AMT Road Funding Proposals Could Make Cars Pay Even More

As if the already heavy tax burden on fuel and car prices, motorway tolls and paid parking were not enough, the pressure placed on drivers could become tighter still.

It seems there may be further ways to make motorists pay that had not previously been identified. Fortunately, the Mobility and Transport Authority (AMT) has now listed them in its Strategic Study on Road Network Funding.

Among the ideas intended to make car users contribute a little more are dedicated charges for electric vehicles, mileage-based taxation for heavy and commercial vehicles, and even tolls for entering cities.

Of course, none of these suggestions would automatically become a new charge tomorrow morning. The recommendations are not binding and form part of a wider debate on the future of mobility funding.

Yet, given the State’s reliance on income generated by the motor sector, putting forward these ideas is rather like asking a child whether they would like a sweet.

AMT road funding proposals: another way to make cars pay

I will not examine each of these proposals individually here. What matters more is connecting them with the reality of the country, which those producing such studies often appear to overlook.

Charging by distance travelled, introducing a dedicated levy for electric cars or imposing fees to enter cities may each have different justifications. The issue arises when they are proposed for a sector that already bears a very substantial tax load.

I am not disputing the need to fund roads, find answers to urban congestion or address the loss of revenue caused by electrification. What I question is how readily the car is treated as the solution to every one of those problems.

Motorists already pay when they buy a car, fill it with fuel, maintain it, use certain roads and, in many cases, park it. New funding methods are open to legitimate discussion. But it is equally legitimate to ask where a necessary contribution ends and excessive burden begins.

For decades, after all, the car has been something of a golden goose for public finances. A highly predictable one, I would say.

The limits of the motorist’s contribution

A car cannot move to a tax haven when the Annual Vehicle Tax (IUC) falls due, cross the border to avoid a toll, or simply stop being used for a large part of the population. The problem is that even golden geese have their limits.

If every proposed measure goes ahead, I believe some people may consider giving up their cars despite needing them, and look for alternatives. These could range from straightforward options, such as using public transport, to more drastic choices, including changing jobs or moving their children to a school closer to home.

When a car becomes only an expense

If Portuguese people start to regard the car solely as an expense rather than the means of mobility and individual freedom it still represents today, the State risks killing the golden goose by constantly demanding more eggs from it.