Alerts

UPDATE 6/30/22: Bill died in committee

House Bill 144 is pending in the House Way and Means Committee. If passed the bill would repeal a requirement that fuel tax adjustments be based on the Consumer Price Index. The bill does not appear to provide an alternative mechanism or formula for calculating appropriate fuel tax rates in the future.

Manipulating fuel tax rates arbitrarily or based on political whims does not serve motorists. Keeping the fuel tax flat over time may seem like a good thing for motorists, but the shortfall will have to be made up in some way. Increasingly, policymakers are looking to intrusive and inefficient road funding schemes such as a mileage-based users fee. Such programs, also known as Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) taxes, are particularly problematic for motorists on many levels. Learn more here.

The NMA advocates for a fair and adequate fuel tax rate (both at the state and federal levels) as the most efficient and equitable way to provide transportation funding. Heavier, less fuel-efficient vehicles contribute more to road wear and tear than do smaller passenger vehicles and motorcycles, but by virtue of higher fuel consumption their owners also pay more for highway upkeep and improvements. Reducing reliance on the motor fuel tax may hasten the adoption of user fees or similar detrimental funding alternatives.

Advocates for user fees point out that electric vehicle owners do not pay their fair share in fuel taxes. However, the proliferation of public electric charging stations means drivers could be charged a tax per kilowatt-hour, similar to the efficient “pay at the pump” gas tax model. Drivers with home charging stations and hybrid owners could pay an annual fee based on average travel amount, with proceeds going to state and federal highway funds. There is no reason to implement costly and intrusive VMT schemes based on tracking vehicle movements when simple and fair alternatives are available.