Ditch Road User Charges?

Forums › Transport (cars, bikes and boats) › Ditch Road User Charges?

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7

309 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 154

#2284422 26-Jul-2019 21:23

I believe that Rates, general taxation, and fuel tax should not go towards roading. RUC should be increased to cover all roading coasts (and rates to decrease proportionately). This way, people will realise how much it actually coasts to use roads. I would increase the number of vehicle classes (as other people have mentioned above) as well as add a Time of Day levy (congestion charge) and Type of Road levy (inner city vs country vs motor way). All can be done with the existing GPS base e-Roads system.

heapsort

250 posts

Master Geek
+1 received by user: 82

Lifetime subscriber

#2284456 27-Jul-2019 05:18

There seems to be some variation of opinion over what the possible end to to the RUC exemption for EVs in 2021 will mean for PHEVs.

I have seen suggestions here that a EV will attract RUC in that situation but a PHEV will not. That is incorrect according to legisltation as I interpret it, but I'm not a lawyer and could easily be wrong.

The key section is the definition of "light RUC vehicle" in section 5 (1) which states:

light RUC vehicle— (a) means a motor vehicle with a gross vehicle mass of 3 500 kilograms or less and with motive power that is not wholly derived from petrol; and (b) includes a light electric RUC vehicle

The important phrase there is not wholly derived from petrol. My understanding of this is that a non-plugin hybrid has motive power wholly derived from petrol, but a plugin hybrid clearly does not.

So if the EV exemption ends and the definition is not revised, any EV (e.g. a Leaf) and PHEV (e.g. a Prius with an electric charging socket) would attract RUC but any non-plugin HEV (e.g. a Prius without an electric charging socket) would still be exempt. This would leave PHEV drivers being "double charged" for some of their travel - paying both petrol taxes at the pump, and RUC for each kilometre.

logo

659 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 255

Trusted

#2284458 27-Jul-2019 07:34

User pays is all well and good. But what about the uncosted benefits of someone cycling to work instead of driving?

eg. Less congestion so less need to expand the road network, next to no wear and tear on the road surface compared to a car or ute, reduced health expenditure because the cyclist is fitter, reduced carbon emissions and better air quality (see also reduced health expenditure) etc.....

I agree.

From a selfish driver's POV, next time you're stuck in traffic or driving around looking for that elusive car park, think about if more of cars were replaced by bikes.

jonathan18

7415 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 2850

ID Verified

Trusted

#2284463 27-Jul-2019 07:52

heapsort:

So if the EV exemption ends and the definition is not revised, any EV (e.g. a Leaf) and PHEV (e.g. a Prius with an electric charging socket) would attract RUC but any non-plugin HEV (e.g. a Prius without an electric charging socket) would still be exempt. This would leave PHEV drivers being "double charged" for some of their travel - paying both petrol taxes at the pump, and RUC for each kilometre.

I get the flow of your logic there and, if indeed correct, is a bit of a screw-up, and surely an anomaly that would have to be tidied up?

At the same time they should certainly look at the categorisations - at least adjusting the weight limit of the lowest category so that it doesn't lump standard passenger vehicles with smaller commercial vehicles (to say 1800kg). And, given the poor attempts at encouraging EV ownership thus far, it would be an ideal opportunity to introduce a (lower-rated) sub-category for EVs (whether solely BEVs or include others).

Geektastic

18009 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 8465

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2284468 27-Jul-2019 08:39

Andib:
nzkc:

As electric cars become more prevalent I actually think things will go the other way. RUC will come off fuel and be done separately for all vehicles.

Agreed, As more move to Hybrids, EVs & Hydrogen cars the cost of maintaining safe roads doesn't reduce. All it means is there's less tax coming in to pay for them.
IMO the tax should be removed from the pump and RUCs be applied to every car.

Or just remove fuel tax and make rego $1500 a year.

gzt

18689 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 7828

Lifetime subscriber

#2284476 27-Jul-2019 09:15

Linuxluver: Well....the law does allow them to use the roads in an incidental way, to get from paddock to paddock, etc.

As I recall the exemption applies only when moving vehicles to other locations on the same property or farm and that requires moving along a public road. It's defined clearly in the legislation.

Night before last I passed a tractor on the Eastern Link toll road, east of Tauranga. This road is 15km long and once on it you have to traverse the entire length of the road.......I assume this tractor paid a toll? But it's just the latest of many, tractors belonging to farm contractors who use the roads daily to get from farm to farm.

The exemption does not apply. It's likely this vehicle is paying road user charges.

Apple TV

Stream your favourite shows now on Apple TV (affiliate link).

raytaylor

4076 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1296

Trusted

#2284505 27-Jul-2019 11:20

User pays is all well and good. But what about the uncosted benefits of someone cycling to work instead of driving?

eg. Less congestion so less need to expand the road network, next to no wear and tear on the road surface compared to a car or ute, reduced health expenditure because the cyclist is fitter, reduced carbon emissions and better air quality (see also reduced health expenditure) etc.....

