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

[Quickst]

Given safe, clean and reliable alternatives to a car people will use them to the benefit of all.

Where there is safe efficient public transportation, car ownership reduces. I have a lot of friends in Inner city Sydney who don't have a car, who don't want an EV because they don't need a car and some of their kids actually don't have a drivers license which I think is a mistake but it is informative. Some of them have E-bikes which I think makes sense only in denser parts of the city

Sydney trains started being electric from 1926
Rideshare/taxis should be electric. In the future robotaxis will be electric.
Buses should also be electric

People think EV are environmentally friendly, but they need to realise a lot of mining goes into making electric cars. Changing EV every few years is not environmentally friendly either.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Why can't the road user charge be based on income, same as the Medicare levy? Make it a progressive tax. Only worry about supplementary usage charges for heavy vehicles.

Because a lot of road usage isn't essential, it's about choice. Where you choose to live and the trips you take for pleasure. I just had a vacation where we drove about 1800 miles and I don't expect other taxpayers to subsidize it, nor would I expect to subsidize others making such trips.

Healthcare is just tough because unfortunately there's a high cost to *sugar* luck..

 

[paulp]

Where there is safe efficient public transportation, car ownership reduces. I have a lot of friends in Inner city Sydney who don't have a car, who don't want an EV because they don't need a car and some of their kids actually don't have a drivers license which I think is a mistake but it is informative. Some of them have E-bikes which I think makes sense only in denser parts of the city

Sydney trains started being electric from 1926
Rideshare/taxis should be electric. In the future robotaxis will be electric.
Buses should also be electric

People think EV are environmentally friendly, but they need to realise a lot of mining goes into making electric cars. Changing EV every few years is not environmentally friendly either.

You need to think outside inner sydney. There is a big country out there and most of it has public transport well below a fraction of inner sydney. The wealth levels often are not so good either.

Recent research has shown that an ev charged exclusively on solar requires 11000km of use (assuming the equivalent petrol car also does 11000km) until it is ahead of the ice on lifetime energy used so far(ie including produxtion). On a 100% coal charged grid that number is around 110,000km. @Vostok provides excellent monthly grid data so you can correlate for your circumstance. (Data based on using same car sizes).
If I then sell my solar charged ev into the 2nd hand market to someone who cannot afford new, then that is a substantially superior outcome to that same buyer buying a new ice car.

 

[PC__LoadLetter]

Because a lot of road usage isn't essential, it's about choice. Where you choose to live and the trips you take for pleasure. I just had a vacation where we drove about 1800 miles and I don't expect other taxpayers to subsidize it, nor would I expect to subsidize others making such trips.

Healthcare is just tough because unfortunately there's a high cost to *sugar* luck..

A lot of health care isn't essential. It's about choice. How much sugar and other carbs you choose to consume and whether you are active. I am absolutely not a good example here but I acknowledge there's a principle. Those of us who eat badly and don't exercise are being subsidised by others, and we probably shouldn't expect to.

 

[gm12]

[Per km charges]

it should be extended as I have consistently said above to all cars

No, as I have consistently said upthread fuel excise and RUC have nothing to do with road maintenance revenue per se - except that it goes into consolidated revenue which is then used for road maintenance among all the other spending by government.

The point remains that IMO there should be a tax/levy for road usage for all vehicles. How it could be equitable shared among all the different road users is a different argument.

A per km charge is a terrible tax. Not only because it has no objective, but its an absolute pain to administer. Drivers have to send a photo of their odometer? That sounds very cumbersome and error prone. Very high cost to administer.

If you want a tax levy for all road vehicles, I'd focus your attention on the fossil fuel commercial sector who dont pay for any of it.

 

[gm12]

You mean for “Car dependant” cities like most Australian cities, an electric car is one answer, as it reduces local noise and pollution. However it doesn’t solve traffic and pedestrian safety issues. Careful reexamination of the roads and built environment along with good public transport options both reduce pollution and give space to improve local residents amenities. Many European cities have made the change but Australians obsession with the house on the quarter acre block and government policies that support car dependency have only made things worse here. Given safe, clean and reliable alternatives to a car people will use them to the benefit of all.

