Traffic moves slowly out of the tunnel and up onto the Zakim Bridge. (Photo by Andy Metzger)

“EVERYTHING SHOULD be on the table.” That’s what Sen. Brendan Crighton, co-chair of the Legislature’s transportation committee, said when asked about the future of transportation revenue in Massachusetts last December. That comment signals a welcome shift to having long-deferred and much-needed conversations, particularly in a state where the hard but necessary public conversations about transportation funding haven’t always gone well.

High on the list of necessary issues to put on the table is this: Gas taxes are an antiquated, highly regressive, and increasingly inadequate revenue tool for funding transportation. From 2022 to 2025, Massachusetts drivers drove 7 percent more while gas tax revenue stagnated, decreasing by around 1 percent.

In practice, this means drivers are putting more wear and tear on the roads, but the taxes collected at the pump go far less at maintaining them. As a result, Massachusetts has fewer financial resources to put towards supporting multimodal transportation needs across the Commonwealth.

As vehicles become more fuel-efficient and electric vehicle adoption increases, the state will continue to collect proportionally less in gas taxes as drivers have less or no need to fill up at the pump. As inflation continues year by year, and the gas tax does not keep pace, the purchasing power of gas tax revenues will continue to diminish.

This once-dependable financial resource is gradually, and inevitably, fading away. While it is not possible to fully replace the gas tax right away, Massachusetts can and should begin the transition now.

There are many ways the state can generate adequate, stable funding for its transportation needs. One of the most powerful, equitable, and proven methods is road usage charging, where drivers would be charged for their miles driven across designated roads.

Other states have shown the potential of road usage charges. Beginning in 2020, Utah’s road usage charge program has given EV owners the choice between paying an alternative fuel fee when registering their vehicle or paying per-mile throughout the year up to that fee. As of last year, the state had enrolled almost 10,000 EVs in the per-mile option.

Virginia charges a highway use fee at the time of registration where owners of vehicles with a fuel efficiency of 25 miles per gallon or greater pay a variable amount. This fee is calculated based on projected gas tax revenue the state would lose. Oregon established the first road usage program, in 2015, which will soon transition to making it mandatory for EVs to choose between paying an annual fee or be charged by the mile.

These states show that the road usage charge is more closely aligned to the pay-as-you-go spirit that the gas tax was supposed to reflect, but never really did.

Gas taxes are incredibly regressive—forcing lower-income drivers to pay a disproportionate amount of their earnings on maintaining the roads compared to higher-income drivers. This is compounded by lower-income drivers being much less likely to own newer, fuel-efficient vehicles or EVs, which are paying little to no gas tax.

Our roads and wider transportation network don’t maintain themselves. Without a fair share of funding from each person who benefits from it, there simply won’t be enough to go around for the maintenance and improvements people deserve. Pursuing a road usage charge creates a new spigot of transportation revenue that we can take time to modify and adapt to Massachusetts’s needs as a gas tax inevitably declines in the decades to come.

Massachusetts also does not charge special fees for registering electric vehicles, a distinction from 41 other states which do. For that reason, it might seem like a flat fee would be an easier alternative or first step before pursuing a road usage fee due to how easy it would be to start. Nonetheless, offsetting gas tax losses will require more than one policy solution over time, and charging a punitive fee on electric vehicles runs counter to the state’s climate goals.

It’s also important that this not solely be an EV program. While EVs are a great testing ground for a voluntary program where we can work out its kinks, highly fuel-efficient vehicles will continue to enter the market long before electric vehicles use a sizeable share of our roads. The numbers bear it out. As of January 2026, there are about 470,000 hybrid or electric vehicles registered in Massachusetts compared with over 4.8 million internal combustion engine vehicles.

Difficult challenges are easier avoided – at least in the short term. But Massachusetts must begin exploring various models to modernize our transportation revenue system to keep up with a changing world. Starting now allows us to test, adjust, and build public trust in changes.

Paying at the wheel, not the pump, isn’t just pragmatic; it’s necessary. If we want reliable transportation funding, the transition must begin before crisis forces it.

Juan Bibiloni is a master in public policy candidate at the Harvard Kennedy School with experience in state, local, and city transportation.