Australian electric cars to pay fair share of federal road excise

[Maka]

A interesting read, whats your thoughts on the issue?

http://mobile.abc.net.au/news/2018-0...64?pfmredir=sm

Electric cars are breaking our roads, here's how & what the future holds for the neighbourhoods that need their cars the most.

By Jackson Gothe-Snape

How much does your neighbourhood rely on the car?

St Andrew's Drive, Lilydale, Vic
81%
car commute – this area
vs
66%
car commute – national avg

(Your information is used only for this look-up and the colourful interactive map below.)

In 2018, Australia's roads are plagued with problems: the long-term decline in the road death toll has slowed, congestion is tipped to increase and long commutes are linked to poor mental health.

And now a multi-billion-dollar road funding black hole looms.

It's caused by the growing popularity of fuel-efficient cars, prompting a multi-generational reset to national roads policy which will change how you pay to drive.

For the people who rely most on their vehicles, that means trouble.

The price of roads -

Australians are big users of roads, and they pay for the privilege … even if most don't know exactly how.

Car is by far the most common way to get to work. About two out of three travel to work this way.

And that number is increasing — it's up by more than half a million since 2011.

It's the most popular way to get to work in every city, by far.

Chart showing that cars are the dominant form of commuting in each Australian city, at least 50 per cent everywhere.
Behind the wheel, pulling out from your garage onto the street, it might seem like access to roads is free.

But the average vehicle is actually charged more than $1,300 by state and federal governments each year, according to information from the Productivity Commission.

That's on top of fees paid directly for toll roads or parking.

Chart breaking down the charges levied on each vehicle per year. At $607, fuel excise is the largest part of the $1334 total.
The largest component is fuel excise — the tax paid on every litre of petrol, of about 40 cents — which goes to the Federal Government.

All up, governments spend approximately the same amount of money on road infrastructure as they receive from drivers.

At more than $12 billion of new engineering work done for the public sector per year, it's greater than the spending on energy, telecommunications and water combined.

But even with today's road outlays, the cost of congestion — which covers environmental, health and social impacts, plus what you could be spending your time on otherwise — is tipped to increase more than 5 per cent annually over the next 15 years by Deloitte in a recent report.

And while the long-term trend in the road toll is downwards, the decline has slowed. Approximately 100 Australians still die in incidents every month.

A Tesla-shaped loophole -

Fuel excise means — for most drivers at least — the more they drive, the more they pay.

However, low-emission vehicles are letting some drivers get away charge-free.

The CSIRO has predicted revenue coming from fuel excise will drop by almost half by 2050.

Urban Infrastructure Minister Paul Fletcher argues the current road funding system has "some features that don't seem very fair".

If you are able to buy a $125,000 Tesla, the amount you pay through fuel excise to use the roads is zero.

"If you're buying a 10-year-old Commodore, the amount you're paying is effectively four-and-a-half cents per kilometre."

The Federal Government is looking at ways to more closely link how people use the roads with what they pay.

Mr Fletcher will soon announce the terms of reference of the formal review into this concept, known as "road pricing" or "road user charging", and similar trials for trucks are earmarked for 2018.

The ultimate solution might link how much drivers pay to their car's GPS tracker. Instead of a rough fuel-based taxation method, the result would be accurate to the metre: the further you drive, the more tax you pay.

Chart showing how in the Oregon user charging trial low fuel efficiency cars actually paid less in monthly charges.
In a trial in the US state of Oregon, all drivers were charged one-and-a-half US cents per mile — no matter how fuel efficient their car was.

An overhaul of road funding such as this would require support from the states.

In the past year, the Productivity Commission and the Grattan Institute have recommended the states introduce trials of user charging to discourage drivers from using the roads during busy times.

An anti-congestion scheme operates in London, where drivers are charged almost 12 UK pounds — $20 — to visit the inner city between 7am and 6pm on weekdays.

Such an arrangement theoretically encourages people to use public transport or explore cheaper alternatives.

But there's little choice but to drive for many right now.

The neighbourhoods that need their cars
The orange areas in the map below show the neighbourhoods where a larger proportion of workers drive to work.

