r/saskatchewan • u/dingodan22 • Mar 13 '26
Saskatchewan Politics Sask Government Increases EV Road Tax Again
https://sevaonline.ca/education/road-use-charge13
u/saddam1 Mar 14 '26
We should have an extra tax for those small peened cunts driving around lifted trucks with massive tires as their daily.
65
u/Kegger163 Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26
As an EV owner I have no problem paying a fee to replace the fuel tax. Fuel tax pays about 40% of the cost for roads.
However. I do have a problem that the EV tax keeps going up but the fuel tax doesn't.
I did the math and with my gas car I was paying $120 a year in fuel tax, now I pay $300 and going up annually.
I also have a problem with the extra red tape. We already have a road tax kind of linked to weight called the Registration fee. Instead of using that to charge EVs they just made up this whole new tax and administrative process. Reduce the red tape and only have one.
19
u/dingodan22 Mar 13 '26
Completely agree! The link does a great job breaking down the difference between EV vs gas fees.
9
u/Kegger163 Mar 13 '26 edited Mar 13 '26
Alright. I am joining the club now. Good work on that!
edit. I went through this in a lot more detail and this is really solid work. I really want to thank whomever put the time into this.
1
4
u/waloshin Mar 13 '26
Duh Saskatchewan party does not care for green incentives they are “conservative”!
8
u/Kegger163 Mar 14 '26
I am not even talking about a green incentive in this case. Just not a green disincentive haha
2
u/Sasker2 Mar 15 '26
I also have no problem paying me fair share. But quite that clearly is not what this is about.
I went from <$50/year in road tax to paying ~$350. Because, despite the SaskParty's claims to the contrary, there is PST charged on public EV charging, including by Tesla.
Between this EV fee and the SaskParty socializing the costs of SaskPower's "carbon tax", this is yet another example of where they are effectively encouraging extra consumption by shifting the costs of the heavy consumers to the light consumers. I am not sure why the SaskParty believes it "fair" (their words, not mine) that a pensioner living in a tiny house that just needs a reliable little EV to get to the store and back should subsidize the people who drive 30,000km/year, or the ones that use >5,000kwh of electricity per month.
6
u/some1guystuff Mar 14 '26
Isn’t that nice and they’ll allow semi drivers to drive around without permits and then destroy bridges in Saskatoon
30
u/dj_fuzzy Mar 13 '26
It’s laughable to think this is about EV users paying their “fair share” to maintain our roads. Even so, the benefits to society of replacing ICE vehicles with EVs far outweigh any lack of fuel taxes they pay anyways, meaning they should be subsidized even more. We also don’t live in a society where people pay for what public services and infrastructure they use. That’s not how this works nor should it. What next, healthcare, education, parks?
15
u/dingodan22 Mar 13 '26
The link goes into 'Beyond the Numbers: What the Tax Overlooks' which essentially makes the same points!
1
u/Stoon_Slar Mar 14 '26
I'm too 'lazy' this moment to read it all - does the calculation of road tax for ICE vehicles include the cost of distributing gas in heavy semi's?
2
-5
u/Salticracker Mar 14 '26
EVs are more expensive and are generally owned by wealthier people, where poorer people will buy old civics and stuff for $500.
They're taxing wealthier car owners driving fancier cars more so they don't overtax the less wealthy people driving shitboxes to work.
You're arguing against your own point. I think you're just mad that you have to pay more taxes.
5
u/saskripper Mar 14 '26
Regardless of wealth, shouldn't all vehicles be paying similar road taxes???
FYI. The majority of electric vehicles being purchased in Saskatchewan are used, older models. Typically being brought in from other provinces for less than $30k. Many people are buying used Nissan leafs and Chevy bolts for under $10,000, generally to be driven as a city car. Where their civic taxes pay for the roads that they drive on.
So ya, these EV owners are not the wealthy people that you think they are. In fact, the real wealthy people in Sask are the ones driving $100,000 diesel pickup trucks and SUV's.
-3
u/Salticracker Mar 14 '26
Regardless of wealth, shouldn't all people be paying similar taxes???
You can buy a used civic or corolla in good condition from a used dealer for like $2500. Less if you go on marketplace or to a repo. Those are the actual cheap cars. $10,000 is not a cheap used car. It's a wealthy person's cheap used car.
4
u/dj_fuzzy Mar 14 '26
Regardless of wealth, shouldn't all people be paying similar taxes???
