The Federal Council wants electric vehicles to contribute financially to transport infrastructure in the future. Today, investments in the maintenance, operation, and further development of road infrastructures are largely funded by revenue from mineral oil taxes paid by owners of combustion engines at the pump. The federal treasury also benefits from these revenues. As more e-cars take to the roads, these revenues decline, particularly affecting the reserves of the National Road and Agglomeration Transport Fund (NAF). This threatens the constitutional financing of our road infrastructure in the medium term, for which the population clearly voted in 2017. The TCS shares the Federal Council's view that all motor vehicle drivers must participate in infrastructure costs in the future, regardless of whether they drive with an electric or combustion engine.
During the consultation process, the TCS thoroughly examined the Federal Council's two proposals. Both a levy on kilometers driven and taxation of charging electricity over the charging infrastructure have pros and cons, and implementing either variant would prove too complex. A levy based on driving performance inaccurately accounts for kilometers driven abroad, and a geolocation variant would compromise data protection. Taxing charging electricity poses a risk of misuse by unregistered charging facilities and would be costly, as each charging station would need to be equipped with a meter.
The TCS, therefore, advocates a phased approach. In the first step, electric cars should be taxed via a flat rate. The flat rate, based on the vehicle's weight, should initially be moderate to not hinder the spread of e-mobility, which plays an important role in achieving ambitious climate targets. Medium-term, this flat rate should be replaced by consumption-based taxation of electricity usage, based on reliable and standardized vehicle data, for which international standards are currently being developed.
For the TCS, securing the long-term financing of our transport infrastructures is crucial. In this regard, Peter Goetschi, Central President of the TCS, states, "A future levy for electric cars is not only fair but also necessary to secure road financing."
The TCS will continue to advocate on behalf of its over 1.6 million members in the ongoing political process to ensure that the NAF model remains in place and all road users contribute, without paying more than they do today. At the same time, the development of e-mobility must not be hampered by disproportionate measures. We must reconcile financial and climate policy goals for mobility.