Study to equip cars with tracking hardware, send testers faux bills

We've been hearing about these highway use tax trials for years now, but apparently, a new $16.5 million Road User Charge Study will be looking for 2,700 mettlesome individuals that won't mind driving around with a tracking unit riding shotgun. The absurdly expensive initiative is purportedly seeking to figure out whether Americans "would accept the idea of paying by the mile, instead of by the gallon." North Carolina-based Innovation Management -- which will "oversee the study" in the Triangle region of NC -- proclaimed that folks who volunteer to take part in it would have their vehicle fitted with "GPS and computer hardware to track the miles they travel through each state and local government jurisdiction." Best of all, however, is the tidbit noting that these very guinea pigs will also receive "make-believe bills" each month displaying what taxes they would owe if they were indeed being taxed per mile. Anyone want to guess how much revenue they could rake in from accidental payments?

[Via The Wolf Web, image courtesy of WRAL]

[Michael @ Dec 14th 2007 8:59AM]

So, does anyone else feel like this is just designed to punish hybrid and all-electric vehicle drivers?

[shanoboy @ Dec 14th 2007 9:02AM]

I think that's exactly what it is. If you're going to use less gas and therefor pay less taxes on fuel, they want you to make it up somewhere else.

Screw this!

[Eric @ Dec 14th 2007 9:05AM]

Less punish but make up for a shortfall in local/federal revenue generated by gas taxes. Its an ugly bit of politics that is often blamed on oil companies, but more often than not is your local representative not wanting to see better fuel economy because it means less tax revenue. That in turn means raising other taxes to make up the shortfall and that is never a pretty picture.

I think this system is rather complicated. I am not sure why they just dont log your odometer. A good number of states require yearly inspections. Why not have odometer readings be part of that inspection process. Pay your taxes based off of that mechanism and you preserve your privacy at the same time.

[Flashpoint @ Dec 14th 2007 9:33AM]

if the state indeed needs money and feels it wants to tax or add "fees" what they shoul;d do is attack drivers who disobey the law.

They should use more technology to track and ticket drivers who speed in excess of 10 MPH and drivers who run red lights, ride the shoulder, etc.

It is coming though.

[Andir3.0 @ Dec 14th 2007 10:47AM]

So how many people still think income tax is a better option than the "Fair Tax"... raise your hands.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fair_Tax

[JHosche @ Dec 14th 2007 12:10PM]

@Eric - the only flaw in just having your odometer read like that - what happens if you drive in different states? Say a few road trips up and down the east coast or something...or even say you live in like NJ but work in NY and spend all your time in NY...or for even more fun say you live near Canada or Mexico and you do some driving down there - Mexico won't get any of that money (nor Canada) instead you'll be paying taxes for using roads in a state you might not even drive in a whole lot.

[Gunnar @ Dec 14th 2007 12:44PM]

Don't forget about compact drivers. My car gets 40 mpg without all that fancy tech stuff.

If there aren't enough revenues from people driving more efficient cars, raise the tax on gas. That's a far simpler solution than this one, and would encourage even more efficient cars.

[Jason @ Dec 15th 2007 12:49AM]

I dunno. All this stuff does is convince me I don't want to drive anymore as I feel like I'm being penalized with government trying their best to attack me for it. The whole ticketing people for how they drive thing just makes me feel like I'm going to be living in a police state in a few years with enforced times I can be outside or where I'm allowed to go. Is it any wonder there's so much anger floating around about these things?

[James @ Dec 14th 2007 8:34PM]

Ostensibly, the gas tax is *supposed* to pay for the roads you drive on using that gas. Your compact that gets 40mpg also weighs less and therefore tears up the roads less.

Electric, hybrid, and biodiesel cars are now throwing the equation out of whack. Your 60mpg hybrid full of heavy batteries probably incurs as much road upkeep as somebody with a 16mpg 1985 Caddy, but he pays about 4 times as much tax per mile. They want to "fix" that problem, though frankly I think if they just cut all the "alternative energy" credits and let the tax structure stand, things would work themselves out.

Of course, this tracking nonsense is not my favorite way to account for miles anyway. I agree that they could count the odometer mileage and bill you that way. On average, you're going to drive in other states about as often as other states' drivers will drive in your state (if you catch my drift) so it should all come out in the wash. Some states might see more out-of-state miles than others, but they could probably arrange revenue exchanges or permits or something like that, which would be cheaper to maintain and less intrusive than this abomination.

