Congestion Charge as Taxation

Todd Howland advocates that the District of Columbia should borrow a page from London and charge people who drive into the city. Howland remains unhappy that DC cannot tax commuters and suggests a congestion charge as a way around that "problem":

A stunning two-thirds of all income earned in the District is by nonresidents. Of these commuters, roughly 250,000 drive solo into Washington daily, making them both polluters of our air and freeloaders of our infrastructure.

Unlike all 50 states, the District is not permitted to collect income tax from those who work there but reside elsewhere. We in the District pay the second-highest "state" taxes in the country, in part because there is no nonresident tax and because the federal government, embassies and nonprofits are often exempt from property tax. Exempt property makes up 41 percent of the District's total area. Wrongly, Congress -- the entity that taxes us without representation -- won't let us impose a nonresident income tax.
. . .

Fenty should impose a District version of London's congestion charge on all nonresident commuters. As in London, the charge should apply to all nonresidents -- even diplomats and members of Congress.

The column is rather misleading in several ways. First, the London congestion charge applies only to a zone in central London--not to the entire city. Second, the main purpose of the London congestion charge is to reduce congestion--not substitute for an income tax. Before the congestion charge, it was literally often quicker to walk through central London rather than riding a bus. The congestion charge has successfully made it easier to move through central Londno by bus as well as by tube or private car. Third, central London is accessible by a thorough and comprehensive public transport system in a way that much of Washington is not.

As usual, the complaint about the leeches that commuters are on the District neglects to mention that commuters subsidize the District through the federal payment to the District and the federal assumption of certain key expenses by the District. Moreover, visitors to the District are especially likely to pay the District's heavy meal tax. Does Howland really want to discourage people from commuting to the city for entertainment or conducting business in the District? Metro, jointly subsidized by Maryland and Virginia as well as the District, benefits the District disproportionately because it is organized around taking people in and out of the central hub. On the other hand, many District residents also commute to the suburbs for work. Perhaps they should have to pay a similar tax to leave the city.

In any case, one suspects that Congress would not allow a charge that was geared toward replacing a commuter tax rather than attacking congestion.