Enforcement Design (24)
Description:
Enforcement design occurs after RUC legislation is passed and involves translating all provisions of law related to enforcing a set of practical enforcement processes; establishing policies and operational procedures for violation detection; and determining the consequences of violations. This process also includes setting penalty fines, determining times for notification, and defining the next steps after notifications.
Details:
Enforcement design involves determining action against general means of evasion as well as mileage reporting method-specific means. General evasion includes the types of violations possible with any mileage reporting method, such as late payment or not registering a vehicle in the state where it is domiciled. Examples of mileage reporting method-specific evasion include leaving on-board diagnostic (OBD-II) devices unplugged or doctoring odometer photo images. Enforcement design determines detection and consequences for various types of evasion, and provides adjudication or a means to dispute a penalty.
Primary Uses:
Set up a system to enforce against RUC violators. Separate systems may be needed for commercial and noncommercial vehicles, if they are administered by different agencies. RUC enforcement could utilize existing enforcement rules and agency partnerships for vehicle tax and registration systems.
Best Practices/Lessons Learned:
- While the fuel tax is in place, drivers paying it have little motivation for evasion because they would still be paying through the fuel tax if they do not pay their RUC.
- For volunteer programs, enforcement could be as simple as removing the participant from the RUC program and returning them to paying the fuel tax or additional registration fees if applicable.
- A state can refine enforcement policies over time. States can start with minimal enforcement policies and further develop them later. Planning that occurs prior to system rollout should account for enforcement costs and interagency collaboration efforts and expenses.
- Do not assume individuals are intentional violators unless the evidence shows otherwise. Most violators do so unintentionally. Education should be a primary goal of enforcement activities.
- Do not attempt to create an enforcement system that catches and penalizes every violation, as doing so could be prohibitively expensive—ensure state value for money in scaling enforcement systems.
- As a major penalty for significant violations, use of a vehicle registration hold or blocker has proved the most desirable method.
- Design the RUC system to be simple and easy to use to increase compliance and reduce evasion. Include features to support all common use cases (such as buying/selling a vehicle from a private or public dealer). Offer multiple mileage reporting methods and payment plans.
- For a limited number of vehicles, use a vehicle history reporting company to perform vehicle audits to detect digital odometer rollback, or to identify criteria for suspicious activity or reported figures.
- Ensuring vehicles are registered in the state where they are domiciled is nontrivial, and the introduction of RUC may increase the number of individuals attempting this maneuver. Cross-referencing other data (e.g., moving and stationary violations, income tax returns, and other licenses) may help to detect this type of activity.
- Offer simple, fair means of adjudication, but prepare for court cases in limited numbers.
- Communication between agencies and states will greatly enhance enforcement efforts.
State Government Context and Assumptions:
The lead RUC agency—with the support of enforcement experts and legal advice, if needed—performs this task. This task may begin when system design is sufficiently complete to determine all mileage reporting methods and ways of entering and leaving the program.