Tax the Cyclists!

In the forums on bicycletimesmag.com, I came across a very interesting Canadian op ed. The gist is the author is miffed because cyclists don't have to pay taxes in the form of licensing, tags, and the other soft costs that come along with car ownership. We could also mention gas taxes, personal property taxes, and disposal fees for oil and tires where appropriate.

On one hand, it makes sense. If we want infrastructure specifically for or friendly to cyclists, why shouldn't we help pay for these improvements? And why can just anyone purchase a bike and take to the roads without any formal certification? Lord knows I see enough cyclists running stop signs and passing dangerously close on MUTs to lead me to believe they have no idea what they're doing.

But on the other hand, it doesn't make sense at all.

Here deep in the suburbs of O.P., KS, everyone pays for infrastructure, not just car drivers. Just merely living in JoCo is enough to necessitate your participation in chipping in, and I'm fine with that. It's the same thing with schools. We have four kids in our JoCostead. And while not one of them attend public schools, we still help fund the schools in our district through our taxes. It's the same with the elderly couple with no school-aged kids next door. In some ways, it's like the poll tax the UK had; you exist so you pay. In this sense, cyclists do pay for infrastructure.

Some infrastructure comes from fuel tax. Gas is a bit higher in Kansas compared to Missouri, but our roads are also much nicer. But saying that a cyclist uses the same roads and should therefore pay a fuel tax is absurd. When I drive a car to work, my car gets roughly 30 miles per gallon. If I drove our family minivan it'd be more like 20 MPG, maybe even less. If I drove the van to work instead of the car I'd pay more in fuel taxes. That makes sense because the van is larger so it does more damage to the roads than my commuter car, and in some circles you might argue it does more damage to the environment as well.

When I ride the bike, my efficiency ranges from 200 to 600 miles per gallon equivalent, depending on who is calculating. But that's not actual gasoline consumed, mind you. It's more like spaghetti or burritos consumed. Plus, the actual damage to the roads is practically nil because the bike is so light weight. There seems to be no logical way to charge cyclists a fuel-equivalent tax. Perhaps I should pay a burrito tax?

Now that we're staring down the loaded barrel of socialized medicine, one could argue that cyclists should pay fewer taxes! Think about it. Minimal if any environmental damage is done on a bike, including noise pollution. This means less carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide, plus no hearing damage due to annoying loud bass-heavy stereos or exhaust pipes. And let's not forget the health benefits of actually riding a bike like weight loss and increased cardio-pulmonary efficiency. Shouldn't we be rewarded for this?

That might not fly. What about licensing requirements? Would anyone argue that having a license to drive a car is a bad thing? I sure wouldn't. In fact, with a teenager in the house I think we should be stricter with who we let behind the wheel.

I'm not sure when or why we started requiring drivers to be certified, but I support it. For automobiles, not for bicycles. To put it simply, automobiles are killing machines. I know, even a ball-point pen in the wrong hands is a killing machine, but cars are about the most deadly device out there. And since our roads are clogged with them it's prudent that we regulate who can and cannot get behind the wheel. It seriously pains me to say that, but it's true. Bicycles, however, don't come with the inherent danger. If the streets are clogged with bikes and a collision ensues, I feel pretty good about the survival rate.

I'm not sold on the idea of taxes for cyclists, and I'm more convinced that cyclists deserve a tax break rather than additional tax burden. I think the person who wrote the op-ed piece is simply annoyed because she sees cyclists as annoyances.

There was a time that I used to agree with that point of view.