Set-back for road tax scheme

Date: 05/12/1996

By Michael Mann

TRANSPORT Commissioner Neil Kinnock looks set to fail in his first real attempt to build environmental costs into transport pricing.

His proposals to revise the Eurovignette system of road taxes for heavy goods vehicles have run into strong resistance from a majority of EU governments.

Officials believe Kinnock may have to accept only minor changes to the existing system, in need of revision since the European Court of Justice found that member states had failed to consult the European Parliament properly before putting it in place.

Kinnock's plans include a sliding scale of charges depending on the axle weight and emissions of individual lorries, and special charges for vehicles passing through 'sensitive corridors'.

National officials say the Austrians and Scandinavians have reacted positively to the plan and Germany, too, appears to be in favour of the ideas - although concerns have been expressed that the 36 levels of charge applicable under the proposal would prove “too bureaucratic and complex”. Most southern member states fear it would be used as an excuse to increase the cost of road haulage.

With little chance of much more than a general debate on the issue when transport ministers meet next Thursday (12 December), the complex negotiations will be handed over to the Dutch EU presidency.

The Alpine countries are particularly anxious to see some sort of differential and punitive pricing regime adopted, fearing that they will suffer increased volumes of traffic if the Swiss go ahead with plans for a system of charges which would take account of 'external costs'.

One of the problems is that a number of member states believe insufficient work has been done on defining what constitutes a sensitive stretch of road.

“We do not think we can agree anything until we have given serious consideration to the ideas set out in the White Paper on fair and efficient pricing of transport. The Eurovignette proposal is very laudable, but Commissioner Kinnock is jumping the gun,” said a diplomat.

However, the Commission still hopes to persuade member states that its approach represents the best way forward. “The new Eurovignette is the first application of the principle of fair and efficient pricing. Few people deny that this is the future,” said one official.

The Dutch presidency is likely to link the Eurovignette proposal to other legislation currently being prepared, including the Commission's review of excise duties on fuels. “Some governments have made it quite clear they do not think it is in the Commission's competence to start legislating on differential tax regimes,” commented one official.

In July, the Commission agreed a proposal which distinguished between tax levels for three vehicle categories and three different emission levels, and would allow extra charges for routes where congestion or the environmental impact of transport was greatly above normal levels. Basic charges would vary between 750 and 200 ecu per vehicle per year.

Since then, officials have at least been able to clear up question marks over whether the proposal should be adopted unanimously or by qualified majority vote.

Being a tax-related measure, unanimity will be required, narrowing further the chances of the Commission's plan being adopted.

The current Eurovignette system is operated by Germany, the Netherlands, Denmark, Belgium and Luxembourg. Sweden will join from the start of 1997, while Austria has its own system.