Car to work 0% 100% -

In many areas on the fringes of Australian cities, more than four in five residents either drive to work or get driven to work.

Some might choose public transport if they could, but many just don't have an option.

The concept of "forced car ownership" is where low-income households are forced to spend a high proportion of their income on cars due to a lack of alternatives and the need for mobility.

Research from Monash University found these households became more common on Melbourne's outskirts between 2001 and 2011.

Professor Graham Currie from Monash said the people that use cars more are more vulnerable to pricing changes as they typically come from low income groups.

Not only are they car dependent, they are very, very car dependent, they are more dependent than anybody else. Which means if you change the price of driving, you affect them more than others.

Mr Fletcher is keen to emphasise that no decisions have been made about road charging and that it's still not clear who might end up paying more at the end of reform that could take more than a decade.

"It's not necessarily right to say this is going to be detrimental to people in outer suburban areas or in rural areas because those people are paying a lot today," he said.

Although residents in areas poorly-served by public transport might find it difficult to ditch the car if costs for them go up, the loser from a user charging-based approach might actually be higher-income, inner-city residents.

A study linked to the Oregon trial by the Oregon State University found that drivers of high-efficiency vehicles would pay more regardless of how far they travel.

Urban drivers were found to be more likely to drive fuel efficient vehicles, so they would be likely to pay more under a user charging program.

Western Australia resident Rob Dean, who has owned his Tesla Model S for more than three years, said he would be happy to pay a "fairly proportioned distance tax" to pay for his road use, but there's a catch.

"I would also expect any progressive government to add an air quality tax on fossil fuel vehicles that emit damaging tailpipe emissions into the air we breath, in turn placing a heavy burden on the health system," he
Turn here for a better system
It's still early on the journey of reform, but every day more cars are being added to the existing road network.

Congestion is a drag on productivity and even mental health. A study from Deakin University published in April linked commuting for more than four hours per week to negative mental health outcomes.

The only significant user-charging trial run in Australia, by toll-road company Transurban in Melbourne in 2015 and 2016, found drivers were open to a transparent, fair scheme.

But it's not yet clear whether user charging is the best solution to improve the road network, particularly when a major goal is to reduce congestion.

Labor and the Greens both want greater investment in public transport options such as rail, and others have suggested modest road reforms in the meantime.

A recent Grattan Institute report recommended limiting the amount of on-street parking and banning right-hand turns in congested areas to reduce the attractiveness of driving there, further reducing the price of off-peak public transport fares and increasing the cost of CBD parking.

In the longer term, the expansion of ride-share services and fully autonomous vehicles could cause significant disruption to the way Australians use the roads.

Jayme Harrison, Adjunct Professor at the University of NSW and founder of road user charging company Clearways, describes road congestion as a "very vexed challenge".

"There have traditionally only been 'supply side' measures — increasing road supply [building roads]," he said

Does [building roads] improve things? It does in the short term, but then you get into the phenomenon of 'induced demand'.

"That means increased road supply, the roads become less congested, it encourages more people onto them, and you move back to [similar levels of] congestion.

"I'm not saying we shouldn't build more roads, we absolutely need to continue to fund roads, and improve the road networks, but if we only have supply side measures when it comes to the road part of our transport networks, it's not sustainable."

For the moment, the path to reform is not straightforward.

"The question is," Mr Fletcher asks, "could you find a better system?"

"The answer right now is we don't know, but it's certainly worth having a look at."

With thanks to the ABC.

Credits
Design: Georgina Piper
Development: Andrew Kesper

Notes: Data is from the ABS Census 2016 unless otherwise stated. "Commute by car" refers to workers living in an area who drove or were driven to work, but did not use any other form of transport. Areas displayed on the map are SA1. The figures in the map are affected by adjustments by the ABS and should be treated as estimates.


cheers, Maka

[csv8]

Rockhampton has 4 charging stations, 2 at the Library and 2 at Stocklands. If everyone goes electric how will everyone get charged???? It will be a big queue!

