Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="John WR"] [quote user="Sam1"]What do property taxes have to do with Amtrak or passenger rail?  Nothing![/quote] Property taxes do have a lot to do with Amtrak even though the direct costs cannot be passed on.  As Mr. Payne so ably points out property taxes are a strong dis incentive to double track a railroad.  Were that disincentive not present at least some--perhaps many--host railroads would better accommodate Amtrak trains which would then be better able to meet their schedules.  In fact, Amtrak schedules could probably be speeded up.   To the extent that property taxes fund expenses related to roads freight railroads are required to subsidize competing trucking companies.  Since trucking companies own no property almost all communities they pass through they get a real benefit in having no property tax liability along their route.   If  freight railroads were relieved of the burden of property taxes Amtrak would be a lot better off.  [/quote] Outside of the major corridors, i.e. NEC, California, and Illinois, I can think of only one area were Amtrak's trains are being delayed because of capacity constraints.  The Sunset Limited suffered from capacity constraints on the line from LA to El Paso.  That line is being double tracked irrespective of the property taxes paid by the UP to accommodate the road's freight trains. Most of the double tracking is taking place between major terminals, i.e. El Paso, Tucson, etc., which already have multiple tracks. The areas along the Sunset route that are being double tracked are basically scrub land and probably levy very low property taxes.   The other double tracking efforts that I can think of that might benefit passenger rail are in Illinois, Michigan, and North Carolina.  These projects are owned by a state government, i.e. North Carolina, that is prohibited from taxing one of its own sub-entities, or the funding is being provided directly or indirectly by the federal and state government. It is unclear whether any of the host railroads that are having their right-of-way improved by   government financing will see an increase in its property tax liability. In any case, neither Amtrak or any of the nation's commuter railroads will be taxed as a result of the improvements. Property taxes are not preventing the sponsoring governments from expanding the rights-of-way of railroads that host or might host passenger trains. Trucking companies own office buildings, warehouses, lay down yards, fuel depots, way stations, etc.  They pay fuel taxes that are intended to cover their proportional use of the highway, although there are convincing arguments that the biggest trucks don't cover the full cost of the wear that they impose on some roadways.  However, as pointed out in the Federal Highway Cost Allocation Study (HCAS) 1982, which was replicated in 2000, it depends on the truck, speed, weight, roadway structure, etc. Levying a property tax on a highway would be akin to laying a property tax on city hall, public schools, police stations, firehouses, churches, etc. I have never heard any official make such a suggestion, although I have taken to paying less and less attention to politicians as time goes on. Road taxes are designed to take the place of real taxes; they are surrogates for rights-of-way taxes.
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag