<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="https://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
  <channel>
    <title>Transport Research International Documentation (TRID)</title>
    <link>https://trid.trb.org/</link>
    <atom:link href="https://trid.trb.org/Record/RSS?s=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" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
    <description></description>
    <language>en-us</language>
    <copyright>Copyright © 2026. National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.</copyright>
    <docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
    <managingEditor>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</managingEditor>
    <webMaster>tris-trb@nas.edu (Bill McLeod)</webMaster>
    
    <item>
      <title>Impact of the efficient use of the motor vehicle tax on road infrastructure quality and safety</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2665941</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Efficient public finance management plays a crucial role in road safety and road infrastructure development. Motor vehicle taxes are an important source of revenue for national and local governments and should be optimally used for road maintenance and modernization. This article analyzes the relationship between the collection of motor vehicle taxes and the number of road accidents whose main cause is lack of road maintenance. Using statistical methods and an analysis of the available data, we investigate to what extent the efficiency of motor vehicle tax collection and distribution affects road safety. At the same time, we discuss how the allocation of these funds can be improved to improve road quality and reduce accidents. The results of the study highlight the need to link tax policy with practical measures in road infrastructure maintenance, which is crucial for the protection of human lives and minimization of economic losses resulting from road accidents.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:15:34 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2665941</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Is fare free transit just? quantifying the impact of moral principles on transit design and finance</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2647528</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Using a stylized transit design model, this study examines fare-free transit (FFT) through the lens of distributive justice. We pose a direct question: Is FFT just according to John Rawls’s theory of justice? Specifically, is it compatible with the resource allocation that maximizes the utility of the most disadvantaged travelers? We compare this egalitarian principle with a utilitarian one, which asserts that an allocation is optimal when it maximizes the total utility of all travelers. FFT is of course not free. In the absence of farebox revenue, a transit system must either cut services or turn to alternative sources, such as local dedicated taxes and fees levied on drivers. Thus, our model incorporates both finance and operational decisions, and captures the interaction between traffic congestion and travelers’ income level and mode choice. Using a case study built with empirical data in Chicago, we show that the fare is not the first choice under either moral principle. For the egalitarian, the most desirable funding source is the driver fee, whereas taxation is preferred by the utilitarian. It follows that FFT can be both just and utility-maximizing, if one is allowed to raise taxes and charge drivers with impunity. However, as the flexibility in finance diminishes, so does the appeal of FFT. In such cases, the proposed model serves as a decision-support tool for finding sensible compromises that address the varied interests and ideologies at play. For example, it reveals that at the current transit-dedicated sales tax rate of about 1 % in Chicago, the Rawlsian egalitarian can justify FFT only if drivers pay about $1,800/year to fund transit, which amounts to about 18 % of an average U.S. household’s driving cost.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 23 Mar 2026 15:15:32 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2647528</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Passenger Vehicle Taxation at the Sub-National Level in Bulgaria: A Proposed Revised Taxation on Acquisition and Ownership Schemes Based on Vehicles’ Carbon Dioxide Emissions</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2594033</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Bulgaria faces multiple development challenges, including the need to preserve fiscal stability and improve tax collection at all levels of government to support investment and programs, especially in the face of negative demographic trends. Internal challenges are coupled with the need to participate in and contribute to EU climate mitigation commitments. Despite the country’s overall achievements in greenhouse gas abatement, emissions from transport in Bulgaria continue to increase. This report provides analytical background on aggregate and transport sector emissions and the benefits of transitioning to low-carbon systems in the passenger vehicle sector. It reviews the current system of passenger vehicle taxation in Bulgaria in the context of recent trends in the EU and proposes a potential incentive scheme for vehicle taxation linked to CO₂ emissions. Such a reform, if pursued, could deliver on fiscal objectives, greenhouse gas mitigation, and other socioeconomic objectives.