[afransen]

Yeah of course. The negative externalities of cars really drops like a rock once its electric. Certainly will have to figure out a new way to fund operations, maintenance and renewal. Plus will always have the demand problem where the incremental user puts way more costs on other road users than the benefits they recieve (the economics of congestion).

It will take some time for language to adjust around how urbanites talk about cars. It will be sorta like over last decade as people's rhetoric shifted away from oil crisis/end of suburbia.

For VIA it is about pure geometry! One VIA train = so many cars off the road. HFR = not building an incremental lane each way on the 401/416/417. HFR = less urban congestion, etc.

The fact that they emit GHGs and local pollutants aren't the only problem with cars. EVs are less offensive, but not something to be embraced in cities. The infrastructure required and social habits created by cars is not desirable.

The whole oil crisis/Jeff Rubin "End of Growth" stuff was always on the face of it nonsense. He was arguing that container shipping was going to end and global trade would dry up. Nevermind that it takes less fuel/energy to float something from China to North America than the train or truck to move it around on the continent. It was always completely economically illiterate doom-mongering.

 

[MisterF]

Peterborough is similar to Kitchener in that there may be sticker shock at HFR fares, and there may be calls for GO service with its lower fare structure and (if you believe ML) fare integration to other transit operators.

Via isn't that much more expensive than GO. A Via commuter pass to Oshawa is $254 for 20 trips. The equivalent on GO is $206 with Presto. On a corridor that Via owns and operates it might even be able to match a GO fare. It could offer a whole range of price points and service types that it can't on the Kitchener line today.

We have a tendency to think of GO, Via, and the TTC doing different things that have little in common because that's what we're used to. But that will become less and less true if RER and HFR get built out. Take the Barrie line for example. When it gets fully expanded and fares are integrated it has the potential to carry everything from intercity trains to local transit and everything in between. Who knows, maybe at some point in the future GO will start running express trains with reserved seats to Barrie or Collingwood. At the same time, you could take the same line to do a quick subway style trip from Bloor to Caledonia. You don't need to bring in other transit agencies to meet those diverse needs.

 

[reaperexpress]

Via isn't that much more expensive than GO. A Via commuter pass to Oshawa is $254 for 20 trips. The equivalent on GO is $206 with Presto. On a corridor that Via owns and operates it might even be able to match a GO fare. It could offer a whole range of price points and service types that it can't on the Kitchener line today.

We have a tendency to think of GO, Via, and the TTC doing different things that have little in common because that's what we're used to. But that will become less and less true if RER and HFR get built out. Take the Barrie line for example. When it gets fully expanded and fares are integrated it has the potential to carry everything from intercity trains to local transit and everything in between. Who knows, maybe at some point in the future GO will start running express trains with reserved seats to Barrie or Collingwood. At the same time, you could take the same line to do a quick subway style trip from Bloor to Caledonia. You don't need to bring in other transit agencies to meet those diverse needs.

For longer trips the difference gets even slimmer.

20 trips Toronto - Kitchener:
GO: $326.40 on Presto
VIA: $294.00 + 13% tax = $332.22

20 trips Toronto - Guelph
GO: $271.80 on Presto
VIA: $267.00 + 13% tax = $301.71

The only reason VIA is more expensive in many cases is that they get charged sales tax while GO doesn't.

We really need to get rid of the sales tax on train and bus tickets - it is wasteful to be taxing VIA while they receive an annual operating subsidy. It is also counterproductive to be taxing Ontario Northland and bus operators licenced by the Ontario Highway Traffic Board (Greyhound, Coach Canada, Casper Bus, Hammond Bus etc) when they're priving a valuable public service that provides a net benefit to the government and citizens. And they're all constantly perpetually struggling to break even.

 

[lenaitch]

For longer trips the difference gets even slimmer.

20 trips Toronto - Kitchener:
GO: $326.40 on Presto
VIA: $294.00 + 13% tax = $332.22

20 trips Toronto - Guelph
GO: $271.80 on Presto
VIA: $267.00 + 13% tax = $301.71

The only reason VIA is more expensive in many cases is that they get charged sales tax while GO doesn't.

