The Gas Tax Makes Sense. Biden Considers Canceling It.
Road maintenance and construction don't suddenly become free because gas hits $5 a gallon.

The gas tax is the one good tax, so it makes sense that it would also be the only one that President Joe Biden is considering suspending.
"I hope I have a decision based on data I'm looking for by the end of the week," the president told reporters on Monday on whether he'd support a federal gas tax holiday. Suspending the 18-cent per gallon federal tax on gas would obviously require some votes in Congress. Biden's final "decision" on whether to call for that congressional action really just boils down to whether he thinks it's politically prudent.
The declaration of gas tax holidays in states both red and blue suggests that it'd be a popular idea, particularly when a gallon is averaging close to $5 nationwide. Five states, including Florida and New York, have suspended their gas tax already, notes CNET—a move that's supported by 72 percent of respondents in a recent Politico/Morning Consult poll.
Sens. Maggie Hassan (D–N.H.) and Mark Kelly (D–Ariz.) introduced legislation back in February to suspend the federal gas tax through December 2022.
Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R–Ky.) threw cold water on that idea at the time, saying then that "Democrats want to blow a $20 billion hole in highway funding so they can try to mask the effects of their own liberal policies on working Americans."
Gas was under $4 a gallon then. Perhaps today's higher prices still will prompt national Republicans to follow their state-level partisan allies and get on board with a gas tax holiday.
Even if that's the popular political move, it would certainly be bad policy. People hate taxes and rightly so. But the federal gas tax is more appropriately thought of as a user fee that charges people for a service they consume.
Fuel taxes paid by motorists are collected in the federal Highway Trust Fund, which is then spent building and maintaining the roads and bridges those same drivers use. The federal gas taxes, excluding the tax on diesel, make up about 60 percent of tax revenue dedicated to the Highway Trust Fund.
Fairness demands charging drivers for the roads. The only alternative would be to require nonmotorists to subsidize driving infrastructure for them.
A user fee-like fuel tax also keeps road spending in line with demand for roads. It's harder to fund bridges to nowhere if people's fuel consumption, and the taxes they pay on it, aren't generating enough revenue for new projects.
Suspending the gas tax, therefore, makes road spending less fair and less efficient. It would also be fiscally costly. Road construction and maintenance don't become free just because gas prices are high. Suspending the gas tax only gives road users a break from paying for it.
If the tax holiday were accompanied by a highway spending holiday, of sorts, perhaps that could be justified. But the proposal from Hassan and Kelly replaces every last dollar of lost gas tax revenue with general fund revenue. That means nondriving taxpayers are now on the hook for that spending instead.
Worse, a gas tax holiday would further untether the increasingly tenuous connection between gas taxes and road spending—setting the stage for more subsidies and spending still.
In the good old days, federal highway spending was entirely covered by gas tax revenues. In recent decades, growing federal road and transit spending and slower-rising gas tax revenue have meant that the Highway Trust Fund has required repeated transfers from the general fund.
In 2008–20, Congress shifted $155 billion in general fund revenue to the Highway Trust Fund. The infrastructure law Biden signed in November 2021 transferred another $118 billion of general fund revenue into the highway fund, both to stave off impending insolvency and pay for massive new road spending.
Suspending the gas tax would completely transform road spending, albeit temporarily, into a federally subsidized transfer program.
To be sure, the federal gas tax is an imperfect user fee. A portion of gas tax revenue is diverted to public transit projects that drivers won't use. They also might be paying for roads that they don't drive on. Fuel consumption is an imperfect proxy for how much wear and tear individual drivers are putting on roads. That means electric vehicles and heavy trucks are undertaxed in this regard.
This reality recommends making the gas tax more like a user fee or even replacing it with a mileage-based fee that could more precisely charge drivers for what they use. That policy isn't quite ready for the prime time yet—there are a lot of logistical, technological, and privacy issues to work out—but it's the direction transportation policy should be moving in.
A gas tax holiday is a step in the wrong direction.
Rent Free is a weekly newsletter from Christian Britschgi on urbanism and the fight for less regulation, more housing, more property rights, and more freedom in America's cities.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Presumably there would be no cut in expenditure that was to be paid for with the gas tax either. Though, if I'm wrong, then I'm fine with this tax holiday, even though I agree that as far as taxes go it is one of the fairer ones.
So long as it was extended to owners of E-cars on a mileage basis.
