Though currently you don't need an MOT until a vehicle is 3 years old, so they'll to add something there.
EVs are also much harsher on roads because of their weight.
I’d have to drive an EV about 35% more miles each year to make it to break even on tax versus our 35 mpg ICE car. It’s no bargain, it’s punishment for driving an EV.
EVs are also much harsher on roads because of their weight.
My Hyundai Ioniq 5 weighs less than the most popular vehicle in the US: the F-150. I don’t see those getting special taxes.
How do you pay more taxes on EVs when you factor in gas taxes?
Huh? Simple math?
$MILES_PER_YEAR/$200 (EV tax in WA) vs. $GALLONS_USED * $0.18 in the ICE car. I pay more in taxes to run the EV in a year than I do for equivalent miles in a 35mpg ICE. IOW, if I drove the Scion xB all the time, I’d pay less tax.
For an EV I’d pay $258.90 extra to register.
My state must be factoring in average miles driven to come up with the $258 number instead of charging per mile driven.
I think they should just tax tires. It sounds easier to administer and if it was a natural tax it would alleviate the main weakness it seemed to have: That's you buy your tires in the state with the lowest tire tax.
In fact, within ICE vehicles, the gap between sedans/hatchbacks/compact crossovers and giant SUVs and trucks is larger, and yet for some reason we aren’t taxing drivers of Suburbans and F-150s accordingly.
If we applied this logic fairly we should be pushing people to right-size their vehicles regardless of fuel type.
See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_power_law
As an example:
A 2026 Honda Accord LX has a combined gas mileage around 32 mpg and a curb weight of 3,239 lbs.
See: https://automobiles.honda.com/accord-sedan/specs-features-tr...
A 2025 Ford F-150 XLT has a combined gas mileage around 20 mpg and a curb weight of 4,941 lbs.
See: https://www.edmunds.com/ford/f-150/2025/features-specs/
Keeping things simple and calculating the axle weight to the fourth powers of both vehicles, the F-150 causes 5.4x the road wear of the Honda Accord while using only 1.6x the gas.
The reason this doesn't matter so much, though, is that the types of trucks used for shipping goods, when loaded, cause on the order of 10^4 the road wear, dwarfing any differences between standard commuter vehicles, which is why commercial trucks have to stop at weigh stations.
So then tax based on weight if that's the differentiator of the damage done? I guess in combination with mileage would make most sense, and add in a scale based on net worth too to make it extra goodie.
[1] Commercial vehicle weight is strongly determined by the cargo load.
Where this new fee has issues is that it would charge EV owners roughly double the average amount paid by ICE owners in federal fuel tax, and wouldn't consider how much driving a given EV is actually doing.
Electricity doesn't, and it's not very fair to just add those taxes.
But, there wouldn't be the opportunity for asking for political favors, so don't expect anyone who likes you having to beg to champion such a process.
Federal gas tax is generally used for new roads, not road maintenance. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Highway_Trust_Fund
If you want an “honest framing”, raise the federal fuel tax to match inflation, then we’ll talk about EVs. Plain and simple, this is just a move to punish EV use.
> […] attempts […] to suspend the federal gas tax, without which […] would have halted efforts to repair and expand the Federal highway system.
(emphasis mine)
Did you have a specific quote you intended to point to to support your claim?
People have gotten incentives to buy EVs for a very long time now. Isn't it time they pay their fair share? Or do they plan to pay back all the subsidies?
For fairness you also take into account that EVs are more expensive so subsidizing EVs isn't just saving the planet, it's punishing the poor.
Just as soon as fossil fuel companies pay back their subsidies, I’ll have a check ready to send to the U. S . Treasury.
I still find it difficult to believe people bring up EV subsidies with a straight face, like it’s the only thing the government has ever subsidized.
But it's annoying to see the US government find a new way to discourage one of the most clear cut ways to reduce fossil fuel usage. If things were fair, we would be taxing gas for its contribution to air pollution and climate change.
We should be doing everything we can to encourage EV adoption, but the current administration is interested in doing the exact opposite. They apparently found a way to do so which gets bipartisan support.
Sure, Detroit which is on life support from making shitty overpriced cars would cease to exist. But EVs would take over the US in just 5 years.
FWIW, the gas tax also only pays a fraction of the actual cost of maintaining roads.
You could argue urban drivers are currently subsidizing rural drivers because they travel fewer miles in a year.
My opinion is this should be up to each State, and that this is federal government overreach.