[Peter B - CV8]

Originally Posted by csv8

Rockhampton has 4 charging stations, 2 at the Library and 2 at Stocklands. If everyone goes electric how will everyone get charged???? It will be a big queue!

Hhhhmmm. I see a good business opportunity there for someone who can design double adaptors or powerboards for said charging stations.. Reminds me of my old man's garage. One power point with about a dozen double adaptors hanging of it for various things (before the days of the powerboard).

[olfella]

Originally Posted by Peter B - CV8

Hhhhmmm. I see a good business opportunity there for someone who can design double adaptors or powerboards for said charging stations.. Reminds me of my old man's garage. One power point with about a dozen double adaptors hanging of it for various things (before the days of the powerboard).

Wont happen as I believe charging stations need 25amp outlets. This means a new dedicated circuit. Imagine a 3 electric car family coming home and plugging in for the night 8hour charge...

[commodorenutt]

I posted on this subject in the "why is it" thread:
https://fordforums.com.au/showpost.p...&postcount=508



Why is it.....

That these ignorant greenies fail to see the big picture, and continue to promote the "all about me" attitude?

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-01-1...arging/9235564

The article notes how the average fossil-fuel car, with 40% excise on fuel, contributes around 4.5c per km to road funding, whilst electric cars contribute nothing.
It then goes on to suggest a distance based, or "user pays" tax system for road funding - meaning owners of electric cars will have to contribute to funding the very roads they are using.

The article quotes a clown with a Tesla who is only willing to pay the distance tax on one condition - he wants an "air quality tax" on fossil fueled cars:


Where the F%*# does he think the power comes from for the majority of electric cars on the road?

Shifting emissions from the tailpipe to the power station is the reality these self-entitled elitists fail to see. Maybe 1 in 100 might be truly "green" charging only with solar, but they would be a very small minority, especially since WA, where he resides, generated just 7% of their power from renewable sources in 2014-2015: https://rac.com.au/home-life/info/st...e-energy-in-wa

[Mercury Bullet]

It's not greenies as such imo, just typical greed of people who don't want to pay their fare share while deriding everyone else.

This tax was always going to happen.

IF electric car owners think they are going to drive for nothing they need to have a rethink.
Free power from council charging stations needs to stop immediately too.

Of course electric car makers (read tesla) are already complaining in the news today.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Mercury Bullet

It's not greenies as such imo, just typical greed of people who don't want to pay their fare share while deriding everyone else.

This tax was always going to happen.

IF electric car owners think they are going to drive for nothing they need to have a rethink.
Free power from council charging stations needs to stop immediately too.

Of course electric car makers (read tesla) are already complaining in the news today.

Yup,there was no way that the Gov’t was going to let this slip through their fingers.(Tax)It has to go this way as the number of elec vehicles climbs on our roads.Cheers

[Maka]

I hope its just the ev's that cop the tax & the guv's (state & fed) dont include older cars in this legislation initiative, i think i heard Mr Fletcher mention something about older cars but not the context.

Theres more to come on this story..

cheers, Maka

[marty351]

Greenies b like...

[dunga]

You cant argue with green fools and their support for so called green cars they conveniently forget where the electricity comes from to charge them also forget how much fossil fuel and is used to manufacture the cars and their lithium batteries in the first place . Not to mention the disposal of the toxic things when used up. If you want to pay 200 thousand dollars to the worlds biggest scammer to save a bit of fuel tax a year go right ahead.

[commodorenutt]

Like the silly fool who told my wife she should get rid of her "gas guzzler" 6.0L V8, and buy a little 4-banger to help save the environment.

She does 3000km a year in it! I worked out that in today's $$ terms, it would take 41 years of fuel savings to pay for the little ****box. No thanks. She waited for the crap to start spewing again and conveniently threw that fact back in their face, to the delight of her co-workers who are also fed up with it. Nobody thinks beyond the tip of their own nose when it comes to ramming "green" propaganda down other people's throats.

[Cruzycuzz]

Electric cars only make up like 0.1 % of car sales in Australia?

[Dr Terry]

Originally Posted by Cruzycuzz

Electric cars only make up like 0.1 % of car sales in Australia?

