Congestion pricing is a tolling system for vehicles entering Manhattan’s central business district designed to reduce traffic and generate revenue for public transit infrastructure. This page covers CBC’s work on the MTA capital program, tolling structure and exemptions, fare and toll evasion, transit system modernization, and the regional economic impact of transportation funding.
This page was created with AICBC Insights uses AI to group, analyze and present data and recommendations from CBC's publications. Always reference the cited sources to verify important details..
The Administration should share more details of the plan so the public and policymakers can rest assured that the $9 congestion charge fully plugs the $15 billion funding gap without slowing projects or using financing methods that stress the MTA’s budget.
Governor Hochul should work with the Legislature to make wise choices on how to fund the needed investment, while ensuring New York’s competitiveness.
The capital plan’s financing should be sustainable—not setting the stage for new tax increases every five years—and fairly apportion the cost across the region and among riders, drivers, and taxpayers.
The State should unpause congestion pricing and then identify a funding plan that is sustainable in the long run, ensures those who benefit pay their share, and does not harm New York’s competitiveness.
The State should first unpause congestion pricing, as any alternative makes financing these new projects harder.
Key Data
In December 2025, the CBC noted that if the MTA's lawsuit to keep congestion pricing is unsuccessful and the program is terminated, the MTA will lose most of the revenue expected to finance $15 billion of its 2020-2024 Capital Plan.
In November 2024, the CBC highlighted that the restarted congestion pricing plan features a $9 congestion charge designed to plug the $15 billion funding gap in the MTA's Capital Program.
Writing in November 2024, the CBC noted that congestion pricing could provide a major economic benefit by reducing an estimated $20 billion in annual costs caused by excess traffic congestion.
In March 2024, the CBC noted that the State's Executive Budget proposed a plan to increase enforcement against congestion pricing fraud, including setting penalties for fraudulently obtaining or using credits, exemptions, or discounts.
In February 2024, the CBC discussed the proposed tolling structure, noting that commercial passenger vehicles would pay the same $15 once-daily charge as personally owned passenger vehicles.
$897 million is the MTA's projected budget gap in 2030. While the budget is stable at the moment, future gaps are widening as expense growth outstrips revenues. On the upside, ridership is near pre-pandemic levels, the MTA is investing in its infrastructure and rolling stock to bring the system into…
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's November 2025 Financial Plan projects manageable budget gaps in the near term, but faces a significant structural deficit of $1.1 billion by 2029. The agency's long-term financial stability is further threatened by potential risks, including the possible termination of New York's congestion pricing program, which is expected to provide $15.0 billion in funding for the 2020-2024 Capital Plan.
Key Data
$15.0 billion
— The amount of revenue the MTA expects to finance for the 2020-2024 Capital Plan from the congestion pricing program, which is at risk if the program is terminated.
$15 billion is the amount congestion pricing is expected to yield for MTA infrastructure investment—to bring trains, tracks, yards, and signals to a state of good repair, increase accessibility, and expand subway service. As congestion pricing is challenged by the Trump administration, this speaks to the larger question of the…
The federal revocation of New York's congestion pricing program threatens to undermine the regional economy and quality of life by halting a program designed to reduce traffic and improve travel times. This decision risks delaying or leaving unfunded billions of dollars in critical transit investments, potentially leading to increased service disruptions and outages.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The federal decision to revoke approval for New York's congestion pricing program should be reversed by the courts.
$35 billion is how much of the MTA's 5-year capital plan remains unfunded. Investing in the MTA’s crumbling infrastructure is one of the most important decisions Albany will make this year; New York's economy, quality of life, and the region's competitiveness depend on it. At a recent CBC event, MTA…
The restart of congestion pricing is a positive step toward funding the MTA's capital projects, provided the $9 charge effectively closes the $15 billion funding gap. Sustainable financing for the 2025-2029 Capital Plan must avoid recurring tax increases and distribute costs equitably among regional stakeholders.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The Administration should share more details of the plan so the public and policymakers can rest assured that the $9 congestion charge fully plugs the $15 billion funding gap without slowing projects or using financing methods that stress the MTA’s budget.
Governor Hochul should work with the Legislature to make wise choices on how to fund the needed investment, while ensuring New York’s competitiveness.
The capital plan’s financing should be sustainable—not setting the stage for new tax increases every five years—and fairly apportion the cost across the region and among riders, drivers, and taxpayers.
Key Data
$9
— The proposed congestion charge amount.
$15 billion
— The funding gap in the MTA's current Capital Program.
Congestion pricing is expected to provide an economic boost by reducing the $20 billion annual cost of excess traffic and helping to close the $15 billion shortfall in the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital budget. Implementing this tolling system is a vital step toward modernizing the regional transit network and improving overall mobility.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA must identify ways to increase efficiency and adjust MTA priorities to reflect changing demands on the transit system.
The MTA must make redoubled efforts to dramatically reduce fare evasion, which has stressed the budget and makes financing capital investment harder.
Key Data
$20 billion
— Estimated annual cost of excess congestion that could be reduced through more efficient movement of people and goods.
$15 billion
— Shortfall in the current capital budget of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority that congestion pricing revenues will largely close.
The MTA's proposed $69 billion five-year capital plan faces a significant funding shortfall, including a $15 billion gap caused by the pause on congestion pricing. To maintain critical infrastructure and financial stability, state leaders must unpause congestion pricing, prioritize essential repairs over expansion projects, and support efforts to reduce fare evasion and increase operational efficiency.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
State leaders should unpause congestion pricing to address one-third of the MTA's capital funding gap.
Albany should trim and hyper-focus the MTA capital plan to a realistic level rather than promising undelivered projects.
The MTA should reduce fare evasion and increase efficiency to stabilize its operating budget and finance debt.
State leaders should evaluate funding options rigorously, ensuring costs are fairly spread among riders, taxpayers, and drivers.
State leaders should defer expansion projects like the Interborough Express to focus exclusively on rebuilding and improving the existing system.
Key Data
$15 billion
— The funding hole created by pausing congestion pricing.
$69 billion
— The total value of the MTA's proposed 5-year capital plan.
$90 billion
— The MTA's unrealistic 5-year commitment goal when including already planned projects.
$8.6 billion
— The amount the MTA would spend on new and previously planned service expansion projects.
$1.5 trillion
— The total value of the MTA's assets requiring investment to reach a state of good repair.
$1 billion
— The MTA's current structural budget gap.
The MTA's proposed 2025-2029 capital plan requires a sustainable funding strategy that includes unpausing congestion pricing to avoid making project financing more difficult. A realistic and tightly focused investment plan is essential to maintain reliable transit service and financial stability without relying on unaffordable debt or frequent tax increases.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should unpause congestion pricing, as any alternative makes financing new projects harder.
The State should develop a funding plan that is sustainable and does not require a new tax increase every five years.
The State should develop a funding plan that ensures riders, taxpayers, and drivers across the region pay their share.
The State should develop a funding plan that does not harm New York’s competitiveness by balancing the need for reliable transit with the fact that New York already has the nation’s highest taxes.
Key Data
$8.6 billion
— The amount of proposed and previously planned expansion projects that divert resources from essential rebuilding and improvement efforts.
$10 billion
— The amount of new MTA bonds proposed, which is currently considered unaffordable.
$1 billion
— The amount the MTA’s structural budget gap will exceed by the end of the decade.
15 percent
— The portion of an operating budget that is not fully funded, which impacts debt affordability.
The MTA's proposed 2025-2029 capital plan requires a sustainable funding strategy, which should begin with the immediate unpausing of congestion pricing to secure necessary revenue. Without a realistic and tightly focused investment plan, the transit system risks further disrepair and financial instability that could threaten the region's economic health.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should unpause congestion pricing and then identify a funding plan that is sustainable in the long run, ensures those who benefit pay their share, and does not harm New York’s competitiveness.
The State should first unpause congestion pricing, as any alternative makes financing these new projects harder.
Key Data
$68 billion
— The total investment in the proposed MTA capital plan.
$10 billion
— The amount of proposed new MTA bonds that are deemed not fiscally sustainable.
$1 billion
— The amount the MTA's structural budget gap will exceed by 2027.
$8.6 billion
— The cost of proposed and previously planned expansion projects that divert resources from essential rebuilding efforts.
$19 billion
— The amount the MTA would be committing annually, which is 68 percent higher than the prior $11.4 billion annual peak.
The MTA faces a significant capital funding gap, with $16.5 billion of the shortfall directly attributed to the pause in congestion pricing. To ensure the 2025-2029 capital program remains viable, the state must unpause congestion pricing and prioritize essential system repairs over expansion projects.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA and the State should unpause congestion pricing, as any alternative merely reduces the options available to fund projects in the 2025-2029 Capital Program.
