logo
Should California drivers get charged by the mile? A pilot program is looking into it

Should California drivers get charged by the mile? A pilot program is looking into it

Miami Herald20-04-2025

The California Department of Transportation is crunching the data from a pilot program it wrapped up earlier this year that addresses one of the most controversial topics in the Golden State - creating a per-mile road charge that drivers across California would pay.
Backers say it's worth considering because revenue collected from the primary source of funding for roads and highways - the per-gallon excise tax charged at gas stations - keeps declining because of more fuel-efficient cars and trucks and the growth in adoption of electric vehicles.
The pilot project by the department, known as Caltrans, is designed to explore completely replacing the excise tax on gasoline with a road charge.
But some critics worry the state will keep the excise tax in place in some form or another, and that a newly created road charge will simply add to the heavy tax burden Californians already shoulder.
To help pay for maintaining and upgrading the state's roads and highways, California's gasoline excise tax charges drivers 59.6 cents per gallon. That's the highest gas tax in the country, with Pennsylvania coming in second at 57.6 cents a gallon.
Despite that, California's Legislative Analyst's Office foresees "notable revenue declines" of some $5 billion over the next decade from the state's gasoline excise tax if the state stays on track to meet its carbon reduction goals.
Under an executive order issued by Gov. Gavin Newsom nearly five years ago, no new gasoline-powered vehicles will be allowed to be sold in California by 2035.
In addition, starting with model year 2026, at least 35% of manufacturers' new passenger car and truck sales must be electric vehicles, plug-in hybrids or hydrogen-fuel cell vehicles, known as ZEVs (zero-emission vehicles) for short. The percentages step up each year until hitting 100% in 2035.
California already accounts for the largest number of electric vehicles and plug-in hybrids of any state in the country, with ZEVs making up 25% of all new car sales last year.
Since electric vehicles and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles don't run on gasoline, that drives down the amount of revenue generated by the state's excise tax.
And because of higher fuel efficiency standards, gas-powered cars and trucks get better mileage than they used to. That means drivers make fewer trips to the gas station, further driving down collections from the excise tax.
The Legislative Analyst's Office, in its December 2023 report, anticipated revenue from the gasoline excise tax falling 64% compared to what was collected 10 years prior.
Budgets in other states are feeling the pinch, too. The National Association of State State Budget Officers recently reported that motor fuel taxes raised 35.9% in transportation revenue in fiscal year 2024, down from 41.1% in 2016.
In 2021, the California Legislature passed and Newsom signed Senate Bill 339 that established a pilot program "to identify and evaluate" the issues in creating a road charge.
Caltrans conducted the pilot, lining up 800 drivers of either gasoline or electric passenger vehicles to "drive normally" from August 2024 through the end of January of this year and report how many miles they racked up.
The drivers could choose among several methods to report their mileage - a monthly reading of their odometers, a plug-in device or in-vehicle telematics.
Participants were split into two rate groups - one with a flat per-mile fee of 2.8 cents per mile or one with an individualized fee based on the miles-per-gallon fuel economy of their vehicles.
"A potential road charge tax is meant to address the way we collect revenue and not as a backdoor to increase the burden on motorists," Caltrans spokesperson Chris Clark said in an email to The San Diego Union-Tribune.
The data from the pilot project is now being compiled and analyzed. As per the provisions of SB 339, Caltrans will present a final report to the Legislature no later than the end of next year.
Another study just came out
Last month, a nonprofit advocacy group for the transportation construction industry released its own study.
"Transportation infrastructure is the backbone of how we live and move in the state," said Kiana Valentine, executive director of Transportation California, based in Sacramento. "So this seemed like the natural next step for us to get involved in terms of helping policymakers address this situation.
The 131-page analysis, conducted by NEWROAD Consulting, identified three "viable funding options" for the state to consider.
The first would expand the current pay-at-the-pump tax model to include EVs and hydrogen fuel-cell vehicles. But the report acknowledges the complexity of folding in a wider variety of vehicle generation, as well as the challenge of capturing at-home EV charging.
