Big Brother and PC In Holland: A Mileage Tax That Varies on Car Type and Time of Day Driven

Photo of Tom Blumer.
  • Bookmark and Share

mmatters/gas-tax_100177492_sIn what is presented to readers of an Associated Press report as a done deal, the Netherlands will impose a mileage tax on drivers beginning in 2012. It goes beyond most if not all other government-imposed taxes in that it will charge more during so-called peak times or if a vehicle is considered a heavier polluter.

The abolition of two other taxes is apparently the mechanism for enticing the Dutch into acquiescing to this intrusive arrangement.

Media bias watchers will not be surprised to know that the AP's unbylined Saturday report saved the government's overhyped promises for the report's second-last paragraph, and the tax-detailing punch line for the final one.

Here are some excerpts (bolds are mine; I believe that "mike" in the first paragraph refers to "micrometer"):

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Dutch drivers to pay tax on road time, not on car

Dutch drivers will pay less to buy a car but will be charged tax for every mike on the road, a system the government says will reduce traffic jams, fatal accidents and carbon emissions.

The Cabinet approved a bill Friday calling for drivers of an average passenger car to pay a base rate of euro0.03 per 1 kilometer (7 US cents per mile), beginning in 2012. Drivers of heavier, more polluting vehicles will pay more, and the cost will go up for driving in peak hours.

GPS will track the time, hour and place each car moves and send the data to a billing agency.

But the annual road tax and purchase tax for new cars will be abolished, reducing the price of a new car 25 percent, the Transport Ministry said.

Nearly 6 out of 10 drivers will benefit under the system, the ministry said, but government revenue would remain the same. Public transportation, including taxis, will be exempt.

..... The ministry calculated that overall traffic will drop about 15 percent, peak-hour congestion will be halved, traffic deaths will fall 7 percent and carbon emissions from road travel will be cut by 10 percent.

The tax will increase every year until 2018 and could be adjusted if it fails to change traffic patterns.

It's "clever" how AP, which knows quite well that later paragraphs are the ones most likely to get edited out by subscribing publications and most likely not to be broadcast by radio and TV subscribers, saved the little tidbit that the tax will increase for six consecutive years after it first goes into effect until the very end.

Some U.S. states have proposed such a regime, most notably Oregon, but as far as I know the idea has ever made it into law. Obama administration Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood floated the idea in a February AP interview, but his own Department's spokesperson said that, "The policy of taxing motorists based on how many miles they have traveled is not and will not be Obama administration policy."

Other points and questions:

  • The Dutch Cabinet is somewhat analogous to ours. There is no word from the AP as to whether the country's bicameral legislature has had or will have any say in this.
  • Will the peak-hour premium apply in areas where there is no significant peak-hour traffic?
  • Who gets to decide whether the tax has "changed traffic patterns"?
  • Will the government force Dutch citizens to give it their banking information (if they haven't done so already in other areas) so they can debit drivers' accounts each month?
  • Will the government be able to remotely disable a driver's car for late payment or non-payment of the tax?

Finally, unexcerpted paragraphs refer to privacy concerns and the government's promise that detailed driving information won't be used for other purposes. How credible is that promise?

Cross-posted at BizzyBlog.com.

—Tom Blumer is president of a training and development company in Mason, Ohio, and is a contributing editor to NewsBusters


Comments Policy

All comments are owned by whoever posted them and are subject to our terms of use. They should not be assumed to represent the views of NewsBusters.

Viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

  These taxes will only

  These taxes will only affect the behavior of the lower incomes so this is really just a method of clearing the roads of all those miserable 'little people' so that the elites can zip through formerly clogged streets.

Horses and Buggies

Perhaps the Dutch should go back to horses and buggies?

Neighhhhhhhh!

Then they will need a road apple tax.

D

Write your Congress and Senate and tell them what YOU think!

Keep the ILLEGALS out, join NumbersUSA to send free faxes to your reps.

Lessons learned

So ...

  • Taxing does reduce behavior? Sales taxes do suppress sales.
  • Using GPS and satellites to monitor individuals is morally OK?