The people dont want that. We like sprawl, and we like cars. Rather than move the mountain (emulate EU cities), just make cars better (EV's). All most Australian cities need is a move to EV's and increased cycling/ebike infrastructure, and they'd be about as good as they need to be.

 

[Vostok]

A per km charge is a terrible tax. Not only because it has no objective, but its an absolute pain to administer. Drivers have to send a photo of their odometer? That sounds very cumbersome and error prone. Very high cost to administer.

Not in NSW. As you are aware, we have this thing called annual vehicle inspections - can’t re-register your vehicle without getting a “Pink Slip” from a certified motor mechanic. As part of that process, your odometer reading is recorded. The Pink Slip process is now entirely paperless. NSW Government will simply deduct the previous year’s odometer reading from this years and send you the RUC bill. Simples.

OK, for the first 5 years no inspections are required so you might be required to declare an odometer reading, or they could just adopt the average of 15,000 km per year if you don’t want to declare a reading. And then do a true-up at the 5th year when your odometer reading is submitted by the independent party. Many low-overhead ways to skin this cat.

 

[Max Spaghetti]

why should someone who pays income taxes but who does not drive have to pay for road usage?

Why should someone who pays income taxes but who has no children have to pay for schools?

Hollow arguments like this explain why all tax goes into general revenue, and all public services like schools, hospitals and roads are funded out of general revenue.
We don't need a separate tax for each.

Taxes can also be used to provide incentives and dis-incentives for various things, to try to push society to behave in a certain way. Those taxes go into general revenue also. For example, alcohol and tobacco excise exists to curtail consumption - and it just so happens that the money adds to the revenue stream. If fuel excise was regarded as a fossil fuel tax to dis-incentivise consumption rather than a road funding tax, then suddenly your argument goes up in smoke - it's all psychological.

Rapid adoption of EV is a bit shortsighted. It should be rapid adoption of Electric public transport. Less cars on roads - including EV.

We already have that, they are called trains and trams.

Unfortunately, none of those trains and trams travel between my home and my place of work, nor my wife's place of work, nor my child's school, and nor the local shops.

Many of us need cars.

We could get electric buses, and I'm sure that will happen. But it's the cars and trucks that are burning the bulk of the fossil fuels. Why do you want to concentrate on 1% of the problem when we should be solving 99%?

I have a lot of friends in Inner city Sydney who don't have a car

Ahh - I see the problem.

There is a whole country outside of Inner city Sydney you know.

I actually lived there once. It was horrible.

Rideshare/taxis should be electric.

So do you think that a road user charge, charged by the km, is a good way to incentivise that?

Changing EV every few years is not environmentally friendly either.

Oh, that old chestnut.

When I turn over my car every 3 years, I create a 2nd hand market for those who are either not privileged enough to afford, or choose not to waste money on, a new car.

The car does not go to landfill.

While trying to transition the country's fleet of cars to EV, every incentive to turn over new EVs will help that transition, which is exactly why the Federal Government decided to incentivise EVs for novated leases and business fleet leases. To create a 2nd hand EV market in a few years time as those vehicles start getting turned over.

The Victorian State government, however, chose to bring in a dis-incentivising road user tax now instead of later, despite supposedly representing the same party of politics. Go figure.

 

[evbee]

Why should someone who pays income taxes but who has no children have to pay for schools?

Hollow arguments like this explain why all tax goes into general revenue, and all public services like schools, hospitals and roads are funded out of general revenue.
We don't need a separate tax for each.

Taxes can also be used to provide incentives and dis-incentives for various things, to try to push society to behave in a certain way. Those taxes go into general revenue also. For example, alcohol and tobacco excise exists to curtail consumption - and it just so happens that the money adds to the revenue stream. If fuel excise was regarded as a fossil fuel tax to dis-incentivise consumption rather than a road funding tax, then suddenly your argument goes up in smoke - it's all psychological.



We already have that, they are called trains and trams.

Unfortunately, none of those trains and trams travel between my home and my place of work, nor my wife's place of work, nor my child's school, and nor the local shops.

Many of us need cars.

We could get electric buses, and I'm sure that will happen. But it's the cars and trucks that are burning the bulk of the fossil fuels. Why do you want to concentrate on 1% of the problem when we should be solving 99%?



Ahh - I see the problem.

There is a whole country outside of Inner city Sydney you know.