Rainy days. Sure some may take a bus or train, but a large portion will get in their cars.

Ray Taylor

There is no place like localhost

Spreadsheet for Comparing Electricity Plans Here

logo

659 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 255

Trusted

#2284524 27-Jul-2019 11:57

raytaylor:

User pays is all well and good. But what about the uncosted benefits of someone cycling to work instead of driving?

eg. Less congestion so less need to expand the road network, next to no wear and tear on the road surface compared to a car or ute, reduced health expenditure because the cyclist is fitter, reduced carbon emissions and better air quality (see also reduced health expenditure) etc.....

Rainy days. Sure some may take a bus or train, but a large portion will get in their cars.

Not sure what your point is here? I bike or e-scooter to work but on rainy days sometimes I drive but even if it was 50% of time that's still 50% of the time I don't have a car on the road and one less car park space taken up. When I do drive I see all these other cars next to me with only one person in the car which feels like a waste to me.

I do feel a little guilty about riding the e-scooter over biking as I don't get any of the health benefits but I exercise enough during the week anyway. I e-scooter as I don't get sweaty and can wear office attire without changing like I have to when I bike. E-scooting takes half the time of driving for short distances (3-4km) and maybe just slightly faster on longer distances (8km) but YMMV. Plus if it's raining at home time I just catch a ride with a workmate and throw my e-scooter in his boot.

Obraik

2167 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1347

#2284533 27-Jul-2019 12:32

heapsort:

There seems to be some variation of opinion over what the possible end to to the RUC exemption for EVs in 2021 will mean for PHEVs.

I have seen suggestions here that a EV will attract RUC in that situation but a PHEV will not. That is incorrect according to legisltation as I interpret it, but I'm not a lawyer and could easily be wrong.

The key section is the definition of "light RUC vehicle" in section 5 (1) which states:

light RUC vehicle— (a) means a motor vehicle with a gross vehicle mass of 3 500 kilograms or less and with motive power that is not wholly derived from petrol; and (b) includes a light electric RUC vehicle

The important phrase there is not wholly derived from petrol. My understanding of this is that a non-plugin hybrid has motive power wholly derived from petrol, but a plugin hybrid clearly does not.

So if the EV exemption ends and the definition is not revised, any EV (e.g. a Leaf) and PHEV (e.g. a Prius with an electric charging socket) would attract RUC but any non-plugin HEV (e.g. a Prius without an electric charging socket) would still be exempt. This would leave PHEV drivers being "double charged" for some of their travel - paying both petrol taxes at the pump, and RUC for each kilometre.

Yeah I missed that wording in the RUC details. So yeah, if they make no changes then this would effectively kill the PHEV

Looking to buy a Tesla? Use my referral link and we both get credits

kharris

1209 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 327

ID Verified

Trusted

#2284643 27-Jul-2019 18:03

logo:
User pays is all well and good. But what about the uncosted benefits of someone cycling to work instead of driving?

eg. Less congestion so less need to expand the road network, next to no wear and tear on the road surface compared to a car or ute, reduced health expenditure because the cyclist is fitter, reduced carbon emissions and better air quality (see also reduced health expenditure) etc.....

I agree.

From a selfish driver's POV, next time you're stuck in traffic or driving around looking for that elusive car park, think about if more of cars were replaced by bikes.

Why is it that you assume drivers are all selfish. That’s an aggressive view point. Some of us are very curious on the roads and have families with very young children to transport around, just going about our day in the best way we can.

I’m just an advocate for user pays. I don’t mind paying my share. It’s not a competition.

Kirk

Lias

5655 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 3978

ID Verified

Trusted

Lifetime subscriber

#2284798 28-Jul-2019 12:26

jfanning:
We don't? Then what was those roading and transport lines for on my rates bill I just got?

So the same taxes that everyone not living in a house bus pays then. Vehicle owners, especially motorcyclists have additional taxes, whereas cyclists pay no NZTA registration fees or ACC levies. You should. So should skateboarders, scooter riders, etc.

MikeB4:

So cyclists don't own motor vehicles or earn any income that is taxed or have ACC levies applied.

So by your logic because I own a car and earn an income, I shouldn't have to pay the registration on my motorcycle? Hell for the guys I know who own multiple motorcycles, that have to pay the extortionate $600/year rego on each and everyone of them despite only being able to ride one at a time, I'm sure they will be thrilled that you think they shouldn't have to because they also own cars and have jobs.

I'm a geek, a gamer, a dad, a Quic user, and an IT Professional. I have a full rack home lab, size 15 feet, an epic beard and Asperger's. I'm a bit of a Cypherpunk, who believes information wants to be free and the Net interprets censorship as damage and routes around it. If you use my Quic signup you can also use the code R570394EKGIZ8 for free setup. Opinions are my own and not the views of my employer.