We really need to get rid of the sales tax on train and bus tickets - it is wasteful to be taxing VIA while they receive an annual operating subsidy. It is also counterproductive to be taxing Ontario Northland and bus operators licenced by the Ontario Highway Traffic Board (Greyhound, Coach Canada, Casper Bus, Hammond Bus etc) when they're priving a valuable public service that provides a net benefit to the government and citizens. And they're all constantly perpetually struggling to break even.

But where does that logic start and stop? It does raise an interesting point of the treatment between 'transit' and 'transit-like'.

 

[roger1818]

But where does that logic start and stop? It does raise an interesting point of the treatment between 'transit' and 'transit-like'.

Agreed. For example, Prestige class tickets on The Canadian probably shouldn't be tax free. Maybe economy class tickets on intercity buses and trains should be tax free, but not premium class tickets.

 

[innsertnamehere]

I wonder why VIA continues to offer commuter passes to some stations like Grimsby and St Catharines.. Those stations are only served by the Maple Leaf right now, and have been for years, which operates on an essentially unusable service pattern. Why even offer it? I would be surprised if they saw even a single customer buying the pass.

 

[reaperexpress]

But where does that logic start and stop? It does raise an interesting point of the treatment between 'transit' and 'transit-like'.

Agreed. For example, Prestige class tickets on The Canadian probably shouldn't be tax free. Maybe economy class tickets on intercity buses and trains should be tax free, but not premium class tickets.

It is indeed an interesting ideological question. The way I see it, intercity ground transportation is a service that the government wishes to support, due to the environmental benefits relative to other modes, the reduced road demand, and the essential service it provides for people without cars, especially in places such as Northern Ontario where towns are very far apart. This is in contrast to airlines, where the government does wish to subsidize some rural air routes due to the essential service they provide, but for the most part it is not in the public interest to subsidize airline operations.

Given that we want intercity ground transportation to continue existing and to be competitive with other modes such as driving and flying, we need to provide it with some form of financial advantage, especially in the more rural parts of the country.

The distinction between "transit-like" is already very clearly defined for private operators, by bus route licenses awarded by the Ontario Highway Traffic Board. Licensed bus routes allow any person to book a ticket, same as a transit service. Other types of bus service, such as tour buses/trains, chartered buses or employee shuttles, aren't licensed bus routes so sales tax would continue to apply. For private operators, we need this distinction so that a company doesn't just run one little licensed bus route to qualify as a tax-exempt "transit-like" operator, but then focus their entire business on other ventures like charter services.

For the public operators (VIA and Ontario Northland), this is not an issue. Due to those companies' direct accountability to governments, there is no chance of that happening. As such it is not necessary to distinguish between certain tickets which do or don't deserve a subsidy (i.e. tax break) - we wish to subsidize the company as a whole. Prestige class customers obviously don't need any tax breaks, but in practice eliminating the sales tax wouldn't make a difference to them anyway. Those tickets are relatively price-insensitive, so VIA would probably just increase the ticket price by 13% and use the extra profits to cross-subsidize other types of service. This the same reason a publicly-funded operator has a Prestige Class in the first place: it helps support the transcontinental train service, whose public benefit is the economy-class service which is a lifeline for people in remote communities.

 

[tmlittle]

For longer trips the difference gets even slimmer.

20 trips Toronto - Kitchener:
GO: $326.40 on Presto
VIA: $294.00 + 13% tax = $332.22

20 trips Toronto - Guelph
GO: $271.80 on Presto
VIA: $267.00 + 13% tax = $301.71

The only reason VIA is more expensive in many cases is that they get charged sales tax while GO doesn't.

We really need to get rid of the sales tax on train and bus tickets - it is wasteful to be taxing VIA while they receive an annual operating subsidy. It is also counterproductive to be taxing Ontario Northland and bus operators licenced by the Ontario Highway Traffic Board (Greyhound, Coach Canada, Casper Bus, Hammond Bus etc) when they're priving a valuable public service that provides a net benefit to the government and citizens. And they're all constantly perpetually struggling to break even.

I agree that a lot of people I know, especially younger people, have the perception of Via as expensive and GO as cheap. Though especially within the corridor, I wish there was more of an effort for short-trip price reductions outside of the GO zone. I understand the argument that this might tie up long-trip seats and throw off ridership balance, but it would make a lot of trips like Kitchener-Stratford much more practical.