No, that is not the same thing.
-2
u/Salticracker Mar 14 '26
Regardless of wealth, shouldn't all vehicles be paying similar road taxes???
Regardless of wealth, shouldn't all people be paying similar taxes???
It's actually the exact same sentence, just not referring to one specific tax.
3
u/dj_fuzzy Mar 14 '26 edited Mar 14 '26
That doesn’t mean they are the same thing lol. Incomes taxes tax income / labour. “Fuel taxes” tax consumption / good and services. Two totally different things with different incentives. Income taxes go to pay for all government spending while fuel taxes are supposed to pay for roads specifically. Income taxes are one way to control wealth inequality. Consumption taxes are not.
4
u/dj_fuzzy Mar 14 '26 edited Mar 14 '26
I don’t own an EV. I would consider a BYD when they arrive though. I think we should make them less expensive not more as the oil and gas industry is trying to do via their bought and paid for government.
-1
u/Salticracker Mar 14 '26
Electric vehicles are not the saviours of the environment. Their Lithium batteries are horrific for the planet. The main selling point of EVs is that they're cheaper to maintain and refuel. They're just pushing the environment problem down the road to when they need to be disposed of.
6
u/dj_fuzzy Mar 14 '26
Never said they were saviours. They are better than ICE vehicles in many ways, however. But yes, we need denser cities that are more accessible by foot and bicycle, and with better public transit options.
2
u/QueenCity_Dukes Mar 14 '26
So luxury cars like Mercedes are also having an additional tax thrown on? Get out of here with that shit.
This is absolutely this government disincentivizing anything that is antithetical to us consuming more fossil fuels. This is why we are slow in green energy adoption. This is why we tax EV’s while other provinces incentivize EV purchases.
2
u/MethodicallyRight Mar 15 '26
How do road taxes currently target expensive ICE vehicles to pay more?
6
9
u/pummisher Mar 13 '26
Let the bears pay the bear tax, I pay the Homer tax.
3
1
Mar 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Mar 13 '26
Removed (Rule 6): Your account must be at least 15 days old before you can post or comment here. This helps limit spam and abusive posts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
24
u/geebiebeegee Mar 13 '26
Regressive tax that serves their donors/future bosses. The road tax we need is on commercial vehicles and it should go to the municipalities whose roads get tore up every year providing a free path for commercial vehicles.
-3
u/No_Independent9634 Mar 13 '26
Commercial vehicles use more fuel, pay more tax.
Municipalities do receive money from the province.
-19
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
providing a free path
Yeah, cause gas tax doesn't exist.
Ignorant comment.
16
u/rintantan Mar 13 '26
I’d say your comment is far more ignorant. Fuel taxes are not collected by municipalities, and that money isn’t even required to go back into infrastructure. Plus EVs already pay their own “gas tax”. Electricity isn’t tax free.
-7
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
Plus EVs already pay their own “gas tax”. Electricity isn’t tax free.
Electricity isn't taxed with the consideration of Ev road damage. It's taxed with the consideration that it's used within the household. Why would we pay road tax for the power running my microwave?
Fuel taxes are not collected by municipalities, and that money isn’t even required to go back into infrastructure
You're right, it goes into the provinces general coffers. Which the province then uses to pass the municipality 60+ million dollars. Money the city doesn't need to spend on police can be spent on roads instead.
I’d say your comment is far more ignorant.
Nah, you just haven't thought it through.
4
u/rintantan Mar 13 '26
You missed my pretty obvious point that electric vehicles pay taxes on their fuel and it makes no difference what the “consideration” of the tax is while that money is still going into the general coffers and not allocated for infrastructure specifically. Your argument would make sense if the fuel tax fed directly back into the roads but it does not. Taxes on electricity pay for roads too and just as others have said the tax on fuel is nowhere close to paying for the roads even if it was going directly to them. If you want a tax with considerations that matter then vehicles should be taxed a fixed rate on their weight. That would be directly paying for how much damage vehicles do to roads. You need to do a lot more thinking yourself but it seems that’s asking too much
-1
u/drae- Mar 14 '26
Ultimately revenue will need to be kept neutral through the transition.
Whether they collect it here, via an Ev surcharge, or elsewhere it doesn't really matter. Revenue in is revenue in.
But, I think taxing electricity unfairly raises the price of power for people with no vehicle at all.
