Kean, who drives a Model 3) in an attempt to head off any such notions here. Not because I disagree with the idea of a RUC, but with one being arbitrarily applied on a “user pays” basis to a subset of road users, and when other externalities of owning a vehicle are not subject to the same principle. It’s also fundamentally contradictory to other policy objectives of the NSW Government in trying to reduce emissions, or the principle that polluters should pay for damage they cause (asbestos dumping, chemical spills, industrial effluent).
 
  • Love
Reactions: Hungry Mile
It’d be great if a lawyer in VIC or SA wanted to challenge this pro-bono, it would be an interesting test case. But I doubt any successful challenge would be based on any notion of ‘certainty’ or ‘retrospectivity’ but on whether a state can attempt to replace a federal tax with a state one, given that’s the rationale the states themselves have offered up for doing it.

As for what I will do, I will write to the NSW Premier, NSW Treasurer and NSW Energy and Environment Minister (Matt Kean, who drives a Model 3) in an attempt to head off any such notions here. Not because I disagree with the idea of a RUC, but with one being arbitrarily applied on a “user pays” basis to a subset of road users, and when other externalities of owning a vehicle are not subject to the same principle. It’s also fundamentally contradictory to other policy objectives of the NSW Government in trying to reduce emissions, or the principle that polluters should pay for damage they cause (asbestos dumping, chemical spills, industrial effluent).
The SA labor party and more importantly an independant have vowed to vote it down in the SA senate, so it looks like the glory of being the worlds first EV tax will be won by Victoria.
 
  • Informative
Reactions: Vostok
So this is a once off gain, but... technically you can start with a higher km reading when the scheme starts.

How long before new cars need roadworthy in Vic? It's 5 years in NSW ..

Look at this Mr Andrews, my starting odometer reading on my Model 3 is 252464km. Did that all in year 1. I'll be reporting the same number for the next few years as I'm not planning to drive it at all..
 
  • Funny
Reactions: Anubis
I have zero moral qualms not paying an immoral tax.
Hmm... that’s what some people said about the fixed-price emissions trading scheme that was in place in Australia 2012-2014 (aka ‘carbon tax’).

I don’t think an RUC is, of itself, immoral. I think letting polluters pollute for free rather than being subject to “user pays” is immoral.
 
I don't mind paying a reasonable charge that:
is part of an overhauled system that replaces fuel excise and registration, and applies to all vehicles

doesn't penalise EVs early in their market acceptance that puts a brake a sales. this will happen if it's applied now

is a part of a taxing regime that penalises congestion and doesn't proportionately penalise rural drivers who will always have to drive further distances, have fewer public transport alternatives, and have less spent on rural roads

EV only charge spots become legally enforceable, tow away for ICE vehicles
 
There is no requirements for ongoing roadworthies in VIC.

The other option is just to register in ACT again, same as when you register there to avoid stamp duty. It's more of a principal than the actual money. I have zero moral qualms not paying an immoral tax.

how do you do this? road trip to the act and say hello? i do note that the act allows your adress to be outside the state
 
Hmm... that’s what some people said about the fixed-price emissions trading scheme that was in place in Australia 2012-2014 (aka ‘carbon tax’).

I don’t think an RUC is, of itself, immoral. I think letting polluters pollute for free rather than being subject to “user pays” is immoral.
Agree with your second para. Perfectly summarised. Not commenting on the first para because it will end up in an unsuitable direction for this forum.
 
Interesting additional details from the Greens in Victoria: https://www.theage.com.au/national/...wards-more-privatisation-20201129-p56iut.html

"I only had to look at who had originally proposed the tax – Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, a pro-privatisation ‘think-tank’ representing Transurban and road builders. They were also the first ones out of the gate to support the government’s move. And we know that Transurban has been gunning to get their hands on road user charging rights for some time."
 
"I only had to look at who had originally proposed the tax – Infrastructure Partnerships Australia, a pro-privatisation ‘think-tank’ representing Transurban and road builders. They were also the first ones out of the gate to support the government’s move. And we know that Transurban has been gunning to get their hands on road user charging rights for some time."

That is starting to make a lot of sense. The South Australian Liberal government is also trying to privatise Service SA.
 
That is starting to make a lot of sense. The South Australian Liberal government is also trying to privatise Service SA.
The process to privatise motor registries and by default the connected services SA was initiated by the previous labor government as part of the sale of the lands title office. So far the current government has not announced that further privatisation will proceed.
The current liberal government was however planning on privitising pathology sa, however after their stellar performance over covid this has now been thoroughly tossed out as an idea.