this post was submitted on 17 Aug 2025
41 points (100.0% liked)

Australia

4439 readers
165 users here now

A place to discuss Australia and important Australian issues.

Before you post:

If you're posting anything related to:

If you're posting Australian News (not opinion or discussion pieces) post it to Australian News

Rules

This community is run under the rules of aussie.zone. In addition to those rules:

Banner Photo

Congratulations to @Tau@aussie.zone who had the most upvoted submission to our banner photo competition

Recommended and Related Communities

Be sure to check out and subscribe to our related communities on aussie.zone:

Plus other communities for sport and major cities.

https://aussie.zone/communities

Moderation

Since Kbin doesn't show Lemmy Moderators, I'll list them here. Also note that Kbin does not distinguish moderator comments.

Additionally, we have our instance admins: @lodion@aussie.zone and @Nath@aussie.zone

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

A specific road use tax on EVs and hybrids makes no sense.

Given the harms caused by traditional vehicles, society should welcome the decline in fuel excise revenue caused by the transition to EVs – in the same way we should welcome declining revenue from cigarette taxes.

Vehicle registration fees make only a modest contribution to road costs. That’s why all motorists should pay a road-user charge. The payment should be based on a combination of vehicle mass and distance travelled

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Kenny2999@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

It would be logical to base road tax also on vehicle weight and the use of studded tires (in addition to CO2 like it is now). However, the weight classes should be devised so that the change only affects the needlessly massive cars. This would be a win-win.

[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 5 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

The fuel excise obviously taxed larger vehicles more over the same distance. It totally makes sense to have weight classes.

Oh, and Australia needs a "kei" class, dammit. Nobody's second car has any business being bigger than that.

[–] sqgl@sh.itjust.works 3 points 8 hours ago (1 children)
[–] pHr34kY@lemmy.world 3 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

Yep. This is why I think my 900kg hatchback should cost less to register than a 2500kg roadblimp ute.

I don't think a quartic tax will scale too well because the impact of a vehicle isn't just its wear on the road.

However larger cars burn more fuel and release more particulates such as brake dust and microplastics from tyre wear. Backstreets that once could park on both sides without impeding flow are now reduced to a single lane. Turning lanes will now only hold 4 cars instead of 6, and less cars get through per green. They bring more kinetic energy into a collision, and are not as manouverable. They're less safe to have around by every measure.

If the TAC processed their road stats properly, they'd realise that a kei car won't kill anyone. People in kei cars will still get killed, but that's a misattributed stat that should go towards the vehicle that brought the most weight into the collision.

A fair tax would need to be based on size, weight and emissions. They all matter independently.