via Black boxes...what do you guys think? Good idea, bad idea? If they would do this and remove the gas tax, I think it would be a more accurate way to fairly tax those who drive more, since many cars are now more eco friendlier than they were a decade ago.

My concern would be the use of GPS within these units to track driving behavior. I think I'm ok with just clocking miles, but they could do that now by checking odometers when you get your vehicle inspected (at least in NC).

http://www.latimes.com/nation/la-na-roads-black-boxes-20131027,0,6090226.story#axzz2j2nFuPLM

I checked and didn't see a thread for this already, but for some reason I swear I've made this thread before.

[Edited on October 28, 2013 at 3:02 PM. Reason : adfas]

10/28/2013 2:57:24 PM

If they can use it to track you, they will.

10/28/2013 3:01:03 PM

Quote :

"since many cars are now more eco friendlier than they were a decade ago. "

providing a tax break for fuel efficient vehicles is something that we should continue to do

10/28/2013 3:02:55 PM

Ok, but we're talking about your use of roads and related infrastructure. You have a car that gets 8 miles/gallon who drives 50 miles a day vs a prius that gets 43 miles/gallon that drives 50 miles a day. The Prius is using the same amount of road, but not paying nearly as much to use it.

Why not just provide the tax break when you fill out your taxes at the end of the year if you have a hybrid or electric car? Plus electric cars get tax breaks already when you buy them.

10/28/2013 3:05:02 PM

Quote :

"but not paying nearly as much to use it."

yes, that's why its a tax break. that's why its encouragement to use a more fuel efficient vehicle.

reading an odometer is the only way to do this, we should never allow black box tracking. then you will need a credit (so much for making taxes easier) that is based on the fuel efficiency of your vehicle. it won't be accurate though, it will only be approximate.

The easiest, and most accurate, way to reward using fuel efficient vehicles is to use fuel taxes. If you would like to reduce those and supplement them with usage taxes that is a good idea, but it should never involve black box tracking and part of it needs to be based on fuel usage.

[Edited on October 28, 2013 at 3:11 PM. Reason : .]

10/28/2013 3:11:10 PM

Another concern I have regarding black box tracking is the use of the data in determing insurance costs. The devices will be able to record speed, braking, etc. Way to much intrusion. If they could just make a stupid device that tracked mileage, I'd be ok, but they'll go overboard.

10/28/2013 3:19:06 PM

they already make a stupid device that tracks mileage

10/28/2013 3:19:59 PM

I do most of my driving in states other than where my vehicle is registered, and the construction wing of my company is notorious for having vehicles out of state for extended periods of time. while it seems like a fair system, I'd hate to imagine how complicated it would get at first. Every state would have to adapt to this system in order to avoid being double taxed every time you fill up with gas out-of-state.

10/28/2013 3:51:59 PM

This is a terrible idea. There are public and social benefits to having roads beyond personal use. And the heaviest beneficiaries of roads are often people who do little driving.

10/28/2013 4:00:08 PM

You should get theDuke866 in here... he loves those data recording boxes!

10/28/2013 6:44:08 PM

yes, i definitely want the government tracking my driving.

seriously who would want something like this?

Quote :

"Ok, but we're talking about your use of roads and related infrastructure. You have a car that gets 8 miles/gallon who drives 50 miles a day vs a prius that gets 43 miles/gallon that drives 50 miles a day. The Prius is using the same amount of road, but not paying nearly as much to use it."

I'd be willing to bet a 3000 pound prius causes less wear and tear on the roads than a 6000 pound F-150.

10/28/2013 7:37:15 PM

Didnt read the article, but if you drive a very old vehicle would you be exempt?

Kind of like emissions tests? etc

10/28/2013 8:16:39 PM

While I do think it would be more accurate taxing, I certainly don't agree. But how would we stop our state government from doing something like this?

And I'm betting they'll come up with an add-on black box for older vehicles.

10/28/2013 9:09:51 PM

Don't you guys realize that your car is already tracking your every control input , and that the data can be used against you in civil or criminal court?

And fuck no, we shouldn't enable any further data gathering or tracking.

10/28/2013 9:34:00 PM

^ that only records a limited data set. Ostensibly only a few dozen "data points", but I'm sure it won't be any more than the car manufacturers are willing to pay for, considering that it's not in their interests.

I mean, if they want to know about your participation in the Occupy movement they'll just check your cell tower data.

10/28/2013 10:15:56 PM

This is dumb. How does the gas tax not already do this?

