←back to thread

Sin taxes are suffering from a shortage of sinners

(www.economist.com)
36 points hhs | 9 comments | 06 Nov 24 22:26 UTC | HN request time: 1.083s | source | bottom
Show context
alsetmusic ◴[06 Nov 24 23:08 UTC] No.42070992[source]▶
I worked at a liquor store when I was 21 and lived in a midwestern bible-belt state. We had flyers at the counter educating customers to vote against a raise of sin-taxes (alcohol, tobacco, possibly adult material, I don't recall) to offset a budget deficit (specifically upkeep of roads and highways).

It's not right for my vices to pay for your infrastructure. Tax tobacco to fund cancer research. Tax alcohol to advance treatment of liver disease. Tax porn to fund, I dunno, therapy for people who can't view it in moderation.

On a similar note, I do NOT have a problem with paying for schools even though I don't have kids. It raises property values and that's a benefit to me and everyone in the district. Plus, educating young people benefits society as a whole. I'm not some "don't tax me" guy because taxes are good. They just should be limited and targeted and not levied unfairly against those with bad habits for the benefit / relief of all.

That said, I apologize for quitting drinking. Research into treating cirrhosis of the liver will have to take a moderate hit and that's my fault. /s but only sorta

replies(5): >>42071023 #>>42071118 #>>42071334 #>>42071358 #>>42071396 #
amanaplanacanal ◴[06 Nov 24 23:12 UTC] No.42071023[source]▶
Fuel taxes should be raised to pay for road infrastructure. Align the incentives so that people can make good decisions about whether to drive or not. And shippers can make better decisions about whether to ship via rail, ship, or truck.
replies(6): >>42071048 #>>42071082 #>>42071175 #>>42071317 #>>42071320 #>>42071392 #
1. mperham ◴[06 Nov 24 23:27 UTC] No.42071175[source]▶
EVs are breaking this funding model.

I'd suggest curbside parking should be charged everywhere. Free omnipresent parking is what has hollowed out American cities. Car storage is an awful use of public space.

replies(3): >>42071251 #>>42071300 #>>42071780 #
2. gorkish ◴[06 Nov 24 23:33 UTC] No.42071251[source]▶
You are woefully incorrect. in most places EV's road taxes are massively disproportionate to the amount of road tax an ICE vehicle would pay.

Here in Texas, I would ordinarily pay about $30/year in road taxes on gasoline driving a 30mpg vehicle 12,000/mi anually.

But I have an EV instead so instead I pay:

$500 in surcharge for the first year of registration and $200 surcharge for every year thereafter.

Oh whoops I misspoke; I actually have 3 EVs so despite being one person, I pay approximately 25x more road tax than the average driver here.

I'm not necessarily complaining about the /amount/ of tax but the simple fact that it is both disproportionately applied and far too low overall. The state should charge based on actual mileage, but since they just eliminated state inspections, good luck with that. Second best alternative is to make it a flat surcharge for all.

replies(1): >>42071458 #
3. cogman10 ◴[06 Nov 24 23:38 UTC] No.42071300[source]▶
Not yet. The biggest road destroyers are heavy vehicles which are all still fossil fuel powered.

The only part of the problem broken is that EV owners are no longer subsidizing the damage done by walmart to a road.

Raising fuel taxes is a win-win for everyone. It makes EVs more attractive and shipping garbage more expensive. It's an effective way to directly impact CO2 emissions.

replies(1): >>42071541 #
4. JasserInicide ◴[06 Nov 24 23:53 UTC] No.42071458[source]▶
I pay approximately 25x more road tax than the average driver here.

But you're not, it's to make up for the revenue TX would get from you via the gas tax. Also EVs are heavier on average therefore do more damage to the road so paying for that too.

replies(1): >>42072218 #
5. dgfitz ◴[07 Nov 24 00:01 UTC] No.42071541[source]▶
> The biggest road destroyers are heavy vehicles which are all still fossil fuel powered.

How does EV trucking solve weight?

It doesn’t, batteries are heavy.

Edit: are batteries not heavy?

replies(1): >>42072081 #
6. dv_dt ◴[07 Nov 24 00:27 UTC] No.42071780[source]▶
Cargo trucks already break this model because damage in roads increases with the cube of weight and diesel taxes are nowhere near a power of three larger than gas taxes
replies(1): >>42072595 #
7. plorkyeran ◴[07 Nov 24 01:02 UTC] No.42072081{3}[source]▶
Nothing in the post you're responding to suggests that EV trucking would solve weight. If EV trucking did become common then the model of funding road infrastructure with fuel taxes would stop working, but that hasn't actually happened yet.
8. Brian_K_White ◴[07 Nov 24 01:19 UTC] No.42072218{3}[source]▶
And rubber dust.
9. mysterydip ◴[07 Nov 24 02:16 UTC] No.42072595[source]▶
Not disagreeing, but if diesel tax is per gallon and cargo trucks have a worse mpg (looks like 7.2 is considered the average?) then they are paying more per mile in tax, possibly 2-4x more than a car (15-30 mpg)