New Transit Funding Sources

[crs1026]

Perhaps it is easier to raise taxes for transit when the tax people are paying is 8% rather than one that is already at 13% ? Perhaps they are not as close to the "enough already" level?

I have no information on Atlanta specifically, but I am always amazed at what comes out when I talk to people in the US about their tax regime - there may be any number of levees or local taxes - even municipal income tax.

No doubt we pay more tax overall up here, but we package it a lot less delicately, and we dump a lot more of it into general revenue. A transit-specific levee with specific goals and time limits has a whole different appeal than a measure that sounds like just cranking taxation.

- Paul

 

[crs1026]

Perhaps it is easier to raise taxes for transit when the tax people are paying is 8% rather than one that is already at 13% ? Perhaps they are not as close to the "enough already" level?

I have no information on Atlanta specifically, but I am always amazed at what comes out when I talk to people in the US about their tax regime - there may be any number of levees or local taxes - even municipal income tax.

No doubt we pay more tax overall up here, but we package it a lot less delicately, and we dump a lot more of it into general revenue. A transit-specific levee with specific goals and time limits has a whole different appeal than a measure that sounds like just cranking taxation.

- Paul

 

[TOareaFan]

The U.S. pays a hidden federal excise tax. In Canada, the hidden excise tax was replaced by a visible goods and services tax.

See link for the table of sales taxes in each state in 2015.

I am not sure the point you are making....perhaps I did not make mine well. Regardless of excise taxes, most goods and services cost more in Canada (currency adjusted) so to the consumer/voter that pays for them it is hardly relevant whether that price includes or does not include any form of hidden tax. So when the people of Atlanta are asked to approve an increase in their sales tax from 8% to 8.5% they are more likely to look upon that favourably than if you said to the people of Ontario you were going to add on to their sales tax which is already at 13%.

 

[TOareaFan]

I have no information on Atlanta specifically, but I am always amazed at what comes out when I talk to people in the US about their tax regime - there may be any number of levees or local taxes - even municipal income tax.

No doubt we pay more tax overall up here, but we package it a lot less delicately, and we dump a lot more of it into general revenue. A transit-specific levee with specific goals and time limits has a whole different appeal than a measure that sounds like just cranking taxation.

- Paul

but if, as you acknowledge, we are already pay ore tax overall what do you think it matters to people if the new tax they are asked to approve is for a specific purpose or not? It is the additive/"pile on" effect that will have people will see. Again, if taxes are generally lower it is easier to sell a small incremental targeted tax than it is if taxes are already higher.

I think transit, specifically, has a problem here....because people know that, already, a portion of gas taxes was supposed to be dedicated to transit....so (whether that number is enough or not) people will say "more taxes, and more for transit....what did they do with the last bunch and where am I going to get this money from?"

 

[crs1026]

but if, as you acknowledge, we are already pay ore tax overall what do you think it matters to people if the new tax they are asked to approve is for a specific purpose or not? It is the additive/"pile on" effect that will have people will see. Again, if taxes are generally lower it is easier to sell a small incremental targeted tax than it is if taxes are already higher.

I suppose, but it depends on what you expect to get for your taxes. If you asked Atlantans what services they expect from government, their list will be shorter than Torontonians'.

A few years back my job centerred on preparing job offers to recruit people from the US to Canada . We used a consulting firm to calculate tax differentials between US and Canada to help sell our salary offers. (The topic is sufficiently complex to need professional databases and research). Housing costs, not tax rates, is what was most often the dealbreaker. Especially once they knew that health care was included in the tax equation.

So, in my experience there is no "comfortable" level of taxation. The threshold for revolt is variable.

I think transit, specifically, has a problem here....because people know that, already, a portion of gas taxes was supposed to be dedicated to transit....so (whether that number is enough or not) people will say "more taxes, and more for transit....what did they do with the last bunch and where am I going to get this money from?"

True, and frankly I would like that answered too. I want my gas tax directed towards transportation.