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 10 Mar 2026 09:54:06 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2594033</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Exploring US Infrastructure Funding Challenges and Strategies for Sustainable Roadway Maintenance</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2562229</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This study examines the current state of US infrastructure funding, focusing on electric vehicles, economic factors, changing transportation habits, and the trucking industry. The research reveals that electric vehicle sales can sustain infrastructure revenues with appropriate fees, and government spending on transportation infrastructure remains largely unaffected by construction costs or economic fluctuations. Public transit and hybrid/electric vehicles have minimal impact on overall transportation patterns. Heavy trucks cause most of the damage to roads and bridges but do not generate proportionate tax revenues. The study recommends implementing registration and user fees for electric vehicles to ensure their contribution to infrastructure maintenance. Additionally, a mileage tax for the trucking industry is proposed to address the disproportionate impact of heavy vehicles. Finally, the research emphasizes the need for developing best practices in allocating limited infrastructure funds to maximize efficiency and sustainability in transportation infrastructure management.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Fri, 20 Feb 2026 15:28:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2562229</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tax and Fee Payments by Motor Vehicle Users for the Use of Highways, Fuels, and Vehicles. Report #17 in the Series: The Annualized Social Cost of Motor-Vehicle Use in the United States, based on 1990-1991 Data</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628285</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The objective of this report is to establish a reasonable framework for estimating motor-vehicle-user payments towards government-provided motor-vehicle infrastructure and service (MVIS), and then to estimate those payments and compare them with government expenditures. (Government expenditures towards MVIS are estimated in Report #7 and incorporated here for comparison with user payments.) First, I argue that the purpose of estimating tax and fee payments by motor-vehicle users is to determine whether users pay governments a “fair” amount. I thus emphasize at the outset that the debate is primarily about equity, not directly about economic efficiency. I show that a simple comparison of current tax and fee payments – however defined – with current motor-vehicle-related costs (however defined) tells us little about optimal pricing, optimal revenues, optimal expenditures, or optimal use of public or private transportation resources. Next, I classify the various taxes and fees that one might count as user payments according to the breadth (or “targetedness”) and disposition of the taxes and fees. The breadth or targetedness of the taxes concerns whether the taxes and fees apply only to motor-vehicle use, or to all commodities and services, or to something in between. The disposition of the taxes or fees concerns whether or not they are dedicated to government MVIS. With these considerations, I establish five classes of user payments (A1, A2, B, C1, and C2). I then present four ways one might tally up user payments (and government expenditures), the differences (on the payment side) owing ultimately to different notions about how taxes and fees ought to be related to actual motor-vehicle use in order to “count” as a user-payment towards government MVIS. These four “Ways of Counting” user payments treat the five different classes of taxes and fees differently. After further discussing the conceptual framework outlined above, I make detailed estimates of all tax and fee payments to all levels of government in the U. S. in a base year of 1991.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 31 Jan 2026 16:28:50 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2628285</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tax benefits for users of company cars: How do they affect the cost of ownership for the employer?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2633894</link>
      <description><![CDATA[I present a cost of ownership (from the perspective of the employer) analysis of leased company cars sold in Belgium in 2023, both before and after taxes. The preferential tax treatment given to company cars with low CO2 emissions has a large impact on the distribution of the cost of ownership of electric cars and of gasoline plug-in hybrid cars. The taxation of the benefit-in-kind enjoyed by employees who can use a company car for private purposes allows companies to lower the wages offered to employees. The integration of these wage savings in an extended cost of ownership concept leads to a large improvement of the relative position of plug-in hybrid vehicles (PHEVs) compared to all powertrains, including electric cars. Given the relatively low environmental benefits of PHEVs in real world driving circumstances, this raises the question of the budgetary costs of the current system.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 27 Jan 2026 16:16:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2633894</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Elasticities and tax incidence in urban ridesharing markets: Evidence from Chicago</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2606312</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Over the past decade, many U.S. cities have imposed taxes on Uber and Lyft, leading to debate over the impacts and incidence of these policies. This paper answers three questions about these taxes: (i) How do ridesharing taxes impact trip prices and quantities? (ii) What are the implied market supply and demand elasticities, and (iii) Who bears the burden of ridesharing taxes? Using data from Chicago, I show that ridesharing demand is inelastic in both gross terms, and relative to supply. Accordingly, 89% of the city’s ridesharing tax is passed through to passengers. From a distributional standpoint, travel survey data suggest that ridesharing taxes are roughly as progressive as the federal income tax schedule. Finally, back-of-the-envelope calculations informed by these results suggest that ridesharing taxes of the size typically seen in the U.S. are unlikely to generate meaningful improvements in congestion or air pollution.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 16:07:14 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2606312</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>The reform of the Flemish registration and annual road taxes: did they cause a change in the CO2 emission factors of new cars?