If you include Hybrids, it's a lot higher than that.

Dr Terry

[Cruzycuzz]

Originally Posted by Dr Terry

If you include Hybrids, it's a lot higher than that.

Dr Terry

I mean full electric

[EgoFG]

for EVs Electricity is the fuel, put the excise on this at the charging stations (not as a percentage, but $per kwh)

Hmmm .. people would start charging from home

maybe based on KMs at re-rego, a penalty rate if no odo count done each year (so that new car owners get their ODO read and entered)

[dunga]

Originally Posted by EgoFG

for EVs Electricity is the fuel, put the excise on this at the charging stations (not as a percentage, but $per kwh)

Hmmm .. people would start charging from home

maybe based on KMs at re-rego, a penalty rate if no odo count done each year (so that new car owners get their ODO read and entered)

It will go the same way as nz you will pay a levy calculated on how many km you do a year

[commodorenutt]

We'll no longer have overnight "off-peak" - that will become the new peak time....

[olfella]

Looks like they are coming quicker than I thought anyway
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-a...-idUSKBN1F30YZ

Originally Posted by Maka

A interesting read, whats your thoughts on the issue?

In 2018, Australia's roads are plagued with problems: the long-term decline in the road death toll has slowed, congestion is tipped to increase and long commutes are linked to poor mental health.

Fuel excise means — for most drivers at least — the more they drive, the more they pay.

The ultimate solution might link how much drivers pay to their car's GPS tracker. Instead of a rough fuel-based taxation method, the result would be accurate to the metre: the further you drive, the more tax you pay.

cheers, Maka

It's such a ridiculous idea.
What do those people who live in inner/surrounding city suburbs say to those who can't afford to buy in their area? "Buy what you can afford, move further out of the city and commute to work!"

Then what does the government come in and say? "The further you drive, the more tax you pay!"

The people who drive the most are those who live well out of town because they already couldn't afford to buy property near the city. Taxing them more... because they already weren't rich enough to buy a property that would permit them to drive less... seems like such a bull**** idea. It's like people can't win in this ****hole of a country.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by leesa

It's such a ridiculous idea.
What do those people who live in inner/surrounding city suburbs say to those who can't afford to buy in their area? "Buy what you can afford, move further out of the city and commute to work!"

Then what does the government come in and say? "The further you drive, the more tax you pay!"

The people who drive the most are those who live well out of town because they already couldn't afford to buy property near the city. Taxing them more... because they already weren't rich enough to buy a property that would permit them to drive less... seems like such a bull**** idea. It's like people can't win in this ****hole of a country.

People who drive the most? What a load of BS! I live outside(rural) it was a LIFESTYLE change for me.Never heard so much crap in my life!

Originally Posted by hackney

People who drive the most? What a load of BS! I live outside(rural) it was a LIFESTYLE change for me.Never heard so much crap in my life!

Right. It was a lifestyle change for you therefore it must be the same for everyone else. Is that about right? There's noone at all who had to buy in a suburb further away than they intended and therefore have to commute further, particularly in areas that don't have public transportation?
You're either a liar or completely ignorant to the world around you.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by leesa

Right. It was a lifestyle change for you therefore it must be the same for everyone else. Is that about right? There's noone at all who had to buy in a suburb further away than they intended and therefore have to commute further, particularly in areas that don't have public transportation?
You're either a liar or completely ignorant to the world around you.

A “liar” or ignorant?(please explain as you seem to be an expert,& you have evidence on this?)Really? I know dozens of people who do NOT live in the city for the same reason.In fact it is more expensive,because of fuel etc...A lot also live “outside” the big city’s because they choose to.🙈🙈🙈

Originally Posted by hackney

A “liar” or ignorant?(please explain as you seem to be an expert?)Really? I know dozens of people who do NOT live in the city for the same reason.In fact it is more expensive,because of fuel etc...A lot also live “outside the big city’s because they choose to.🙈🙈🙈

Sounds like you've got a bee in your bonnet because your personal circumstances don't seem to align with an opinion of mine. According to your keen intellect the only possible response is wild disregard and denial of everything that doesn't personally apply to you. Heaven forbid we all be living different experiences in life.

