• Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
Carnegie Europe logoCarnegie lettermark logo
EUUkraine
  • Donate
{
  "authors": [
    "Bill Bradley",
    "Tom Ridge",
    "David Walker"
  ],
  "type": "legacyinthemedia",
  "centerAffiliationAll": "dc",
  "centers": [
    "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace"
  ],
  "collections": [],
  "englishNewsletterAll": "ctw",
  "nonEnglishNewsletterAll": "",
  "primaryCenter": "Carnegie Endowment for International Peace",
  "programAffiliation": "SCP",
  "programs": [
    "Sustainability, Climate, and Geopolitics"
  ],
  "projects": [],
  "regions": [
    "North America",
    "United States"
  ],
  "topics": [
    "Economy",
    "Climate Change"
  ]
}

Source: Getty

In The Media

Here's a Tax That Ends Pain at the Pump

The United States needs an innovative transportation revenue mechanism that will help to stabilize gas prices, restore solvency to a broke and broken program, and help America rebuild its infrastructure and economy.

Link Copied
By Bill Bradley, Tom Ridge, David Walker
Published on Aug 2, 2011

Source: Bloomberg

Here's a Tax That Ends Pain at the PumpThe U.S.’s national transportation program is broke. We borrow about $12 billion from the Treasury annually for the Highway Trust Fund. But our real annual transportation deficit is more than $100 billion when you include interest, deferred maintenance and other spending.

At the same time, the 55-year-old Interstate Highway System is crumbling and needs to be rebuilt, at an estimated cost of $2.5 trillion to $3 trillion during the next 20 years.

We have no choice but to find new revenue. The way to do it is with a revamped federal gas tax. The gas tax, last raised to 18 cents a gallon in 1993, now has a buying power of 11 cents. In the same period, our real gross domestic product has grown 55 percent and our driving has increased 31 percent. The president’s fiscal commission -- widely cited as a bipartisan road map for tax reform-- recommended an immediate gas-levy increase of 15 cents.

But simply raising the gas tax won’t address a serious threat to our economic well-being -- wild swings in pump prices due to spikes and crashes in world oil prices. Europe, with gas taxes averaging more than $4 a gallon, faces this same risk. Gas taxes that increase with the price of oil can just make matters worse. Any plan for transportation solvency must include a price-stabilization mechanism so that rising oil costs don’t crush household budgets or the economy.

Security Fee

To accomplish this, we propose establishing a value-added oil-security fee at the refinery or point of importation. This fee would be a fixed percentage based on the price of a barrel of oil. In addition to the levy, there would be a varying retail tax on gas. When oil prices increase, the gas tax is reduced. When they decline, the gas tax would rise, thus offsetting diminished oil-security fees due to lower oil prices.

For example, if a 5 percent oil-security levy were assessed when oil costs $100 a barrel, the fee would be $5 a barrel and yield, at present levels of oil consumption, about $28.3 billion a year. At $115 a barrel the gas tax per gallon could be abated by 5 cents (assuming abatement at 1 cent for every $3 increase in oil price) but the oil fee would rise to $5.75 a barrel, offsetting the lost gas-tax revenue. If the price of oil fell to $90 a barrel, the oil fee would also drop 50 cents a barrel, but the gas tax would rise by 10 cents a gallon, more than offsetting the lost oil-fee revenue. Thus, oil companies pay more when their profits increase, and consumers would bear more cost when oil prices -- and prices at the pump -- fall.

Share the Burden

This share-the-burden strategy would raise the revenue needed to restore transportation solvency and the infrastructure investments that would help the economy grow. This plan would also assist consumers by encouraging gas-price stabilization. Conceptually, this shifts responsibility for transportation funding from a straight “user pays” approach (gasoline consumers) to a “beneficiaries pay” system (both producers and consumers). Because both oil companies and consumers benefit from transportation investments, this is fair.

We understand that this plan wouldn’t stop large price swings in energy markets. Oil and gasoline values will continue to fluctuate for many reasons, including some that have nothing to do with underlying oil supply and demand. But this countercyclical pricing plan would help trim price peaks and troughs while sending a signal that public policy would be used to fight price manipulation by the hedging or hoarding that exploit bottlenecks in oil markets.

It would also allow us to rebuild our infrastructure and our economy. We need to invest in new, intelligent and integrated transportation systems; build smart, low-carbon cities; revolutionize freight logistics; and develop systems that efficiently move products through our ports, rail yards and airport gateways. We have an opportunity to address our infrastructure problems. The longer we wait, the more future generations will pay for our neglect. 

About the Authors

Bill Bradley

Tom Ridge

David Walker

Authors

Bill Bradley
Tom Ridge
David Walker
EconomyClimate ChangeNorth AmericaUnited States

Carnegie does not take institutional positions on public policy issues; the views represented herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of Carnegie, its staff, or its trustees.

More Work from Carnegie Europe

  • Greenland United States Denmark Agreement Nuuk
    Commentary
    The Denmark-Greenland-U.S. Agreement Needs to Stand the Test of Time

    The new U.S.–Denmark–Greenland agreement will help Washington exert political, economic, and financial dominance under the guise of security. Yet, it acknowledged Copenhagen’s and Nuuk’s sovereignty on the island.

      Marc Pierini

  • Ukraine Russia Black Sea Food
    Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    A Black Sea Truce Is About Global Food Security, Too

    A summer of escalation in the Black Sea has hurt Ukraine economically and is exacerbating world food security. A truce is needed—as is a broader reframing of Europe’s Ukraine strategy.

      Thomas de Waal

  • Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    The Speech Ursula von der Leyen Can’t Deliver

    European Commission President Ursula von der Leyen is about to give her annual address on the state of the EU. Here’s what she won’t—but should—say.

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz

  • Le Pen France Far Right
    Article
    How Europe’s 2027 Elections Could Test EU Governance

    Radical-right parties are expected to do well in upcoming elections in four of the EU's biggest member states. If successful, they could prevent the union from addressing key challenges ahead.

      Stefan Lehne

  • Carney Canada EU Trump
    Commentary
    Strategic Europe
    Taking the Pulse: Is Canada Leading a Third Way?

    Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney has twice inspired praise for standing up to U.S. President Donald Trump: at the 2026 World Economic Forum in Davos and on Canada-U.S. trade negotiations. Is Carney showing a third way better than the EU has in dealing with the Trump administration?

      • Rym Momtaz

      Rym Momtaz, ed.

Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
Carnegie Europe logo, white
Rue du Congrès, 151000 Brussels, Belgium
  • Research
  • Strategic Europe
  • About
  • Experts
  • Projects
  • Events
  • Contact
  • Careers
  • Privacy
  • For Media
  • Gender Equality Plan
Get more news and analysis from
Carnegie Europe
© 2026 Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. All rights reserved.