In RealClearPolicy Robert Atkinson presents an interesting suggestion for changing how U. S. road and bridge infrastructure spending is funded:
Technology exists that could easily and relatively cheaply charge trucks by the mile traveled, varying the charge by the truck’s axle weight or the type of road the truck is traveling on. This vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) is simple. The truck receives a one-way GPS signal to allow it to identify its location and an onboard computer loaded with price-per-mile data for all the roads across America. Additionally, trucks would be equipped with wireless axle-weight sensors, allowing the onboard computer to calculate an additional surcharge based on pavement damage (a formula that factors the type of road and the truck axle weight). The computer would then remit taxes monthly to the federal Highway Trust Fund and to every state the truck traveled through.
This sort of VMT system would have huge advantages over the current taxing system. First, taxes would be more carefully associated with true costs imposed on infrastructure. Trucks that do more damage to roadways would pay more. In turn, it would encourage trucks to drive more on roads that are properly engineered for heavy trucks, to drive fewer trips, and to use their hauling capacity more efficiently.
I haven’t really considered what the implications of such a system would be. I wouldn’t be a bit surprised if its first effect was to change the composition of what sort of freight was being transported by truck.
The basic problem in our present system is that the federal government pays 90% of new interstate construction while state and local governments bear the cost of maintenance. That’s the cause of our problems. We keep building new interstates regardless of commercial merit which creates opportunities for developers while state and local governments are so busy paying for health care and public employee retiree pensions that they aren’t maintaining the existing infrastructure adequately.
That system could be used in other ways as well:
– Eliminate most weigh stations
– Make it easier to enforce driver time restrictions
– Enforce speed limits for trucks
– Aid in future route planning since you’d have nationwide, high-fidelity data on truck transport
Not with the way our federal government presently works. Dollars to donuts they’d be restricted from using the data for anything but tax accounting.
Right. And likewise the time has come to tax consumers on the basis of how much carbon dioxide they breathe out. There’s no reason a family of four should pay the same taxes as a single person.
You are conceptually 100% correct, Jimbino. However, the excess costs contemplated in your example are so infinitesimally small it makes enforcement, and the issue, an absurdity.
I kinda like the Pigouvian nature of the guys proposal. And Dave’s initial reaction of a trucking reaction is actually pure markets at work.
The civil court system is necessary for businesses to enforce contracts, but nobody is calling for a per contract fee.
Everybody loves Pigovian taxes until they actually work. The gas tax was great until more fuel efficient vehicles became prevalent. Conventional wisdom is wonderful, until it is not.
I do not understand the reluctance to build and maintain roads. There are no economic transactions that do not include transportation costs. I doubt that a country of toll roads can become very prosperous.
The US Interstate System is a wonderous economic advantage. Rather than building the factories next to the coal mines, manufacturing can be spread out with goods transported to where they are needed, and this benefits everybody.
Federal roads should be maintained by the federal government. Again, I am baffled that this is not the case, but I am often befuddled. (I do not understand why the gas tax is not a percentage like other taxes.)