Key Data
$16.5 billion
— The amount of the MTA capital program funding gap that is specifically due to the congestion pricing pause.
$27.6 billion
— The value of projects from prior capital plans that will not be committed by the end of 2024, a delay caused in part by congestion pricing uncertainty and the pause.
The Governor's pause on congestion pricing has created a $15 billion financing gap in the 2020-2024 Capital Program, necessitating an immediate resumption of the program to fund critical infrastructure. To ensure long-term stability, the state and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority must prioritize essential system repairs and develop a sustainable, fair financing plan for the 2025-2029 Capital Program.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should say when the congestion pricing pause will end, preferably as soon as possible or by the end of the year, so projects continue smoothly.
The MTA Board should do everything in its power to implement congestion pricing as soon as possible.
The MTA should focus on and commit to the most critical projects to rebuild and improve the system as quickly as possible.
The MTA should propose a 2025-2029 capital program that wholly prioritizes the most critical rebuild and improve projects, and is sized to be ambitious but achievable by the end of 2029 if perfectly executed.
The 2025-2029 capital program should include a sustainable, fair financing plan—one that apportions the non-federal share regionally and appropriately across drivers, riders, and taxpayers.
The State should release any remaining funds it long ago committed to the MTA’s 2020-2024 capital program.
Key Data
$15 billion
— financing hole opened in the 2020-2024 Capital Program due to the congestion pricing pause.
Oct. 1
— deadline for producing a thoughtful, 2025-2029 Capital Program.
2025-2029
— timeframe for the next capital program that must be produced by Oct. 1.
2020-2024
— timeframe of the capital program currently facing a financing hole.
Implementing congestion pricing is essential to funding critical transit needs and maintaining the system's state of good repair. Delaying this policy in favor of shortsighted fiscal maneuvers or spending outside the budget process threatens the state's fiscal stability and the quality of life for residents.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should not enact an eleventh-hour fiscal scheme to make up for the poor decision to delay congestion pricing.
The best decision is to stay the course and implement congestion pricing.
The MTA should include these projects and develop a realistic, holistic 2025-2029 capital program that focuses on essential state of good repair and modernization needs, funds them in the smartest way possible, and transparently involves the public.
The State should avoid committing to spend billions of dollars outside the budget process, as it will further widen its own budget gaps and weaken fiscal stability.
Governor Hochul's decision to indefinitely suspend congestion pricing has prompted calls for alternative funding, but raising the Payroll Mobility Tax by $1 billion or depleting state reserves would negatively impact the economy and business competitiveness. Instead of seeking substitutes, the state should proceed with the original congestion pricing plan and engage in a data-driven assessment of the MTA's long-term capital investment needs.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should not now raise the Payroll Mobility Tax $1 billion annually to replace congestion pricing.
The State should not raid reserves, as it would weaken the capacity to protect New Yorkers from the next recession or severe emergency.
The State should stay the course and implement congestion pricing.
There needs to be a thoughtful, information-based discussion of the MTA’s needs for state of good repair investment—how much they will cost and how appropriately and fairly to finance those needs.
Key Data
$1 billion
— The amount the State is considering raising the Payroll Mobility Tax annually to replace congestion pricing.
$1.1 billion
— The amount in taxes raised last year from businesses to fund the MTA operating budget.
Congestion pricing serves as a critical mechanism for funding transit, reducing emissions, and easing traffic, and should be maintained to avoid the negative consequences of raising business taxes or depleting state reserves. The state must release committed capital funds and ensure the transit authority accelerates investments in infrastructure repairs to prevent further system instability.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
We should be staying the course regarding congestion pricing.
All sectors should contribute to improving transit, including drivers.
The State should release the funds it has committed to the current capital plan and ensure the MTA speeds up its investments in state of good repair work.
The congestion pricing program should be closely monitored and fine-tuned to meet its objectives.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is urged to publish an addendum to its Twenty-Year Needs Assessment that details the costs, benefits, and timelines for "Rebuild" and "Improve" projects to ensure transparency regarding critical transit infrastructure investments. This transparency is essential for public understanding of the tradeoffs required to address the system's condition, which may require between $40 billion and $80 billion over the next five years.
Fare and toll evasion pose a significant threat to the success of the Central Business District Tolling Program, as the revenue is essential for the MTA's capital projects. Strengthening enforcement laws and increasing penalties for evasion are necessary to ensure the financial viability of the transit system and the fairness of the tolling program.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should enact policies that make using a tolled road without payment a theft-of-services offense, increasing this from a civil to criminal infraction.
The State should enact policies that make it illegal to sell devices that obscure license plates to prevent toll evasion.
The State should enact policies that impose fines ranging from $100 to $500 for intentionally obscuring plates while passing through tolled facilities.
The State should enact policies that empower the Department of Motor Vehicles to restrict the transfer or registration of motor vehicles with suspended registrations due to nonpayment of tolls.
The State should enact policies that make it specifically illegal to fraudulently obtain credits, discounts, or exemptions from tolls as a part of congestion pricing.
The State should enact policies that strengthen the penalties for toll fraud, making the offense a felony if the value exceeds $1,000.
Key Data
$700 million
— The amount the MTA lost in revenue from fare and toll evasion in 2023.
$100 million
— The cost of license-plate-related rejections to the NYC Speed Camera Program in 2023.
$40 million
— The estimated annual uncollected tolls for the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey.
$276 million
— The amount of unpaid tolls and fees the NYS Thruway Authority has struggled to collect.
$46 million
— The amount the MTA lost from license plate fraud in 2022.
The Executive Budget includes a plan to increase enforcement of fares and tolls, including penalties for fraud related to the upcoming congestion pricing system. These enforcement mechanisms are deemed necessary to protect the critical revenue base that sustains the State's transportation authorities.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should enact proposed fare and toll enforcement policies, which include measures to prevent fraud within the forthcoming congestion pricing system, to protect the critical revenue base that sustains transportation authorities.
The proposed central business district tolling program aims to reduce congestion and emissions while generating $15 billion for the MTA's capital program. To ensure the program's success, the MTA should avoid granting additional exemptions or credits, while closely monitoring toll evasion, commercial vehicle traffic patterns, and the impact of weekend nighttime discounts.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should adopt the TMRB’s recommended tolling structure.
The MTA should not grant credits for bridge and tunnel crossings.
The MTA should reject calls for additional exemptions or credits.
The MTA should monitor the effects of the tolls to ensure the program’s long-term success.
The MTA should monitor traffic volumes and patterns for all commercial vehicles to determine if substitution occurs and has negative impacts.
The MTA should monitor and evaluate the safety, revenue, and congestion implications of beginning the Friday- and Saturday-night discount periods at 10 p.m.
The MTA should consider a toll evasion mitigation and monitoring program similar to the one recommended by the Blue-Ribbon Panel on Fare Evasion.
The MTA should closely track license plate obstruction and delinquent payment data following implementation to monitor the evasion rate and the effectiveness of mitigation efforts.
Key Data
$15
— The once-daily charge that commercial passenger vehicles will pay under the proposed tolling structure.
$15 billion
— The amount of annual revenue the central business district tolling program is expected to generate for the MTA's 2020 to 2024 Capital Program.
$1.5 trillion is the MTA’s total asset value—the trains, buses, yards, and stations...all the infrastructure moving New Yorkers round the clock. At a recent CBC event, MTA Chair and CEO Janno Lieber and President of Construction and Development Jamie Torres-Springer discussed congestion pricing, fare evasion, congestion pricing, state of good…
Swift implementation of congestion pricing is essential to provide necessary funding for the current capital plan. Prioritizing the maintenance and repair of existing transit assets must occur before any system expansion to prevent network failure.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority should swiftly and wisely implement congestion pricing to support the current capital plan.
Congestion pricing is expected to generate $1 billion in annual revenue to support $15 billion in capital investments for the transit system, though project costs and interest rates pose risks to these projections. To ensure the program's success, the system should maintain limited exemptions, vary charges by time, and consider implementing a vehicle-miles-traveled fee for in-zone trips.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Limit exemptions to public and some private transit providers, those specified in the law, and those agreed to in the Final Environmental Assessment.
Do not provide credit for payment of MTA or Port Authority of New York and New Jersey tolls, as doing so would increase the program's complexity and the toll paid by other travelers.
Vary the congestion charge by time of day and day of the week, and ensure the charge is easily understood and well-communicated.
Consider charging a vehicle-miles travelled (VMT) fee for those that stay inside of the zone.
Monitor and report congestion pricing outcomes and operational metrics to inform future policy adjustments.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Annual revenue expected from the congestion pricing system.
$15 billion
— Capital investment in the 2020-2024 Plan expected to be supported by congestion pricing revenue.
45 percent
— Portion of the $55 billion in funding for the 2020-2024 capital plan that comes from sources that will not recur in the next cycle.
