[sustran] Re: [NewMobilityCafe] France to Impose Green Tax on Big Cars

[edeakin at ix.netcom.com]

One time high vehicle purchase or registration fees have had the unintended
consequence of deterring vehicle replacement. When newer vehicles are
cleaner than older ones - usually the case - this can have adverse
consequences for the environment.  

A VMT (VKT) tax makes sense as a way of taxing overall use, though road
pricing can be a better way to get at congestion. Newer cars that have
on-board emissions monitoring computers offer a direct way to measure
emissions as they record them. That doesn't do anything for the many older
cars in use, but over time is worth considering, since the monitors will
pick up the higher emissions of stop and go driving - or very fast driving.

I am not so convinced that we need to make exceptions for business
travelers, since they should be able to incorporate the costs of their
travel into the costs of the goods and services they provide - and leaving
the tax for them to handle means that some will find ways to reduce
transport input.

Betty Deakin



Original Message:
-----------------
From: Noel Hodson noelhodson at btconnect.com
Date: Mon, 28 Jun 2004 08:24:18 +0100
To: NewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com, sustran-discuss at jca.ax.apc.org,
bombaynet at yahoogroups.com, hjk at rincon.co.in
Subject: RE: [NewMobilityCafe] France to Impose Green Tax on Big Cars


Green Car Taxes - Fiscal simplicity is essential. But I cannot (yet) think
of a  simple way to reward or deter vehicle drivers while meeting the
complex, diverse needs of travellers.

The essence of a pollution tax is the weight of the vehicle per passenger
(which dictates fuel consumption) x miles/klms per year x traffic
decongestion which is governed by the footprint of the vehicle. So ideally
it's weight x distance x size (WDS).  For, say, 5% of vehicles, the
decongestion impact of reducing road use on the remaining 95% is far more
pollution effective than is the reduction in fuel of the 5%. (I have the
arithmetic if you are interested).

In my view, an effective tax must be based on miles/klms travelled annually.
And it needs to be a large amount, imposed as a lump sum - not as an extra
fuel tax (though taxing the fuel is the most logical, people find the money
for the incremental cost) to deter the short, unecessary journeys - and
carefully balanced to protect the vital business user. I think a one-off
sales or factory tax may help - but it will not deter new owners  who will
roll it into the vehicle financing - nor  will it deter, for example, the 25
million UK vehicles already in use.

The aim of such a tax or taxes might be to persuade ALL vehicle owners to
drive the smallest and lightest possible vehicles (Minimum Weight Vehicles
MWV's), fewer miles. Rapid/easy transaction hire cars and vans will be
essential. Buses and trains are not in general efficient MWV's - They are
major polluters which represent  lazy, unthinking, QWERTY economics ( I have
the arithmetic if you are interested).

Wishing you all cleaner street level air and quieter streets.

Noel
Noel Hodson
SW2000 Telework Studies
Experts Unlimited - Professional Advice Lines
14 Brookside OXFORD OX3 7PJ UK
Tel +44(0)1865-760994 Fax 769384
Email: noelhodson at btconnect.com <mailto:noelhodson at btconnect.com>
http://www.noelhodson.com

Due to Spam, I auto-delete emails with blank or strange SUBJECT lines.
Please complete the SUBJECT box sensibly.



--------------------------------------------------------------------
mail2web - Check your email from the web at
http://mail2web.com/ .