I even have made $30,030 simply in five weeks clearly working parttime from my loft. (res-32) Immediately when I've lost my last business, I was depleted and fortunately I tracked down this top web-based task and with this I am in a situation to get thousands straightforwardly through my home. Everyone can get this best vocation and can acquire dollars on-line going this website.
>>>> https://oldprofits.blogspot.com/
ICE fumes pollute, kill slowly. How do you "extend to ICE owners" that cost? That disgusting environmental pollution has been going on for over a century while govt. gave tax money to the oil industry in the form of subsidies. The people trusted the politicians with their money and it was used to kill them. Vote much? Submit to tyranny?
There is no such thing as "fairer" theft. All "legal" theft is denial of property rights. Therefore, any tax holiday is to be cheered for, even as statists wring the hands and worry about depriving the thugs of their booty. Taxes are consumed by red tape and corruption NOT productive works. Infrastructure is slowly crumbling as many a documentary has shown, but the answer is always to give the crooks more money.
Defund the govt.! Privatize everything!
The gas tax is the one good tax, so it makes sense that it would also be the only one that President Joe Biden is considering suspending.
Speak for yourself, Cheek-Turner Britches! I'm not getting my money's worth for either Federal or State gasoline taxes here in North Carolina! We have pothole on both the Interstate and the back roads that would swallow a Musk-Mobile!
Maie the roads and infrastructure private, competitive institutions funded by business-owners, housing developers, and ultimately in the cost of real estate and goods and services. All developers and businesses have reason for consumers to have access to their wares, and all consumers want access to wares. So if roads and other infrastructure were funded by this means, it would provide both fairness in how the roads were paid for and incentive to keep them maintained, better than giving the money to Feds and States who then give building and maintenance contracts to incompetant Cronies.
Well, for one thing, it is harder to hide bullshit green spending in the highway fund than in an "unexpected" need to fund "infrastructure" spending on blue state fantasies via a new bill.
Let's face it folks, every "bad" thing they whine about on this site is a direct result of implementing the policies stated in the democrat party platform they voted for because they can't avoid reading mean tweets.
"Promises made, promises kept"
I agree
I like the old Mean Tweet tax I had to pay when gas was under $3 a gallon. The Mean Tweet tax was only a tax on journalist's time and didn't affect me.
I think you have it backwards. The Mean Tweet tax came applied only to snowflakes and ideologues who had to suffer almost daily, and perhaps incurred cash expenses for coloring books and puppy therapy. Journalists all got employment boosts when their daily screeds almost wrote themselves.
This reality recommends making the gas tax more like a user fee or even replacing it with a mileage-based fee that could more precisely charge drivers for what they use.
I propose a $10,000 a year "bike lane" tax. If you own a bike, you pay $10,000 a year to cover the bike lanes. That tax will go lower if you get more bikes to use them as it will be divided amongst the bike riders, incentivizing them to actually use the fucking things.
And let’s not forget the folks driving EVs. Why should they get to freeload just because they don’t buy gas. They still cause wear and tear on the roads, in fact they cause more because their vehicles are heavier, what with several hundred pounds of batteries.
Gas prices haven't risen under Biden. That's a wingnut.com lie. But even if they had it wouldn't matter to me because I'm a successful liberal capitalist like George Soros and Warren Buffett. Who cares about spending a few extra bucks at the pump when I'm making millions every day?
#TemporarilyFillingInForButtplug
That's pretty good - you're following the template.
1. Its not happening.
2. Ok, its happening but its not that bad.
3. Its happening and this is why its a good thing.
Hold on, if we repeal the gas tax, that means Charles Koch and other billionaires will have to pay less money to the government. It also means they can justify paying their employees less as the cost of living will be lower.
>>get on board with a gas tax holiday.
suck (D) dick in hopes they'll stop raping us.
So, no where do we question why the *federal government* is collecting taxes for roads?
How about this - the feds stop collecting taxes and funding road construction and maintenance. Then the states take over all the roads within their jurisdictions and choose which to maintain and which to build and where.
And then they choose how they'll raise the money to do this - gas tax (not useful in the electrified world the Greens wants), tolls, out of the general fund, ect.
Definitely, Agammamon's got the right idea. Ideally, in fact, funds for highway construction and maintenance should be derived to the greatest extent possible from tolls collected on specific stretches of highway.
Under the feds-collect-and-distribute system, funds are allocated not according to the effective demand for the roadways in question, but according to the political clout of each state's and district's Congressional delegation. There's a similar problem even at state level: in my state, for instance, a little-used rural highway has been upgraded to a four-lane, at great cost, because certain legislators' votes were necessary to pass the statewide expressway project.
