Taxing road users by mile

[signed]

They do it in flight. https://aviationweek.com/business-a...rm-engine-health-monitoring-services-products

That monitoring isn’t sending data to RR/GE for computation on their servers in (near) real-time, it’s computing them onboard and likely sending the data while on the ground

 

[JamesT]

That monitoring isn’t sending data to RR/GE for computation on their servers in (near) real-time, it’s computing them onboard and likely sending the data while on the ground

Engine Health Managment | Ingenia

Ingenia focuses on all aspects of engineering. Our articles showcase a wide range of engineering and technology innovation, from robotics and data to the latest in renewable energy and medical technologies.

www.ingenia.org.uk

A critical aspect of the EHM system is the transfer of data from aircraft to ground. The A380 uses the ‘ACARS’ digital datalink system as the primary method. This transmits the ACMS reports via a VHF radio or satellite link whilst the aircraft is in-flight. A worldwide ground network then transfers this data to the intended destination.

Now, it does go on to say the volume of data sent in flight is limited, but that is an article from 2009, fairly sure things have improved in the last 17 years. Also, for the road application it’s only being suggested to send location data, which is much lighter than say trying to stream audio or video.

 

[35B]

That monitoring isn’t sending data to RR/GE for computation on their servers in (near) real-time, it’s computing them onboard and likely sending the data while on the ground

No, it's sending the data in real time. As I discovered when I heard one of the engineers involved in resolving the QF32 incident talking about the experience

 

[signed]

TIL, thanks for that

 

[Bald Rick]

What I mean by that is while in flight.

Sure they send data when they are on the ground, like a car, but not continuously either

That monitoring isn’t sending data to RR/GE for computation on their servers in (near) real-time, it’s computing them onboard and likely sending the data while on the ground

It’s done in flight. Such data transfer is really quite easy. I was streaming live video above the north Atlantic a few weeks ago.

It’s not new tech either. Live flight systems data was streamed from Apollo 11 to Houston back in 1969.

 

[renegademaster]

The cell network is not reliable/extensive enough and giving every car a starlink terminal would be very expensive. Very different economics than streaming data from a few thousand planes

 

[Bald Rick]

The cell network is not reliable/extensive enough and giving every car a starlink terminal would be very expensive. Very different economics than streaming data from a few thousand planes

But cars already stream data back to ‘base’. Lots of it.

For example a friend of mine had an email from Volvo a couple of weeks back to say that they had noticed he had charged his car above a temporary limit suggested due to a recall notice (pending rectification).

 

[renegademaster]

But cars already stream data back to ‘base’. Lots of it.

For example a friend of mine had an email from Volvo a couple of weeks back to say that they had noticed he had charged his car above a temporary limit suggested due to a recall notice (pending rectification).

It needs to be consistent enough with little blind spots you don't create weird anomalies that charge people more than they used or give people plausible denialabilty to wrapping their black box in tin foil.

Another aspect that's needed is a common protocol for reporting, which is possible but would be much easier if we had the EU working with us on it at the same time

 

[martin butler]

How many billion will a pay by mile scheme cost though? Especially when the government finances will already be under pressure,

I can see the government deciding it's just going to be too difficult, and finding a way to replace the lost duty through general taxation, with a few changes here and there, so it's hardly noticed

Not every car can be easily fitted with a data recording box, unless its stand alone and does not need a power point, arial etc. then there's the cost involved,

 

[35B]

How many billion will a pay by mile scheme cost though? Especially when the government finances will already be under pressure,

I can see the government deciding it's just going to be too difficult, and finding a way to replace the lost duty through general taxation, with a few changes here and there, so it's hardly noticed

Not every car can be easily fitted with a data recording box, unless its stand alone and does not need a power point, arial etc. then there's the cost involved,

The point is that it should be pay per mile based on the odometer, not pay per mile based on where driven. That is the genius of the scheme proposed by the government, because it avoids all of the costs you highlight.

 

[Joe Paxton]

The point is that it should be pay per mile based on the odometer, not pay per mile based on where driven. That is the genius of the scheme proposed by the government, because it avoids all of the costs you highlight.

It also neatly sidesteps the issues about tracking, privacy and 'big brother' etc.

 

[SargeNpton]

If any pay by mile system is introduced, let's hope that it is more robust and accurate than the one on the Dartford Crossing that fined vehicles that had already paid their tolls.