</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2606319</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The Flemish Region in Belgium reformed its registration tax for passenger cars and its annual road tax in 2012 and 2016 respectively, to reflect a car's CO2 emissions and Euro pollution class. Moreover, from 2019 to 2020, natural persons and the self-employed could obtain a premium for the purchase of a zero-emission car. Using a difference-in-differences analysis, we find that the reform of the registration tax has caused an accelerated decrease in the CO2 emission factors of new cars sold in Flanders, compared to other regions. This result holds for privately owned cars as well as company cars. However, the average treatment effect was rather small compared to the counterfactual. The additional effects of the reform of the annual road tax and the zero-emission car premium are even smaller than for the registration tax, and not significant in the case of private cars.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 22 Dec 2025 16:07:13 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2606319</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Incentivizing U.S. Airport Privatization</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2589143</link>
      <description><![CDATA[All but one of the commercial airports in the U.S. are government owned. This paper looks at why airports in the U.S. have failed to become privatized or leased as public-private partnerships (P3s), the benefits of privatization, and possible tax reforms that could encourage privatization. The tax law changes discussed relate to the payment of outstanding tax-exempt airport bonds when there is a change in control, and the inclusion of airports in surface transportation tax-exempt private activity bonds (PABs). The paper outlines how long-term P3s might improve U.S. airport performance, how airport privatization could impact financial proceeds, and what the impact would be on federal tax revenue.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 18 Dec 2025 11:53:45 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2589143</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Analysis of government taxation methods and maritime companies’ strategies under emission-reduction incentives</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2626159</link>
      <description><![CDATA[The European Union (EU) has incorporated the maritime industry into the European Emissions Trading System (ETS) since 2024, signifying a notable trend within the maritime sector towards reducing emissions. This paper employs game theory to analyze the interplay between carbon taxes and competitive and cooperative relationships in the maritime supply chain based on the effectiveness of existing policy implementation. The objective is to provide management insights for the implementation of maritime carbon taxes in other regions and to support companies in coping with the pressure of the carbon tax. A two-stage Stackelberg game establishes a low-carbon maritime supply chain involving the government, carriers, and ports. The discussion encompasses single- and dual-route models, with these models being based on various realistic conditions. In each model, the government has the option of imposing a carbon tax on either the port or on both the port and the carrier. The power structure of the supply chain is classified as port-led or carrier-led. The equilibrium solutions of the single-route model demonstrate that the port effectively shields itself from the taxation method through service fee adjustments, thereby compelling the carrier to accept the carbon tax policy. The government and carrier both favor a bilateral carbon tax scenario led by the carrier, whereas the port holds the opposite view. In seeking opportunities for coordination, a “triple growth” phenomenon has been observed, whereby the combination of carbon taxes and green preferences results in higher actual carbon emissions and freight costs. The government must engage more extensively in supply chain management. This involvement includes the imposition of rate limits on taxes to avert the previously mentioned phenomenon, as well as the provision of low-carbon subsidies to ensure the effectiveness of the port’s subsidy and revenue-sharing contract. The findings of the dual-route model indicate that ports may experience a decline in supply chain leadership, while carriers appear to benefit more from the carbon tax. Utilizing the ports of Southampton, UK, and Le Havre, France, as exemplars for numerical experimentation, it is contended that government environmental policies exert a favorable influence, notwithstanding carriers’ selection of alternative routes to circumvent the carbon tax. This paper provides a more feasible implementation pathway from unilateral to bilateral carbon taxes for other regions that have not implemented a carbon tax on maritime transportation, such as the UK, demonstrating the asymmetric impacts of a carbon tax on ports and carriers.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 17 Dec 2025 08:49:04 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2626159</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Tax progressivity and mobility costs</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572006</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This paper examines how mobility costs influence the effectiveness and desirability of tax progressivity using a general equilibrium spatial model. A key feature of the model is that workers’ idiosyncratic productivity depends on location. The interaction of amenities, idiosyncratic shocks and moving costs implies that progressive taxation distorts location choices by reducing incentives for agents to relocate to their most productive areas. Using a quantitative framework, I find that the negative effect of tax progressivity on output is weakest when mobility costs are either relatively low or high. The optimal degree of tax progressivity balances the costs of spatial tax distortions against the benefits of enhanced insurance, leading to relatively high optimal progressivity at both extremes of mobility costs.