Local-toll funding would go a long way toward removing these inefficiencies and distortions. But it's not likely that it'll ever happen—too many legislators are eager to brag about all the federal funds that they're bringing to the state or district, while somehow not mentioning the overall cost of the latest highway-funds bill.
The gas tax goes to the general fund its not set aside for roads and infrastructure. The same way property tax and the lotto are not set aside for "education"
There's no such thing as good theft.
The "one good tax" argument is defeated by one fact: fungibility. The money all goes into one pot. As far as I'm concerned, it's just another tax, so there's no good reason for a libertarian not to want to get rid of it, reduce it, suspend it, or create loopholes in it.
^This^. I support toll roads where the revenues stay with the road.
Creating loopholes in taxes is what crony capitalists do, not libertarians.
In a libertarian society, roads are financed through user fees. Historically, gas taxes were a good way of doing that.
What's primarily wrong with gas taxes and roads is that they are not separate from other parts of the government; that is, both the tax revenue and the road building expenditures are subject to lobbying and political power. So, fungibility is part of the problem, but it's not the whole problem.
"The "one good tax" argument is defeated by one fact: fungibility..."
VERY good point; what was intended to construct and maintain roads for gas-powered vehicles it now used to finance bike-trails in Marin County and (maybe not anymore) Moonbeam's choo-choo.
So do tariffs, yet you are on a crusade against them.
On the other hand, you never say anything about income taxes, sales taxes, or capital gains taxes.
Bingo.
Taxes that hit the US working class good, taxes that hit the international ruling class bad.
As a reminder, the supposed "Free Traders" of Reason oppose Adam Smith, and it's impossible that the professional corporate shills at Reason don't know this.
Smith generally favored tariffs to protect industries for national security, to offset local taxes on production, and on deliberation as a negotiating tactic to lower foreign tariffs.
Tariffs to offset local taxes on production are key.
Why should your neighbor's labor be taxed, or goods he sells you from his labor, but not the goods from foreigners?
That's not free trade, that's biased trade favoring foreign production.
Wealth of Nations, pg. 355, 356, 359
https://ibiblio.org/ml/libri/s/SmithA_WealthNations_p.pdf
Fairness demands charging drivers for the roads.
If the gas tax doesn't apply to EVs, then it's discriminatory.
The only alternative would be to require nonmotorists to subsidize driving infrastructure for them.
You mean people who use buses and EVs?
Generally have to pay a fare for a bus.
I mean, most of the public transit here is heavily subsidized, but still.
I don't have a mitigation argument for EVs. They straight up aren't paying this "user fee" gas tax. And they get MORE access than those paying it, as almost all of the local freeway construction here has been HOV lanes which single drivers in EVs can use, but gas driven cars cannot.
Alas, the only solutions to this I've seen seem to be to allow the government to track every mile you drive, which is a monstrous privacy nightmare. Like they couldn't just report an odometer reading on their tax form, the solution always seems to be an embedded tracking device. There has to be a better way to get EVs to pay their road tax share.
We need a smug asshole tax for the EV drivers.
Smug asshole taxes in this state would be a hell of a moneymaker!
Start with the EVs and expand out from there and you might even be able to fund all of those unfunded pensions that get curiously left out of the accounting when they talk about budget deficits and surpluses.
BMW 3 series drivers.
I don't know if you have noticed by many places like where I live have removed the bus fair and put it to the property owners to pay. The goal was to have "equity" in transportation, but then rent just went up for them...
In actual fact, motorists have been subsidizing public transit and other boondoggles.
But we wouldn't have to have these discussions in the first place if roads were private businesses. They'd make revenue from tolls, but also from gas and concessions, similar to movie theaters and ski resorts.
It's a libertarian idea. You should look up "libertarianism" some time, Christian.
Eat a dick, Christian.
I propose a journalist tax, to be paid weekly by these talentless hacks who campaigned for Biden
Nobody mentions that the "Highway Trust Fund" was solvent until all of the designated funds were put into the General Fund to give the illusion of a surplus.
the "Highway Trust Fund" was solvent
Bullshit. It was looted just like the SS "trust fund" from day one. It's nothing but a pile of IOUs from the biggest debtor of all time.
-jcr
It would be a valid point to critique the gas tax reduction if the funds actually went to road maintenance. Sadly, a large chunk of those funds go for parks, bike paths, and pedestrian access programs for things like abandoned rail access easements.
It is indeed a valid point that electric vehicles currently pay no road taxes. Of course we (taxpayers) subsidize the price of electric vehicles so I guess you can view the lack of road taxes as just additional subsidy.