10/29/2013 7:59:51 AM

its an issue because conservatives want to strike back at electric cars

10/29/2013 8:11:44 AM

Honestly the black box probably isnt even needed.

As soon as a law is passed they will just noodle around in that smartphone of yours in your pocket.

If you dont have a smartphone they will add a "penalty" to your yearly taxes that increases exponentially until you get one.

Oh, and if you're poor they'll subsidize the phone

10/29/2013 9:27:46 AM

Tracking devices on every car thank you

10/29/2013 9:35:49 AM

With the phone solution they could even tax your usage of precious sidewalks, or when you walk in a governmental building and sample the fabulous AC.

10/29/2013 10:00:20 AM

We could tax fat people for excessive plumbing usage.

10/29/2013 10:48:43 AM

Quote :

"that only records a limited data set. Ostensibly only a few dozen "data points""

For cars with an EDR (which now is just about everyone except VW/Audi, and maybe Porsche? Maybe Mini?), they are required to record at a minimum: throttle application, vehicle speed, vehicle acceleration, yaw rate, brake application, seat application, seatbelt usage, steering input, and I think engine RPM, airbag deployment data, and some other stuff. Some manufacturers also record additional data.

So yeah, it's a "limited data set" in the sense that it doesn't capture everything, indefinitely. It captures pretty much everything you might want to completely reconstruct what happened in and leading up to almost any incident.

I don't plan on having a car with an EDR for as long as I can hold out. I bought my Honda after checking the build month to verify it didn't monitor pre-crash data. Once it finally wears out, I'll probably buy a VW or Audi (if they start installing them, then I'll just get the newest one I can). After that, there are always kit cars and limited-volume manufacturers.

That doesn't even get into the privacy issues inherent in navigation systems or assist systems like OnStar, either.

10/29/2013 11:09:38 AM

Quote :

"providing a tax break for fuel efficient vehicles is something that we should continue to do"

Oregon was the first state to experiment with this tracking approach. In their case, they were a victim of their own success: they were so successful with pushing fuel efficient vehicles that the tax base supporting roads is starting to erode. Thus, the new approach. Besides, they will still have the fuel taxes, so the less fuel efficient vehicles will still be penalized.

Personally, I would prefer they just stick with doing a reading of the odometer when they do inspections/emission tests. Yes, it's not as accurate, but I think it's the best compromise.

10/29/2013 11:17:46 AM

Yeah I'm 100% against this. Another attempt at the government to increase it's power over us.

10/29/2013 11:22:23 AM

I'd assume car companies would want this info as well.

10/29/2013 11:44:02 AM

dtownral, not to get off topic, but could you provide sources for your comment regarding conservatives wanting to strike back at electric cars? Why would conservatives care if you drive an electric vehicle? Are you going to tell me that they're all invested in big oil and electric cars are bad for business? What about the horrible conservatives who invest in big coal? Or big natural gas- those resources help fire the plants that generate the electricity your electric car uses.

No, we don't care about electric cars...its just usually the drivers that we don't like

10/29/2013 11:55:30 AM

I think it's about time to start arguing over whether oil and gas gets taxpayer subsidies.

And let's include indirect subsidies while we're at it. I'm sure no one will disagree with that.

10/29/2013 12:00:21 PM

I'm sure "getting back" at liberal prius owners is part of it for a small percentage of politicians, but the problem is like someone said before... cars are driving more miles on less fuel than they were 10, 20 years ago, and the current gas tax isn't fully supporting the amount of roads it once did. (in addition to americans driving fewer miles in general)

I still think a mileage tax is something that should be avoided.

10/29/2013 12:21:06 PM

Quote :

"And let's include indirect subsidies while we're at it. I'm sure no one will disagree with that."

How many levels of indirect are we talking? Untold trillions have gone into military options for securing cheap oil since the 1950s at least.

Oil should be much more expensive, but the American way of life depends on it being cheap. If oil were appropriately priced (i.e. no military crusades to artificially lower the price, no subsidies, etc), our transportation systems and urban design would look entirely different.

10/29/2013 12:29:22 PM

does OPEC still exist in this appropriately priced expensive gas?

10/29/2013 12:31:24 PM

Heavier vehicles inflict more damage upon the roadway. oddly enough, heavier vehicles burn more fuel too.

Raise the gas tax. Charge per mile only in electric vehicles.