[Freedom_man @ Dec 17th 2007 2:20PM]

First off the hybrid like the Prius cause more pollution in it's life time then a Hummer does in it's life based on life time from development/manufacture to junkyard.

The life of a hybrid is 100,000 miles expected life. Hummer is 300,000 expected life. The hybrid you have to spend 5-6000 'dollars' on new batteries every 5 years or so causing more pollution. For the same price I could have the engine on a Hummer rebuilt (including removal and installation) after 200,000 miles and have the engine/car go another 200,000 miles.

You would have to drive your hybrid for more than 400,000 miles with almost no breakdowns before you save money on purchase price (even with tax breaks on some models) verus the same model that is not a hybrid. The fuel savings is not nearly what the EPA tells you it is. The enviromental impact for a hybrid is staggering. You are better off finding something like a VW, Mercedes, Volvo, and others with a small non-hybrid diesel engine that gets 35+ mpg without worry about having a 5000+ dollar set of batteries quit on you. Then you can use that 'saved' money to buy a good Optima battery and have even less worry about break down.

So this is not an attack on hybrid owners. If they are stupid enough to believe that hybrids are environmentally friendly they deserve to pay more. It's funny because they all ready do.

I think that this is really an attack on those who make their own biodiesel at home, run their cars on propane, natural gas, and/or home electric (solar, wind, home hydro, home biodiesel and/or home methane generators).

[NHAnimator @ Dec 14th 2007 9:01AM]

Bad bad bad bad bad bad bad idea.

[Wes @ Dec 14th 2007 9:02AM]

ummm.... wouldn't paying taxes by the mile instead of by the gallon, discourage use of high MPG vehicles? You'd pay the same taxes over 1000 mile for a Prius or an Excursion.

[Eric @ Dec 14th 2007 9:13AM]

That is the point. Your wear on the road doesnt change based on gas mileage. It changes based on weight class and miles driven. Your taxed to keep the roads in good repair based on your contribution to the wear of the road.

If you want to look at it in another light. People who drove vehicles with poor gas mileage were paying an unfair slice of the taxes compared to their use versus someone with a high gas mileage car. They both contributed similar wear but unequal shares of money to pay for that wear.

[crunkMonkey101 @ Dec 14th 2007 10:53AM]

Dumb. So they are taking mileage into account; great idea. How about vehicle weight? And why can't they accomplish the same thing in North Carolina with the yearly automobile inspection in which they check your odometer, and then charge for miles and vehicle class? Or, couldnt they use an accelerometer to track distance rather than the intrusive GPS?

This took 1 minute of brain storming, which concerns me about our people in charge. [I am a NC resident]

[Christopher Bowers @ Dec 14th 2007 9:05AM]

The reason this is being done is, in 15 years we will be using different fuels. So they HAVE to figure out an alternative now.

[Andir3.0 @ Dec 14th 2007 10:50AM]

You know that the money for road upkeep comes from taxes across the board and not solely from fuel taxes, right?

[rachub @ Dec 14th 2007 12:35PM]

There's going to be a tax on any fuel that ends up being used for vehicles.

[Julius @ Dec 14th 2007 9:06AM]

Economically speaking this may create an incentive for people to drive less gas efficient cars. If someone pays more based on how far they drive, then shorter, less gas-efficient trips could be cheaper or as expensive as longer more gas-efficient trips. Charging people by the gallon is probably still the best (and as the article points out) and cheapest way to reduce consumption.

[Tom @ Dec 14th 2007 1:07PM]

You still have to PAY for your gasoline. This is just for taxes.

[Julius @ Dec 14th 2007 3:35PM]

My point was that taxing gas rather than the amount traveled would be a more effective way to reduce gas consumption. With this scheme, it would just reduce the amount traveled and not the amount of gas used (of course, understanding that you still have to pay for the gas you use, possibly just not the taxes).

[Jaymez @ Dec 14th 2007 9:07AM]

Bad, bad, bad idea. Way too much big brother. This isn't about finding a new way to charge us for road usage. This is about putting an electronic leash on every one of us so we can be tracked at all times.

GPS tracking is why I will no longer buy new GM products. I do not trust the On Star system at all. I do not trust the government, either.