- Paul

 

[Euphoria]

Goods are already more expensive here than in the U.S. and we're taxed at higher rates. High energy prices are already a disincentive to energy consumption, and that's without Trudeau's coming carbon tax grab. There's an easy way to pay for the construction of new transit lines: let the private sector build new toll highways and require provision (room in the build) for subways, trains, or LRT's. That would cover at least the capital costs. Don't put any tolls or congestion charges on existing roads or highways. We're fleeced enough.

 

[W. K. Lis]

Goods are already more expensive here than in the U.S. and we're taxed at higher rates. High energy prices are already a disincentive to energy consumption, and that's without Trudeau's coming carbon tax grab. There's an easy way to pay for the construction of new transit lines: let the private sector build new toll highways and require provision (room in the build) for subways, trains, or LRT's. That would cover at least the capital costs. Don't put any tolls or congestion charges on existing roads or highways. We're fleeced enough.

See this link for electricity prices in 2016.

From April 1, 2016, for 1,000 kWh.
Montreal $72.26
Toronto $178.08
Boston $276.87
New York City $295.22
San Francisco $310.48

Guess which ones are private sector?

 

[Euphoria]

I hear you, though Hydro Quebec is in a unique jurisdiction for energy. I've always thought the oil sands should be government owned like Norway's oil, which basically ensures that Norway will always rank around the top of the UN Human Development Index. That ship has sailed for Ontario with the sale of Hydro One. Expect outrageous energy costs in the future. I would love for all future toll highways to be government owned, but our current governments and the public seem unable or unwilling to find novel ways to fund transit.

Really, I don't want the government to put any more money into health, education, or the environment. If the government put more money into transportation infrastructure, health, the environment, our competitiveness, and quality of life would improve. It's unnecessary to raise taxes to do this. Tolls on new highways would do the trick, whether the highways are government or privately owned.

 

[W. K. Lis]

The year was 1970. That was the last year in which fare revenues meet TTC operating expenses. Looking at this map

you'll see two out of three reasons why.

It was the last year in which Toronto had two fare zones. Senior fares were introduced (student fares were expanded from only up to 5 PM on school days, to 24/7 all year round). There was less, way less, bus service in zone 2 (just look at the northeast section of Scarborough).

 

[Adjei]

See this link for electricity prices in 2016.

From April 1, 2016, for 1,000 kWh.
Montreal $72.26
Toronto $178.08
Boston $276.87
New York City $295.22
San Francisco $310.48

Guess which ones are private sector?

I thought Ontario had the highest electricity prices in North America according to some of the media. No wonder Trump won. Media is just there to spread misinformation these days. We need to fact check the media on our own from independent sources.

 

[jje1000]

The thing is, people remember distinctly the past here when prices were lower rather than compare now the prices with other jurisdictions. It's not comparing prices now, it's comparing prices now to prices in the recent past.

The only time they compare to other places is when they see the double digit increases and think, "Why don't we see this elsewhere?"

 

[Adjei]

The thing is, people remember distinctly the past here when prices were lower rather than compare now the prices with other jurisdictions. It's not comparing prices now, it's comparing prices now to prices in the recent past.

The only time they compare to other places is when they see the double digit increases and think, "Why don't we see this elsewhere?"

We have regularly heard the PC Party stating Ontario has the highest hydro rates in North America which has been printed in the media and talk radio. They did not say the highest increase in rates.

https://niagaraatlarge.com/2016/08/...t-hydro-rates-of-any-region-in-canada-or-u-s/

https://www.baytoday.ca/local-news/...ty-prices-now-highest-in-north-america-354726

Media have become puppets for the political parties. They print what they believe is good for the parties they support. If you are going to print something make sure it's the truth. Since most people won't independently go out and verify if these claims are true, we get all this misinformation being spread.

 

[Fred.S]

I think if we want to get really serious about sustainable transit funding, we'll have to look at our fare system, and make some hard choices. In my experience, many places in the world with the geographic size and population density of Toronto have some sort of distance-based fare structure. Within Toronto, you could travel up to 35 km for $2.90, which seems way too low for that distance. A GO transit ride within the city usually runs just over $6.

With Presto, and tap in/tap out being possible, we have the technology to have distance-based fares without zones. You tap in at one station, tap out at your destination, and then the system calculates your point-to-point distance and assigns a fare. For example, you could have fares that are between $2 and $6 as below:

<5 km = $2
10 km = $3
15 km = $4
20 km = $4.50
25 km = $5
30 km = $5.50
35 km = $6
* $0.20 per km between 5 and 15 km, $0.10 per km between 15 and 35 km.