10/29/2013 12:42:21 PM

Quote :

"dtownral, not to get off topic, but could you provide sources for your comment regarding conservatives wanting to strike back at electric cars?"

if they were not trying to stick it to electric cars and bikes, they would be taking the small government approach of reducing spending or increasing private toll roads or some other solution instead of raising taxes and adding special electric vehicle registration costs.

10/29/2013 12:47:22 PM

Quote :

"Heavier vehicles inflict more damage upon the roadway. oddly enough, heavier vehicles burn more fuel too."

This is what drives me nuts, and makes the entire concept totally incoherent.

While you're at it, adjust for tire width and pressure. Heck, for every car model we'll have to do simulation and testing to get a rating for the road wear per number of miles driven or gallons of gas burned. It will likely be better correlated with the gas consumption, so then charge people different at the gas pump depending on what car they're driving.

Oh, but higher tire pressure will also decrease the safety of the roads while decreasing the wear on them. So I guess we'll be stuck taxing those drivers with higher tire pressure for endangering other drivers more, while we give them a subsidy for producing lower wear on the road.

10/29/2013 12:50:54 PM

You're suggesting everything you just said would be difficult to calculate?

Ha, let me introduce you to "taxes."

10/29/2013 1:03:04 PM

in NC, we already tax heavy vehicles more. it's commonly referred to as "weighted tags".

10/29/2013 7:31:05 PM

those are extremely heavier vehicles and it's not very common to get them.

10/29/2013 8:20:33 PM

Actually Smath, we barely made the cutoff from having to have a weighted tag, and all we have is an extended cab silverado

10/29/2013 8:40:42 PM

^^most folks think that's how it is, but that's incorrect.

pretty much any pick-up truck requires them if you hook a trailer behind it. the highway patrol only started enforcing it (they pull you over and put you on a set of mobile scales) in recent years. the fines are very large. it's a wonderful cash cow for them.

there used to be a crazy loophole for SUVs. idk if it still exists. i think i heard the state wanted to close it. folks who did a lot of hauling (fishermen, primarily) were going crazy for powerstroke excursions and big block suburbans because they could avoid the ridiculously expensive weighted tags.

10/29/2013 9:21:17 PM

Quote :

"^^most folks think that's how it is, but that's incorrect"

I've seen maybe 5 weighted tags in the past 6 months, and i usually take note when i see them. I don't think they are as common as some would believe.

10/29/2013 9:25:26 PM

http://www.northcarolinasportsman.com/details.php?id=754

it was enough of an issue and pissed off enough folks that NCHP held a public forum to discuss it

but, yeah, since you've only seen 5 in the past 6 months then i guess i'm full of shit

10/29/2013 9:29:28 PM

I love how opposed conservatives seem to be about an issue that affects them directly but otherwise fits their model of fairness.

10/29/2013 9:30:27 PM

looks like you have to get weighted tags for vehicles 7000 pounds or over. most F-150 type trucks are under that. Towing is of course a completely different issue.

10/29/2013 9:33:43 PM

so

like i said

we tax heavier vehicles more

10/29/2013 9:38:25 PM

^^^ Almost as if your idea of their "model of fairness" wasn't based upon reality.

[Edited on October 29, 2013 at 9:42 PM. Reason : ^]

10/29/2013 9:41:54 PM

Don't EVs (and possibly hybrids?) already receive higher registration fees to offset the loss of fuel revenue for infrastructure?

10/29/2013 9:46:40 PM

^^^^ half-ton and below are below that for sure if you aren't hauling anything. I think you could easily load a new f-150 to that gross weight.

They told me I needed weighted tags for my ram 2500 if I ever intended to haul a load with it. I rolled the dice; I just needed to make it a few weeks in NC before I moved to FL.


By the way, road wear and tear from passenger cars is minuscule compared to that from heavy trucks.

10/29/2013 11:19:15 PM

Quote :

"they already make a stupid device that tracks mileage"

damn near spit my drink out

10/29/2013 11:42:15 PM

Quote :

"so like i said we tax heavier vehicles more"

I think the argument here isn't about taxing vehicles that weigh 7000lbs more, which is done. More like that a 5500lb SUV is looked at the same as my 2700lb 2 door.

10/30/2013 8:58:39 AM

No, we should ignore that category of vehicle, but not the other one. Do you think that people who drive [insert car type associated with demographic] would ever vote for me? lol

10/30/2013 9:12:07 AM

lol

10/30/2013 11:44:03 AM