Does "Road transport" equal "roads"? I'm not so sure.

We have got bogged down but thanks for the info.
I know in the last few years we truly have increased spending on roads.
Mostly in QLD and NSW and then on the east coast state links, I still think we spend less that we tax.
In fact maybe this is why we can not reduce tax on fuel, we spend too much on other things.
As tax is a percentage of the total price it would increase with prices in dollar terms wouldn't it?
If so what would this years figure be?
And next?
An interesting number to know would be by how much if any are we decreasing our use of fuel?
The answer could tell us if high prices is impacting on things like greenhouse gases.
Small European diesel motors seem to offer about 40% increase in fuel economy just maybe we should tax non efficient motors out of existence?

"My education while with the RTA told me roads and the money we spend on them have been a battle ground for 45 years maybe more.

So what? Everything's a battle when you work for the government. You are missing the point.

"It was often said it was not spent on roads

Uhuh, that's your proof? Sme bloke down the pub told you?

"IF government spent 10% of fuel tax on developing or funding the development of new cars we could without much effort get double current distances from the same fuel inputs.

Yes, but no-one would buy them because fuel is so cheap. We already have cars that get double the efficiency.

Thanks Rhian. Where did you get those numbers from? Do they cover all levels of government?

"As tax is a percentage of the total price it would increase with prices in dollar terms wouldn't it?

The GST does. The excise does not.

freediver

"Not true. Market forces would prevent such an arbitrary price increase. However, consumption would go up so the price drop would be less than the tax."

I don't agree freediver. You only have to look at increases in rebates for services like childcare followed by fee increases by childcare centres. Where I live rainwater tanks went up as soon as the government granted a rebate for installation costs. I only know that because years ago when looking at installing one I did the usual quote run around and then waited a while - but not too long. The rebate came in and hey presto the tanks were suddenly disproportionately dearer.

That is the only thing I have against rebates as a rule, is that there is the risk of pushing the price up of the products or service involved.

Don't get me wrong I think fuel tax is just another arbitrary tax that should never have been implemented. Like any other of the myriad of hidden taxes we pay despite the mantra of the GST being the tax to end all other taxes.

Even our insurance policies include a emergency services levy, our bank accounts attract government taxes on money that has already been taxed on payday. We pay taxes or 'levies' at the local, State and Federal level. How many times are our incomes taxed? I wonder if anyone has devised a formula to reflect the 'real' amount of tax an average income earner pays.

Do we really need State governments? Surely Federal and local is enough. It works for New Zealand. Reduce the burden of bureaucracy and save money. No more need for ridiculous arbitrary taxes.

"I don't agree freediver. You only have to look at increases in rebates for services like childcare followed by fee increases by childcare centres. Where I live rainwater tanks went up as soon as the government granted a rebate for installation costs.

That's market forces for you. For starters, the media is exagerating price increases due to things like inflation in order to make a story. The price of tanks went up because of a shortage in some of the materials, not because manufacturers decided they wanted more profit. Even if the government is subsidising your tank, you will still shop around, which means those that are comapritively expensive will miss out on sales. You cannot increase the number of childcare centres overnight either. However, in the long run supply will increase also and the price will come down a bit.

However I agree with you that subsidies are a bad idea.

"I wonder if anyone has devised a formula to reflect the 'real' amount of tax an average income earner pays.

Sure, here it is:

http://www.ozpolitic.com/forum/YaBB.pl?num=1177399964

"No more need for ridiculous arbitrary taxes.

Fuel tax is one of the few taxes that are not arbitrary. There is economic justification for it. The bulk of tax does not go to state governments. A lot does go to the services they provide, such as hospitals. You will still need hospitals (and arbitrary taxes) even if you get rid of state governments.

Hi

sorry, should have posted links, the expenditure data are for all levels of government, from ABS Cat. Table 31:

http://www.ausstats.abs.gov.au/ausstats/subscriber.nsf/0/30A3BB70B09DBAB7CA25742B001A6293/$File/55120_2006-07.pdf

The revenue data from the Commonealth budget papers:

http://www.budget.gov.au/2008-09/content/bp1/html/bp1_bst5-04.htm
Both are 2006-07 data.

Steel: Road transport probably covers a few items as well as road construction and maintenance (e.g. planning and road safety campaigns) but these cost should also legitimately be slated home to drivers.