[Technotolitan @ Dec 14th 2007 10:23AM]

Oh yes, the government just wants to track your every move and steal all of your cookies. Paranoid delusions such as this are the kind of thing that breed mass hysteria and derail reasonable adult conversation about a serious subject.
Get the facts, do some research, and then take an informed position. The government is not "out to get you" do not flatter yourself to think that YOU are that important.
Fuel economy is about to get turned up on it's ear. We are not more than 5-10 years from a large portion of our vehicles being hydrogen(or some other alternative) powered. When this happens tax revenue from fuel purchases will drop drastically. This will not leave enough to maintain the roads. As I am sure many have noticed a lot of our roads are ALREADY in a terrible state of disrepair. New methods have to be researched.
The poster that mentioned having your odometer checked and recorded at yearly inspection points is a good idea imho. I second that.

[John @ Dec 14th 2007 9:59AM]

I hear they're going to start putting GPS trackers in tin-foil boxes.

I'd advise you to stock up now. :)

[MosquitoControl @ Dec 14th 2007 10:22AM]

And why, exactly, does the government want to track you at all times?

Are you burying some bodies deep in the woods that we should know about? Probably not. You're probably driving back and forth between work, your home, and McDonald's.

Why does the government care? What possible reason could they have? And, if you're not burying bodies, why are you afraid?

[Jaymez @ Dec 14th 2007 11:04AM]

It's amazing that so many people fail to see 1984 becoming a reality. They do want to check your every movement and insure that you are a good, blind, little sheep. GPS tracking for your car. RFID tracking tags for your body. The governemt is slowly building a database filled with all sorts of tidbits of information on you. They can already track everything you buy, now they want to check everywhere you go. Is noone concerned about privacy?

Just wait. That bitch from Arkansas will get elected next year and then the fun will really start. I may sound like a nut, but, I'd rather be a little crazy than under 24/7 monitoring. These programs are not good for us.

[Vidikron (FU) @ Dec 14th 2007 11:17AM]

@Technotolitan

Wow... you claim he's paranoid, but you're nothing short of naive if you don't think the gov't would use tracking systems in every car for something other than taxing people for road usage.

[Rocketboy @ Dec 14th 2007 11:41AM]

Ok, here's a rational side of the argument. I am against it, not because i see the world as sheep vs. anyone, but because does the gov't really need to know how many miles that I drive a year? Is this per mile method really the best use of my tax money? Gas tax is a consumption tax that's already being abused. Does anyone believe that a per-mile tax will never be added on top of a per gallon tax? We've already seen records from Ez-Pass toll systems being used in court cases. I can't wait to see what will be done with these records.

[jroc @ Dec 14th 2007 12:01PM]

@ Technotolitan: What is the Patriot act or the military commisions act? We have done our research sir and yes the government is not all loving as you claim. They use warantless searches and they wire tap. It is a reality wake up. Those who want power seek to keep it.
1984 is not far fetched and I was disgusted when I read some of these comments of disillusionment claiming that anyone who dissents the gov't is paranoid and needs to wear a tinfoil hat. Dissenters are not paro it is what the US was built on. The same gov't who staged the gulf of tonkin is "not out to get you" yeah right. I think you need to read more.

[MosquitoControl @ Dec 14th 2007 12:34PM]

Rocketboy:

What? What will the government use it for other than tracking the car? Other than law enforcement, what possible use could it have?

[mabhatter @ Dec 16th 2007 2:19PM]

I think it's a shame to get leashes on us all. Smaller cars do less damage to the road period.. not even per mile. But everybody in "power" bought those 6000lbs + SUVs because they could get a business credit for them. They can't simply raise the base tax per gallon.. it's been stuck in the 30 cent range for a decade, in spite of gas prices this decade tripling!! All the localities need to do is kick an extra quarter on per gallon.. that's DOUBLE the tax now, and most of us wouldn't notice the change at the pump because the oil companies have prices so high. This means Echo drivers will only get nicked for 1/3 what SUV drivers do.. those who don't like it should buy smaller cars, especially if they commute large miles!!

I agree that these officials are looking for "alternative" ways of pricing fuel. Corn ethanol is cost effective at about $3.50 a gallon... that would allow farmers to make a nice profit.. something that the feds haven't allowed by keeping food prices artificially low for years. Better to keep the "oil forever" myth going than to allow the market to correct itself and stop using oil, that people have been asking govt to do for years.

[smithtuna6633 @ Dec 14th 2007 1:12PM]

@MosquitoControl

The *current* gov. probably won't be tracking you for any but a reasonable reason. However, many countries have had decent normal political leaders for years, then suddenly, ended up with the less-than-desirable evil dude. Think back to history class, you'll come up with some easy examples. So lets say in a couple years our economy crashes and someone truly evil takes power in the US. He(she?) already has a system to track every car in the country, and we'll all be smacking our foreheads.

