QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper Police and fire departments also provide services to truckers and airports. In addition to not paying realestate taxes, interstate highways, which are in the transprotation business after all, don't pay corporation taxes nor do airports. The taxes themsevles are not a busidy; it is their relative absense on railroads' competitors that is a hidden subsidy.
QUOTE: Originally posted by up829 [ Railraods & Airlines don't pay road-use tax. In addition, both are usually able to purchase fuel in states where state & local taxes are lower, trucks can't do that to the same degree. Trucks are also subject to other taxes and fees. They must be licenseed, often in multiple states, then there's bridge & road tolls, etc. Real Estate Taxes aren't a subsidy, they're taxes on real property. Residential property near a railroad is often worth less than property located elsewhere. There are expenses a comminity has in relation to the railroad such as crossing miantenance, etc. Local Police and Fire departments also provide servies to the railroads. I don't know the exact rates, but generally in Illinois, railroads are assesed at a much lower rate than commercial or farm property.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
QUOTE: Originally posted by gabe [brHow is the argument that this constitutes a hidden subsidy obviously wrong? Sure truckers pay gas taxes, but so do railroads. Also, last I checked the tax on Diesel is not that much more expensive than gasoline, despite the fact that a truck does 453 X (number given by governor of Illinois) the amount of damage to a highway. I am not saying Dave's argument is correct, and I concede that there are many issues that make it more complicated than that, but I don't think we are being fair to Dave to dismiss him in such a facile manner. Gabe
QUOTE: Originally posted by eastside I'd be interested in knowing just exactly how much the typical RR pays in property taxes per mile of right-of-way each year. I worked on a major RR restructuring in the '80s and remember that most RR land is pretty useless -- wrong locations, funny shapes -- for other uses. If their lawyers are doing their jobs, the tax assessors tax them at a low rate.
QUOTE: Originally posted by tomtrain Wasn't the Central of Georgia RR exempt from paying property taxes as long as the railroad provided passenger service? Would such an agreement be incentive enough for railroads to be happy with a basic national passenger rail system that balances with the trucking/auto setup?
QUOTE: Originally posted by MP173 Fuel for vehicles is taxed. I dont know the exact tax, but it is HUGE. Federal excize tax is assessed on new equipment. It goes on and on.
Randy Vos
"Ever have one of those days where you couldn't hit the ground with your hat??" - Waylon Jennings
"May the Lord take a liking to you and blow you up, real good" - SCTV
Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts Posted by daveklepper on Friday, April 8, 2005 3:09 AM All these points are correct. When someone moves freight by rail, part of the cost is for real estate taxes. When he moves by air, he is excused from this tax. Regardless of gate fees, taxes on diesel and gasoline fuel, concessions, all the rest, the fact remains that this is a hidden subsidy for all who do not use rail transportation. Gate fees, fuel taxes used to maintain highways, all that is part of running the airline and private car business. But they are excused from supporting schools and hospitals and police and firemen through real estate taxes. The freight railroads are not excused, and indeed some of their taxes benefit the airports and highway traffic control! This subsidy also exists, now, for state-owned commuter rail systems. It did not exist when the railroads subsidized the commuter operations themselves, and the NYCentral did win a repreave, when they had to replace the important Halem River drawer bridge (north of the 125th St Station and south of Mott Haven) and the state and city multiplied their real estate taxes by four. The case of the Jersey Central was similar. I don't know what the situation is with the Amtrak-owned portion of the NE Corridor and someone can tell me. But, still, since the freight railroads do pay enourmous real estate taxes, and Amtrak does pay fees to the railroads, Amtrak contributes to local real estate taxes. Another idea. Ask Bush if he believe America should be a "Christian Society." If we have any welfare at all, then yes, according to all Christian doctrine, all denominations, and taken from Judaism, 10% off all highway expenditures should go to public transportation of all types, including intercity, for people who cannot afford to or medically are not able to drive cars. Finally, a UN survey of all citiies in the World concluded that Zurich, Switzerland has the highest living standard, that in total, its people are better off than anywher else. Zurich has a subsidized mass transportation system. NO FARES ARE CHARGED. Less than 10% commute by car. The mayor uses public tranportation without a bodyguard. A majority of commuteres use rail, either streetcar or commuter rail, and there are also trolleybuses. These penetrate the Central Business District, and nearly all diesel bus lines are feeder to rail. Of course we would all be happy if Amtrak met even its existing schedules as accurately as the Swiss intercity railroad system does. Reply PNWRMNM Member sinceMay 2003 From: US 2,593 posts Posted by PNWRMNM on Friday, April 8, 2005 1:49 AM Dave is correct in the arguement he did not specifically make which is, to the extent that motor carriers use taxes do not pay real estate tax, which they do not, it is another hidden subsidy in comparison to railroads which do pay real estate taxes. Not that anyone who makes public policy cares. His point is also true with airports but is complicated by the huge captial investment which is recovered to a greater or lesser degree by gate fees. Here, as in the highway case the big advantage to the carriers is the avoidance of the capital investment in the first place and the nonrecovery, partial recovery, or full recovery at less than private market interest rates. These are huge numbers but nobody cares and some of you think is a good idea. The reason this policy is not good public policy, even though the consumer benefits from it, is that it represents a missallocation of resources. Take the simple case of highways. To the extent we subsidize motor carriers (which we do to a massive degree, but it is well hidden), they will transport some freight that should have, and would have moved rail but for the subsidy. The economic cost of