Research submitted to House of Representatives
The goal of the current government is that we will switch from the current motor vehicle tax to ‘pay according to use’ by 2030. To do this, however, it must be reliably recorded how much you drive. An initial investigation puts forward several options for this. It is also clear that only a small majority is in favor of the kilometer charge.
It has been talked about for decades, but it now seems to be becoming a lot more concrete: kilometer charge. No more fixed amount mrb, but pay according to use. Last year we already extensively discussed the proposals that are now available to put this into practice. Since then, the government has not been idle, because research has been done into the support in the Netherlands and the possibilities for putting it into practice. State Secretary Van Rij (Tax and Tax Authorities) and Minister Harbers (Infrastructure and Water Management) have this investigation now presented to the House of Representatives.
Limited support for kilometer charge
There does not seem to be too much support for paying according to use, because only a small majority of the respondents with an opinion are in favour. About 50 percent are positive about it, 44 percent negative and 6 percent don’t know. The following conclusion emerges from the study: ‘The initial reaction of the Dutch is positive: Paying according to use seems more logical and therefore fairer because the user pays. Further consideration raises strong doubts about the fairness and effectiveness of pay-as-you-go. These doubts seem to be related to sentiments about distrust of the government and growing inequality.’ Furthermore, a majority says they do not support the idea of having everyone pay the same per kilometer. What is seen as positive is that the ‘polluter pays’. This is the most frequently mentioned argument in favor of the kilometer charge (33 percent). The most frequently mentioned counter argument is that there is not yet enough knowledge about the consequences (16 percent). After that, the expectation that driving will make driving more expensive is most often given as a counter argument (14 percent).
Mileage registration options
The Cabinet’s starting point is that there is a kilometer registration on an annual basis. Various options are presented for registering the kilometers driven. The first is one annual registration of the mileage at the garage. Without a box in the car or the like, just a registration by reading the counter, as is currently the case with the National Auto Pass (NAP). In addition, you must also report the mileage to the tax authorities yourself. A second option is almost the same, only then you have to report your mileage to the tax authorities every quarter. The third option is a box that transmits the odometer readings and, in addition, one more moment when you have to manually report it to the tax authorities.
The first option has the greatest support, according to the study. However, the third option, with the box, is seen as the most reliable. The important side note is that this is also regarded as the most privacy-sensitive by the interviewees. It is also described as a system that is ‘least suited to a government that trusts its citizens’. If the kilometer charge is introduced, there will be a slight preference for reliability of the kilometer registration over guaranteeing privacy. If a choice has to be made between privacy and ease of registration, there is more of an even split.
It is striking that in the plans the government does not yet make a distinction between kilometers driven in the Netherlands or abroad, and 34 percent of the respondents say they have no problem with that. That group accepts that if it means that the government does not collect data about the location of the car. A slightly larger group (37 percent) does want foreign kilometers to be disregarded. 29 percent have no opinion on this.
Proposal for further research
In the letter to parliament that was handed over on Thursday by Van Rij and Harbers, three possible forms of registration are presented. It is striking that this concerns one method that is purely based on manual registration of the mileage and two methods that require a box in the car. The first option is ‘building on existing measurement systems and recording them, possibly with additional registration moments.’ The second option is one with a built-in box: ‘Device in the car that registers the mileage of the car without GPS (device is connected to odometer reading and stores data separately).’ In view of the research results, the third option will probably provoke the most resistance: ‘Device in the car that independently measures, registers and communicates the number of kilometers driven on the basis of GPS.’
In their letter, Van Rij and Harbers do write that the recommendation is to further develop the first option, ‘and to develop a more detailed picture of the potential fraud behavior per risk group, so that within solution direction 1 a targeted set of control measures can be developed. , supervision and enforcement.’ In the spring, the cabinet expects to present further research results into how the kilometer registration can be designed.
– Thanks for information from Autoweek.nl