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 28 Aug 2025 17:15:59 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572006</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Methodology to Estimate Non-Highway Recreational Fuel Taxes CY 2016 – 2018</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572896</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This report is prepared as a response to Senate Report 116-109. The report describes the process currently used to determine non-highway use of gasoline in recreational vehicles and corresponding amount of taxes received over the past three fiscal years. The current process leverages data collected annually to determine the amount of fuel used for non-highway purposes, which includes construction equipment, agricultural vehicles, watercraft, and other non-highway applications in addition to recreational vehicle use. The estimate of the total amount of non-highway recreational fuel taxes can be calculated by multiplying the estimated gallons of fuel used for non-highway purposes by the prevailing tax rate.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Wed, 06 Aug 2025 15:00:22 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2572896</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Land-Value Capture in Bogotá: Case Studies on the Valorization Levy</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2569560</link>
      <description><![CDATA[This note presents a comprehensive analysis of Bogotá’s experience with the betterment levy—contribución de valorización (CV)—as a land value capture (LVC) instrument to finance urban transport infrastructure. Focusing on five major programs implemented in 1995, 2005, 2010, 2013, and 2018, the note draws critical lessons for cities in the developing world seeking sustainable, equitable, and locally anchored financing mechanisms. Unlike much of the existing literature that isolates the betterment levy from broader fiscal dynamics, this note situates the levy within Bogotá’s evolving tax ecosystem, including property and sales taxes, and highlights the pivotal role of a modernized cadaster. It shows that while the betterment levy has never fully financed transport projects on its own, it has consistently contributed to closing funding gaps, especially when paired with improved tax collection and strategic debt use. The note concludes with ten actionable lessons for other cities, emphasizing the importance of enabling legislation, affordability assessments, city-wide standards, and citizen participation. It also underscores the need to consider the total tax burden on residents and the political economy of earmarked revenues. Sound financing sources generate significantly more revenue than the cost of collecting it. Bogotá’s experience demonstrates that even partial revenue from betterment levies can be transformative when embedded in a robust fiscal and institutional framework.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 14 Jul 2025 12:53:27 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2569560</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>From Tank to Odometer: Winners and Losers from a Gas-to-VMT Tax Shift</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563642</link>
      <description><![CDATA[With the increase in fuel economy of the personal transportation fleet along with the increased penetration of hybrid and electric vehicles, federal motor vehicle fuel excise tax revenue has been steadily declining. This has led to calls for finding a replacement for this tax. One option is to replace the gas tax with a vehicle miles traveled (VMT) tax. To investigate the impact of such a tax swap, the authors combine data from the 2017 National Household Transportation Survey (NHTS) and the American Community Survey (ACS). Using machine learning techniques, the authors generate estimates of VMT and gasoline tax collections at the census tract level. This allows us to explore the distributional implications of this tax swap at a geographically disaggregated level. The authors find, as have previous researchers, that this tax swap is modestly progressive. The more granular geographic analysis highlights striking disparities not previously reported. The authors find that rural areas and census tracts in the center of the country generally benefit from this tax swap, while urban and bicoastal areas generally experience higher taxation. Additionally, Republican-leaning districts, which overlap significantly with rural areas, see marked gains compared to Democratic districts.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 30 Jun 2025 16:37:00 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2563642</guid>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>State Revenue Scenarios for Different Economic Conditions and Taxation Policies</title>
      <link>https://trid.trb.org/View/2549154</link>
      <description><![CDATA[Recent changes in basic economic conditions have had a considerable impact on state revenues available to the Texas State Department of Highways and Public Transportation (SDHPT). The historical growth pattern for revenues has been interrupted because of reduced growth in travel and numbers of vehicles. This change in the revenue growth pattern, coupled with large increases in costs, has resulted in a large reduction in the real purchasing power of available revenues. Because of this new revenue and cost situation, it is more difficult to predict future SDHPT revenues for different possible economic conditions and taxation policies. This report presents a method that can be used to project future revenues for different scenarios (forecasts) of economic conditions and different taxation policies. Revenue projections for the different economic conditions considered in this report reveal that there is a wide variation in future revenues, depending upon which scenario is considered. Even in the most optimistic case, however, a considerable increase in taxes would be necessary to prevent real revenues from decreasing substantially, if current trends in highway costs continue in the future.]]></description>
      <pubDate>Mon, 16 Jun 2025 17:15:52 GMT</pubDate>
      <guid>https://trid.trb.org/View/2549154</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>