A second option: Replace all fuel taxes with a "pure" road user charge that would make drivers of all types of vehicles pay, based solely on the distance traveled. While straightforward, the report admits this option would require "significant investments in technology" to track each vehicle and also raises concerns about how the charge would be enforced and who would do it.
The third pathway opts for a mixed model that would combine gasoline (and diesel) fuel taxes at the pump with a road user charge for zero-emission vehicles. This option would allow for a gradual transition for policymakers to work out fairness and equity concerns, but the report said "challenges remain," including what to do with out-of-state vehicles.
Valentine said there are tradeoffs with each of the three options and thus far her group has not endorsed one over the others. "I think we are still in an exploratory phase of trying to figure out which one would fit best within the state of California," she said.
Transportation California was a major supporter in the passage of 2017's Senate Bill 1 that spends $5.4 billion each year on roads, freeways, bridges, transit programs and safety efforts.
The San Diego Association of Governments proposed instituting a road user charge under former SANDAG Chief Executive Officer Hasan Ikhrata. But the fee of 3.3 cents per mile traveled received strong pushback and the SANDAG board in September 2023 ditched the plan on a 15-4 vote.
In an email last month to constituents, San Diego County District 5 Supervisor Jim Desmond called the SANDAG mileage fee "an outrageous idea" and voiced opposition to creating a statewide road user charge.
"Let's be clear: this debate shouldn't be about electric vehicles versus gas-powered cars - it should be about government overspending," Desmond said. "We already pay for our roads through sky-high gas taxes, registration fees and even property taxes. Yet Sacramento continues to spend irresponsibly."
When the Legislature passed SB 339, then-Senate Minority Leader Scott Wilk, a Republican, sent Newsom a letter, urging the governor to veto the bill.
While acknowledging the state's transportation system and the gas tax that supports it "are fundamentally broken," Wilk said a mileage charge would make things worse for California drivers who have long commutes.
"As long as we fail to build housing in adequate supplies to house our workforce near their jobs, then the working poor are still going to be paying far more in vehicle-miles traveled fees than their wealthy counterparts," Wilk wrote.
Steven Greenhut of the Pacific Research Institute, a think tank based in Pasadena that espouses free-market solutions to policy issues, thinks a mileage tax is a good idea - in theory.
"The state has a legitimate concern that the gas taxes are running out in order to pay for road maintenance," he said. "From a free-market perspective, a user fee based on how much the driver uses the road makes a lot more sense."
But Greenhut said the state would need to make sure the mileage fee completely replaces the gasoline excise tax so that drivers don't end up getting "double-taxed."
"I just think that the Legislature has proven to us over years that it's never seen a tax it doesn't want to increase," he said. "I'm skeptical of whether the state will actually get rid of the gas tax."
Other states have started experimenting with mileage charges.
In Utah, drivers of electric vehicles or hybrids pay an annual fee of $143.25 or they can voluntarily enroll in the Utah Road Usage Charge Program and pay 1.11 cents per mile. Drivers in the program will never pay more than $143.25 in a given year, which benefits motorists who drive less.
Enrollees can report their mileage through telematics that automatically records the distance traveled by the vehicle or by taking a photo of their odometer every three months. Utah transportation officials said as of last year, about 20% of eligible drivers had signed up.
Oregon and Virginia have similar voluntary programs in place.
In July, Hawaii will start phasing in a mileage-based road usage charge that applies only to drivers of electric vehicles. The charge will eliminate Hawaii's annual $50 registration fee for EVs, with the odometer checked each year when vehicles are inspected. By mid-2028, all EV drivers will be automatically enrolled.
(Steven Greenhut is a member of the editorial board of the Southern California News Group, which is owned by Media News Group, the owner of The San Diego Union-Tribune.)
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Let the countdown begin: One year until the California governor and L.A. mayor primaries
Let the countdown begin: One year until the California governor and L.A. mayor primaries