They have ignored the law of cause and effect. If you penalize driving during peak times, theoretically you'll flatten out the difference between "peak" and "off" times. The effect of your penalties will be to abolish peak times. But that becomes an information problem: if you don't know what time is peak, you won't know what time to avoid.

This strategy only works if there are lots of people who will be driving at peak times anyway. But then, if they can't avoid being on the road during certain times, how can it be fair to penalize them?

Lesson learned?

Taxing does reduce behavior? Sales taxes do suppress sales.

No liberal will ever learn this lesson.  Don't kid yourself.

Using GPS and satellites to monitor individuals is morally OK?

To liberals, in the name of protecting the environment, anything is okay.  These are the same people, mind you, who get their panties in a twist because Bush ordered the CIA to listen in on calls outside of the US in order to prevent terrorism and save human lives.  It was an "invasion of privacy" they screamed;  but now it's not an invasion of privacy to track where someone goes all the time?

All this is doing is furthering socialism to its ultimate goal: total, 100% goverment control over everything you believe, say, do, and purchase.

Just think...imagine Holland one day decides to outlaw religious worship.  Just track people to the places they congregate and shut down undground services.  The avenues for abusing this are endless, and all will be explored.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

They'll only shut down houses of CHRISTIAN worship

because they are all afraid of ISLAMIC worship.

It will happen here one day too I am afraid. Someday America will be secular but Muslims will be spared. 

I agree, but religion is

I agree, but religion is just one example.

Say you're overweight.  What's to stop the government from making sure you don't stop at the local fast food place, or for frozen custard (a regional delight in my area), or the neighborhood restaurant, lest you be doing something "unhealthy"?

Say the government doesn't approve of drinking.  You stop at a liquor store or - gasp! - a bar on the way home from work.  BAM.  Drunk driving charges.

When the government can track your every move, the next step is dictating those moves and questioning those who are disobedient.  After the questioning comes punishment.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

If Obama and the Piglosi

get their healthcare TAKEOVER bill signed, I agree.

Do you think welfare moms and their kids, this is going to be unPC, I don't really care, many who tend to be on the FAT side, will be monitored?

Somehow I think if it ever comes to this only those against the left will be told what to eat, what to think, what to drive, what kind of rationed healthcare they can receive.

I agree

While finding new and creative ways to take money from the populace is likely the prime motivator, the ability to monitor the movement of all individuals would sure be a nice side benefit for a stifling government.  The possibilities are limitless.  Gosh, any guesses on who will pay for all the equipment and infrastructure to create, install and maintain the tracking system?

America is secular.  The

America is secular.  The government has seperation of church and state, as created in the First Amendment, and doesn't promote religion, but you can still worship whoever you want.

God, people are so

God, people are so stupid.

This is not even close to the meaning of the First Amendment.  "Separation of church and state" appears nowhere in the Constitution.  It's a fallacy to think the First Amendment says anything to that effect.

What it does do is protect the free expression of religion for all peoples, churches, and religious organizations.  This freedom is not conditional; it is not contingent on whether or not one pays taxes or is politically correct.  It is not confined to the laity, but to the leaders of churches, synagogues and mosques.

Yet liberals - time and again - show their true, atheistic colors when they attempt to stifle free religious expression and freak out about "God cooties" when someone talks about Jesus in public.

Aut viam inveniam aut faciam

Mitchell.. Actually the

Mitchell..
Actually the Constitution says nothing about forbidding prayer in school, forbid the display of religious symbols in the public square or in any other way forbid the exercise of religious expression in any form whatsoever. It says quite the opposite: that the Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religious practices. Period. There is no "separation of Church and state", expressed in the Constitution.

It does mandate that the Congress cannot establish a national religion, or even a preference for a particular religion as they had in England.

Couple of references for you:

http://www.firstamen...

http://topics.law.co...

No citizen's right to life, liberty, pursuit of happiness, or property is safe as long as Obama is President of the United States.

from a transportation mgmnt POV,

developing a vehicle class over mileage PAYGO scheme makes some sense. Allow me if you will;

1) UHFEV or worse, electric cars, pay ever reducing whole dollars in FUEL tax; less pollution, but worse for gov't, dramatically less revenue. The revenue hemorrhaging gov't can't stand it. The money pig that is gov't doesn't care about environmental greenness when it negatively impacts their confiscation of currency green from you wallet

2)  Roads are very expensive infrastructure systems that need regular maintenance and expansion. A road only knows the different stresses put on it, light cars v. heavy trucks. All are users, but induce different stress. a tax (permit / fee) by weight is a common application here already. 