I actually lived there once. It was horrible.


So do you think that a road user charge, charged by the km, is a good way to incentivise that?


Oh, that old chestnut.

When I turn over my car every 3 years, I create a 2nd hand market for those who are either not privileged enough to afford, or choose not to waste money on, a new car.

The car does not go to landfill.

While trying to transition the country's fleet of cars to EV, every incentive to turn over new EVs will help that transition, which is exactly why the Federal Government decided to incentivise EVs for novated leases and business fleet leases. To create a 2nd hand EV market in a few years time as those vehicles start getting turned over.

The Victorian State government, however, chose to bring in a dis-incentivising road user tax now instead of later, despite supposedly representing the same party of politics. Go figure.

I don't think the EV tax will disincentivise the take up of EV's. There are already enough incentives around. Evidence is the massive sales of EV's in the first half in 2023. We all don't want to pay any more than we need to, but if my taxes go towards maintaining our way of life, why not.

In NSW, EV's already benefit from not having to pay stamp duty on registration, so consider the EV tax to be paid from that saving. We all have to pay at some stage.

 

[EcoCloudIT]

I don't think the EV tax will disincentivise the take up of EV's. There are already enough incentives around. Evidence is the massive sales of EV's in the first half in 2023. We all don't want to pay any more than we need to, but if my taxes go towards maintaining our way of life, why not.

In NSW, EV's already benefit from not having to pay stamp duty on registration, so consider the EV tax to be paid from that saving. We all have to pay at some stage.

And the state with the least sales of EVs is guess where? VIC, where we have a RUC, get charged stamps on EVs, and the $3k incentive has been pulled...

 

[meloccom]

The people dont want that. We like sprawl, and we like cars. Rather than move the mountain (emulate EU cities), just make cars better (EV's). All most Australian cities need is a move to EV's and increased cycling/ebike infrastructure, and they'd be about as good as they need to be.

Will this look any better even if every vehicle pictured is electric?

 

[paulp]

Will this look any better even if every vehicle pictured is electric?
View attachment 965117

Might not look any different but it would certainly sound and smell different

 

[meloccom]

Might not look any different but it would certainly sound and smell different

I spent most of my working life living close to the city, specifically to avoid losing multiple hours per day. One of my last contracts was for a company in Belrose in the Northern Beaches area and I was living in Potts Point. The commute could be anything from 35 minutes to more than 2 hours on one occasion. The biggest driver of traffic density appears to be school days, but the 2 hour commute was due to an accident on a non school day. The only alternative was multiple buses that got stuck in the same traffic as my car. This contrasts to my prev contract in the city that had a 35 minute travel time even during a rail strike as I could walk to work if necessary.
I’ve been very lucky to be able to live centrally but I remain cognisant that many others have no choice but to battle Sydney traffic every day. I see it as a quality of life issue.

 

[ItsNotAboutTheMoney]

Will this look any better even if every vehicle pictured is electric?
View attachment 965117

It will smell and sound a lot better. Well, maybe not sound so great. Depending on laws it might be silent or a continuous woooooooooo.

 

[EcoCloudIT]

Will this look any better even if every vehicle pictured is electric?
View attachment 965117

Will be better for ears of the humans that live near the highway, not to mention developing lungs of kids....

 

[Davemcd]

For London there are 3 zones:

The inner one is the congestion zone - currently free for BEV until 2025
The middle one is the ULEV zone payable if not an ULEV or better
The outer one is LEZ zone and also bans HGW vehicle of greater than 12T

And London City has recently won a Court case which allows them to expand the ULEV to all of greater London - to include basically all of the other zone in pic.

View attachment 965021

No I was not talking about that one.
There is a rego component depending how clean your car is.

Like how QLD does it per cylinders.

Registration costs

Get an online free registration quote for your vehicle, motorcycle, light truck or boat in Queensland.

www.qld.gov.au

1-2-3 $283.55
4 cly $360.60
5-6 $570.95
8-10 $799.60

 

[meloccom]

I live beachfront adelaide and can drive to the city in 20 mins, 25 in peak hour. Alternatively I could bus it and take twice as long, or catch a bus to the train then train then a tram from the train to where i need to be in the cbd, which is about an hour.

