Latest news with #fuelExcise
News.com.au
a day ago
- Automotive
- News.com.au
Aussies explode over Albo's latest cash grab
Earlier this week, we published a story about the Federal Government's intention to introduce a road user charge (RUC) for electric vehicle (EV) owners. A per-kilometre tax to replace the fuel excise revenue lost as more Australians switch to electric vehicles. The proposal encouraged more than 2000 readers to comment. What followed was a passionate public policy debate, part stand-up comedy and a masterclass in Australian scepticism. While the conversation is divided, a large majority of readers believe EV drivers should contribute to road maintenance. But many also say the policy must be fair, transparent and apply equally across all vehicle types. 'Tax the trucks, not the Teslas,' one reader wrote, summing up a sentiment that hundreds of readers agreed with. Another, HelpMeOverHere, accused the government of double standards: 'A mining truck the size of a suburban street guzzles thousands of litres a week and gets all the fuel tax refunded.' The 'free ride' is over Many of our readers argue it's simply time for EV owners to pay their way. They believe that EV owners are currently getting a 'free ride' by avoiding the fuel excise, which raises more than $15 billion annually. 'There is not one solitary argument that supports the notion that EV drivers should be able to use the roads and not contribute to their upkeep. Not one,' nonedeplume said. Stephen argued: 'EV manufacturers are upset that the free ride is coming to an end and the EV drivers will have to pay to use the road like everyone else.' But others saw it less as fairness, more as the government's latest 'gotcha' tax. 'It's always the proletariat that has to pay for incompetent government,' Walker Texas Ranger said. 'Just another tax to prevent us from moving up in the world.' Some readers proposed replacing the fuel excise entirely with a universal RUC. 'Why don't we scrap the fuel excise and then just apply a RUC to all road users - that would then be fair to ALL road users regardless of what type of fuel (petrol, diesel, EV, hybrid),' Gaynor said. The trucking elephant in the room A big chunk of outrage was over Australia's heavy freight industry. Many said heavy vehicles are the 'culprits' and should pay more, given their impact on infrastructure. Fair enough. Infrastructure Australia data shows that one five-axle truck causes the same road wear as 2900 cars. The actual ratio varies depending on factors like axle weight and road construction, but a truck's damage is often cited as being much higher than 2900. Currently, heavy vehicles pay a RUC of 32.4 cents per litre, set to rise 6 per cent annually until 2025-2026. They also pay the federal fuel excise, now around 51-52 cents per litre - but operators can claim back the difference through fuel tax credits, reducing their net cost by about 20 cents per litre. 'Trucks are the issue,' Grande_choice said. 'All those regional roads are getting slammed by trucks but not EVs.' Rural drivers fear being slugged harder Polestar Australia's managing director Scott Maynard said a one-size-fits-all approach could unfairly hit regional drivers who travel long distances for essential services. According to Australians tend to drive longer distances for essentials and often live further out because property is more affordable. 'People in regional areas generally are poorer and drive more distances to get from A to B,' BobtheBuilder said. 'Hence why the CEO (Scott Maynard) makes the point that they will be discriminated against.' Reader Vicki agreed: 'I'm rural and 75km from my nearest town, doctor, supermarket…city EV owners with public transport will cost them nothing, and rural/regional drivers big money. When the policy debate turned into a comedy set In between the policy arguments came some memorable one-liners that had me chuckling hard. 'If it can't be eaten or plucked, it will be taxed.' 'The word of the day is fungible.' 'I'm just going to wait until a hamster-powered car comes out.' 'How about we bring in a tax on breathing?' The green glow-up….or greenwash? Some readers went straight for the environmental jugular. 'It's time the idealists wake up to the fact that electric cars aren't better for the environment…they will never pay off the carbon footprint cost of making the batteries,' Mark wrote. But Adam added, 'battery disposal facilities are already at 90+ per cent recyclability…the 'cut even' point for emissions is approx 37,000km.' Trusting the government…like trusting a cheating ex Underlying much of the conversation was the distrust of the government. Even commenters who back the idea of EVs paying said they didn't trust Canberra to use the money for roads. 'For FY23-24 the fuel excise raised $15b while [the] government only spent $10bn on roads,' Bryn wrote. 'When is it enough?' 'It's just revenue raising,' Jeff said. 'Once they have you hooked, they tax you.' The road ahead So the consensus? Most readers agree that EV drivers should pay and contribute. But it's simple, they want it to be fair. If the government can deliver that, they might just win people over. But if not, they'll be left with a few angry Australians.
News.com.au
18-06-2025
- Automotive
- News.com.au
Australian EV drivers to get hit with new tax, if goverment gets its way
Treasurer Jim Chalmers has flagged the development of a new road-user charge across Australia for drivers of electric vehicles to ensure EV drivers are contributing a fair share to road upgrades. The Treasurer has made no secret of his support for a shake-up of the current system before the election, raising the idea with business leaders in February. But the debate over road-user charges (RUC) for electric vehicles is now set to be reignited as a result of his speech to the national press club. 'We will also continue to work with states and territories on the future of road-user charging,'' Dr Chalmers said. 'All of this represents a big agenda on the supply side of our economy. None of these reforms are simple.' How does fuel excise work? The current rate of fuel excise is 50.8 cents in excise for every litre of fuel purchased. For a typical household with a car running on petrol, the tax costs more than $1200 a year. But the flat sales tax isn't paid by drivers of pure electric vehicles, who simply need to plug in their cars to recharge. While registration and driver's licence fees go to state and territory governments, fuel excise is collected by the federal government. Australian motorists paid an estimated $15.71 billion in net fuel excise in 2023-24, and are expected to pay $67.6 billion over the four years to 2026-27. However, governments have long-warned that a road-user charge will be required to fill the gap in the budget left by declining revenue from the fuel excise, as the petrol and diesel engines in new cars consume less fuel and Australians adopt hybrid and electric cars. What does the AAA say? The Australian Automobile Association (AAA) is calling for a national approach to road-user charging but wants a guarantee the revenue will be earmarked for road upgrades. The AAA backs a distance-based road-user charging as a fairer and more equitable way to fund land transport infrastructure. The 2024 federal budget forecasted a reduction in fuel excise receipts by $470 million over four years from 2024-25. Roadblocks to reform Currently, New South Wales is the only state with firm plans to introduce a road-user charge from 2027 or when EVs reach 30 per cent of new car sales. Plug-in hybrid EVs will be charged a fixed 80 per cent proportion of the full road-user charge to reflect their vehicle type. Western Australia has also stated an intention to implement a road-user charge. Meanwhile, Victoria's electric vehicle levy had to be scrapped following a ruling from the High Court. Two Victorian electric car owners launched a legal challenge on the basis the tax was not legal as it was an excise that only a federal government could impose. They won with the High Court upholding the legal challenge. There have been several false starts to enshrine a road-user charge including in South Australia, where the former Liberal Government planned to introduce a charge for plug-in electric and other zero emission vehicles, which included a fixed component and a variable charge based on distance travelled. It was later pushed back to 2027 due to a backlash before the legislation was ultimately repealed. 'Gold standard' for reform Some experts argue the gold standard for reform is a variable rate that factors in the vehicle's mass, distance travelled, location, and time of day. But there's a big barrier to the Commonwealth imposing those charges because the Constitution prohibits it from imposing taxes that discriminate between states or parts of states. State governments could impose those levies, but as the experience of the Victorian Government underlines, it is legally complex.