$55 billion
— Total funding for the 2020-2024 capital plan.
The Traffic Mobility Review Board should implement a congestion pricing system that limits exemptions, avoids toll credits, and varies charges by time and day to ensure the program meets its congestion, emissions, and revenue goals. Future policy adjustments should be informed by monitoring operational metrics and considering a vehicle-miles travelled fee for in-zone traffic.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Limit exemptions to transit providers, those specified in the law, and those agreed to in the Final Environmental Assessment.
Do not provide credit for payment of MTA or Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) tolls, as credits will increase the congestion charge for other drivers.
Vary the congestion charge by time of day and day of the week, and ensure the charge is easy to understand and well communicated.
Consider charging a vehicle-miles travelled (VMT) fee for those that stay inside of the zone to help meet the program's goals in the future.
Monitor and report congestion pricing outcomes and operational metrics to inform future policy adjustments.
Key Data
$1 billion
— The annual revenue mandate required by law for the congestion pricing program.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority is utilizing various funding sources, including $1 billion in projected revenue from congestion pricing, to support $15 billion in infrastructure investments. While this funding is critical for the transit system's financial stability, the primary focus of the discussion is on labor negotiations and operational improvements.
Key Data
$1 billion
— The amount drivers will pay to support infrastructure investments through congestion pricing.
$15 billion
— The total amount of infrastructure investments supported by congestion pricing revenue.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a significant structural budget deficit of at least $2.5 billion that threatens the future of the region's public transit system. Implementing congestion pricing expeditiously is essential to funding critical capital repairs, and these revenues must be protected from being diverted to cover operating budget gaps.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Congestion pricing should be implemented expeditiously.
Revenues from congestion pricing should not be diverted to narrow the operating budget gap.
The Central Business District Tolling Program aims to reduce traffic and emissions while generating $1 billion in annual revenue to support the transit system. To ensure the program's success, policy adjustments such as limiting exemptions, varying tolls by time, and monitoring outcomes are necessary to maintain fairness and effectiveness.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should vary tolls based on the time of day and day of the week to prioritize both raising revenue and reducing congestion and emissions.
The MTA should limit exemptions to those specified in the law and for-hire vehicles and taxis, while avoiding credits for other existing tolls to prevent the need for higher charges on other drivers.
The MTA should clearly communicate the tolls to enable drivers to know how much they would pay for different trip times and modify their trips accordingly.
The MTA should monitor and report congestion pricing outcomes and operational metrics to inform future policy adjustments and ensure the program meets its goals.
The MTA should consider charging a VMT fee for trips occurring entirely within the zone in the future to remove the de facto exemption for in-zone vehicles.
Key Data
$1 billion
— The annual revenue goal for the Central Business District Tolling Program.
between $5 and $14
— The estimated cost increase for each non-exempted car if exemptions and credits are expanded.
The MTA's capital plan faces significant funding shortfalls, with at least $12 billion at risk or unaffordable, making the full realization of congestion pricing revenue essential to bring the system to a state of good repair. Delays in implementing congestion pricing have already cost $2 billion in forgone revenue, and further delays or excessive exemptions could jeopardize the funding needed for critical infrastructure modernization.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should continue to work with the federal and State governments to implement congestion pricing by 2023 to provide critical revenues, environmental and congestion benefits, and support increased ridership.
The MTA should continue to include congestion pricing’s full estimated revenue, which is essential to support a capital plan robust enough to bring the system to a state of good repair.
The MTA should avoid significant exemptions and credits to the congestion charge, as these could lead to a higher charge for those who pay and lower overall revenue.
Key Data
$2 billion
— forgone revenue from the congestion pricing delay in 2021 and 2022.
$1 billion
— likely forgone revenue from the congestion pricing delay in 2023.
$3 billion
— potential reduction in capital funding if congestion charge revenue is 20 percent lower than expected.
$15 billion
— planned revenue from the Central Business District Tolling Program.
Congestion pricing is essential to generate $15 billion in capital funding for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to implement its capital plan and address transit system needs. Implementing this program without further delay is critical to reducing traffic congestion and mitigating the environmental impacts of increased air pollution in disadvantaged communities.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
We urge you to use the full force of your office to push the White House and the Federal Highway Administration to expedite the necessary approvals for the congestion pricing program.
It is critical that the MTA continues to stand firm against calls for exemptions that would only increase the price of tolls on the rest of the driving population and undermine the goal of traffic "decongestion."
We urge you to contact Secretary Buttigieg of USDOT and request that there be no further delay in federal review or permitting processes necessary for the implementation of the congestion pricing program.
Your continued support is crucial to ensuring that congestion pricing is implemented without further delay and in no event by later than the end of 2023.
Key Data
$15 billion
— The amount of capital funding that will be generated from congestion pricing revenue, which is essential to the MTA implementing its capital plan.
New York State should move quickly to implement congestion pricing, which is projected to generate $1 billion in net annual contributions for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital plan. This funding would support $15 billion in infrastructure investment while helping to decrease traffic congestion and emissions.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should expeditiously implement congestion pricing.
The State should implement congestion pricing in a fair and sustainable manner that limits unnecessary exemptions and maximizes social benefit.
Key Data
$1 billion
— in net annual contributions for the MTA capital plan expected from the congestion pricing program
$15 billion
— in investment that would be supported by the net annual contributions from congestion pricing
New York State's transportation sector is the largest source of carbon dioxide emissions, accounting for 47 percent of the state's total, with emissions rising due to increased aviation and persistent motor gasoline use. To meet ambitious greenhouse gas reduction goals, policymakers should implement strategies such as congestion pricing in Manhattan, carbon fees, and mandates for zero-emission vehicle sales.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Implementing congestion pricing in Manhattan should reduce emissions.
State leaders also should consider how transportation emission reductions can be encouraged when making tax policy, state spending, and local aid decisions.
Governor Kathy Hochul recently signed legislation mandating that 100 percent of new passenger cars and trucks sold in NYS be zero-emissions by 2035.
The State also should consider other options, such as carbon fees to build the cost of carbon emissions in the price of fossil fuel heavy transport options like gas cars and aviation with the intent to reduce their use.
Key Data
83.3 MMT
— The amount of CO2 generated by the transportation sector in 2018, representing 47 percent of the state's total emissions.
4.3 metric tons
— The level of transportation emissions per capita in New York State in 2018.
22 MMT
— The amount of aviation-related emissions in 2018, which increased from 2 MMT in 1990.
21 percent
— The growth in SUV ownership in New York City between 2016 and 2020.
6,324 miles
— The vehicle miles travelled (VMT) per capita in New York State in 2018.
47 percent
— The increase in passenger enplanements across New York State from 2000 to 2018.
Manhattan below 61st Street suffers an estimated $5 billion in annual travel time and related losses, which congestion pricing aims to mitigate while generating $1 billion for the MTA capital plan. Effective implementation requires a balanced approach that prioritizes revenue and emission reduction while limiting exemptions and utilizing variable tolling.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Prioritize both raising revenue and reducing congestion and emissions by varying toll levels to achieve these policy goals.
Limit exemptions to transit providers, those specified in the law, and perhaps to for-hire vehicles and taxis to maintain program support and effectiveness.
Do not provide credit for payment of MTA or Port Authority of New York and New Jersey tolls, as doing so would increase program complexity and the toll burden on other travelers.
Vary the congestion charge by time of day and day of the week while ensuring the structure is easy to understand and well communicated to drivers.
Consider charging a vehicle-miles travelled (VMT) fee for those that stay inside of the zone to help meet program goals in the future.
Monitor and report congestion pricing outcomes and operational metrics to inform future policy adjustments at regular intervals.
Key Data
$5 billion
— Estimated annual travel time and related losses in Manhattan below 61st Street.
$1 billion
— Projected net annual contribution to the MTA capital plan from congestion pricing.
$1 billion
— Annual revenue target for the congestion pricing program.
New York's congestion pricing program aims to generate $1 billion annually to support a $55 billion capital plan while reducing traffic and emissions in Manhattan. To ensure the program's success, policy adjustments should focus on variable tolling, limited exemptions, and potential future fees for vehicles traveling within the zone.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Vary the congestion charge to prioritize both raising revenue and reducing congestion and emissions.
Limit exemptions to transit providers, those specified in the law, and perhaps to for-hire vehicles (FHVs) and taxis.
Do not provide credit for payment of MTA or Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) tolls.
Vary the congestion charge while ensuring it is easy to understand and well communicated.
Consider charging a vehicle miles travelled (VMT) fee for those that stay in the zone.
Monitor and report congestion pricing outcomes and operational metrics to inform future policy adjustments.
Key Data
$1 Billion
— Annual revenue generated by the congestion pricing program to support the MTA's capital program.
