The cost factor of the truck toll, which is often not sufficiently taken into account

The German truck toll system “Toll Collect” was launched to restructure the heavily neglected and ailing infrastructure and to make the financing of road maintenance more equitable and sustainable. As early as 1990, under the then black and yellow federal government, the plan was developed to reduce the cost of commercial goods through a special truck feeto participate in the maintenance of the traffic routes. The aim was to distribute the burdens more fairly and to close the financing gap in road construction.

Legal challenges and first attempts

However, this initiative soon encountered legal hurdles: the design of the fee did not correspond to the requirements of European Community law at the time, so that the introduction had to be stopped shortly after the first implementation. Despite this setback, however, the federal government remained true to its basic idea. She wanted to find a solution to increase the traffic in the trucksto include cost sharing and to finance the infrastructure in the long term. In August 1994, the so-called Eurovignette was introduced in cooperation with the neighboring countries of the Netherlands, Belgium, Luxembourg and Denmark – a motorway user fee especially for heavy-duty vehicles. The legal framework conditions were set as well as the fee levels andthe distribution of revenues between countries regulated. The structure and technical implementation of this system were transferred from the beginning to a private company: AGES Maut System GmbH & Co. KG, a joint venture of Vodafone, Aral and Shell.

From idea to technical implementation: disputes and delays

From the point of view of the federal government at the time, the pure time-dependent billing of the tolls was not the optimal solution. As early as 1998, the aim was to introduce a toll-based, route-dependent toll that better reflects the actual costs of road pollution. In July 2002, the bidder consortium “Electronic Toll Collect” (ETC) was finally awarded the contract. this oneThe company consisted of the industry giant Daimler Chrysler, Deutsche Telekom and Cofiroute. The aim was to develop and operate a nationwide electronic toll system – the largest project of this kind in Germany to date.

Complex contract design and technical breakdowns

The contract with ETC envisaged generating around 650 million euros in toll revenue over twelve years. In addition, up to three contract extensions were planned. However, the system was launched considerably by numerous technical problems. The operational date originally planned for August 31, 2003 could not be held. Instead, the preliminaryOperating license granted on December 15, 2004, around 16 months later than planned. In January 2005, the system finally went into operation with limited functionality. A year later, full functionality was achieved. The late introduction led to significant loss of income, which prompted the Federal Ministry of Transport, to file a lawsuit against theOperator company Toll Collect to collect. The reason was the alleged deception behavior of the operators, who are said to have concealed the delays and fraudulently deceived the federal government.

Legal disputes and massive costs for the taxpayer

The federal government is demanding damages of several billion euros in several proceedings. So far, the court proceedings alone have cost around 136 million euros without a final agreement being foreseeable. An out-of-court settlement failed largely due to the resistance of the former Federal Transport Minister Peter Ramsauer, who insisted on a court decision toExclude possible mismanagement allegations. If the federal government had taken control of the system itself instead of relying on the private consortium, the costs would probably have remained significantly lower.

End of contract, re-enactment and political decisions

In 2015, the original contract expired. In view of the enormous volume of traffic – in 2012 more than 330 million toll-based trips on German motorways were counted – it would have made economic sense to operate the toll on their own. The coalition agreement between the CDU, CSU and SPD also envisages expanding the toll to all federal roads from 2018. With that wouldthe toll route increases from the current 13,000 to over 40,000 kilometers, which increases the pressure to control the system independently in the future. Nevertheless, the contract with Toll Collect was initially extended by three years and the company was again commissioned to collect 1,100 kilometers of federal roads. This decision seems uncomprehensible because theConfidence in the operator is significantly shaken by the previous disputes. There is apparently a strong lobbying work here that has influenced the political will.

Perspectives for an independent national toll administration

The question remains whether the federal government will take responsibility for the toll itself in the future or whether it will continue to rely on private service providers. Experience shows that an independent organization – for example by the motorway maintenance departments – might have been cheaper and more efficient. However, the many legal disputes and delays resulted in high costsand significantly impairs the system’s efficiency.

The discussion about a car toll and privatization of road traffic

In addition to the truck toll, the discussion about a car toll has also flared up again. The concept, which was presented by Federal Transport Minister in July 2014, is highly controversial. Critics warn of a possible further privatization of the road infrastructure, which primarily benefits investors. The so-called “foreigner toll”, which is also mocking in the tabloids as “compulsory levyfor foreigners” is expensive to collect and could jeopardize European cohesion. According to current calculations, the income would only be around 600 million euros a year – a sum that is hardly sufficient to justify the enormous costs of operating such a system, let alone improve the infrastructure in the long term.

Lessons from the past

Overall, the history of the German toll system shows how complex and problematic public-private partnerships can be in infrastructure financing. Delays, legal disputes and lack of trust have increased the costs and restricted the effectiveness of the system. It is to be hoped that in the future a more transparent and efficientSolution is found – possibly by a stronger return to government control and planning. This is the only way to ensure that the infrastructure is maintained and financed in the long term without unnecessarily burdening taxpayers.