First off, if the feds do such an inefficient job maintaining the roads that the current gas tax scheme isn't enough to keep up the payments, then we should definitely be questioning its sustainability and coming up with better options, rather than just ceding the premise that "gas tax = good" because as far as government theft goes, it's marginally less bad than their other various methods.
Secondly, replacing gas taxes with mileage taxes is just another bad idea. It, like gas taxes, may be on the 'less bad' side of the government theft scale, but changing how the government take our money isn't going to make them less wasteful in how they spend it. On top of that, given what we've seen the surveillance state doing with cell phone data & mass espionage, do we really want to give the feds our permission to track us everywhere we drive? How is that libertarian in any way, shape, manner or form?
Quite correct. A mileage tax is a most dumbassed idea.
Here at Reason, they cede the Statist ground and quibble over the details. Should be their motto.
Yes. It's a damn shame.
If the gas tax were a percentage based tax, it would be a good idea to reduce it, or suspend it. It's not. Its a per gallon tax and doesn't increase with gas prices.
EVs need to be taxed for road usage as well. Implement a mileage tax for EVs.
notice how Reason dot com is FOR a tax, as long as it's regressive. Corporatist bastards
Right? Instead of advocating privatization TeenReason plumps for taxes.
Notice how the assholish TGP shows up now and then?
Eat shit and die, lefty shit-pile.
Bingo.
Benjamin Tucker's critique of Herbert Spencer in 1884 applies to most all of Reason's articles on economics.
A good tax?
If that's true (that the gasoline tax funds roads by taxing the people who use them), then electric car buyers should be getting a separate tax bill, and not a tax credit.
Biden still hasn't allowed any sales of on shore oil leases, today announcing he once again has pushed back a scheduled sale at the behest of environmental groups. How about instead of tax holidays we have a holiday were we sell leases and allow refineries to be built and expanded?
Also, it makes absolutely no sense to me to protest against petroleum drilled domestically and shipping in to replace it, if your primary concern is CO2. Don't you think shipping petroleum from thousands of miles away by ship and train produces more CO2 than drilling it here and shipping it hundreds of miles (at most) via pipelines? Once again I can't help but be amazed by the pure disconnect of the environmental movement (that is if I actually believed they cared about the environment rather than used it as a means to change society).
32% of the total Co2 in the atmosphere is anthropogenic.
Co2 composes 0.04% of the atmosphere.
Thus human impact on the atmosphere via Co2 emissions is roughly .01%.
We're being forced to make massive sacrifices and reduce our livelihoods in the hope that we can somewhat influence atmospheric conditions by 0.01%...
There is no rational logic here, only war.
The author is either naive, stupid or intentionally misleading. A basic search turns up accounts like this ...
"The 19-cent gas tax in Illinois was intended to be directed solely to the Road Fund and State Construction Fund and used exclusively for infrastructure improvements. However, According to the Illinois Economic Policy Institute, $6.8 billion in transportation funds was diverted by Illinois' legislature between FY02 to FY15 in order to plug budget deficits in non-transportation related areas."
You'd be hard pressed to find a state, especially the blue ones, that actually used gas taxes for improving roads, etc.
And, more generally, how is it "libertarian" to argue in favor of ANY kind of tax for a service that can be provided by the private sector?
Uh, the state taxes are irrelevant here.
Now the **REAL** question remains.. Why the F is federal doing road maintenance and what authorized them to do so????
The USPS?? What joke... Where exactly are the State's denying "Postal Route" access??
Well, you've got a losing hand, so don't play it too long; this is one of the few "general welfare" claims that passes the sniff test.
The fed gov set standards in signage and road engineering, so once you crossed a state line you were not surprised. Further, like the intercontinental railway, it improved commerce nationwide, adding prosperity far in excess of any tax costs, which were intended to be collected at the pump by the national gas tax.
If that ain't the closest approximation of toll roads, minus the stops every X miles, it'll do until a better one comes along.
Perhaps that's the very problem...
Too many think the USA is a "losing hand" and Nazism will work better.
P.S. There is no such thing as a "general welfare" clause. It is the taxing clause for the general welfare of the U.S. Government.
You guys have it all wrong. Taxes, and associated made-up numbers, have nothing to do with anything else. Taxes, and tax changes, are for punishing bad people for doing evil things, and rewarding good people for their virtue, like voting (D).
Instead of a tax holiday, how about a law and regulation holiday?
Including laws against hookers and blow?
