Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="V.Payne"] "trucks, pay substantial federal and state income taxes, excise taxes, inventory taxes, and property taxes...  Some of the monies flow back to dedicated transportation funds to cover the financial shortfall between the cost of supporting trucks and the direct revenues generated..." If we are going to consider these general taxes as partially funding the $16 Billion yearly hole in the Highway Trust Fund, why not return the same types of funds to investor held railroads in the transportation bill with a provision they be used for extra trackage. [/quote] Several of the railroads got substantial taxpayer support to upgrade certain aspects of their capabilities under ARRA. One project that comes to mind is the raising of the heights in the tunnels on the line that runs northwest from Norfolk.  The outcome was that the railroad, I believe it is the NS, could move its container trains more directly to the Chicago area.  I don't recall the amount of time saved, but it is something like a full day.  The railroads receive substantial investment tax credits and R&D tax credits (individually and collectively) for a variety of projects.  Also, if I remember correctly, they don't pay any taxes on the fuel that they use. The railroads are investor owned, and they have been successful, thanks in large part to the Staggers Act, to make it without a lot of government support.   According to the U.S. Treasury, Highway Trust Fund 69X8102, Income Statement (Unaudited), For the Period October 1, 2012 through September 30, 2013, the transfer to the Highway Trust Fund from the General Fund was $5.9 billion.  The CBO rounded the number to $6 billion and projects a transfer of $9.7 billion for FY14. According to the CBO's projections, sans any change in construction needs or funding, i.e. increasing the fuel taxes, the HTF will have an average annual shortfall of approximately $12 billion per year through 2024.  Of course, this assumes that nothing will be done to address the shortfall, which the Administration is attempting to do. The key point that I was attempting to make, however, appears to have been lost. If one just looks at the fuel, license, and other road taxes paid by trucks, he misses the complete picture.  Truckers pay a lot of corporate tax, and some of it flows back to the road funds.   Oh, I forgot to mention it.  Actually, JB Hunt, as per my example, does not pay any taxes.  Depending on the elasticity of its demand/price curve, the cost of the transport, including any taxes baked into it, is passed through to the end users in the form of higher prices for food, medicine, etc.  So, raise the tax on trucks - I believe they should pay the full cost of the infrastructure that they use - and the cost of 10s of thousands of goods will go up. The truckers are not going to absorb it in most instances.  Not exactly a strong selling point for politicians to push. I have long argued that the best way to ensure a balanced transportation system in the United States is to pass the true cost of each mode through to the users at the price point.  If motorists, for example, saw the true cost of driving at the pump, many of them probably would opt for smaller vehicles, use alternate modes of transport, etc. Many of them would not; they are willing to pay a lot to drive. The same concept applies to all modes of transport.   No matter how sound a proposal may be from a technical, economic, etc. point, if it is not politically viable; that is to say, the benefits are not crystal clear to a substantial majority of the voters, it is dead in the water.
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