 

[roger1818]

It is indeed an interesting ideological question. The way I see it, intercity ground transportation is a service that the government wishes to support, due to the environmental benefits relative to other modes, the reduced road demand, and the essential service it provides for people without cars, especially in places such as Northern Ontario where towns are very far apart. This is in contrast to airlines, where the government does wish to subsidize some rural air routes due to the essential service they provide, but for the most part it is not in the public interest to subsidize airline operations.

Given that we want intercity ground transportation to continue existing and to be competitive with other modes such as driving and flying, we need to provide it with some form of financial advantage, especially in the more rural parts of the country.

The distinction between "transit-like" is already very clearly defined for private operators, by bus route licenses awarded by the Ontario Highway Traffic Board. Licensed bus routes allow any person to book a ticket, same as a transit service. Other types of bus service, such as tour buses/trains, chartered buses or employee shuttles, aren't licensed bus routes so sales tax would continue to apply. For private operators, we need this distinction so that a company doesn't just run one little licensed bus route to qualify as a tax-exempt "transit-like" operator, but then focus their entire business on other ventures like charter services.

For the public operators (VIA and Ontario Northland), this is not an issue. Due to those companies' direct accountability to governments, there is no chance of that happening. As such it is not necessary to distinguish between certain tickets which do or don't deserve a subsidy (i.e. tax break) - we wish to subsidize the company as a whole. Prestige class customers obviously don't need any tax breaks, but in practice eliminating the sales tax wouldn't make a difference to them anyway. Those tickets are relatively price-insensitive, so VIA would probably just increase the ticket price by 13% and use the extra profits to cross-subsidize other types of service. This the same reason a publicly-funded operator has a Prestige Class in the first place: it helps support the transcontinental train service, whose public benefit is the economy-class service which is a lifeline for people in remote communities.

interesting thought. I wonder how much GST VIA collects compared to their subsidy?

 

[Darwinkgo]

interesting thought. I wonder how much GST VIA collects compared to their subsidy?

Important to remember that making VIA's sales GST free, while not making its inputs GST free, actually makes VIA worse off.

And it is free to see, it is in VIA's annual report (including straight sales taxes like BC, SK and Man.):

 

[reaperexpress]

Important to remember that making VIA's sales GST free, while not making its inputs GST free, actually makes VIA worse off.

How so? Could you explain further? What do you mean by inputs?

 

[Fritter]

How so? Could you explain further? What do you mean by inputs?

I am not an accountant, and I stand to be corrected if I'm way off on this, but I believe the GST system works this way.
A business collects GST on all it's sales, subtracts the GST paid on all its inputs to make those sales (In VIA's case Diesel, cleaning supplies, food and beverage sold onboard etc) and pays the government the net amount. If a business did not collect GST, then costs on inputs would be higher without the negating GST collected.
In other words, GST is paid by the final customer not each time along the procurement line.

 

[EnviroTO]

That is correct. The amount of the GST collected that a company needs to remit is how much it collected from sales minus the GST it paid on supplies that make up the product they sell. However, I believe if the product you sell is non taxable the tax you pay on inputs directly related to the product still get claimed resulting in a GST refund. Because the value is usually added through the supply chain most industries a refund doesn't happen, but if what you make is nontaxable but relies on taxed items that can happen.

 

[roger1818]

I am not an accountant, and I stand to be corrected if I'm way off on this, but I believe the GST system works this way.
A business collects GST on all it's sales, subtracts the GST paid on all its inputs to make those sales (In VIA's case Diesel, cleaning supplies, food and beverage sold onboard etc) and pays the government the net amount. If a business did not collect GST, then costs on inputs would be higher without the negating GST collected.
In other words, GST is paid by the final customer not each time along the procurement line.

How do transit agencies get around this, or do they have to cover the GST on their supplies? As for food and beverage sold, they would still be charging GST on those items.

 

[SFO-YYZ]

Guys, I think we may be getting a bit off topic here with the GST/tax remittance transit discussions...

Let's try to get back to VIA/HFR, etc.