This means that people taking shorter trips pay almost a dollar less than today, and those taking what I assume is an average commute of 15 km, pay a dollar more. Those traveling over 15 km get a lower per km rate, so there is still technically a discount for longer distances. As well, with fare integration, you would pay the same fare whether you use a subway, LRT, or GO train, thus incentivizing people to use RER for longer trips within Toronto, and putting less burden on the subway system (assuming RER will be 10 min frequencies, all-day, in both directions). You could also make this GTA-wide, so there are no cross-border double fares.

One big issue that would have to be figured out is bus (and streetcar) transfers. You could either go tap-out on buses, or keep a flat fare and put a discount on transfer to/from buses. Something that won't cost the person more or too much less on long-distance trips.

In my opinion, the province is tapped-out for cash, and has some worrying debt issues. Tax hikes, new taxes, and other funding sources probably won't even cover all the capital costs of new projects. This may be difficult politically, but I think a fare system similar to this is necessary if we want to get really serious about making transit more sustainable.

 

[steveintoronto]

I thought Ontario had the highest electricity prices in North America according to some of the media. No wonder Trump won. Media is just there to spread misinformation these days. We need to fact check the media on our own from independent sources.

Very good find! I'm not going to comment on the specifics as that relates to Toronto prices, except to state that it's *Ontario prices* that's the real issue, but I don't want to get into that discussion right now, but what I found most odd about glancing at the different categories was Ottawa's rates being relatively cheap for the largest users, and relatively expensive for residential users. Hmmmmmm....my immediate impression there is that Ottawa is bending over backwards to attract large users, and Joe Q Public is paying the price for it.

 

[steveintoronto]

I think if we want to get really serious about sustainable transit funding, we'll have to look at our fare system, and make some hard choices. In my experience, many places in the world with the geographic size and population density of Toronto have some sort of distance-based fare structure. Within Toronto, you could travel up to 35 km for $2.90, which seems way too low for that distance. A GO transit ride within the city usually runs just over $6.

With Presto, and tap in/tap out being possible, we have the technology to have distance-based fares without zones. You tap in at one station, tap out at your destination, and then the system calculates your point-to-point distance and assigns a fare. For example, you could have fares that are between $2 and $6 as below:

<5 km = $2
10 km = $3
15 km = $4
20 km = $4.50
25 km = $5
30 km = $5.50
35 km = $6
* $0.20 per km between 5 and 15 km, $0.10 per km between 15 and 35 km.

This means that people taking shorter trips pay almost a dollar less than today, and those taking what I assume is an average commute of 15 km, pay a dollar more. Those traveling over 15 km get a lower per km rate, so there is still technically a discount for longer distances. As well, with fare integration, you would pay the same fare whether you use a subway, LRT, or GO train, thus incentivizing people to use RER for longer trips within Toronto, and putting less burden on the subway system (assuming RER will be 10 min frequencies, all-day, in both directions). You could also make this GTA-wide, so there are no cross-border double fares.

One big issue that would have to be figured out is bus (and streetcar) transfers. You could either go tap-out on buses, or keep a flat fare and put a discount on transfer to/from buses. Something that won't cost the person more or too much less on long-distance trips.

In my opinion, the province is tapped-out for cash, and has some worrying debt issues. Tax hikes, new taxes, and other funding sources probably won't even cover all the capital costs of new projects. This may be difficult politically, but I think a fare system similar to this is necessary if we want to get really serious about making transit more sustainable.

I take your point even further, and this will actually allow much more efficient use of the best way 'from here to there' to happen:

All GTHA transit systems integrated with GO must adopt the same distance-based fare rate (in terms of 'as the crow flies') so as to make transfer between them seamless and fully integrated. The customer has the choice of using whichever way is best for them, and there's incentive for supplying the most efficient way to deliver that trip. This is done in a number of 'World Class Cities' (Paris, London, etc), at least within a central zone.

Once this is done, SmartTrack can realize one of its few raisons d'etre.