I have to assume that installing a GPS-based mileage tracker would cost at least $100. It's probably two to three times that, but I'm trying to keep the math easy -- and this could be a cheap unit (no screen or nav maps needed) with a wholesale cost of $50 with one hour of installation at $50. So that's $100 paid for by...the government, right? Or are you going to charge me for the right to pay more tax?
All right, let's assume that the government provides these at taxpayer expense, taking the cost out of future increased tax revenues.
Let's say I drive 10,000 miles per year (again, just keeping the math easy) in a 45mpg Prius (as they appear to be the target here). That's 222 gallons, so under the current gas tax I'd pay a mere $41 in federal tax. So under the "penny per gallon" mentioned in the npr article I'd pay $100 instead, and the feds would gain $59. But they would have invested $100 to do it. It'll take nearly two years for that to pay for itself.
If I had a conventional 25mpg car, I'd normally pay $74 per 10,000 miles. So the feds would make an extra $26, and the break-even point would be almost 38,000 miles down the road.
And a 17 mpg pickup truck could result in *less* tax revenue.
Seems to me that the current usage-based system is the simple one. If you want to raise the gas tax, raise the gas tax -- don't hide it by investing billions of dollars in GPS tracking equipment that could eat up the revenue increases.
|
