Skip to main content

NATSO dismisses tolling study claims

NATSO, the US association representing travel plazas and truck-stops, has rejected the report prepared by the Reason Foundation that pushes for widespread tolling. "The public detests interstate tolls, and with good reason," said NATSO president and CEO Lisa Mullings. "Tolls divert motorists and truck drivers to non-interstates, leading to more traffic deaths. Additionally, it costs the government more money to collect tolls than to collect fuel taxes."
September 16, 2013 Read time: 2 mins
Some dispute the finding of a study advocating tolling as the way to fund infrastructure investment
7486 NATSO, the US association representing travel plazas and truck-stops, has rejected the report prepared by the Reason Foundation that pushes for widespread tolling.

"The public detests interstate tolls, and with good reason," said NATSO president and CEO Lisa Mullings. "Tolls divert motorists and truck drivers to non-interstates, leading to more traffic deaths. Additionally, it costs the government more money to collect tolls than to collect fuel taxes."

According to NATSO, the report makes several faulty assumptions, including the five percent collection costs for the entire interstate system based on a study of four existing urban toll roads. NATSO says vast majority of the interstate system is rural and therefore has lower volumes, so collection costs are bound to be much higher on average. Historically, it costs less than one per cent to collect the fuel tax, which is collected at the wholesale level by about 1,500 registered taxpayers. Even with electronic tolling, it costs between 20 per cent and 30 per cent just for toll collection and administration.

The report claims motorists prefer tolls to higher fuel taxes, but this is based on surveys asking about tolls only on newly built lanes, not on existing interstates.

NATSO feels the Reason Foundation's report mischaracterises why three states that have been granted conditional approval to implement interstate tolling under a federal pilot program have not moved forward. The report claims Virginia, North Carolina and Missouri have not "solved the political problem of getting legislative approval to go forward."  The fact is the legislature in each of the states killed the tolling initiatives, citing overwhelming public opposition to it.

"It is not a 'political problem' when citizens urge their elected officials to reject a proposal that would, if enacted, effectively tax them twice," Mullings said.

For more information on companies in this article

Related Content

  • Texans would support toll interoperability
    September 12, 2014
    As transportation industry experts from around the world gather in Austin, Texas for the International Bridge, Tunnel and Turnpike Association’s 82nd Annual Meeting and Exhibition, 14-17 September, infrastructure solutions firm HNTB Corporation announces the results of a new America THINKS tolling survey, including the public’s views on tolling in the State. According to the survey, close to three in four (73 per cent) Texans who regularly drive on roads or bridges with tolls are pleased with the value
  • Minnesota study finds support for automated speed enforcement
    December 14, 2012
    A recent study by the University of Minnesota found strong support for automated speed enforcement, particularly in work zones and school zones and if revenues from fines are dedicated for road safety programs. Presenting the findings, Frank Douma, associate director of the State and Local Policy Program in the Humphrey School of Public Affairs said automated speed enforcement has been deployed in fourteen states and in many countries, especially in Europe. Automated speed enforcement is proven to be an ef
  • Road pricing is inevitable – because the ‘user pays’ principle is fair
    June 14, 2018
    We pay for roads through our taxes: the poor pay proportionately more, and effectively subsidise the rich. It would be fairer to accept the ‘user pays’ principle, says Dr John Walker. Road pricing is already used worldwide to combat congestion and pollution, to compensate for falling revenues from fuel duty (‘gas tax’), to provide an alternative (and fairer) means of charging motorists than the 80-year old fuel tax and to improve the efficiency of and expand transport infrastructure. However, it could and s
  • Debating road user charging systems
    January 26, 2012
    Are pre-launch trials of charging systems the way to improve public acceptance? Or is the real key a more robust political attitude? Here, leading system suppliers discuss the issue. The use of distance-based Road User Charging (RUC) is now well established, at least for heavy goods vehicles on strategic roads. However demand management for all vehicles, whether a distance-based charge or some form of cordon scheme, has yet to make significant progress. This is in spite of the logic and equity of RUC being