Gas Tax Suspension

Question A: A three-month gas tax suspension would provide meaningful financial relief to Ohio residents.

Question B: The long-term economic benefits of a three-month gas tax suspension would outweigh the long-term economic costs of reduced state infrastructure funding.

Question C: More of the benefits of a three-month gas tax suspension would accrue to consumers than fuel retailers.

Question A: A three-month gas tax suspension would provide meaningful financial relief to Ohio residents.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	8	Demand for gas is highly inelastic, and the supply FOR OHIO is relatively elastic in the short run since suppliers can transport gas across state lines fairly easily to go where it is most profitable, but this is a very short-run analysis and it will likely hurt the long-run prosperity of Ohio.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	9	The savings would only be about $50 per Ohio driver over the summer.
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	7
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Disagree	10	Consumers would Not see a 38.5 cent reduction in gasoline prices; probably more like half that. Saving 16 cents a gallon for a vehicle that averages 30 mpg and is driven 16,000 miles a year so 4,000 miles in 3 months would save (4000/30)*.16=$21.33. $21 is not "meaningful". This is performance art by Ohio Congress instead of actually doing anything to help lower income households in the state with higher costs.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Uncertain	9
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Disagree	9
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	7	If you buy a tank of gas every week you would save $6. Over a three month period that would be about $80. Low-income people could use a break but $80 would not, in my view, by meaningful financial relief.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Uncertain	8
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Disagree	7	Meaningful' is open to interpretation, but my calculations suggest Ohio drivers use about 10 gallons of fuel per week, so this would save the average driver about $4 per week, about $50 over the three-month period. And because fuel usage increases with income, this 'tax relief' would be even smaller for lower-income Ohioans. The tax relief would, of course, be much greater for people who drive for a living, particularly trucking companies.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Disagree	7
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Agree	8
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	6	Unless there is any corresponding reduction in spending on transportation infrastructure, a three-month suspension merely shifts the timing on when Ohioan consumers actually pay. For those Ohians who live in border cities like Cincinnati - they can experience the benefit of gas tax holidays in neighboring states while not experiencing the consequences of reduced investment.
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Strongly Agree	10
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Agree	7	A suspension of the gas tax would amount to something like a 10.5% price cut - less if gas prices continue to rise. But that could be meaningful to lower-income households and those who have to drive far.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	8
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Disagree	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Disagree	10	The key word is "meaningful." The current tax on gasoline is $0.385 per gallon. That is not nothing but gas prices of $2 more per gallon than they were a year ago. The gas tax is not the problem, nor is suspending it going to provide meaningful relief.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	9
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Agree	8

Question B: The long-term economic benefits of a three-month gas tax suspension would outweigh the long-term economic costs of reduced state infrastructure funding.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Strongly Disagree	10	There is an enormous consensus about the negative externalities of gas consumption among economists on both the left and the right (except those few who are funded by the fossil-fuel industry). Even Greg Mankiw thinks taxes on gas are inefficiently low which lead to distortions in the economy. This would make those distortions worse. Plus, the tax revenues fund necessary infrastructure like roads that are crucial for long-term growth. Finally, the macroeconomic timing is bad because we currently have low unemployment and above-target inflation, so an additional tax stimulus to boost consumption now is likely to exacerbate inflation. It is just a populist budget-buster to give a temporary sugar rush during an election season, and it will just make America less healthy in the long run.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Strongly Disagree	9	Gas tax holidays usually end up causing deferred maintenance, which makes roads more expensive to repair than if normal maintenance had been done. It's like skipping a few dentist visits: it will save you some money upfront, but the resulting cavities will be more expensive to repair.
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	8
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Strongly Disagree	10	The end result is a budget shortfall for Ohio roads with only 2 options: Other taxes must be raised to fund the shortfall Or Ohioans put up with worse roads.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Disagree	9
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Disagree	8	There would be less money available for roads. Our roads are crowded and need to be fixed.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Disagree	8
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Strongly Disagree	10	Gas taxes are already too low to maintain infrastructure. Given the current anti-tax political climate, it seems like this would just decrease funding for a critical public good.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Disagree	9
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Uncertain	5
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Disagree	8
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Uncertain	6
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Disagree	9	The long-term benefits of a three-month gas tax suspension are minimal, but the reduction in infrastructure funding would be long-lasting and the multiplier impacts of construction spending are generally higher.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	9
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Strongly Disagree	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Strongly Disagree	9	As I said in prior question, benefits are not particularly large. However, the money that is collected is important because if pays for infrastructure and - like many states - our infrastructure is in need of a lot of work. Since I think the short run gain to consumers are small - and the long run gains almost nonexistent - then the long costs are way too high to justify.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Uncertain	8

Question C: More of the benefits of a three-month gas tax suspension would accrue to consumers than fuel retailers.

Economist	Institution	Opinion	Confidence	Comment
Jonathan Andreas	Bluffton University	Agree	7	As mentioned above, the relative elasticity determines the incidence and the supply is pretty darn competitive, so most of the financial gain will go to consumers, but not all of the money. The oil companies are lobbying for it because they stand to get millions of profits out of the government too.
David Brasington	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8	Studies of gas tax holidays suggest that about 70% of the savings are passed on to consumers.
Ron Cheung	Oberlin College	Disagree	7
Kevin Egan	University of Toledo	Uncertain	5	The benefits will be shared between fuel retailers and consumers and I am uncertain who will benefit more. The conclusion is that this is a poorly targeted tax change. Instead, directly target a policy to the lower income citizens the majority of citizens would support helping such as expand the state Earned Income Tax Credit so lower income households have more income for any expenses that have gone up in price.
Kenneth Fah	Ohio Dominican University	Disagree	9
Vinnie Gajjala	Tiffin Univeristy	Disagree	9
Bob Gitter	Ohio Wesleyan University	Agree	9	In general, a tax on a good like gas is paid by the consumer. If you remove the tax, they will be the ones to benefit.
Nancy Haskell	University of Dayton	Agree	8
Paul Holmes	Ashland University	Agree	7	Fuel tax burden falls almost exclusively on consumers due to the inelastic nature of fuel demand. The only caveat here is that Ohio gas stations have recently been increasing prices well above their increase in costs - recently I drove to Western NY and found gas cheaper both in PA and NY than in OH, despite gas taxes being lower in OH - so I have some doubt that Ohio gas station owners wouldn't just see this as a windfall for themselves.
Faria Huq	Lake Erie College	Disagree	7	Given that the demand for gas tends to be inelastic, especially when the price change is known to be short term, fuel retailers might not pass on the entire tax reduction on to consumers.
Christian Imboden	Bowling Green State University	Uncertain	6
Michael Jones	University of Cincinnati	Agree	8	There is evidence in the research literature that consumers will largely experience the benefits of a tax reduction. E.g. see https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0047272711000545
Charles Kroncke	Mount Saint Joseph University	Uncertain	5
Bill LaFayette	Regionomics	Agree	5	Gas stations would probably raise their prices to sop up some of the benefit, but I am not sure by how much.
Trevon Logan	Ohio State University	Disagree	7
Joe Nowakowski	Muskingum University	Uncertain	9
Curtis Reynolds	Kent State University	Agree	9	There is some research showing that gasoline taxes at the state level have high incidence to consumers (price increases almost one-for-one with the tax) so most of the benefits should accrue to customers in the form of lower prices.
Ejindu Ume	Miami University	Agree	8
Rachel Wilson	College Board	Uncertain	8