Come back when the feds agree that gas taxes will be used for highways and only highways.
https://www.zerohedge.com/energy/chevron-ceo-slams-political-rhetoric-scorching-letter-biden
War is being waged on you, and you're being subjugated.
Stop lying to yourselves.
https://twitter.com/ShellenbergerMD/status/1539321954163130368?t=g2uoGAu5BReYXRPzcK-7vw&s=19
The Fed is raising interest rates to reduce demand but the main cause of inflation is lack of supply, particularly abundant, cheap, & reliable energy. Even ESG/renewables promoter Larry Fink @BlackRock admits "the energy transition can be highly inflationary."
There are other causes of inflation, e.g. the slow ramping up of supply chains following the pandemic, the $1.7 trillion stimulus, and China’s lockdown.
But energy prices rose 4x more than all prices & energy is a factor in the higher prices of everything in the economy.
The evidence is overwhelming that weather-dependent renewables make electricity more expensive. The reason is because of all the additional people and equipment including reliable power plants they require
And then there's ESG
“ESG [environmental, social, & governance] considerations account for much of the decline in capital expenditure by international oil companies in recent years and the investor exodus out of oil and gas markets” said @FT last year
Normally, the anticipation of higher oil and gas demand causes firms to increase investment in exploration. That hasn’t happened. The main reason, according to Goldman Sachs, is climate activist pressure on governments, firms, and banks to divest from oil and gas exploration.
Oil and gas exploration investments declined by half between 2011 and 2021. New oilfield discoveries fell to historic lows between 2016 and 2020, not due to lack of oil, but lack of investment in exploration. In 2021, firms spent 25% less than they needed to maintain production
Note that Fink recognizes that renewables/ESG will continue to keep energy prices high even after recession ends. "We may continue to have supply problems" as a consequence of restricting energy supplies and moving to weather-dependent renewables.
“Fink: Energy Transitions Can Be Highly Inflationary”
Actually, only a transition TO renewables is highly inflationary
Past energy transitions, eg from wood to coal to oil/gas, *lowered* the cost of energy
[Links]
And war is being waged against us by Putin too, right?
Putin compares himself to Peter the Great in fight to expand Russia
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/putin-ukraine-russia-tsar-peter-great-imperialism-rcna32909?share=twitter
Putin's TV mocks 'opulent' celebration of the Queen's Platinum Jubilee and warns power cuts are on the way for Britons over Russian sanctions
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10881273/Putins-TV-mocks-opulent-celebration-Queens-Platinum-Jubilee.html
Oh, FFS! One more assholish "twitter source".
Fuck off and die, asshole.
Sorry. Reply to the assholish nardz.
The gas tax is the one good tax,
Fuck you. Taxation is theft.
-jcr
So now the Libertarians are arguing for a tax because of roads? Reason is lost. This is why we can't have nice things.
But my roads....
Actually, gas taxes are an absolutely lousy proxy for road maintenance costs. Cars can vary radically in fuel consumption for the same amount of road wear.
Studies have shown that road wear is basically a 4th power function of pounds per tire contact patch, approximately speaking. One overloaded truck can cause more damage to the roads burning a gallon of diesel than normal passenger cars burning 10,000 gallons of gasoline. While the cars might use up 10,000 times as much road space.
You could, in theory, come up with a vehicle mile based tax that would much better approximate the expense a vehicle imposed on the road system. It wouldn't look anything like a gas tax.
No tax makes sense. Privatize the roads.
the federal gas tax is $.18/gallon. given that gas prices have more than doubled since brandon took office this suspension will have little impact. the actual solution is something he will never even consider because "climate change". what a moron.
"what a moron."?? Really? You assume Biden makes policy? You assume the "deep state" means well, but is moronic?
Think about it!
"But the federal gas tax is more appropriately thought of as a user fee that charges people for a service they consume." - It's not though. Electric cars "consume" the service and pay nothing. Hybrids and fuel efficient cars pay less than their share. Secretary Mayor Pete's mileage tax idea would actually be what you say the gas tax is, but I don't know how you implement it in a way that isn't extremely intrusive.
“The Gas Tax Makes Sense.”
No, it doesn’t!
That was true when Eisenhower was president but it has not been true since Reagan’s presidency. It was on Reagan’s watch that massive diversion of gas tax revenue began.
As long as drivers have to pay user taxes that are not spent 100% on roads, and as long as there doesn’t exist any user taxes for bus and train passengers, the gas tax makes NO sense. We might as well pay for all transportation out of the General Fund.