Lenovo

Shop now for Lenovo laptops and other devices (affiliate link).

zenourn

281 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 168

ID Verified

Trusted

#2285302 29-Jul-2019 17:29

I emailed the MoT about RUCs on PHEVs and their reply was:

"We are aware that PHEVs may be subject to tax from both RUC and fuel excise duty on petrol after the exemption from RUC is removed in 2021. (For example the issue was raised as a concern in this review of the RUC system in 2016 https://www.transport.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/News/Documents/d72418c14d/RUC-Evaluation-Cycle-3.pdf )

Under current definitions, a PHEV is not a 'petrol' vehicle and so would be required to pay RUC at the full applicable rate after 2021. If PHEV owners are required to pay RUC they would be entitled to apply to the NZ Transport Agency for a refund on the fuel excise duty that they also paid for petrol they used. This can happen under our current laws (see this page at the NZ Transport Agency if you want to know more: https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/licensing-rego/road-user-charges/ruc-rates-and-transaction-fees/excise-duty-refunds/). Having to provide thousands of refunds to individual owners of PHEVs is clearly not the best solution. If nothing else, it would have high administrative costs, both for the vehicle owner and for the NZ Transport Agency, so we are looking at other longer term solutions. Almost any option to avoid this ‘double taxing’ would require an amendment to the Road User Charges Act 2012 or other related legislation. You would be welcome to make a submission on any changes once we have a proposed solution to this."

So it looks like they may be looking at a potential changes to the RUC system to deal with this. The other area I see an issue is that when the RUC exemption for EVs ends non-plugin hybrids will pay a lot less in taxes than EVs and will ultimately mean running costs of EVs and non-plugin hybrids become similar. This will make non-plugin hybrids rather attractive which isn't really the correct message when wanting to minimise CO2.

jfanning

438 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 82

#2285304 29-Jul-2019 17:43

Lias:

So the same taxes that everyone not living in a house bus pays then. Vehicle owners, especially motorcyclists have additional taxes, whereas cyclists pay no NZTA registration fees or ACC levies. You should. So should skateboarders, scooter riders, etc.

Pardon? What do you think making a cyclist pay a registration fee will achieve? Are you willing to fund this? There is no way a cyclist would be paying the entire cost to manage a system, and what happens with a bike that you only ride off road, do you register this, and if so, why?

So by your logic because I own a car and earn an income, I shouldn't have to pay the registration on my motorcycle? Hell for the guys I know who own multiple motorcycles, that have to pay the extortionate $600/year rego on each and everyone of them despite only being able to ride one at a time, I'm sure they will be thrilled that you think they shouldn't have to because they also own cars and have jobs.

Actually both bikes can be ridden at the same time, just not by the same person

Kyanar

4089 posts

Uber Geek
+1 received by user: 1684

ID Verified

Trusted

#2285313 29-Jul-2019 18:25

Lias:

So the same taxes that everyone not living in a house bus pays then. Vehicle owners, especially motorcyclists have additional taxes, whereas cyclists pay no NZTA registration fees or ACC levies. You should. So should skateboarders, scooter riders, etc.

Again, way off base. Which is starting to look like a trend anytime someone says the word "cyclist" around you.

Numerous countries, states, and territories have looked into whether a bicycle registration regime would work. All have come to the conclusion that the registration scheme is simply uneconomical, as it would cost more to set up than it would raise, same as low value import GST. A registration system that breaks even or loses money just to screw cyclists to appease motorists like yourself is not an efficient use of taxpayer money.

Lias:

So by your logic because I own a car and earn an income, I shouldn't have to pay the registration on my motorcycle? Hell for the guys I know who own multiple motorcycles, that have to pay the extortionate $600/year rego on each and everyone of them despite only being able to ride one at a time, I'm sure they will be thrilled that you think they shouldn't have to because they also own cars and have jobs.

Just because the individual cannot ride or drive more than one vehicle at a time, doesn't mean noone else can. The ACC levy covers anyone who uses the vehicle, not just the driver or rider. You may or may not think it's fair to be charged multiple sets of levies, and that's a separate discussion entirely, but to use it to fuel your hate-rant of cyclists is just silly.

logo

659 posts

Ultimate Geek
+1 received by user: 255

Trusted

#2285315 29-Jul-2019 18:31

kharris:
logo:
User pays is all well and good. But what about the uncosted benefits of someone cycling to work instead of driving?

eg. Less congestion so less need to expand the road network, next to no wear and tear on the road surface compared to a car or ute, reduced health expenditure because the cyclist is fitter, reduced carbon emissions and better air quality (see also reduced health expenditure) etc.....

I agree.

From a selfish driver's POV, next time you're stuck in traffic or driving around looking for that elusive car park, think about if more of cars were replaced by bikes.

Why is it that you assume drivers are all selfish. That’s an aggressive view point. Some of us are very curious on the roads and have families with very young children to transport around, just going about our day in the best way we can.

Didn't mean it in a derogatory manner - more in a "what's in it for me" and clearly for drivers, the more drivers that can be shifted onto alternative transport (bus, bike, e-scooter, walk, run, carpool etc...) the better it is for the remaining drivers. When I drive and am stuck in a traffic jam I often think how many cars I am stuck behind that I don't need to be and if they weren't there I would be at my destination sooner.

1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7