3) Some highways already have a premium pricing plan in place and are succeeding. 

http://www.tollroadsnews.com/taxonomy/term/117 

4) Vehicle based location pricing will garner mountains of push-back. We must be vigilant that that kind of scheme doesn't get buried into another piece of unrelated legislation. Conversely,  fixed systems of vehicle detection are very expensive infrastructure that only add to the cost of roadway maintenance. 

If you can read this, thank a teacher. If you can read it in English, You're welcome - Deskpilot, AM(H)1 (AW), USN (Ret)

they don't think

Since I've heard about this mileage tax, I thought, isn't a gas tax already a mileage tax? You pay more tax because you buy more fuel if you drive more miles. Am I wrong?

If they make it more expensive to drive during peak hours, wouldn't quite a few people just leave earlier to beat the peak hour time thereby making it congested when it's not historically?

We all know it's not about saving the environment, it's about control and nothing else.

MPG

As was mentioned earlier, cars that getter better mileage use less fuel.  Therefore less motor fuel tax receipts to the government.  That just won't do.  They have to find a way to keep increasing tax revenues regardless of the method.  In the words of Governor William J. Lepetomane in Blazing Saddles..."We've got to protect our phony baloney jobs.."

The whole point of the gas

The whole point of the gas tax letting cars use less fuel pay less is that it encourages fuel-efficient cars, which in turn helps the environment and decreases the cost of gas for everyone (in decreased demand).

If they don't base a tax (such as a gas tax) on fuel efficiency, they will just encourage more non-efficient vehicles.  Doesn't B-Rock love the environment, or something?

Sic transit fuel efficiency

- Relying upon the State Run Media for your information is like relying upon an embezzler for your portfolio management.

- I didn't leave the Republican Party; the Republican Party left me.

My impression of Holland is

My impression of Holland is that it is a typical Libtard, Socialist European country and the majority of their citizenry will be fine with this.

Also, I don't get the impression that a percentage comparable to Americans own cars or drive anywhere near as much as we do over here.

One of the 34% who thinks George W. Bush was a great President. One of the 86% who wants to bring back the stock and pillory.

Why don't they just raise

Why don't they just raise the gas tax instead of creating some complicated formula that only lawyers who don't follow it themselves can understand?

Oh, that's right, because they can't reward special interests if they make it simple.

The gas tax is based on car type, because cars with low gas mileage have to pay a higher tax.

Because it does not allow

Because it does not allow GPS tracking of the peasants. 

 

Getting rid of congession

Getting rid of congession during peak hours might have the burdensome effect of adding congession during non-peak (well, non-previously peak) hours.  In fact, congession is the only thing that keeps people from driving during peak hours.  No one wants to drive in congession, so that, in and of itself, is enough to discourage people from driving, and if people still want to drive then, that's their decision.

 

In fact, peak hours are in some ways mandated by work schedules and stuff.  Obviously there's always going to be congession when people are driving to work.

 

I guess Obama is solving that problem with cap and trade and stimulus, because pretty soon, no one will have to drive to work.

Do you think the ACLU would support this?

Do you think the ACLU would support this?

The government tracking where you are at all times...

OK

Lived in the west for years and commuted great distances at times to produce the goods used by New Yorkers and those in DC.

Let's extend this tax idea to those who "use" airplanes, helicopters, taxis, limos, subways and trains. No, not the owner of those but the one(s) being conveyed.  That way Pelosi and Biden will have to pay even though they are royalty in this new so-called classless society.

OMG Al Gore and little Robert F. Kennedy Jr would have to spend most of their time convincing large groups with money to fly with them as they crisscross the earth.

Pelosi would love to make some form of this...

Americas next Christmas present!  But first we get...bend over now...Health Care Reform!(Health Care Destruction)

islam is a lie and Truth is killing it.