$15 Billion
— Amount of the MTA's capital program supported by the congestion pricing revenue.
$55 Billion
— Total value of the MTA's 5-year capital program.
$2.50
— Congestion pickup fee for taxis.
$2.75
— Congestion pickup fee for for-hire vehicles (FHVs).
$60,000
— Annual income threshold for residents of the congestion zone to be exempt from the toll.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a long-term structural deficit that may approach $2.5 billion annually once federal pandemic aid is exhausted. To address this, the agency must improve operational efficiency and expedite the implementation of congestion pricing to avoid massive fare and toll increases.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should expedite the implementation of congestion pricing, which remains urgently needed.
Key Data
$2.5 billion
— The long-term structural deficit the MTA may face annually once federal funds are exhausted.
$8.0 billion
— The cumulative cash shortfall forecasted through 2024 in the February 2021 Financial Plan.
$6.5 billion
— The amount of additional aid delivered by the federal American Rescue Plan.
Managing the City’s fiscal crisis well will be a critically important duty of the next Mayor and a primary determinant of how the city survives the current crisis, and ultimately thrives in the future. Managing NYC’s Fiscal Crisis: A CBC Mayoral Candidate Forum featured a 10-minute conversation with each candidate,…
The MTA's 2020-2024 capital plan is currently stalled because the launch of congestion pricing has been delayed until 2023 due to a lack of federal environmental review guidance. This delay is significant because 30% of the capital plan relies on bonding out $1 Billion in annual net revenue from the program.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA must ensure that congestion pricing is authorized and implemented so that the capital plan can proceed.
Because congestion pricing has been delayed, it is critical for the MTA to focus its investment on the highest priority state of good repair and critical system replacement work.
Key Data
30%
— Portion of the 2020-2024 capital plan that relies on bonding out revenue from congestion pricing.
$1 Billion
— Annual net revenue from congestion pricing that the capital plan relies on.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a severe fiscal crisis exacerbated by the pandemic, leading to the indefinite delay of the congestion pricing system that was expected to generate $1 billion annually. To address this revenue shortfall, temporary large toll increases on tunnels leading to the central business district could serve as a substitute to reduce traffic and support capital investments.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Consideration could be given to temporary large toll increases on MTA tunnels connecting directly to the central business district during the period of delay, since they could have the dual benefits of reducing auto traffic into the central business district and providing substitute revenue for the capital plan.
A second break with current policy to be considered is to unlink the size of fare increases from toll increases, as significantly larger percentage toll increases should be considered.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Annual revenue expected from the congestion pricing system that has been delayed by federal inaction and the pandemic.
$11
— The amount by which the current in-bound toll on facilities could be increased to generate substitute revenue.
$250 million
— Estimated annual yield from increasing the current in-bound toll on facilities by $11.
New York City taxpayers already provide the majority of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's non-fare and non-federal revenue, a share that is expected to grow as new funding sources like the Manhattan central business district tolling program are implemented. Recognizing this existing financial burden is essential when evaluating future calls for the City to increase its contributions to the transit authority.
Key Data
93%
— Percentage of new funding sources, including the Manhattan central business district tolling program, that City taxpayers will pay in 2020.
74%
— Percentage of all operating subsidies that City taxpayers will pay in 2020, including contributions from new funding sources like the central business district tolling program.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's 2020-2024 Capital Program relies heavily on new revenue streams, including central business district tolling, which is estimated to generate $1 billion annually to support $15 billion in bonds. To ensure the feasibility of this funding, officials must limit exemptions and credits to the tolling charge so that the promised revenue remains available for the plan.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA and other public officials must ensure that exemptions and credits to the central business district tolling charge are limited, so that the revenue promised is available to support the plan.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Estimated annual revenue generated by the central business district tolling charge to support $15 billion in bonds.
$15 billion
— Amount of bonds planned to be supported by the central business district tolling revenue.
The MTA's 2020-2024 Capital Program relies heavily on new revenue streams, including central business district tolling, to fund $15 billion in bonds. To ensure the feasibility of this plan, officials must limit exemptions and credits to the tolling charge to guarantee the promised revenue is available.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA and other public officials must ensure that exemptions and credits to the central business district tolling charge are limited, so that the revenue promised is available to support the plan.
The MTA should prioritize the most impactful projects and initiate those as soon as practicable.
The MTA should allocate its human and financial resources to the highest priority projects, and its capital plan documents should reflect these priorities by including, at minimum, the year in which the MTA plans to commit and complete each project.
The MTA should provide the detail needed and present a five-year plan for investment so the MTA Board, oversight bodies, and the public can assess whether it is appropriate and hold the MTA accountable for implementation.
Rather than using volatile real estate transfer taxes to support debt, the MTA should consider this a source for pay-as-you-go capital projects.
Key Data
$1 Billion
— Estimated annual revenue generated by the central business district tolling program.
$15 Billion
— Amount of bonds planned to be supported by central business district tolling revenue.
$10 Billion
— Amount of funding to come from bonds backed by the expansion of the real estate transfer “mansion” tax and a newly dedicated portion of State and City sales tax revenue.
$9.8 Billion
— Amount of the capital plan to be financed with MTA bonds and pay-as-you-go capital.
$6 Billion
— Amount of funding for the capital plan coming from the State and the City.
$2.8 Billion
— Amount of funding for the capital plan coming from a federal New Starts grant.
CBC Vice President Maria Doulis says MTA managers, riders, and drivers will all be making sacrifices through job cuts, fare hikes, and congestion pricing, so it’s only fair labor contributes as well: “The MTA’s demands reflect the fact that more needs to be done with the workforce in order to…
The Central Business District tolling program, which will charge vehicles entering Manhattan at or south of 60th Street, is designed to generate $15 billion to support the MTA's 2020-2024 capital program. To mitigate the impact on local residents, the plan includes a personal income tax credit for those earning less than $60,000, with toll rates to be determined by the Traffic Mobility Review Board.
Key Data
$15 billion
— The amount of the MTA's 2020-2024 capital program that the Central Business District tolls must be set to support.
$60,000
— The income threshold for zone residents to receive a personal income tax credit under the Central Business District tolling program.
New York State should implement a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) fee to address the growing gap between transportation funding needs and revenue from stagnant fuel taxes. This mileage-based user fee would complement the recently authorized congestion pricing system by creating a more sustainable, equitable, and transparent way to fund the maintenance and improvement of the state's extensive road and bridge network.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New York should phase in implementation of a VMT fee to allow the public sector to build expertise and mobilize experts in government, academia, and the private sector.
The state should require commercial fleets to transition to a VMT fee to address the high costs these heavier vehicles impose on highways and the ease with which they can evade fuel taxes.
New York should create a volunteer program for passenger vehicles to provide added insights into the implementation of a VMT for personal vehicles and build public awareness.
The state should establish rates that vary by type of vehicle and location to account for the negative effects of air pollution and traffic congestion, as well as the added wear and tear imposed by heavier vehicles.
New York should use the VMT fee as an addition to existing sources to help remedy the mismatch between available highway and transit revenues and needed annual expenditures for operations and repairs.
Key Data
$5.7 billion
— Annual investment required for the State to achieve a state of good repair on its assets.
37%
— Portion of necessary repair work on state assets that is currently deferred.
123 billion
— Estimated miles traveled by motorists in New York State in 2016.
51%
— Reduction in the inflation-adjusted per-mile direct cost to motorists who travel on State roadways since 1993.
New York's congestion pricing program, which tolls vehicles entering Manhattan south of 60th Street, is expected to generate roughly $1 billion annually to support the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital investments. These revenues, alongside new real estate transfer taxes and sales tax intercepts, will be deposited into a dedicated lockbox to finance $25 billion in capital projects.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Annual revenue expected to be generated by the congestion tolling program.
$15 billion
— Amount of capital investment in the MTA's 2020-2024 Capital Plan supported by the tolling program.
$100 million
— Loan provided by the State to the TBTA to cover initial implementation costs of the tolling program.
$25 billion
— Total financing for MTA capital projects expected from the new revenue sources.
$11.52
— Peak toll rate recommended by previous analyses.
$127.5 million
— City sales tax revenue deposit into the CBD Tolling Capital Lockbox in State fiscal year 2020.
New York State's fiscal year 2020 budget agreement includes the enactment of a congestion pricing program designed to reduce traffic and pollution in Manhattan's central business district while generating essential funding for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. To ensure the program effectively meets its goals, it is essential to minimize fee exemptions that could undermine projected revenue and traffic reduction efforts.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
It is critical to limit fee exemptions in order to preserve projected revenues and traffic reduction.
Spectrum News NY1 NY1 looked at education, congestion pricing and criminal justice and taxes and the proposal for five year extension of the millionaire's tax, CBC President Andrew Rein joined to help unpack the proposed budget.