Simple rule: Every time the government proposes a law, think about ways that law could be abused by someone with bad intentions - because chances are, someone eventually will. That's not paranoia, it's planning for the worst-case scenario.

[MosquitoControl @ Dec 14th 2007 2:11PM]

Smithtuna - but you haven't come up with a plausible use, even for someone evil.

What could an evil dictator possibly do with the knowledge that I tend to go down the street to the grocery store twice a day, and that even though I claim to go to the gym thrice a week I'm lucky to make it twice?

Oh no! He might know I take the long way to avoid red lights!


I can't think of a single way the government could use it against me. Unless, you know, they had a vendetta against me personally and wanted to know where to put the roadblocks up. But we have a Constitution and a Supreme Court. They can bend, they do bend, but not to that degree.

Now, if they started selling the data to private entities, then we'd have an issue.

[Jaymez @ Dec 14th 2007 3:23PM]

If they know where your car is, they can track you down whenever and wherever they want. Any government offical that's looking for you, be it for lawful or unlawful reasons would be able to track you. Might want to stop sleeping with that cops wife.

More realisticlly, it helps to breed complaceny. Today it's no bg deal that they can track your driving habits. What's it going to progress into tomorrow. One thing will eventually lead to another. Think I'm kidding. This was once a nation with a minimalist national govermnet whose one and only job was to raise and maintain an effective military to proect us from threats both foregin and domestic. Look what it has morphed into. Today, the government is the threat.

[DarkLightConnection @ Dec 14th 2007 9:15PM]

They don't care about what you do, they only want to be sure you don't know too much.... so you just discovered that the UFOs are comming from a secret militar base in New Mexico? If it wasn't because you refused to be tracked (ie. smart enough to use effective instead of credit card), your life would be over man.. Another "mysterious death case" for the TV :-)

[Rocketboy @ Dec 17th 2007 4:07PM]

Mosquito.. It's not that I see it happening anytime soon, but the possibility of it being done easily is there. And considering that EZPass records are used in the courts, who's to say that this will not be?

[Tracy in Cary @ Dec 17th 2007 6:03PM]

@mosquitocontrol:

Here's a few examples for you:

1) You're driving down the road minding your own business when the police pull you over. It seems there was a crime (doesn't matter what)on Mosquito Street between 9 and 10pm and your GPS has already informed the police you were on that road during that time. In addition, their statistics on you say you rarely ever drive on that street during this time. They say that counts, in their department, as probable cause so they're taking you in for questioning and searching your car. You say that's rediculous and the dumbest sh!t you've ever heard. Now you're labeled as "aggressive and possibly dangerous" so they handcuff you just as a precaution. Where were you going? Doesn't matter. Your next 4-8 hours will be spent at the police station waiting for someone to spend 15 minutes asking you a few questions. But you don't mind because it's for the greater good.

2) You daily commute to work takes you by an elementary school. A couple days a week you seem to always get stuck behiind the garbage truck. A year later you apply for a job that requires a government security clearance. You see your report and see the words "potential pedophile" in a block labeled "statistical correlation results". You ask like the rest of us "Where the hell did THAT come from?" The guy doing the background check tells you not to worry about it because they don't pay much attention to that section. What nobody ever tells you is that you got that because your GPS data shows you keep driving by an elementary school you don't have a kid in AND you keep slowing down really slow and occasionally stopping just long enough to take a few pictures. But you don't mind being labeled a "potential pedophile". It's just some silly statistics that don't mean anything. Heck, you'll have to remember it as an icebreaker when you're meeting your new neighbors!

Those examples took little more time to think up than they did to write. They are not set in some distant future but are technically feasable right now. And I don't think either of the examples require any change AT ALL in our current laws. But my main point is that neither one of them require any evil empire government. Just a government that is more concerned about what can be done than what should be done.

[DJWhiplash2001 @ Dec 14th 2007 9:16AM]

I'm already paying taxes on my vehicle. cool thing the government can do, make you pay for something you already own.

Saving the environment doesn't generate revenue, they could honestly care less what happens to polar bears. Tax money is what it's all about, so essentially yes, they are trying to punish you for driving a hybrid. They just don't want to directly tax the vehicle higher. Then you'd easily see the discrimination. Taxing vehicles by mileage makes it all seem fair.