Did you even read what I wrote before getting yourself worked up? It quite clearly applies to people who work in the city and live outside of the city. It also quite clearly does not apply to people who live in outer city and rural areas for reasons other than the property prices are cheaper. Now pipe down, comprehend more and stop making everything about you.

Originally Posted by hackney

Well, I am sorry to have an opinion.I simply do not agree.Sure some people have to go into the outer suburbs,but not all.Cheers.

If you communicated that as a normal person would instead of throwing insults while frothing at the mouth, you'd probably get better discussions and less drama.

[Bossxr8]

Originally Posted by hackney

People who drive the most? What a load of BS! I live outside(rural) it was a LIFESTYLE change for me.Never heard so much crap in my life!

I agreed with everything she said. People in large cities have to build on the outskirts cause inner city prices are ridiculously high.

Just because that doesn't apply to you doesn't make it wrong. Seeming to be a trend with you that if anyone has a different opinion they are wrong. Pull your head in.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Bossxr8

I agreed with everything she said. People in large cities have to build on the outskirts cause inner city prices are ridiculously high.

Just because that doesn't apply to you doesn't make it wrong. Seeming to be a trend with you that if anyone has a different opinion they are wrong. Pull your head in.

Well, I am sorry to have an opinion.I simply do not agree.Sure some people have to go into the outer suburbs,but not all.Cheers.

[commodorenutt]

Originally Posted by leesa

The people who drive the most are those who live well out of town because they already couldn't afford to buy property near the city. Taxing them more... because they already weren't rich enough to buy a property that would permit them to drive less... seems like such a bull**** idea. It's like people can't win in this ****hole of a country.

100% agree.

And they are already paying far more tax at the moment than those closer to the city - with ~40% of the cost of fuel being excise, and having to spend more on fuel to travel the extra distance.

And for those on the outskirts on lower incomes, who can't afford the latest & greatest fuel efficient cars, it's a double whammy.

And you may as well add tolls into it too. Inner Sydney has 2 (maybe more) tolls that are only paid one-way, whilst the motorways that serve the outer suburbs (M2, M4, M5 & M7) are all tolled both ways.

And if you're fortunate enough to live close to the M5 east, you get a free ride - yes, those getting on the M5 east from King Georges Rd have no toll at all to pay, yet those who have to travel further out, get slugged.

So you make a very, very valid point about the urban fringe being unfairly taxed more heavily.

The only way a distance tax would work, is if the excise was dropped. They did a study on this in the USA, and it was something like 1.5c/mile road user tax, was enough to offset the reduced excises on fuel. In Australia it would likely need to be something like 4c/km as we have about 4 times more excise on our fuel.

But the result of the study showed that cars like a Prius or Tesla would pay more road tax than fuel excise, whilst a truck or SUV would see a significant gain in savings, yet road funding would stay at the same level.

Our government would never go for it in the way it's intended because:
A. They won't get additional tax for no reason (cough** carbon dioxide tax **cough).
B. The greens would block any move to lower excise on fossil fuels.

Originally Posted by b0son

If its about road damage, then surely the trucking industry should be paying way more than it does now?

Definitely. But also include busses that are tearing up neighbourhood roundabouts, and paying very little compared to the trucking industry.

[Junkyard-Dog]

More taxes? Sounds pretty Australian to me mate.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

More taxes? Sounds pretty Australian to me mate.

You should try the UK then! You don’t know how good you have it here.Best place in the world.(& that’s coming from a “Pom”!)Cheers

[Junkyard-Dog]

Originally Posted by hackney

You should try the UK then! You don’t know how good you have it here.Best place in the world.(& that’s coming from a “Pom”!)Cheers

Yeah, a licence just to watch tv is a bit rich mate. I can't stand the BBC.

[hackney]

Originally Posted by Junkyard-Dog

Yeah, a licence just to watch tv is a bit rich mate. I can't stand the BBC.

You should watch the rest of the channels! Think we have got it bad.Almost forgot I did get hooked on “Movies for Men”!Mmmmm. Cheers