slagjumper

I'd like my employer to give me a day off for every 20 days that I ride or use alternative transportation. My free time is worth more than cash.

ZachS

As a former IRS employee, I can attest that using income tax benefits to manipulate social policy is a wrongheaded approach. First of all, our tax system is already too complicated - this only benefits wealthy people who know how to sneak through the loopholes. Second, the IRS is a tax law enforcement agency (and they're surprisingly good at that job). It does not have any expertise in transportation policy - or for that matter healthcare, disaster relief, social welfare (although it administers the Earned Income Credit, America's largest - and most successful - welfare program), or any of the other things it's asked to deal with.

Finally, and most importantly, tax rebates are only helpful for people who actually owe taxes. As a poorly-paid graduate student, I could double my income without incuring a significant tax liability - only those people with middle- and upper-class incomes would benefit.

Other suggestions that have been proposed in this thread, like a higher gas tax (I suggest looking up NYT columnist Thomas Friedman's 'Freedom Tax') are much better ideas. But nothing will make things change overnight - the 60 years of car-oriented infrastructure where most Americans live is a very strong financial incentive for them to stay with the transportation status quo.

UCSDbikeAnarchy

I agrre that the tax code is way too complicated, But I think it has to be used as a part of policies towards social change. We need to build communities that facilate walking/biking/public transport and upgrade the infrastructure in exsiting places.
It seems like the employer end is the best place to start encouraging bike commuting, as there is no real way to check if people are biking to the store, or to bike up their kids at school.
I also believe that you need both a carrot and a stick. Tax benefits for using alternative means of transport and penalties for excesive driving.
The problem is there is no way to make a law that could be "fair" across the country. The tax breaks on SUVs were originaly menat to help farmers buy big trucks. The transpertation needs of someone living in rural kansas is very different than someone living in San Francisco. Its a tough thing to solve.

burbankbiker

Logistically speaking, it shouldn't be too hard to prove who is using their bike recreationally and who is using it to reduce energy use. If someone doesn't have a vehicle registration (no car), but owns a bike and works outside the home, they would obviously qualify for a tax break. If someone does own a vehicle AND owns a bike, a simple yearly accounting of vehicle mileage should suffice. I run a business that keeps inventory and I have to account for my inventory each year. The starting inventory of each year must match the ending inventory of the previous year. Similarly, the starting mileage of your car should match your prior year's ending mileage. If you're putting 15,000 miles on your car... you probably don't qualify. If you only put 2,000 miles on your car, it's pretty clear that you're reducing your energy use and only driving for necessities and greater distances. Doesn't seem tough to me.

But as to whether it would make more people bike, I don't know if that's the case until our cities have better bike infrastructure. I can't help but feel that most people wouldn't put up with what I do on my morning commute. The anger, the aggresive drivers, the close calls, the lung-damaging pollution. Until we have dedicated bike paths (not just lanes which aren't respected or observed by drivers), the option of biking anywhere is always met with a certain excessive risk.

Having biked in Sweden where they have these incredible bike roads off away from the main road and away from traffic and which get you around cities and rural areas alike, I can say that the tax break wouldn't be the deciding factor. The ABSOLUTELY PLEASANT experience would be the deciding factor.

Brad M

I already get a "tax break" by not paying for gas, repairs, or parking. I get free underground parking for my bike, a $100/mo luxury for everyone else.

Money money money! Forget about how much money everyone else is getting and think instead of what you are getting. (here's a hint: it's not money)

trailwarrior

That will never happen as long as we allow corporatists to the control policy making.

Refunding to car-free citizens, the average $7000/year/vehicle incured by our government would be a good starting point ...
https://www.bikeforums.net/showthread...12#post2103912

If you read the "Transportation Costs and Benefits" report you will see that there are numerous "indirect costs" associated with ownership which we all must bear through taxes including, but not limited to Traffic Services, Fuel Externalities, Residential Parking, Roadway Land Value, Traffic Congestion, Environmental Costs, Vehicle Fuel, Roadway Costs, Non-residential Parking, Crash Damages, Land Use Impacts, Equity Impacts, etc.