[Ian @ Dec 14th 2007 9:27AM]

Gas taxes primarily should be an incentive for fuel efficiency, not primarily a funding source for road repair. A better alternative to funding road repair is a combination of automated high speed toll collection and funding from the general treasury. This way, regardless of the fuel source, the roads are maintained. In addition, the hardware required for tracking vehicles will add another expense to vehicle ownership without providing alternative transportation. Instead of wasting money on furthering our nation's addiction to the automobile, why not spend the money building high speed, high volume, high frequency mass transit?

[David W. @ Dec 14th 2007 10:17AM]

bullet train ftw

[Grrrr @ Dec 14th 2007 9:29AM]

What's up with article linking these days? There's a link to the forum that brought it up, but no direct link to the actual newspaper that printed the story.

Stop with the linking to links that link to links, please.

[o rly @ Dec 14th 2007 11:31AM]

Click the "Read" link, which links to http://www.newsobserver.com/news/story/827473.html

[BigD145 @ Dec 14th 2007 9:30AM]

First the feds lower the gas tax and then this? Screw it. Just raise taxes on the rich and the roads will be payed for. They've been getting enough tax breaks as it is.

[Trent @ Dec 14th 2007 9:39AM]

The govt(fed and state combined) already taxes about 50 cents to the gallon we already consume. And this doesnt even count for the TOLLS(another tax) people pay in many many many states. The idea that THEY need more money for WHATEVER reason is ridiculous. If anything, the govts need to INVEST in alternative types of transportion such as HIGH SPEED trains like those in Europe.

[Kurtis @ Dec 14th 2007 12:30PM]

It is really ANNOYING when PEOPLE randomly type WORDS in all caps.

[z0phi3l @ Dec 14th 2007 1:28PM]

50c? Gas is ~3.00 a gallon, drop all the ridiculous Federal and State taxes and gas would immediately drop to ~1.50 a gallon, THATS how much we are being screwed over.

[Michael @ Dec 14th 2007 9:39AM]

Flashpoint, now you are talking about two separate things. Basically, the idea of taxing based on usage is so that people who use highways more, pay more to help maintain those highways (or city streets, or whatever). The problem with odometer-based taxing is that it doesn't track which roads the automobiles have used - and there is no way to put the money in the hands of the municipalities that deserve it. As for ticketing people for running red lights, speeding, driving on the shoulder, etc. - NONE of those activities increase the cost of highway maintenance, so charging those people more is unfair to everyone. The idea is actually a great idea - but it does ultimately punish those who drive the lower-mileage vehicles. Ultimately, I think there should be a hybrid approach - gasoline taxes should pay for clean air costs (parks, etc.), and road usage taxes should pay for road maintenance.

[MosquitoControl @ Dec 14th 2007 10:29AM]

It doesn't punish those driving vehicles with better fuel economy. It simply rewards them less. Or, more accurately, it punishes other drivers less. It gives an equal playing field, as people have mentioned. You pay for the road you use as you use it.

People in hybrids will still be saving at the pump. They'll be filling up less. The reward still comes there.



Not to say there aren't still massive problems with this system. Will people come to read the meters? Will you have to go to an inspection station once a year to have your numbers read? Will people be able to remove the GPS so it appears they do not leave the garage? Will it be as easy to hack as voting machines?

It's an excellent theory, but so much less elegant and efficient than simply paying at the pump.

[oly va ha @ Dec 15th 2007 1:51PM]

what about off road driving? about 1/2 of my miles are put on off road? now if i were taxed for driving on a dirt road that never gets maintenance how could they justify taxing me. they couldnt and they never will, this was just an idea and will probably never make it to see the light of day, as much as our govt would love to have more and more control over us, this is one they wont have, all those politicians are really shady, why would they vote to have this in place to hurt them.....but on another note if they did get this in place you could bet big time that the used car market would sky rocket

[Mike G @ Dec 14th 2007 9:50AM]

People will end up having to pay for the actual services they use ... This will never fly.

Me? I live downtown and walk or my motorcycle to work, yet I pay around $3,000 / year in taxes that can be directly or indirectly attributed to roads. People living in the burbs and commuting 2 hrs / day are far too used to getting a free ride from to give this up.

[Todd @ Dec 14th 2007 9:57AM]

Fear not, the Insurance companies will step in and stop this. If I had that data, I could use it to show what a safe driver I am and force a huge rate reduction. The insurance companies rely on you not being able to prove you never speed, you actually drive your specified amount, etc.

So yeah, let's have that "tax by the mile" data to bankrupt Allstate, State Farm and the rest of the FUD profiteers.