 

[martin butler]

I'm assuming that the plan will be for the milometer reading to be recorded when a vehicle goes in for MOT, as that's the only time it is input on the DVLA database

So, what then happens to cars that are MOT exempt, or have not yet reached the age where an MOT is needed, what happens then? Asking drivers to report their milage without a verified check will be asking for fraudulent readings, to be sent in,

 

[Lucan]

So, what then happens to cars that are MOT exempt, or have not yet reached the age where an MOT is needed, what happens then?

Require them to report to an MoT test centre anyway, just to have the mileage taken.
Seems to be a lot of heavy weather being made of this.

 

[Sonic1234]

So, what then happens to cars that are MOT exempt, or have not yet reached the age where an MOT is needed

Cars that haven't reached MOT age will either submit readings annually, or get a bill for 3 years worth at the first MOT or if earlier, when the car is sold.

Classics may well be exempt, like they are exempt from road tax, ULEZ......

 

[Harpers Tate]

I can see a case for a scheme that operates in much the same way as monthly Direct Debits work for (eg) domestic energy consumption, whereby one provides an annual mileage estimate pending an actual "meter reading" (mileage at MOT) and that is used, alongside any + or - carried over figure, to calculate a fixed monthly payment for the coming 12 months.

 

[martin butler]

I can see any arrangement as being near on impossible to get right, for example estimated milage, some will be massively over charged, whilst others could be undercharged, and then being presented with a large bill, or large refund,

It would be far easier, if when using a charger, your subjected to an equivalent additional charge included in the cost as what is taken by fuel duty, so as petrol and diesel use declines, and use of electric vehicles increases, it balances out.

Most in home chargers, operate on a separate charging system, at a different cost, per Kw, so it should be able to tell when its being used to charge a car.

I just see road charging per mile, as being fraught with problems, unless the government bring in mandatory fitting of data boxes that can download to the DVLA accurate milage readings every month, using GPS

That might be a way to do it, similar to how inexperienced drivers have to on their insurance policies these boxes don't need to be hard wired, and can record distance travelled, it will need every driver though to have an DVLA account but if you hold an UK driving licence, you will already be on their database.

 

[Harpers Tate]

Most in home chargers, operate on a separate charging system, at a different cost, per Kw, so it should be able to tell when its being used to charge a car.

Too easy to avoid. My (and I suspect most) home charger(s) use exactly the same mains power supply and meter as the rest of the house. Yes, the charger itself knows how many units it has dispensed, but in order to apply a levy to that, the figure would have to be reported somewhere. And that requires a data connection. A data connection can be disconnected; mine operates solely via WiFi (accepting that some will have a cellular connection alongside) and all I'd need to do is disconnect it. That would render it a dumb 7kW outlet. I suspect a cellular connection can be disrupted if necessary. My "different cost" comes from a pure TOU (time of use) tariff, which applies equally to all power use in the house, including topping up the domestic backup battery overnight (so I can pay off-peak rates for much or all of my usage and get a higher export rate for my solar, than I pay for my overnight import). No reason to suppose any of these will change.

And in any case, I can use a slow 13a charger off any 13a socket on the domestic supply. Can't measure that.

As to estimates being wildly wrong - yes, but is the same not equally true of fixed monthly DDs for energy and water? It's "simply" a matter for the consumer to get that as close as they can to avoid a significant end-of-year + or - settlement..

 

[renegademaster]

Most in home chargers, operate on a separate charging system, at a different cost, per Kw, so it should be able to tell when its being used to charge a car.

Then everyone will just end up using granny chargers unless they can absolutely not avoid it.


Something people on here have to account for is that for any scheme that involves reporting from the cars software, is that we need to force the big manufacturers to agree to install the system, which they'll resist heavily and might even threaten to pull out of the British market.

 

[HSTEd]

A 2.5kW charger on a notionally 13A socket will easily supply 'ordinary' electric car usage, let alone a 16A 'Commando' socket that is actually rated for 16A continuously.

If a car spends 12 hours a day parked (7pm-7am) the charger could deliver something like 30kWh from a 13A socket.

I don't think the exemption of very new cars from MOTs is that big of an issue, it only imposes a marginal delay on when the state gets it's money from a small portion of the vehicle fleet.

