In message , at 22:22:41 on Sat, 2 Jul
2011, D A Stocks remarked:
Has anyone produced a reasoned argument about the difference between a
tax and a toll ?

Tolls are rarely charged on routes you *have* to use, there's
normally a "long way round". Which doesn't exist for the US Embassy,
being inside the zone. So it's a lot more like car tax, than say the
Dartford Toll. Wouldn't they get a 90% residents' discount anyway?

I believe that a toll is money collected to pay for the construction
and upkeep of the asset being used.

The Dartford Toll, and the PFI concession under which the Queen
Elizabeth II Bridge was built, ended on 31 March 2002 because enough
money had been collected to pay off the construction debts for bridge
and tunnels and to accumulate a suitable maintenance fund. The existing
Dartford River Crossing Ltd company was liquidated and a new company
took control of the crossing on behalf of the Highways Agancy and they
collect a crossing *charge* which goes to the government in full for
redistribution.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dartford_crossing

So at Dartford it's definitely not a toll, and may well be a tax ...

I didn't realise the "toll" period at Dartford was over. I remember when
it was owned by the two county councils, and the money they took didn't
even pay off the interest for building the tunnels. Maybe it should have
been a bridge from the beginning if it's taken that much money so
quickly!

But that's provided a useful definition, and as the Congestion Charge is
for roads which were built and paid for in some cases generations ago,
it seems to take it out of the "toll" category. Indeed, as the money is
supposed to go towards public transport, they aren't even claiming it's
to pay for the roads. (Yes, I know some public transport uses the
roads).
--
Roland Perry