Los Angeles Times

timean hour ago

  • Los Angeles Times

Let the countdown begin: One year until the California governor and L.A. mayor primaries

It's June in California, which means the jacarandas are magnificently in bloom, joyous graduates overfill school auditoriums and the weather is utterly unpredictable. Oh and one more thing: As of this week, we are exactly a year out from the 2026 primary election. Here's what you need to know. California is a country within a country — a cultural and economic behemoth where the future happens first. And with term limits forcing Gov. Gavin Newsom out, the world's fourth-largest economy will be picking a new leader at the end of 2026. There is already a crowded field of prominent Democrats vying to replace Newsom. They include former state Senate President Pro Tem Toni Atkins, former U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra, businessman Stephen J. Cloobeck, Lt. Gov. Eleni Kounalakis, former state Controller Betty Yee, former Rep. Katie Porter, state Supt. of Public Instruction Tony Thurmond and former Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa). Two notable Republicans are also in the fight: Riverside County Sheriff Chad Bianco and former Fox News commentator Steve Hilton. The biggest question mark remains whether former Vice President Kamala Harris will enter the race, a decision she plans to make by late summer. That waiting game has stalled the Democratic field: Candidates are continuing their frenetic campaigning, but many activists, donors and elected officials are holding off on further endorsements until Harris makes up her mind. (Though some are growing more frustrated with Harris, and the implicit message that governing California is a consolation prize that she can toy with for months.) California's affordability crisis — and varying views on how to solve it — will probably dominate the long slog of campaigning ahead. But given the wilderness the national Democratic Party currently finds itself in, competition for California's top job will also probably double as a referendum on the broader question of what a winning Democratic leader should sound like. Registered Democrats outnumber Republicans nearly 2 to 1 in California. And what about billionaire Angeleno Rick Caruso, a relatively recent entrant to the Democratic Party? The Grove developer has been flirting with both a gubernatorial bid and another run at the Los Angeles mayor's race but remains undecided. His personal fortune affords him the luxury of some extra time, though self-funding a statewide campaign will be far more expensive than a mayoral one. Still, there could be a lane for a business-friendly centrist running California's sclerotic political system. And speaking of Caruso, he also looms large over the 2026 Los Angeles mayor's race. As of now, incumbent Mayor Karen Bass is the only serious candidate in the race, meaning the first-term mayor could glide to reelection. But the former congresswoman has also taken a political beating in recent months. A catastrophic firestorm put her leadership under a national microscope, a bruising budget crisis left her in a no-win political puzzle and her strong-arm authority on homelessness has been threatened. Which is a long way of saying that Bass could certainly be vulnerable if a real challenger gets into the race, be it Caruso, or someone else. But that remains a big if. The nightmare scenario for Bass is a landscape that looks less like her predecessor Eric Garcetti's reelection romp in 2017 — where he ran virtually unchallenged and leapt to victory with more than 80% of the vote — and more like then-Mayor James K. Hahn's reelection dogfight in 2005. Hahn, a badly wounded incumbent, only barely eked his way into second place in the primary and ultimately rode a wave of voter discontent right out of City Hall, losing to Antonio Villaraigosa that May. Beyond Caruso, a few other names have been bandied about as potential challengers to Bass. As my colleague David Zahniser and I reported a few months ago, that list includes Councilmember Monica Rodriguez (an iconoclastic force who has been openly critical of Bass), L.A. County Supervisor Lindsey Horvath (another politician who has sparred with the mayor) and City Controller Kenneth Mejia (a digitally savvy leftist who, you guessed it, has also taken shots at the city's current direction). Whether any take the leap remains to be seen. Read some of the best stories from our archives Few stories published by the Times in recent years have hit a nerve as forcefully as Julissa James' essay from 2021, 'Lonely in L.A.? These 21 places and experiences will help you embrace it.' Julia Wick, staff writerKevinisha Walker, multiplatform editorAndrew J. Campa, reporterKarim Doumar, head of newsletters How can we make this newsletter more useful? Send comments to essentialcalifornia@ Check our top stories, topics and the latest articles on

California shifts from Musk glee to Trump dread
California shifts from Musk glee to Trump dread