I’ve been to Adelaide, population 1.4M, a number of times and even could drive in and park at Rundle Mall. In Sydney, population 5.2M, where competition for space is much higher, particularly in the inner city and CBD, you need to balance the space taken up by car traffic versus the space for public amenities. Car centric sprawl is not the answer as it uses up too much space and makes people spend more and more time driving rather than time at home, but that seems to be the standard government answer to release more land on the fringes. This then necessitates more roads, which cost money to build and more money to maintain, further exacerbating the problem of road funding, incentivising the government to introduce and increase road user charges.

 

[paulp]

I’ve been to Adelaide, population 1.4M, a number of times and even could drive in and park at Rundle Mall. In Sydney, population 5.2M, where competition for space is much higher, particularly in the inner city and CBD, you need to balance the space taken up by car traffic versus the space for public amenities. Car centric sprawl is not the answer as it uses up too much space and makes people spend more and more time driving rather than time at home, but that seems to be the standard government answer to release more land on the fringes. This then necessitates more roads, which cost money to build and more money to maintain, further exacerbating the problem of road funding, incentivising the government to introduce and increase road user charges.

Could not agree more. I’ve been advocasting for decades in Adelaide to stop urban sprawl, but they just keep pushing it further and further. It really makes no sense. SA governments on both sides just cannot grasp that sprawl requires more funding and makes any form of decent public transport fairly much impossible.

 

[Davemcd]

going off topic.. People still want a house and land in OZ.
Had a few friends do the apartment thing close to city and move back out as too noisey.


Public transport is the key for me to get into the city although needs to be more frequent.
Sort of a catch22.. If you do not run more people will use the car.
Where I am I have to walk 1km up hill and down the hill to catch a bus that runs every 30-60 mins that does not connect to train.
Then after 9am we have trains every 20 mins when they are not replaced by buses.

 

[Quickst]

Why should someone who pays income taxes but who has no children have to pay for schools?

Exactly my point. Why should you. You already pay through all the other taxes that you already pay including transaction stamp duty.
There should be a contribution from families of children in schools. Private school families already do - they get much less per child funding from the Government. Note that I said "contribution". This is different to saying they should pay for 100%. There is a social benefit for the community collectively funding all infrastructure and I agree with this. However it makes sense for direct users to contribute toward infrastructure use such as roads /water/electricity/health/schools/digital connectivity/airports

all public services like schools, hospitals and roads are funded out of general revenue.

Yes they are but don't assume they are properly funded
.....

Taxes can also be used to provide incentives and dis-incentives for various things, to try to push society to behave in a certain way

Correct and my point is that driving on roads should come with a price signal to say that using roads in a car has ac cost to the community.
.....

If fuel excise was regarded as a fossil fuel tax to dis-incentivise consumption rather than a road funding tax

It has been sold as both. However currently ICE vehicles contribute more to road funding via Fuel excise than EV vehicles which pay nothing.
.....

Unfortunately, none of those trains and trams travel between my home and my place of work

Same for me. I drive. But I am cognisant of the fact that driving has a cost.
.....

But it's the cars and trucks that are burning the bulk of the fossil fuels. Why do you want to concentrate on 1% of the problem when we should be solving 99%

No, but currently ICE contributes more to road funding via Fuel excise (the % it contributes to road funding via consolidated revenue) EV. Ideally all road users should be making a contribution to road maintenance/funding whatever you like to call it
.....

There is a whole country outside of Inner city Sydney you know.

Yes I live outside of inner Sydney. It is important to not be biased based on where you live
.....

So do you think that a road user charge, charged by the km, is a good way to incentivise that

Wrong question. It sends a price signal that using roads comes at a cost
.....

When I turn over my car every 3 years, I create a 2nd hand market
The car does not go to landfill

You increase turnover - Mining still occurs and is required to produce all the raw materials necessary to make a car.
.....

Like how QLD does it per cylinders

Or number of axles, or tare weight. These are just adjustments if you like to make a RUC more indicative of road use - more axles, more powerful cars, heavier vehicles.
.....

makes any form of decent public transport fairly much impossible.

Thats the problem. Current Govt policies incentivise private car ownership rather than measures which reduce congestion and efficient use of resources.
The USA is a perfect example of an overbalance in private car ownership