the truck rate plus the subsidy is more that the rate by the unsubsidized rail. Society paid a higher cost for the transportation than if it had gone rail, but the shipper paid a lower rate than he would have by rail. We the taxpayers subsidized the shipper, not the carrier. I have deliberately set aside service issues to focus on the central point which is, if someone subsidizes an activity more of that activity will occur than would have occurred without subsidy. Where there is a competitive substitute that is not subsidized that substitute is disavantaged by the subsidy. The buyer of the subsidized service pays a lower rate that he otherwise would have. The social cost of the entire system will be higher in the subsidy case than would have been in the non subsidy case. This is basic microeconomics available in any undergraduate textbook. Mac Reply spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 7, 2005 7:56 AM Thanks for that I did not even think of those items. You can extend that to highways a motorist buy gas (pays taxes) goes & purchases food ( pays taxes) buys knick knacks (pays taxes). [:o)][8D][:o)] Originally posted by up829 Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 7, 2005 7:36 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. At least for airports, it's very likely that O'Hare generates far more revenue from concessions, sales tax, ticket tax. fuel tax, commercial leases, and so on than would be collected in real estate tax. The airlines also have to pay for gates and kick in part of the construction costs. I would further guess that revenue from nearby commercial.property(hotels, etc.), including real estate tax, also far exceeds what would be collected if you demolished everything and replaced it all with subdivisions of nice suburban homes. I'd guess the same is true for JFK, Logan, LAX, etc. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 7, 2005 6:50 AM Did you consider in your post the tradeoff that us taxpapyers have of using the facilities you mentioned so that we can get from point A to point B quickly? Think that should also be taken into consideration when discussing subsidies of public lands. You may also add to your post parks, memorials, court houses, city office buildings, city gold courses & on & on. [:o)][:D] Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts The real estate used by interstate highways and airports Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 7, 2005 3:13 AM One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub
Originally posted by up829 Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 7, 2005 7:36 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. At least for airports, it's very likely that O'Hare generates far more revenue from concessions, sales tax, ticket tax. fuel tax, commercial leases, and so on than would be collected in real estate tax. The airlines also have to pay for gates and kick in part of the construction costs. I would further guess that revenue from nearby commercial.property(hotels, etc.), including real estate tax, also far exceeds what would be collected if you demolished everything and replaced it all with subdivisions of nice suburban homes. I'd guess the same is true for JFK, Logan, LAX, etc. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 7, 2005 6:50 AM Did you consider in your post the tradeoff that us taxpapyers have of using the facilities you mentioned so that we can get from point A to point B quickly? Think that should also be taken into consideration when discussing subsidies of public lands. You may also add to your post parks, memorials, court houses, city office buildings, city gold courses & on & on. [:o)][:D] Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts The real estate used by interstate highways and airports Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 7, 2005 3:13 AM One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply Anonymous Member sinceApril 2003 305,205 posts Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, April 7, 2005 7:36 AM QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. At least for airports, it's very likely that O'Hare generates far more revenue from concessions, sales tax, ticket tax. fuel tax, commercial leases, and so on than would be collected in real estate tax. The airlines also have to pay for gates and kick in part of the construction costs. I would further guess that revenue from nearby commercial.property(hotels, etc.), including real estate tax, also far exceeds what would be collected if you demolished everything and replaced it all with subdivisions of nice suburban homes. I'd guess the same is true for JFK, Logan, LAX, etc. Reply Edit spbed Member sinceDecember 2001 From: Austin TX 4,941 posts Posted by spbed on Thursday, April 7, 2005 6:50 AM Did you consider in your post the tradeoff that us taxpapyers have of using the facilities you mentioned so that we can get from point A to point B quickly? Think that should also be taken into consideration when discussing subsidies of public lands. You may also add to your post parks, memorials, court houses, city office buildings, city gold courses & on & on. [:o)][:D] Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts The real estate used by interstate highways and airports Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 7, 2005 3:13 AM One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
QUOTE: Originally posted by daveklepper One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops.
Originally posted by daveklepper Living nearby to MP 186 of the UPRR Austin TX Sub Reply daveklepper Member sinceJune 2002 20,096 posts The real estate used by interstate highways and airports Posted by daveklepper on Thursday, April 7, 2005 3:13 AM One hidden subsidy for highway and air transportation, not included in any statistics produced by DOT or Mineta, is the amount of land air and highway transportation require. Has anybody estimated what the real estate taxes on all this land would total on a yearly basis? I know about ten years ago, the statement was made that one-tenth of the land of Massachusetts was devoted to highway use, streets, highways, and parking facilities. If anyone had facts and figures, it would be of interest. Freight railroads to pay taxes on their rights of way and yards and shops. Reply Join our Community! Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account. Login » Register » Search the Community Newsletter Sign-Up By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy More great sites from Kalmbach Media Terms Of Use | Privacy Policy | Copyright Policy
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.