New York City's proposed congestion pricing plan aims to generate approximately $1 billion in annual revenue to support MTA capital investments while reducing traffic in the Manhattan Central Business District. Implementing such a system could help address the state's transportation funding shortfalls and provide necessary resources for mass transit improvements.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Introducing congestion pricing to New York City can yield significant transportation revenues with the added benefit of reducing traffic in one of the most congested street networks in North America.
The Governor and legislature should develop and advance a comprehensive congestion pricing proposal this year, one that raises sufficient revenues to reduce transportation funding shortfalls and to support additional mass transit service to meet the needs of those drivers who choose to switch modes.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Estimated annual net revenues the FY 2020 Executive Budget proposal aims to raise through congestion pricing to support MTA capital investments.
15 and 20 percent
— Estimated reduction in traffic in the Manhattan Central Business District depending on the time of day pricing options.
$322 million
— Total congestion fees collected in London in fiscal year 2018.
$219 million
— Net revenue from London's congestion fees that went to mass transit services in fiscal year 2018.
14 percent
— Amount by which Stockholm's congestion tax revenue fell short of projections.
The post advocates for the passage of congestion pricing to address the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's financial needs, while emphasizing that it must be paired with operational efficiencies and spending restraint. It argues that congestion pricing is a necessary first step to improve service and reduce traffic, but should be complemented by broader reforms and revenue sources.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
It is crucial for the Legislature to pass congestion pricing in order to raise revenue, decrease congestion, and improve service.
The capital program should be more focused on state of good repair needs and capital projects executed with greater efficiency.
Any additional revenue needed after these operational and capital reforms should come from motorists and broad-based taxes.
The 10-Point Plan to transform the Metropolitan Transportation Authority includes necessary congestion pricing parameters and revenue strategies to support system restoration and financial stability. The plan requires clear management of new revenue sources through the budget process and ensures that the Regional Transportation Committee does not impede the timely approval of capital programs or fare adjustments.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Critical to those efforts will be the participation of labor and increased productivity by all segments of the workforce.
Ideally, new revenue sources like internet sales taxes and marijuana excise taxes should be allocated in the budget process and not 'earmarked' in statute.
Clarification is needed on Regional Transportation Committee’s (RTC) role in reviewing the capital program and toll and fare increases required to fund it.
The Regional Transportation Committee should not become an obstacle to timely approval of the capital program or fare increases.
Implementing a congestion pricing program in Manhattan's central business district requires a strategic approach that balances revenue generation with traffic reduction through variable tolling. To ensure effectiveness, the system should limit exemptions, prioritize funding for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and city-owned bridges, and mandate collaborative implementation between city and state agencies.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Toll rates should serve the dual goals of raising revenue and reducing peak hour vehicle entries to the central business district, with tolls varying by time of day and day of week to encourage off-peak travel.
Exemptions or discounts to toll rates should be granted to emergency vehicles, vehicles already subject to a congestion charge, and mass transit providers, but broader exemptions should be avoided.
Toll revenues should be used primarily to support the Metropolitan Transportation Authority (MTA) capital program, and a share of toll revenues should support City-owned bridges relied upon by toll payers to enter the congestion pricing zone.
Installing and operating equipment required for the system should be the responsibility of the MTA and be implemented in collaboration with the City of New York.
Authorizing legislation should include provisions to facilitate speedy creation of the system.
Implementing congestion pricing is identified as a critical strategy to address the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's worsening fiscal outlook and substantial capital needs. This revenue source is considered essential for ensuring the long-term financial stability of the transit system.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The City should support the proposed congestion pricing plan to provide essential recurring revenue to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority.
The proposed congestion pricing plan is a positive step because it establishes a fee for entering Manhattan’s central business district to fund the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital needs. However, the budget unfairly shifts the burden of funding the remaining portion of the MTA capital plan onto New York City taxpayers.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The state should maintain the structure of the congestion pricing proposal that imposes a fee for entering Manhattan’s central business district and dedicates the revenues for the MTA’s capital needs.
The state should avoid the requirement that New York City fund half of the MTA capital plan not covered by new congestion pricing revenues.
New York State should implement a comprehensive congestion pricing plan to support the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. This policy should ensure that all generated revenue is fully dedicated to the transit agency to address its management and funding needs.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State should enact a congestion pricing plan and ensure that all of the revenue is dedicated to the MTA.
The Metropolitan Transportation Sustainability Advisory Workgroup Report highlights the fiscal and managerial challenges facing the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Establishing a congestion pricing zone in Manhattan and dedicating all resulting revenue exclusively to capital investments is a necessary step to improve the system's fiscal health.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The Citizens Budget Commission supports the recommendation to establish a congestion pricing zone in Manhattan and to devote all resulting revenue exclusively to MTA capital investments.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority and its partners in Albany and New York City should address the fiscal and managerial challenges by implementing congestion pricing and seeking greater agreement than was possible among the Workgroup during its 16-week lifespan.
Congestion pricing is presented as a necessary alternative funding source to address the state's significant infrastructure investment needs. Implementing such a program, similar to London's model, could generate substantial annual revenue to support public transit and infrastructure maintenance.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New York should pursue alternate funding sources, such as congestion pricing and value capture, to appropriately fund the State’s infrastructure needs.
New York City should monitor the success of the FHV congestion pricing program and expand it to all cars and trucks in the near term.
Key Data
$15.15
— Cost for drivers to enter the London CBD between 7am and 6pm.
$1.58 billion
— Gross revenue generated by London's congestion pricing from 2003 through 2013.
$155 million and $605 million
— Estimated annual gross revenue range for a for-hire vehicle (FHV) congestion pricing charge.
$810 million and $1.1 billion
— Estimated annual gross revenue range for a congestion pricing charge on cars and trucks below 60th St.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's financial plan includes a new revenue stream of $385 million annually generated by fees on taxicab and for-hire vehicle trips in Manhattan south of 96th Street. This funding helps offset broader financial challenges, including declining fare revenue and significant projected cash deficits in the coming years.
Key Data
$385 million
— Annual revenue generated by new fees on taxicab and for-hire vehicle trips that occur in or traverse Manhattan south of 96th Street.
The New York State Fiscal Year 2019 Budget failed to implement a comprehensive congestion pricing plan to address traffic and provide long-term revenue for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Instead, the budget relied on short-term measures and forced the City of New York to provide $418 million for the Subway Action Plan.
The proposed congestion zone concept is viewed as promising, yet it lacks critical details regarding the amount of revenue it will generate for the MTA. The broader state budget relies on short-term fixes and speculative revenue sources, such as $3 billion in projected health insurance conversion proceeds, rather than addressing long-term structural spending imbalances.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The state should provide more details on the concept of a congestion zone, particularly regarding how much revenue will be provided for the MTA.
New York City's mass transit system requires a comprehensive, public accounting of its infrastructure condition and repair costs to properly evaluate funding proposals like congestion pricing. Mandating an annual Asset Information Management System (AIMS) report for the Metropolitan Transportation Authority would ensure that investment decisions are driven by actual system needs rather than available funds.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Congestion pricing is important and should be adopted, for environmental and business reasons as well as for the revenue it can provide.
A full accounting of the mass transit system's condition and the costs needed to achieve a full state of good repair should still be made—and made public.
The governor's agenda for the coming legislative session should include mandating that an AIMS report be prepared and regularly updated by the MTA.
Key Data
$1 billion
— Annual revenue target aimed for by proposals recently floated by transit advocacy groups regarding congestion pricing.
The state faces significant funding questions regarding the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, specifically whether the upcoming executive budget will incorporate the FixNYC congestion pricing plan to generate necessary revenue. Without this funding, the state must determine how to cover at least $161 million in annual costs for the first phase of the Subway Action Plan, as well as billions in outstanding capital commitments.
Key Data
$161 million
— annual costs for phase one of the Subway Action Plan that the state must cover if congestion pricing revenues are not realized
$4 billion
— capital funding required for phase two of the Subway Action Plan
$1 billion
— remaining capital promised in 2017 for the MTA’s 2015-2019 capital program
This week's datapoint is $1.5 billion - the amount of money that can be raised by the congestion pricing plan known as MOVE NY. The plan introduces tolls to the East River bridges, a surcharge on taxis and for-hire vehicles, and lays out specific plans for using the funding to…
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority should shift its funding model to rely more heavily on motorist fees, such as congestion pricing, to support long-term transit needs. By increasing contributions from drivers, the agency can reduce the disproportionate financial burden currently placed on New York City taxpayers.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should seek additional motor vehicle use charges to cross-subsidize transit, such as the adoption of a more-comprehensive congestion pricing system.
The funding stream or streams to support the MTA's long-term needs ought to come from motorists, either from congestion pricing or other charges for motor vehicle use.
