Bridge Tolls
Advocacy Project

East River Bridge Tolls, Who Will Really Pay

[Page: Previous 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next]

5. Borough Impact of Tolls

The last column of Table 1 shows the relative burden of East River tolls on each of the 10 affected boroughs or counties. This is displayed graphically in Fig. 1.

To estimate the absolute burden in dollars, we assume that the toll level will be set to gross $700 million a year. This figure assumes one-way tolls of $3.72, a mathematical construct arrived at by dividing $700 million by the 188 million East River bridge trips taken in 2000. This is a deliberate simplification, ignoring phenomena such as E-ZPass discounts, “value pricing” (time-differentiated tolls), higher rates for heavy trucks, and changes in travel due to price-elasticity (trip reduction, route changes and mode switching in response to the tolls). The $700 million figure may err on the high side, an intentional choice on our part to avoid understating the burden of tolls. (Should the total toll burden prove different from $700 million, the dollar estimates for each borough and county may be adjusted proportionally.)

Based on the percentage splits shown in Table 1, this $700 million would be apportioned as follows:

• New York City residents will pay $543 million (led by Brooklyn, with $233 million);

• Long Island residents (Nassau and Suffolk Counties) will pay $129 million;

• New Jersey residents (Bergen, Hudson and Essex Counties) will pay $28 million.

Fig. 1 would seem to support the claim of some Brooklyn officials, including Borough President Marty Markowitz, that bridge tolls will impose a disproportionate burden on residents of Brooklyn. (See http://www.bridgetolls.org/polpolls/martymarkup.htm.)

But a different picture emerges when East River bridge tolls are viewed in a broader context, alongside other means of raising revenue for fiscally pressed New York City.

In November 2002, the City enacted a permanent 18.5% surcharge on real estate taxes to help close its multibillion-dollar budget gap. This levy imposes $1.7 billion a year in new taxes, including $770 million on residential properties. (The remaining $930 million, from the surcharge on commercial and utility property, is ignored here.) Although the tax rise percent is the same for all boroughs, the dollars come disproportionately from Manhattan, where the assessed value of residential properties is highest. Some 47% of the $770 million in new residential property taxes, or $361 million, is being paid by Manhattan co-ops, condo’s and rental apartments. Only 22% of the residential property tax hike, $143 million, is being paid by Brooklyn households, as Table 2 demonstrates.

As Table 2 and Fig. 2 show, Manhattan’s combined “hit” from the tax surcharge and tolls, $429 million, exceeds Brooklyn’s total of $376 million. Moreover, with Brooklyn’s adult population exceeding Manhattan’s by 40%, the per capita tax-and-toll impact is some 60% heavier on Manhattanites than Brooklynites. Similarly, compared to Queens, Manhattan’s tax-toll burden is higher by 25% in dollars and by almost 70% per capita.

Bridge tolls percentages add to 77.5% since L.I. and NJ account for 22.5%. Real Estate Taxes are 18.5% surcharge on residential property. See http://www.bridgetolls.org/data/NYC_Tax_Surcharge_by_Borough.htm for details. Per capita figures are calculated using persons age 18 to 80 (2000 Census) to exclude children and elderly.

Is it legitimate to lump bridge tolls together with the property tax surcharge? Absolutely. Both measures are (or will be) new additions to the fiscal landscape, instituted for the same goal: municipal solvency. Each falls unequally among the boroughs. But the disproportionality falls one way where tolls are concerned (against Brooklyn and Queens), and the opposite way with property taxes (against Manhattan).

[Page: Previous 0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Next]