I want to drive my EV and you subsidise me

Kim Luck

1000+ Posts
There are multiple reasons for which owners of non self-powered vehicles are charged. The only incentive needed to purchase a 100% EV is that of saving the planet. Everything else comes at commercial rates, including the registration, insurance and taxation. If EV's are as economical and cheap to run as we are told, owning one is the key to substantial savings. Why the taxapayer should subsidise EV's at all is a moot point, the numbers either add up for their owners or they don't. And roads continue to require maintenance. There is no Jobkeeper for EV's.
 
Money to build and maintain roads is partly funded by an excise on fuels. Currently 43.3 cents per litre. The thinking is this is an equitable tax, given those who drive further and/or have larger vehicles pay more. If a vehicle uses a non petroleum fuel, its fuel escapes excise so a new method must be devised so the vehicle pays what is effectively road tax at a proportionate rate. No matter the means of propulsion the vehicles use the same road network and must contribute equally.
 

1972Ren

The Comeback Kid
That is a thoroughly logical argument, and it is important to note that even if BEV drivers did pay a per-km road tax equivalent to that embodied in liquid fuels, it would only be 1/4 to 1/3 of the cost of filling the tank of an ICE equivalent. The political reality of charging BEVs that per-km tax might be a bit of a challenge, however, and would certainly make clear the motivations of those buying them!
 

alan moore

1000+ Posts
Not quite on topic. A friend bought a Tesla 3 recently and has now done 7500klm for a total cost of charging being $150.

He fortunately has a shopping centre across from where he lives with two free Tesla chargers, although these seem to not be maintained, as only one works and this is often the case at other charging stations. Nice car to drive, and interestingly has a nose very similar to a Renault Floride/Caravelle.
 
EV's accelerate better than the equivalent petrol jobs, reason enough alone.
So we should all strive to drive a car that out accelerates a petrol model , that makes sense,. How many drivers do you see , even supercar drivers, accelerating like they are being pursued by someone with nefarious intent ? Wake up to yourself, acceleration is but a small aspect of the pleasure of car ownership.
 

Guido

New member
Another perspective wd be “I want to drive my fossil fuel powered vehicle but not pay for the contribution it makes to global heating by producing a kilogram of CO2 from the exhaust every 3 kms I drive.” Pretty sure I’ve read that big trucks (semis) do all the real damage to roads and they don’t go anywhere near paying for it thru fuel excise. Regardless, EVs are here and won’t be long (3-5 years?) before almost all new cars are EVs, including Frog ones. Jag only making EVs from 2025. Interesting times.
 
Vehicles are taxed through registration according to classes. Registration is an additional road user tax to fuel excise. All vehicles use the same roads. I have not noticed levitation as a feature of electric vehicles. Arguments as to the merits and costs of electric vehicles compared to petrol and diesel are irrelevant in a matter of road use tax. Everyone must pay their share.
 
Last edited:

simca1100

Member
I don't think it is that simple. Guido makes a good point.

We are on a path to planetary oblivion, fossil fuel cars add to the problem, electric vehicles much less so. (Yes, even if recharged from coal fired power, but that's another story.) Recharged from renewables is the go.

We are still in the early stages of EV adoption. Driving an EV is much better for the planet than driving a fossil fuel car. EVs are still very expensive, but increasing production leads to economies of scale. Getting more old petrol and diesel cars off the road (or kept as "occasional use" classics) and replacing them with EV is good for future generations.

Letting EV drivers avoid the fuel levy for a few years is a simple incentive to encourage the change. Today's EV early adopters will be providing the affordable second hand EVs that many of us will be looking for in 5 to 10 years.
Encouraging more EV purchases is a social good. Giving them a tax break is like lowering tax on low alcohol beer. It is an incentive to promote a less harmful option.

In the LONG term, when EVs are a substantial percentage of the fleet, and EVs cost about the same as a petrol car, of course a road user charge of some sort will have to apply. But we are not there yet.

Just to be clear, I don't own an EV and getting one is not imminent. I live off the power grid and my solar power system is not big enough to run a car. But I'm happy to pay a fuel excise for my petrol car and happy for EV users to avoid that charge. Good on them.
 
We are talking about road tax. If some people wish to argue their method of power is superior to others that is their business. I might find some EV owners worthy of an annoyance tax but that is not the law. There is no law in Australia giving some powered machines the right to use the road system without contributing to its construction and maintenance. Unpowered vehicles like bicycles don't pay road tax and horse power is free to use but both are of course excluded from freeways. If you wish a different law that is the realm of politics and you are free to play in that sphere. But for the moment even the saintly must pay their share of road tax even though some may prefer a free ride at the expense of other road users.
 

85Fuego

Member
Another perspective wd be “I want to drive my fossil fuel powered vehicle but not pay for the contribution it makes to global heating by producing a kilogram of CO2 from the exhaust every 3 kms I drive.”
Obviously the subtlety is lost on some of the population......................