The MTA should pursue a different funding framework that recognizes motorist cross-subsidies, paid by drivers through bridge and tunnel tolls, fuel taxes, and license and registration fees.
The MTA should adopt a mileage-based user fee, also known as a vehicle-miles traveled tax, which would better reflect the actual use of roads and bridges than motor fuel taxes.
Key Data
12 percent
— The current share of MTA mass transit funds contributed by motorists.
45 and 50 percent
— The recommended range of mass transit expenses that should be funded by fares.
20 to 25 percent
— The recommended share of mass transit expenses that should be paid with a cross-subsidy from motor vehicle users.
$18 billion
— The amount of authorized capital funds from the 2000 to 2014 period that remains unspent.
The Mayor's proposal to increase the personal income tax to fund the MTA is inappropriate, as New York City taxpayers already contribute approximately 40% of the mass transit budget. Instead, new funding for the transit system's long-term capital needs should be generated through congestion pricing or other charges for motor vehicle use.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New funding streams to support the transit system’s long-term capital needs should come from motorists through congestion pricing or other charges for motor vehicle use.
Key Data
40%
— Portion of the mass transit budget already provided by New York City taxpayers through the payroll mobility tax and other taxes.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's plan to address the subway crisis requires $456 million in annual operating costs and $380 million in new capital investments, necessitating new revenue sources beyond traditional state and city funding. Potential funding solutions include implementing congestion pricing, expanding taxicab taxes, or establishing a vehicle-miles-traveled user fee to ensure motorists contribute to the system they rely on.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Congestion pricing offers one possibility for funding the MTA, while other options are to expand the taxicab tax to black cars in New York City or to dedicate a larger portion of the sales tax on this service to transit.
A long-term approach to funding the MTA is to collect a vehicle-miles-traveled user fee, based on the distance traveled, the weight of the vehicle, or the route or time of day.
More money can and should come from cars and trucks to support the MTA's mass transit system.
Key Data
$456 million
— Recurring annual operating costs for the MTA's plan to reverse deteriorating subway performance.
$380 million
— New capital investments required for the MTA's plan.
12%
— Portion of the MTA’s mass transit system currently funded by tolls from bridges and tunnels.
2,700
— Additional workers required to implement the enhancements in the MTA's plan.
The Mayor's proposal to increase the personal income tax to fund the MTA is inappropriate given that city taxpayers already contribute 40% of the mass transit budget. Instead, the city should implement congestion pricing or other charges for motor vehicle use to ensure motorists contribute their fair share to the transit system's capital needs.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New funding streams to support the transit system’s long-term capital needs should come from motorists through congestion pricing or other charges for motor vehicle use.
Key Data
40%
— New York City taxpayers already provide approximately 40% of the mass transit budget through the payroll mobility tax and other taxes.
To address a projected 2017 deficit exceeding $2.7 billion, the transit authority should increase fares by more than 4 percent and implement new motor vehicle charges, such as tolling East River Bridges or vehicle-miles traveled fees, to better cross-subsidize operations. These measures aim to shift the funding mix toward a goal where fares cover half of expenses and motor vehicle users contribute significantly more to transit funding.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The Board should continue the policy of regular and predictable fare increases and move toward a long-term goal of covering approximately half of mass transit expenses with fare revenue.
Transit fares should increase greater than 4 percent in 2017 and 2019.
The MTA should seek additional motor vehicle use charges to cross-subsidize transit.
The MTA should seek other motor vehicle user charges such as tolling of the City’s East River Bridges, increasing gasoline taxes, levying additional motor vehicle fees, or introducing a vehicle-miles traveled user fee.
The MTA should ensure the contractor and the agency have the capacity to implement an income-conditioned fare structure so that if such a policy is adopted by the Mayor and City Council, it can be implemented quickly.
Key Data
$2.7 billion
— The MTA's projected deficit using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP) in 2017.
40 percent
— The portion of relevant expenses currently covered by transit fares.
12 percent
— The portion of relevant expenses currently covered by cross-subsidies from motorists.
4 percent
— The current target for annual fare and toll increases.
$90 million
— The estimated potential yield from capping the number of allowed rides for weekly and monthly passes in 2015.
$1.86
— The average revenue per ride on the transit system.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority's capital plan funding gap should be addressed by shifting the burden toward motor vehicle cross-subsidies, such as congestion pricing and a vehicle-miles-traveled tax, rather than relying solely on city or state tax subsidies. Implementing these mechanisms, including new tolls at Manhattan's central business district entry points, would better align funding sources with the benefits drivers receive from reduced congestion and lower emissions.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The Citizens Budget Commission recommends that drivers cover more than twice the current proportion of mass transit costs through motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
More immediate funding for the MTA should come from enhanced tolling policies, including East River bridge tolls and other congestion pricing mechanisms, or higher vehicle registration fees.
Over the long term, the state should implement a vehicle-miles-traveled (VMT) tax, which could also fund transportation infrastructure state-wide.
Key Data
12 percent
— The current proportion of MTA funding provided by motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
$9.8 billion
— The reduced funding gap for the MTA's capital plan.
$29.8 billion
— The total cost of the MTA's five-year capital plan.
73 percent
— The share of the MTA's $1.3 billion regional payroll tax paid by New York City employers.
$1.0 billion
— The amount New York City taxpayers contribute annually in operating and capital support to the MTA.
The MTA's 2015-2019 capital plan faces a $9.8 billion funding gap that requires moving beyond the debate between City and State contributions to focus on sustainable revenue sources. To address this, the transit system should increase reliance on motor vehicle cross-subsidies, including immediate implementation of East River bridge tolls and congestion pricing mechanisms, alongside a long-term vehicle-miles traveled fee system.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
In the longer term, the MTA should implement a vehicle-miles traveled fee system to fund transportation infrastructure.
More immediate funding for the MTA should come from East River bridge tolls and other congestion pricing mechanisms or higher vehicle registration fees.
Key Data
12 percent
— The share of MTA transit services funding currently derived from motor vehicle cross-subsidies.
$9.8 billion
— The funding gap for the MTA's 2015-2019 capital plan that requires new revenue sources.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority requires a balanced funding model where mass transit users, motorists, and general tax subsidies each contribute to operating costs and capital investments. Motor vehicle user fees should be increased to generate a surplus that covers 20 to 25 percent of mass transit costs, helping to offset the negative externalities of traffic congestion and air pollution.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover 45 to 50 percent of the operating costs of those services.
The cost of road infrastructure—bridges and tunnels in the MTA’s case—ought to be borne entirely by motorists.
Motor vehicle user fees should generate a surplus large enough to cover 20 to 25 percent of the cost of mass transit services to help compensate for the negative externalities of vehicle use—namely traffic congestion and air pollution.
Tax subsidies to mass transit should comprise 25 to 30 percent of the operating costs and also fund “catch up” capital investments needed to bring the system to a state of good repair.
Key Data
$14 billion
— Annual operating cost of the MTA system.
$5.7 billion
— Annual revenue generated by the fare box.
$1.7 billion
— Annual revenue generated by tolls on MTA bridges and tunnels.
$16.6 billion
— Estimated 2018 funding requirement for mass transit services, excluding Bridges and Tunnels.
$2.1 billion
— Projected unfunded deficit for 2018 under current policies.
New York City taxpayers currently provide $4.5 billion annually to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority, significantly more than the $2.1 billion contributed by taxpayers outside the city. To address funding needs, the region should shift toward user charges on motor vehicles, such as a vehicle-miles traveled tax, which would incentivize reduced congestion and provide a sustainable revenue source.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
There is a better way to raise the money the MTA needs: user charges on motor vehicles.
More money can and should come from motorists.
Launching a vehicle-miles traveled (VMT) tax in New York could provide a fiscal foundation for future highway and mass transit investments and put New York State in a leadership role in addressing this looming national issue.
Key Data
$4.5 billion
— Total annual amount New York City taxpayers provide the MTA.
$2.1 billion
— Total annual amount paid by taxpayers outside the city.
$587 million
— Amount provided by tolls to help pay for mass transit services.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a $19 billion funding gap for its five-year capital plan, necessitating a shift in how mass transit is funded by increasing the share paid by drivers. Implementing a combination of a vehicle-miles-traveled tax and new tolling policies, such as those in the Move NY plan, could generate the required $2.1 billion in annual revenue while addressing environmental concerns.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The State of New York should create a new revenue stream to support borrowing that fills the gap in the capital plan and contributes 25% of the MTA’s operating costs, with motor vehicle drivers covering 25% of mass transit costs.
Elected leaders should implement, over a period of years, some combination of a VMT tax and more rational tolling to sustain and improve transportation facilities.