 

[35B]

I can see any arrangement as being near on impossible to get right, for example estimated milage, some will be massively over charged, whilst others could be undercharged, and then being presented with a large bill, or large refund,

It would be far easier, if when using a charger, your subjected to an equivalent additional charge included in the cost as what is taken by fuel duty, so as petrol and diesel use declines, and use of electric vehicles increases, it balances out.

Most in home chargers, operate on a separate charging system, at a different cost, per Kw, so it should be able to tell when its being used to charge a car.

I just see road charging per mile, as being fraught with problems, unless the government bring in mandatory fitting of data boxes that can download to the DVLA accurate milage readings every month, using GPS

That might be a way to do it, similar to how inexperienced drivers have to on their insurance policies these boxes don't need to be hard wired, and can record distance travelled, it will need every driver though to have an DVLA account but if you hold an UK driving licence, you will already be on their database.

There are plenty of ways that the government could obtain the data. They currently use MOT, but that's flawed for new cars. A declaration of mileage at insurance renewal could work, or requiring a manual statement might. All of that can be the registered keeper's duty, not the driver's - my daughter drives our car, but is nothing to do with how it's taxed.

Estimated bills work aren't bad for most people, and it's usually pretty straightforward to submit a reading - nothing especially sophisticated is required, and the cost of going that far would be far in excess of the extra value.

 

[RailWonderer]

There are plenty of ways that the government could obtain the data. They currently use MOT, but that's flawed for new cars. A declaration of mileage at insurance renewal could work, or requiring a manual statement might. All of that can be the registered keeper's duty, not the driver's - my daughter drives our car, but is nothing to do with how it's taxed.

Estimated bills work aren't bad for most people, and it's usually pretty straightforward to submit a reading - nothing especially sophisticated is required, and the cost of going that far would be far in excess of the extra value.

New cars are normally delivered with <100miles on them but they could easily make the first 500-1k miles tax free.

One thing to consider is the government has never taken odometer clocking seriously even though it is a form of fraud. If pay per mile goes ahead they will need to criminalise this clocking like they do with energy meter tampering.

 

[35B]

New cars are normally delivered with >100miles on them but they could easily make the first 500-1k miles tax free.

One thing to consider is the government has never taken odometer clocking seriously even though it is a form of fraud. If pay per mile goes ahead they will need to criminalise this clocking like they do with energy meter tampering.

Which they would given it will affect tax revenues.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Overall I think a simple mileage charge could work.

Could expect new car owners to visit an MOT station every year n the period before the first three years is up.

As for annual billing being a bit blunt. When I was on 3 monthly energy billing I would in most quarters ring up with my own meter reading. So a car owner could easily ring-up/go-online as and when they desire in between annual MOTs to give an odometer reading. That could trigger an intermediate/mid-year bill. Or it could just alter an existing monthly (somewhat estimated) billing cycle. The choice could be the car owners/operators.

If people want regular billing of mileage then perhaps they would consider getting an automatic reader and reporter fitted. It is similar to the roll out of smart meters for domestic energy use.

If people are reporting a suspiciously low reading then invite them to visit a MOT test centre for the reading to be proved. That is what would happen with me. This is what used to happen with energy use before smart meters.

I would go for a monthly mileage based billing charge. With the option to give own readings * in between MOTs.

*= a personally read odometer reading would be worth catering for as it would cover a change of vehicle owner.

 

[The Ham]

Is there scope to add a surcharge on to the base rate every time you charge your EV? of the same rate as fuel duty is charged at? that then goes to the Government ? In very much as service stations, will pay the exchequer the fuel duty on sales,

Then no need for road pricing no need for complex tax changes etc, and it could run alongside fuel duty until the last petrol and diesel engined cans are consigned to a museum.

As othershave said far too easy to bypass.

I've already got an external plug socket on my drive.

If I wanted to (because of such a proposal) I could replace the internal switch with a WiFi controller with timer.

That would mean I could limit my charging to overnight or whenever a tariff was cheap.

Overall I think a simple mileage charge could work.

Could expect new car owners to visit an MOT station every year n the period before the first three years is up.

As for annual billing being a bit blunt. When I was on 3 monthly energy billing I would in most quarters ring up with my own meter reading. So a car owner could easily ring-up/go-online as and when they desire in between annual MOTs to give an odometer reading. That could trigger an intermediate/mid-year bill. Or it could just alter an existing monthly (somewhat estimated) billing cycle. The choice could be the car owners/operators.