You own a vehicle, currently, the rego & FUEL excise pays for some/most of the infrastructure/maintenance.
I'm pretty sure the battery cars are not lightweight and thus also contribute to the deterioration of the tarmac.
Ergo, the owners need to reach into their pocket and pay for the road use as well NOT ONLY FOR electricity use.

It's a forgone conclusion we're at a tipping point where economies of scale will make them cheaper and thus the rigueur for the future.

Listen to the howling then, when governments charge for use........

Tell me, who's going to put the electrical infrastructure in and pay for it????
We have very little fat in the electron supply side now, can I demand cars not be charged during peak times?
 

Guido

New member
I’d have to go back to your original
post and ask who are you referring to who is saying “I don’t want to pay my fair share”? It’s really a matter of governments getting their head around what EVs mean for fuel excise and then implementing eg Victoria. Very, very minor issue at the moment here - about 6,000 EVs sold in first half of 2021 (most of them Teslas) out of about 600,000 cars sold total. But soon will be a huge issue because within probs <5 years EV new car sales will almost completely displace ICE new car sales and road user charges will be everywhere. And I don’t think you can ignore the emission reductions benefit of EVs - that’s why they exist, that’s the whole reason why governments are subsidising their uptake, including some not much worrying about road user charges yet. And fuel excise doesn’t fully fund roads anyway, road users are subsidised from other taxation sources. The electrical infrastructure is all there, will develop and adapt accordingly. Evolving very fast.
 
Fundamentally it comes down to some advocates of electric vehicles not wanting to pay their share of road tax. A new method of taxing them that is equivalent to fuel excise must be worked out and imposed. The supposed benefits of electric cars are debated elsewhere. That is not in discussion here. People have every right to drive electric cars if they wish but have no right to selfishly expect other motorists to subsidise their road use.
 

85Fuego

Member
I’d have to go back to your original
post and ask who are you referring to who is saying “I don’t want to pay my fair share”? It’s really a matter of governments getting their head around what EVs mean for fuel excise and then implementing eg Victoria. Very, very minor issue at the moment here - about 6,000 EVs sold in first half of 2021 (most of them Teslas) out of about 600,000 cars sold total. But soon will be a huge issue because within probs <5 years EV new car sales will almost completely displace ICE new car sales and road user charges will be everywhere. And I don’t think you can ignore the emission reductions benefit of EVs - that’s why they exist, that’s the whole reason why governments are subsidising their uptake, including some not much worrying about road user charges yet. And fuel excise doesn’t fully fund roads anyway, road users are subsidised from other taxation sources. The electrical infrastructure is all there, will develop and adapt accordingly. Evolving very fast.
Obviously the subtlety is still lost on some of the population......................

These 2 smarties are saying to the vic gov't : we're trying to get out of paying to drive on the roads.
Instead of going with the flow and accepting they have to pay SOMEHOW to use the roads they're wanting the rest of the road users to subsidise their travel.
....... It’s really a matter of governments getting their head around what EVs mean for fuel excise and then implementing eg Victoria. ...........
So here we see the govt implementation but it appears one team does not want to play.
The electrical infrastructure is all there...........
Beg to differ, would be interested to know who is paying for the installation of the supply to the soon to be common 250 kW chargers for example.
 

Guido

New member
It’s just change. EVs are here and will replace ICE with some form of charging for road infrastructure and the electrical infrastructure.
 

85Fuego

Member
It’s just change. EVs are here and will replace ICE with some form of charging for road infrastructure and the electrical infrastructure.
Either it's lost on you or you plainly don't see the argument.

THESE PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO PAY.

I UNDERSTAND where it's going, I am happy to pay, are you happy to pay for these people to travel for free?
 

simca1100

Member
I am very happy for EV drivers to have a short term subsidy to get more petrol car drivers to become EV drivers.
I think it is WAAAY more important to slow down the rate at which we are fu*cing the planet than it is for every last road user to pay their bit towards repairing the road damage that is mostly done by big trucks.

It's not lost on me, I do see the argument. I just have a different opinion on the matter.

"These people" ARE willingly paying to do something more important than fix the roads - they are paying to fix the planet. (By paying the extra to buy an EV.)
 
So EV drivers can't pay their share of road tax and can sponge off others because they're saving the planet. What a self important and arrogant attitude towards other road users. Let's exempt ambulances from road tax because they're saving lives. Or fire trucks or police vehicles or cars driven by someone off to plant a tree or Sunday morning drivers on the way to church or anyone else who thinks they should have a free ride. We have a system where fuel has an excise imposed to help fund roads and an equivalent must be worked out so drivers of EV's and Stanley Steamers don't get a free ride. It's a simple principle that has a considerable degree of equity because people who have larger vehicles and who drive further pay more tax.
 
Top