The State of New York should adopt new tolling policies, such as those proposed in the Move NY plan, which would lower tolls on outer-borough bridges and impose new tolls at all entry points to the Manhattan central business district.
Key Data
$32 billion
— The amount the Metropolitan Transportation Authority needs over the next five years to repair, replace, and improve its facilities.
$13 billion
— The amount of funding the Metropolitan Transportation Authority currently has available for its five-year capital plan.
$19 billion
— The funding gap the Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces for its capital plan.
11%
— The portion of MTA mass transit costs currently covered by drivers through bridge and tunnel tolls, state license and registration fees, and gasoline taxes.
25%
— The target percentage of mass transit costs that the funding model recommends drivers should cover.
$2.1 billion
— The total needed new annual revenue from motor vehicle user fees to support borrowing and operating costs.
NY1 Drivers could be paying more to help fund mass transit if one non-profit group gets its way. The Citizens Budget Commission is proposing a number of fees on cars and trucks to help the MTA close a $1 billion gap in its capital investment program.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant financial instability, characterized by recurring deficits and a heavy reliance on borrowing for capital projects. To address these issues, a new financing policy is proposed that includes implementing congestion pricing and adjusting fare and subsidy structures to ensure long-term fiscal sustainability.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be funded entirely through user fees paid by motorists.
User fees paid by motorists should also generate a surplus large enough to cover approximately one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
New York should adapt and implement new policies imposing fees for vehicle access to the central business district.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover approximately one-half the operating cost of those services.
State and local tax subsidies to mass transit should cover at least one-quarter of the operating cost of those services and fund 'catch-up' capital investments.
Key Data
$2.6 billion
— Additional annual revenue provided by the 25-50-25 policy by 2016.
$16.8 billion
— Total investment in five MTA 'megaprojects'.
$3.6 billion
— Cost overruns for the five MTA 'megaprojects'.
$17.1 billion
— Annual operating and financing expenditures of the MTA in 2012.
$3.6 billion
— Projected MTA deficit in 2016.
$600 million
— Estimated annual revenue from setting tolls at East River bridges to match MTA bridge and tunnel tolls.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a $15 billion funding gap for its capital plan, which requires a new approach to revenue generation. This strategy involves balancing funding between regional tax subsidies, transit fares, and increased charges on motorists to account for the benefits of reduced road congestion.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The motor vehicle users’ cross-subsidy would need to more than double to reach its 25 percent target.
Policymakers should consider the Move New York plan, which alters and expands current bridge tolls and features a newly designed vehicle-miles-traveled tax to charge vehicles based on road usage and congestion levels.
Designing new ways to raise revenue from motor vehicle use is a key challenge for the future of all modes of transportation.
Key Data
$32 billion
— Total investments called for in the MTA Board's early version of the capital plan.
$15 billion
— The funding gap the MTA faces for its capital plan.
$167 to $293
— The range of increased annual costs motorists would face under the Move New York plan.
$1.6 billion
— The annual increase in funding from the payroll mobility tax authorized in 2009.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority should implement a "50-25-25" funding strategy that relies more heavily on auto user fees to support mass transit services. By increasing tolls and fees to cover a larger share of transit costs, the agency could reduce its reliance on tax subsidies and address the significant funding gap currently projected for its operations.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be funded entirely through tolls and fees paid by the motorists who use them.
Motorists’ tolls and fees should generate a surplus large enough to cover approximately one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
The share of revenue from auto users should be significantly higher than is currently the case.
Key Data
$4,216
— The amount in millions of dollars recommended by the CBC for annual auto cross-subsidies to mass transit.
$1,865
— The amount in millions of dollars projected by the MTA for annual auto cross-subsidies to mass transit.
-126%
— The percentage difference between the CBC's recommended auto cross-subsidy and the MTA's projected amount.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a significant long-term funding shortfall, with GAAP-based deficits projected to reach up to $3.4 billion annually. To address this, the agency should adopt a funding model where auto users contribute 25 percent of operating costs through mechanisms like congestion pricing or bridge tolls.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should adopt a funding structure where a cross-subsidy from auto users covers 25 percent of operating costs, which can be achieved through some form of congestion pricing.
To address the MTA's long-term funding needs, officials should pursue major initiatives to draw a bigger contribution from auto users, including new East River Bridge tolls or some form of congestion pricing.
Key Data
$1.9 billion
— The MTA identified $1.9 billion in new resources since February 2013.
$240 million
— The 2014 budget gap has been eliminated and the out-year gaps have been reduced to a cumulative total of $240 million.
$26.6 billion
— The MTA estimates it needs $26.6 billion to cover core capital needs related to state-of-good-repair and regular replacement of rolling stock between 2015 and 2019.
$2.8 billion
— Using Generally Accepted Accounting Principles, the MTA is running a $2.8 billion dollar deficit this year.
$3.0 billion
— The MTA will have deficits ranging from $3.0 billion to nearly $3.4 billion annually in each of the next four years.
$1.3 billion
— The MTA launched measures in 2009 and 2010 intended to achieve savings of $1.3 billion annually by 2017.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority should implement a multi-year revenue strategy that includes higher tolls and fares to address unsustainable borrowing and rising operating costs. This approach includes exploring initiatives like tolling City-owned East River bridges to better align revenue sources with the benefits provided to different system users.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should pursue a '25-50-25' formula for funding the MTA’s transit services, where 20-25 percent of expenses are paid by auto-user cross subsidies.
The toll increases for bridges and tunnels should be larger than currently proposed, including new initiatives such as tolling the City-owned East River bridges.
The MTA should explore the potential for peak pricing on subways and buses to change subway utilization during rush hours.
Fare and toll decisions should be made on a multi-year basis to ensure predictability for the system’s revenues.
The MTA should 'cap' the number of allowed rides for weekly and monthly passes to protect against fraudulent abuse.
Key Data
20-25%
— Target percentage of transit expenses that should be paid for by auto-user cross subsidies.
45-50%
— Target percentage of transit expenses that should be paid by riders.
25-30%
— Target percentage of transit expenses that should be paid through state and local tax subsidies.
7.5%
— Revenue increase target for 2013.
42%
— Current reliance of MTA revenue on fares.
13%
— Current reliance of MTA revenue on cross subsidies from motor vehicle use.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant funding deficits, requiring a new approach that balances costs between riders, taxpayers, and motorists. By implementing a "25-50-25" funding model, the system could generate nearly $2.6 billion in additional annual revenue by 2016 through a combination of fare increases, tax subsidies, and increased tolls on drivers to account for negative externalities like congestion.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The cost of bridges and tunnels should be funded entirely through tolls and fees paid by the motorists who use them.
Motorists' tolls and fees should generate a surplus large enough to cover approximately one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover approximately one-half the operating cost of those services.
State and local tax subsidies to mass transit should cover at least one-quarter of the operating cost of those services and fund "catch-up" capital investments needed to bring the system to a state of good repair.
Key Data
$17.1 billion
— Annual operating and financing expenditures of the MTA's agencies in 2012.
$3.6 billion
— Projected deficit for the MTA in 2016.
$2.6 billion
— Additional annual revenue generated by the 25-50-25 approach by 2016.
$2.75
— Cost of a single-ride subway ticket by 2016 under the proposed plan.
39 percent
— Percentage of operating expenses currently recovered through fares by the MTA.
33 percent
— Percentage of operating expenses recovered by the Long Island Rail Road.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant financial instability due to recurring deficits and heavy reliance on borrowing, necessitating a new funding model. A proposed "25-50-25" formula suggests that auto user fees, including potential congestion pricing, should cross-subsidize mass transit alongside fare increases and tax subsidies to ensure long-term fiscal health.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New York should adapt and implement new policies imposing fees for vehicle access to the central business district.
One policy option is to begin collecting tolls on East River bridges to generate revenue for the MTA.
The state could also increase the gasoline tax from 34 cents to 42 cents per gallon to help fund the MTA.
Bridge and tunnel tolls could be increased more than the currently planned 15 percent to generate additional revenue.
Key Data
$600 million
— Annual revenue estimated from setting tolls at East River bridges to match MTA bridge and tunnel tolls.
$200 million to more than $950 million
— Annual net funds raised from congestion pricing plans for Manhattan's central business district.
$350 million
— Potential annual revenue from phasing in a doubling of current motor vehicle registration and license fees.
$120 million
— Annual revenue yield from increasing the gasoline tax from 34 cents to 42 cents per gallon.
$22 million
— Annual revenue for the MTA generated by the gasoline tax increase allocated to the Dedicated Mass Transportation Trust Fund.
$120 million to $343 million
— Additional annual revenue from an additional 7 to 20 percent increase in bridge and tunnel tolls.