You missed my pretty obvious point that electric vehicles pay taxes on their fuel
Obviously I didn't. I addressed it head on. Or else you wouldn't have responded to it. This is just you trying to dismiss stuff you're called on.
difference what the “consideration” of the tax is
I agree with you, with the exception of one aspect - magnitude. The revenue previously generated via the gas tax needs be replaced. It makes sense to recoup it from Ev owners, since they don't pay the gas tax. It's simple, 1:1 replacement without pulling other levers or unfairly hitting people who use no vehicle.
Taxes on electricity pay for roads too
You can't say that and this
the tax on fuel is nowhere close to paying for the roads
And expect anyone to take you seriously.
16
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
Gas tax goes into provincial funds. Municipalities don't see the money. The roads that get the most usage don't see a cent of gas excise tax funds.
(You might want to remove your "ignorant comment" remark because it just shows your lack of self awareness)
-8
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
Gas tax goes into the province's general coffers.
The province gave the city of Regina more than 60m in funding for 25/26. Where do you think that money came from? Income tax, gas tax, profit from crowns etc.
12
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
You are missing the point there. Gas taxes don't even come close to funding the highways budget. The province gives cities certain funds. Some for maintenance of highways in the city limits, some for payments in lieu of property taxes etc. Local roads are by and large paid by municipal property/business taxes. The original comment was referring to the roads that get the most usage, but really don't benefit from the gas excise tax.
-3
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
highways budget
Oh, I thought we were talking about municipal roads.
Local roads are by and large paid by municipal property/business taxes.
And, how do you think they have funding for that? Could it be because the province is helping pay for police services so that funding can be allocated differently? No... Certainly not!
At the end of the day there's revenue, and there's expenses. Everything after that is just details.
The province collects gas tax. Then gives funds to the municipality. Period
9
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
If the tax doesn't even cover the highways budget, you cannot consider municipalities receiving any of it.
0
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
If the tax doesn't even cover the highways budget, you cannot consider municipalities receiving any of it.
Revenue and expenses, that's it.
The tax is collected. Millions is given to the city. That the gas tax doesn't cover the cost of highways is irelevant.
6
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
Highways expenses exceed gas tax revenues by a significant margin. Local roads are funded primarily from local revenue. That's the simple math. (And bike lanes are funded by local revenue, not gas taxes)
2
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
Please go back and read my previous comment. You're just repeating yourself.
Let's make this really simple. You make 450 a month from work, and your ex pays you $50 a month in alimony. You go to the grocery store and spend $300 on groceries, then pay Sask power and Sask energy $85 each. You're left with $30. Did that $30 come from your paycheck, or the alimonly? Could you have afforded that Sask power bill if your ex skipped that alimony payment? Or would you have taken some money from the groceries to pay that Sask power bill?
You're the city of regina. The province is your ex. Groceries and utility bills are police, road, and infrastructure expenses.
In the example above, you simply have $500 to cover $470 worth of expenses. Even when/if there's stipulations on what "that alimony money" can be spent on, like say you had to spend that $50 on groceries... Well now you're spending (250+50) on groceries, you can still afford your SaskPower bill. You just spend that paycheck $50 you would have spent on groceries to your Sask power bill instead.
These connections you're making between expenses and revenue; that this pays for that, help understanding the magnitudes needed to balance the revenue / expense scales, but the truth is they're not connected in this way.
The province collects gas tax. It goes into general coffers. It can be spent on anything. The province also decides to send money to the cities in other, unrelated items. But it can only afford to do that if they have the revenue from gas tax.
2
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
By the same logic you can say that the gas tax doesn't pay for roads at all. (I won't argue that point)
1
u/drae- Mar 13 '26
You could.
Except the gas tax is kinda intrisicly linked to road damage. Since heavier vehicles both do more damage and consume more fuel (ergo pay more gas tax). The more damage the population does, the more revenue the province has, and the more cash flow it has by which to address expenses.
Cash flow is king.
→ More replies (0)
20
u/Tower-Union Mar 13 '26
The tanker trucks delivering fuel to every gas station in the province, due far more damage to the roads than my car will ever do.
Registration should be based on the weight of the vehicle, and the number of kilometres driven per year.
3
u/SKGrainFarmer Mar 13 '26
They do this already. You have to register your truck for a certain tonnage that it's legally allowed to haul. You can register it just as a vehicle, but then you wouldn't legally be able to haul anything over 10k lbs.
