Ev tax in Oregon

[Dan the Coot]

Does anyone know about this EV tax they are voting for in Oregon? I heard it is supposed to be a mileage tax.

Sponsored

 

[Dan the Coot]

Oregon used to have a choice of either installing a tracker in your EV thru a subcontractor called OReGo, or, pay about double the registration fee than ICE Vehicles pay. Our governor, Nina Kotek, has asked for EV owners to pay both fees in the future. The tracking tax is to be 2 cents/ mile, registration $200/year? It’s a lot! EV owners will pay more road taxes than other drivers on average. It’s a disincentive.

 

[CharonPDX]

My big complaint is that it doesn't encourage efficiency.

A gasoline tax encourages efficiency - the less efficient your vehicle, the more you pay in taxes.

With this, an Aptera and a Hummer EV would be taxed the same.

And while the per-mile encourages you to drive less, it's based on the gas tax that would be paid by a *20 MPG* gasoline car.

What I'd like to see is a combination of "tax per kWh dispensed at public paid EV charging" and "fee at vehicle registration/renewal," where the latter is based on vehicle efficiency (either simply MPGe, or weight.) That would balance the "charge at home" crowd with the "public charging", while also taxing out-of-state visitors for their impact on the roads, the way gasoline tax does.

If you're on a vacation driving through Oregon in an ICE, you pay Oregon gas tax when refilling in Oregon. Similarly, we should charge on paid public charging. Gas tax in Oregon is due to go to 46 cents/gallon next year. Make charging 1.3 cents/kWh (46 / 33.7) - but only at paid stations. No reason to add payments to places that offer free charging.

At present, Oregon has a "pay per mile" method for EVs and "high efficiency" vehicles. These allow you to get a credit on the per-mile for miles driven out of state, and for gasoline purchased (for hybrids/PHEVs.) We could the similar "credit for public charging paid for", so that people don't double-pay.

 

[Dave Cundiff]

Remember, long distance rail rights-of-way are basically owned by private oligopolies, whereas long distance highway rights-of-way are almost all owned by the public.

Rail as a technology can't achieve its full economic efficiency until it's handled like highways -- if you meet the safety standards and are willing to abide by the safety rules (with strict automated enforcement), then you get to use the right of way.

That being said, it's reasonable to tax heavy vehicles according to their share of road wear (not necessarily their share of assembling the rights of way). Internalizing the external costs and harms, if done systematically, would be good for EVs and for the environment.

***

Neither the per-registration nor the per-mile EV surcharges is efficient or fair, for reasons outlined by others above. But a combination of number of axles, axle weight, and miles driven could be used for a road tax that would be fairer than any I've seen used in my lifetime.

Best to all!

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

No one is objecting to paying their fair share.

Problem with all of these schemes is that they are NOT equivalent, and therefore not fair.

The fair thing to do would be to tax ICE vehicles and EVs the same way. In this case make them ALL pay a per-mile fee or a flat fee, and do away with the gas tax.

While I agree, a per mile tax for all vehicles would be impossibly difficult to administer. Unless you ask people to report their mileage on their state tax returns? Maybe…

I think a reasonable flat rate for EVs is a good way to do it. Take the average miles driven a year (yes I know not everyone is average) and the average MPG of the ICE cars sold that year and that’s your flat rate for EVs. It gets adjusted every year like most taxes.

 

[VSG]

While I agree, a per mile tax for all vehicles would be impossibly difficult to administer. Unless you ask people to report their mileage on their state tax returns? Maybe…

I'm not advocating for that - but that is one of the choices that Oregon wants to give people, and if they want to do it that way for EVs then the should do it that way for ICE as well.

An unworkable scheme will be shot down quicker if it affects all the ICE owners as well. Imposing fees and per-mileage charges on just the minority (EV owners) may get some pushback but it will go through because the majority wants all those other people to pay their fair share. But the only really fair way to do it is to treat everyone the same - propose that and you'll be sure it will get rejected by the majority as well if it is not reasonable.

I think a reasonable flat rate for EVs is a good way to do it. Take the average miles driven a year (yes I know not everyone is average) and the average MPG of the ICE cars sold that year and that’s your flat rate for EVs. It gets adjusted every year like most taxes.

If it's reasonable to charge a flat rate for EVs then it's also reasonable to charge a flat rate for ICE.

 

[eleanor22]

Oregon used to have a choice of either installing a tracker in your EV thru a subcontractor called OReGo, or, pay about double the registration fee than ICE Vehicles pay. Our governor, Nina Kotek, has asked for EV owners to pay both fees in the future. The tracking tax is to be 2 cents/ mile, registration $200/year? It’s a lot! EV owners will pay more road taxes than other drivers on average. It’s a disincentive.

What about all the subsidies

Oregon used to have a choice of either installing a tracker in your EV thru a subcontractor called OReGo, or, pay about double the registration fee than ICE Vehicles pay. Our governor, Nina Kotek, has asked for EV owners to pay both fees in the future. The tracking tax is to be 2 cents/ mile, registration $200/year? It’s a lot! EV owners will pay more road taxes than other drivers on average. It’s a disincentive.

the article said 350 a year!

 

[Hereforthesnacks]

If it's reasonable to charge a flat rate for EVs then it's also reasonable to charge a flat rate for ICE.

Agree here. But if it’s reasonable, then you know it has no shot.

 

[mczouav]

Expanding the rail system would be incredibly expensive and time consuming. The US is absolutely gigantic, and building rails is far more difficult than building roads. The "last mile" where freight is handed off to trucks may still be several hundred miles.

That's not to say additional rail doesn't have its benefits, but to think it's going to replace the majority of what trucks move across the country is not at all realistic.

?

Sponsored