Congestion pricing, which charges drivers for entering busy areas, remains an unimplemented but effective strategy for shifting commuters to mass transit and reducing traffic. Renewed efforts to gain state legislative approval for such a plan in New York City's central business district are necessary to improve traffic flow and encourage cleaner transportation choices.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New York City should launch a renewed campaign to gain State legislative approval for congestion pricing.
A renewed effort to authorize and implement congestion pricing for New York’s central business district should be pursued.
New York City should implement congestion pricing to encourage consumers to shift to cleaner modes of transportation.
Key Data
$13
— The initial fee for entry into central London under its congestion pricing plan.
20%
— The reduction in traffic in central London credited to the congestion pricing system in a 2006 study.
30%
— The drop in traffic at peak hours in central London following the implementation of congestion pricing.
37%
— The increase in traffic speed in central London following the implementation of congestion pricing.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant financial instability, with projected operating budget gaps reaching over $5 billion by 2013 when accounting for non-cash expenses. To address these deficits and capital investment needs, the agency should adopt a "50-25-25" funding model that relies on a mix of rider fares, tax subsidies, and new tolls or fees on auto users.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The MTA should adopt a "50-25-25" approach to raising money, where mass transit services are funded half from fares, one-quarter from general tax subsidies, and one-quarter from cross-subsidies from auto users.
To implement the "50-25-25" funding strategy, the MTA should implement significant new tolls or fees for auto users.
The MTA should utilize the "50-25-25" approach as the basis for financing the regular repair and replacement of facilities, with spending handled on a pay-as-you-go basis or through debt service raised from that mix of sources.
New MTA leadership must prioritize constraining expenditure growth while utilizing cross-subsidies from auto users and the farebox as the best sources for new revenues.
Key Data
$4,656 million
— Projected MTA operating budget gap in 2012 if generally accepted accounting principles were applied.
$5,097 million
— Projected MTA operating budget gap in 2013 if generally accepted accounting principles were applied.
$28.1 billion
— Total investment called for in the preliminary 2010-2014 capital plan.
$18.2 billion
— Identified funding sources for the 2010-2014 capital plan.
25 percent
— Portion of work in the 2005-2009 capital plan that may not be started by the end of the period.
The MTA requires a more sustainable financing model that relies less on volatile tax revenues and more on consistent funding from riders and drivers. Implementing tolls on East and Harlem River bridges, alongside more substantial fare increases, would provide necessary revenue while encouraging a shift toward mass transit.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Tolls on the East River bridges can be an effective and significant source of new revenue for the MTA.
The proposed tolls on East River Bridges and Harlem River Bridges should be higher than the Commission recommends to provide a greater incentive to shift to mass transit.
More revenue should be raised from auto users by increasing and dedicating to the MTA other fees such as those for drivers’ licenses and vehicle registration.
The MTA should implement a two or three year schedule of fare increases to bring the share of expenses covered by the fare to approximately 50 percent.
Key Data
8%
— The initial fare hike percentage recommended by the Commission.
7%
— The annual fare increase percentage required to reach the goal of covering 50% of expenses by 2011.
50%
— The target share of MTA expenses that should be covered by rider fares.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces significant budget shortfalls, necessitating a new funding model that balances costs between riders, drivers, and general tax subsidies. Implementing a 50-25-25 funding split, which could include measures like a revised congestion-pricing plan, would help stabilize revenues and incentivize operational efficiency.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Fares should cover half of mass-transit operating costs.
We must link fares to costs to create an incentive for efficiency.
Drivers should pay a quarter of the cost of mass transit, in addition to the full cost of MTA bridge and tunnel operations.
A general tax subsidy should cover the remaining 25 percent of mass-transit costs.
New funding sources from drivers could include a revised congestion-pricing plan or tolls on East River bridges.
Key Data
$1.3 billion
— Amount needed to be raised from drivers in 2009 to achieve a fair share of funding.
$1.9 billion
— Amount needed to be raised from drivers in 2012 to achieve a fair share of funding.
13 percent
— Current portion of mass-transit costs covered by revenues from drivers.
46 percent
— Portion of mass-transit costs covered by fares in 2008.
$97
— Projected cost of a monthly Metrocard following a cumulative 20 percent fare increase by 2012.
The Metropolitan Transportation Authority faces a severe financial crisis with a projected $2.1 billion shortfall by 2010, driven by heavy borrowing and rising debt service costs. To address these fiscal challenges and ensure the system's viability, revenue strategies such as congestion pricing and increased tolls are necessary to rebalance the agency's funding sources.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
Other revenue options include higher gasoline taxes and congestion-pricing plans, similar to those recently adopted by London and Stockholm.
Significantly higher tolls and fees are appropriate both because drivers benefit from the traffic reduction made possible by mass transit and because drivers should pay more to offset their cars’ contributions to congestion and pollution.
Higher tolls and increased license and registration fees would also encourage more commuters to move from cars to mass transit.
Key Data
$2.1 billion
— The projected shortfall for the M.T.A. in 2010.
$1.9 billion
— The projected debt service cost for the M.T.A. by 2010.
$900 million
— The potential annual savings from enacting productivity initiatives equal to 2.5 percent average annual gains.
The MTA faces significant, growing budget deficits that require new revenue sources, including potential congestion pricing schemes for the central business district. Implementing a London-like congestion pricing system could generate substantial net revenue while encouraging a shift from automobile use to mass transit.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
The cost of bridge and tunnel facilities should be paid for entirely through user fees paid by motorists.
User fees paid by motorists should also generate a surplus large enough to cover one-quarter of the cost of providing mass transit services.
Mass transit users should pay fares sufficient to cover one-half the operating cost of those services.
State and local subsidies to mass transit should cover one-quarter of the operating cost of those services and fund “catch-up” capital investments.
New congestion pricing policies should be explored seriously and, if warranted, pursued promptly as an alternative means for raising needed funds.
Key Data
$1,382 million
— Estimated annual net impact of a London-like congestion pricing plan.
$638 million
— Estimated annual net impact of tolling East River bridges.
60 million
— Estimated number of trips shifted annually from autos to mass transit under a London-like congestion pricing plan.
$1.7 billion
— Estimated gross additional revenues from a congestion pricing plan with variable tolls.
The New York region's transportation system suffers from fragmented financing and inconsistent pricing, leading to neglected infrastructure and inefficient operations. To address these issues, the region should implement a comprehensive regional transportation policy board and adopt congestion pricing to manage traffic and generate necessary revenue for transit improvements.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
A regional approach in New York could apply a similar strategy to reduce traffic flowing into the Manhattan central business district.
Rather than trying to design toll booths for the now 'free' East River bridges, a new system could replace all toll booths with a system like London’s that charges for bringing an auto into the central district regardless of which entry route was used.
In this way, new pricing policies and technology could reduce congestion as well as raise the necessary revenue.
The governors of New York and New Jersey should create a new entity with authority to set and enforce policies and priorities.
Motor vehicle user fees should be dedicated to transportation agencies for two purposes: to cover the operating costs of roads and bridges, and to provide a cross-subsidy to mass transit of one-quarter of mass transit costs.
Key Data
13 percent
— A London-like congestion pricing system in New York would reduce rush hour vehicle trips to Manhattan by 13 percent.
$730 million
— A London-like congestion pricing system in New York would increase revenues by about $730 million annually.
700
— A network of 700 cameras at entry points in London reads the vehicles’ license plates and imposes stiff fines on any unregistered vehicles.
14.5 cents
— Fuel taxes in New Jersey currently equal 14.5 cents per gallon.
22 cents
— Fuel taxes in New York currently equal 22 cents per gallon.
New York's transportation infrastructure, while extensive, faces challenges in efficiency and cost compared to international peers, necessitating strategic investments and policy shifts. To address peak-hour congestion, the report suggests exploring peak-hour pricing and modernized signaling systems to optimize existing capacity rather than relying solely on new construction.
Recommendations related to Congestion Pricing
New York should use pricing policies to shift ridership from the peak to 'shoulder' periods.
Experiments with higher fares at the busiest time could identify effective ways to shift some ridership to the less crowded hours.
The initiative to shift ridership could be made even more effective if employers were encouraged to cooperate by facilitating flexible working hours.
Another alternative to new construction for increasing capacity is modernized signaling and train control systems.
New York’s leaders should address how to improve transit system efficiency and ridership.
Key Data
25%
— The potential reduction in safe headways achievable through modern signaling and train control systems.
30 to 40
— The potential increase in the number of rush hour trains on New York City’s busiest subway lines if safe headways are reduced.
35,000
— The projected increase in capacity in people per hour for the new LIRR connection to Grand Central.
40,000
— The potential rush hour ridership for expanded Queens subway lines (B and Q) in the peak hour.
No results for your current filters. Manually edit your filters, or
clear the filters.
Share Feedback
Give a star rating, write a comment of at least 10 words, or both.