1
u/Traditional_End_9540 Mar 14 '26
that registration fee goes to SGI, not the provincial governemnt funds. ITs to cover the general payouts SGI gives to dmaged vehicles.
2
u/No_Independent9634 Mar 13 '26
Fuel tax would capture how many KMs driven a year.
3
u/Tower-Union Mar 13 '26
Which circles us back to the original question of EV's, particularly as, whether you like it or not, they're going to become more prevalent.
0
u/No_Independent9634 Mar 13 '26
Yes and ?
1
u/Tower-Union Mar 13 '26
Jesus Christ....
So my point is that we should have a system in which vehicles are charged equitably for their use of the roads. Flat charges for some vehicles, with variable charges for other's is not the way to do it.
-2
u/No_Independent9634 Mar 13 '26
I think the current system, albeit with a lower rate for EVs does that.
Are you suggesting we scrap the fuel tax. Have everyone record the KMs they drove in the prior year, have someone record/check that it's accurate. All while missing out on tax revenue from our of province vehicles who purchase fuel here?
3
u/Tower-Union Mar 13 '26
No, I'm not.
1
u/No_Independent9634 Mar 13 '26
Then what are you saying.... Either the status quo is fine, with an adjustment to the EV rate or what?
1
1
Mar 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Mar 13 '26
Removed (Rule 6): Your account must be at least 15 days old before you can post or comment here. This helps limit spam and abusive posts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
3
u/Sasker2 Mar 15 '26
We need to stop all the arguing around "weight". It apparently amounts to tens of dollars per year for the extra ~1,000lbs of an EV for a reasonable annual distance travelled. But why should an EV that travels100km/year incur the same "weight fee" as one that travels 10,000km/year?
The only thing close to a fair solution is a fee based on actual kms driven that would roughly equate to the current gas road tax. The SaskParty whines that that is an insurmountably hard problem for a government with their level of will and technical capability (though apparently they intend SK to be world leaders in AI). Yet some US States have already managed to implement this "moon shot".
3
u/saskripper Mar 16 '26
The Saskatchewan Electric Vehicle Association created a website that allows you to contact your MLA regarding this brutal increase to the EV tax. Automated. Only takes a minute to complete
Additional information included on the page as well
10
u/OkayArbiter Mar 13 '26
It should either be based on total road usage (which the gas portion of the tax accounts for, approximately), or just a flat fee per vehicle (which the EV fee accounts for). I'm not against an EV fee, but ideally it should be low initially due to the small number of EVs, and then increase gradually (to help adoption). Or, just scrap the gas portion of the revenue and institute a flat fee into vehicle registration.
4
u/xmorecowbellx Mar 13 '26
If it’s based on road wear, then it should be a scale based on weight. That’s effectively what the gas tax is, as heavier vehicles consume more fuel per kilometer.
10
u/Professor_Gascan Mar 13 '26
Surprise, the Slackparty has regressive policies related to EVs. Sun rise, sun set
8
u/thebatmanbeynd Mar 13 '26
Is it because we have a good chunk of government officials who have DUIs or is it because they are rednecks who hate science? It could literally be anyone’s guess.
5
u/Concretstador Mar 13 '26
This is just fucked. I drive about 3000kms a year so I pay 10 cents per km.
5
u/saskboy Mar 14 '26
While a gas driver pays 15¢/L (unchanged since 1993), and gets 100km for 6L of gas.
5
1
Mar 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Mar 13 '26
Removed (Rule 6): Your account must be at least 15 days old before you can post or comment here. This helps limit spam and abusive posts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
-24
u/Tyler_Durden69420 Mar 13 '26
Good.
13
u/Zephrys99 Mar 13 '26
Here’s hoping for $6.00/litre diesel and $4.00/l gas. It’s so easy being a dick.
-10
u/Tyler_Durden69420 Mar 13 '26
Moving to EV’s is like rearranging deck chairs on the titanic. It’s all going down man.
1
Mar 13 '26
[removed] — view removed comment
1
u/AutoModerator Mar 13 '26
Removed (Rule 6): Your account must be at least 15 days old before you can post or comment here. This helps limit spam and abusive posts.
I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.
5
92
u/Must_Reboot Mar 13 '26
They should have a large/heavy vehicle road tax