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

California shifts from Musk glee to Trump dread

The dissolution of the Donald Trump-Elon Musk marriage was enough, for a brief moment, to lift beleaguered California Democrats' spirits. But within 24 hours, the gleeful mood in this heavily Democratic state darkened amid sweeping immigration raids and reports the Trump administration was planning to yank funding from California. The swift reversal was a reminder that, for all the delight Democrats took in a public feud between the president and the world's richest man, a war of words on X is far less consequential than a hostile White House. Gov. Gavin Newsom and legislative leaders on Friday quickly returned to a familiar defensive crouch, condemning the White House's reported plan and escalating the standoff by threatening to withhold the money California sends to Washington. 'We pay over $80 BILLION more in taxes than we get back,' Newsom said in a post on X. 'Maybe it's time to cut that off, @realDonaldTrump.' It was unclear on Friday what money the White House might rescind. A spokesperson said no decision had been made. Many Democrats had spent the previous day reveling in the extraordinary break between Trump and his former patron Musk, piling on in a cascade of snarky tweets, triumphant news hits and floor speeches. The joy was especially palpable in California, where Democrats watched Musk transform from a source of pride to a conservative nemesis eager to attack the state that helped make him. The dunking contest seemed to open new political possibilities, as Musk amplified Democrats' case against tariffs and the GOP 'megabill' being debated in Congress — two central features of the president's agenda. But the respite from unforgiving news cycles proved short-lived. And it vindicated warnings from some Democrats that the Trump-Musk feud was distracting from the more serious threats emanating from Washington. For Rep. Dave Min, who is preparing to defend a frontline Orange County seat that could help determine control of the House, Thursday was all about Musk: He excoriated the Tesla executive in a preplanned floor speech, and joined the mockery on X. On Friday, Min was scrambling to confront what he called a 'blatantly lawless' push to claw back funds. 'These cuts appear to be clearly and on their face illegal and motivated by vengeance and political retribution aimed at our state,' Min wrote in a letter to the White House. Rep. Jimmy Gomez went from tweaking Trump with a Taylor Swift meme to sounding the alarm about immigration arrests throughout Los Angeles, a resolutely Democratic county, that followed Trump's vow to target 'sanctuary' jurisdictions that limit cooperation between local law enforcement and federal authorities. Union officials said SEIU California President David Huerta was detained and injured during a protest of immigration raids, drawing condemnations from a broad swathe of elected officials (ICE did not respond to a request for comment). Californians were simultaneously rallying in San Francisco against federal plans to rename a naval ship named after the late gay-rights icon Harvey Milk. Against the backdrop of that multifront defensive, the feuding between Trump and Musk became a secondary concern, at best. Newsom passed on a chance to swipe at Musk, with whom he has a long and complicated relationship, telling reporters during an unrelated news conference on Thursday that he hoped people mesmerized by 'what Elon Musk tweeted today and what Trump said tomorrow can focus on what matters' — although Newsom's press office still used a Trump-Musk breakup reference to tease the news conference, Similarly, Rep. Laura Friedman called the Trump-Musk meltdown a distraction from the White House's agenda to remake the federal government. 'They are cutting health care from Americans, they are destroying people's ability to go to the doctor and get health care coverage, they are making life more expensive for everyday people through tariffs,' Friedman said. 'I hope people see through the entertainment value of this — it is funny, but this is harmful to our country in so many ways.' Few were laughing by Friday afternoon. Instead, leading California Democrats were once again girding for battle with an administration that has made a habit of threatening to block money for areas like wildfire recovery, education and law enforcement if California does not change its policies. 'We must look at every option, including withholding federal taxes,' Assembly Speaker Robert Rivas said in a BlueSky post.

Newsom pushes back against potential federal cuts to California public universities
Newsom pushes back against potential federal cuts to California public universities

Yahoo

time3 hours ago

  • Yahoo

Newsom pushes back against potential federal cuts to California public universities

The Brief Sources told CNN that the Trump administration is targeting California universities over alleged antisemitism on campus. Newsom is threatening to withhold federal tax dollars if the cuts go through. PALO ALTO, Calif. - California Gov. Gavin Newsom is pushing back amid reports that the Trump administration is considering cutting federal funding for the University of California and California State University systems. A White House spokesperson told CNN no final decision has been made. Still, Newsom is threatening to withhold federal tax dollars if the cuts go through. H.D. Palmer, a spokesperson for the governor, responded to the CNN report on Friday. "Let's have a serious discussion about how much California contributes to the national economy," said Palmer. Newsom also took to X, posting, "Californians pay the bills for the federal government. We pay over $80 BILLION more in taxes than we get back. Maybe it's time to cut that off." In Palo Alto, community members responded to the potential federal cuts to universities during a rally in defense of science research and academic funding. "We want to preserve our democracy, our science, and our medicine," said Carol Peyser, an organizer of the "Stand Up for Science and Sanity" demonstration. Big picture view Next year's federal budget proposal includes cuts of 40% to the National Institutes of Health and 55% to the National Science Foundation. Peyser and others expressed concern that additional cuts could reverse decades of progress in scientific research and public health. "The attacks on the universities are really severe and not what we voted for. People did not vote for this," Peyser said. "It's absurd, and it's not just going to hurt California. We develop technology that goes all over the country and supports our economy." The Source Original KTVU reporting

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store