If people want regular billing of mileage then perhaps they would consider getting an automatic reader and reporter fitted. It is similar to the roll out of smart meters for domestic energy use.

If people are reporting a suspiciously low reading then invite them to visit a MOT test centre for the reading to be proved. That is what would happen with me. This is what used to happen with energy use before smart meters.

I would go for a monthly mileage based billing charge. With the option to give own readings * in between MOTs.

*= a personally read odometer reading would be worth catering for as it would cover a change of vehicle owner.

Given milage is recorded at change of ownership, it would be a fairly easy thing to have added to the HPI check a check which logs the last recorded milage for the per milage charge.

Any large difference could result in people not being willing to buy the car.

As whilst at 3p a mile 500 miles is only £15 (and whilst most people would be grumpy about paying that when the previous owner should have, it's a small enough value which people could accept).

Although that does highlight that unless someone is underestimating their millage by more than 1,000 miles (>£30) they are unlikely to face a significant bill.

Likewise, it's unlikely that they would over estimate to the extent that they would end up with a large credit unless they were a few thousand miles off.

The system could send a "on your estimate you car xxnnxxx should be at around xx,000 miles" every month or quarter giving users a chance to check and adjust their payments.

 

[AlterEgo]

Overall I think a simple mileage charge could work.

Could expect new car owners to visit an MOT station every year n the period before the first three years is up.

As for annual billing being a bit blunt. When I was on 3 monthly energy billing I would in most quarters ring up with my own meter reading. So a car owner could easily ring-up/go-online as and when they desire in between annual MOTs to give an odometer reading. That could trigger an intermediate/mid-year bill. Or it could just alter an existing monthly (somewhat estimated) billing cycle. The choice could be the car owners/operators.

If people want regular billing of mileage then perhaps they would consider getting an automatic reader and reporter fitted. It is similar to the roll out of smart meters for domestic energy use.

If people are reporting a suspiciously low reading then invite them to visit a MOT test centre for the reading to be proved. That is what would happen with me. This is what used to happen with energy use before smart meters.

I would go for a monthly mileage based billing charge. With the option to give own readings * in between MOTs.

*= a personally read odometer reading would be worth catering for as it would cover a change of vehicle owner.

Why are we charging for road mileage potentially accrued outside the UK in this situation, and why are we charging all miles the same? GPS or camera controlled tolls are a much better way to manage this surely.

 

[35B]

Why are we charging for road mileage potentially accrued outside the UK in this situation, and why are we charging all miles the same? GPS or camera controlled tolls are a much better way to manage this surely.

Why? A huge infrastructure, large scale privacy intrusion, and maximum political risk. An average will work fine to get tax collected.

For the number of cars that leave the country, declarations at the port of exit and re entry would be sufficient if the tax is truly mileage based. And if it’s actually a vehicle levy in mileage clothing, then no need to bother.

 

[AlterEgo]

Why? A huge infrastructure, large scale privacy intrusion, and maximum political risk.

No more so than the congestion charge or ULEZ.

An average will work fine to get tax collected.

Sure but it will disproportionately affect people in rural areas and sparsely populated ones who need vehicles the most and who have the least alternative, which seems very unfair.

 

[renegademaster]

Are the cars that currently that are easy to hack the OBD to freeze the miles without leaving any evidence going to be recalled?

It doesn't matter how scary you make the penalties if enforcement is impossible, look at the TV licence or the streaming sticks everywhere

 

[35B]

No more so than the congestion charge or ULEZ.

Significantly more so - those are about driving within certain zones in a relatively limited area, not tracking journeys and mileage nationwide

Sure but it will disproportionately affect people in rural areas and sparsely populated ones who need vehicles the most and who have the least alternative, which seems very unfair.

No more or less unfair than the current fuel duty regime - which also additionally penalises those who can't afford more efficient cars.

But both raise a fundamental question - what is the purpose of the change? If you are just trying to replace a government income stream, then it's about how you transition between two regimes. The current direction of policy seems to focus on that, and is quick and dirty, in line with the relatively low cost to run fuel duty regime (and also some other taxes, notably Air Passenger Duty).

If you're trying to restructure how car usage is taxed, then the sort of ideas you mention start to apply. That's more demanding, will cost a lot of money, and carries significant political risks.