politics transport

Is it time for pay as you go road pricing?

As electric car sales rise in the UK, a problem looms for the government. The treasury takes in a substantial amount of money from fuel duty – the tax on petrol and diesel that drivers pay at the pump. Even with recent crowd-pleasing cuts and freezes to fuel duty, it still hauls in £28 billion a year in tax.

However, since they don’t burn petrol or diesel in their cars, electric vehicle drivers don’t contribute anything to this total. The more electric cars there are, the more that source of funding erodes. £28 billion is a significant prop to public spending, and it needs to be replaced by something else.

There’s also a matter of fairness. Until recently EV owners didn’t pay Vehicle Excise Duty either. That has all helped to incentivise their take-up, but as they become a mainstream option, EV owners ought to be contributing towards the cost of the road infrastructure they use.

Another problem, outlined by the Campaign for Better Transport recently, is that the tax exemptions could make EVs too cheap. No bad thing you might think, but if EVs are cheaper than public transport, then there’s little reason for people to choose the latter. That means – as has always been the risk with the electric cars – that in the long term we lower emissions but do nothing for traffic, car dependency, health, road safety or car-clogged neighbourhoods.

One way to address these problems is pay-as-you-go road pricing. This is fairly straightforward as a concept, and would consist of a per-mile charge for driving. The more miles you drive, the more you pay, and the rate could be linked to the car so that more polluting vehicles are more expensive. This could easily be reported as part of the MOT process, when mileage is read and recorded already.

It is possible to make a smarter system than that, now that cars have on-board telematics that would allow for location tracking. You could develop a road pricing system that accounts for location and time of use. That would avoid discriminating against people living in rural areas, where public transport isn’t a viable option. You could also incentivise people to travel outside of peak times by having higher rates at rush hours, or create automated congestion charging zones. This could be a harder sell because of the privacy element, though you could potentially opt out and choose to pay a flat fee based on MOT mileage.

One of the most useful aspects of pay-as-you-drive is that people only pay for what they use. If you take your car everywhere, you’ll pay more for it. If you walk or cycle but use the car occasionally, you’ll pay proportionately. That creates incentives to use the car less and save money, and that supports active transport and the lower carbon emissions that result.

The Campaign for Better Transport found that 49% of people support the idea, and a significant number of people who opposed it changed their minds when it was explained. That suggests we need some awareness raising around what is currently a fairly unfamiliar idea, but one that could well be on its way.


  1. I am a car driver. I am much in favor of charging by the mile driven. It should reduce unnecessarily mileage driven.

  2. I too would support a sensible pay per mile approach.

    Re your fairness comments and the VED. ‘Road tax’ is not of course, anything of the sort. It is a tax based on emissions. That is why electric cars are exempt and is a fair incentive to switch.
    Roads are funded from general taxation and everyone (well, all taxpayers) will contribute, even those with only feet and bicycles to their name. This is actually more fair than only motorists paying.and heavier more damaging vehicles pay more.
    This myth continues to feed the ire from some motorists and newspaper columnists that cyclists should ‘pay road tax’ and be licensed in order to have the ‘right’ to use the highway.

    Top blog as usual though!

  3. Yeah great exactly what we need ( not ) our post be more expensive all deliveries more expensive buisness will have to close because they can’t afford to survive or absorb the cost
    Shut the private planes they burn more in 50 mins than the average car in one yr no one talks about flights put the charge on them not the working class we already paying the price and taking the hits
    And the government ride round in big range rovers come on man wake up they should set the example on The ev but they don’t .Why ?

  4. Thanks for the work you ‘ve done. Pay-as-you-go road pricing offers a potential solution that aligns costs with usage, incentivizes sustainable transport choices, and supports the development of a more equitable and environmentally friendly transportation system.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

%d bloggers like this: