Railraods & Airlines don’t pay road-use tax. In addition, both are usually able to purchase fuel in states where state & local taxes are lower, trucks can’t do that to the same degree. Trucks are also subject to other taxes and fees. They must be licenseed, often in multiple states, then there’s bridge & road tolls, etc.
Real Estate Taxes aren’t a subsidy, they’re taxes on real property. Residential property near a railroad is often worth less than property located elsewhere. There are expenses a comminity has in relation to the railroad such as crossing miantenance, etc. Local Police and Fire departments also provide servies to the railroads. I don’t know the exact rates, but generally in Illinois, railroads are assesed at a much lower rate than commercial or farm property.
Police and fire departments also provide services to truckers and airports.
In addition to not paying realestate taxes, interstate highways, which are in the transprotation business after all, don’t pay corporation taxes nor do airports.
The taxes themsevles are not a busidy; it is their relative absense on railroads’ competitors that is a hidden subsidy.
And neighboring property often increases in value when highways are built and it is then often developed for a “higher” use which increases the value and property tax assessments even more.
NIMBYs often state they are afraid of property values decreasing when new light rail lines are built. In every case in the USA, and I mean every single cars, property values have increased, on the average, for every new light rail system constructed…
This has NOT been true of highways. It is a mixed bag. The values have gone down when a new limited access highway runs through a residential neighborhood and:
Does not really serve the local needs of the neighborhood, just cuts a swath through it.
Noise barriers are absent or ugly.
Blocks pedestrian or local auto access between residences and schools and/or shopping areas.
On the other hand, you are correct in that a well-planned highway with (1) attractive looking noise control measures that work and (2) that meets local needs as well as those passing through definitely increases property values.
Also Prof. Ballsbaugh, at MIT, was anti-rail, he did a terrific job of teaching how to design highways. Except he hated traffic circles as much as railroad tracks. And both have their uses, I am glad to say!
You’re still missing the point that everybody pays in one form or another. Interstate Highways & Airports don’t pay corporate taxes, but virtually all commercial users do, and both generate significant development and related revenue to local governemnts(some of which goes to police & fire departments). Residential property values may go down, but commercial values often go up along with other related income. That’s why local & state government are willing to use their bonding power to build these things. It’s also why investors are willing to buy these bonds at lower rates of interest. And railroads aren’t excluded, when there’s direct value(i.e. positive cash flow) to local governments, as with light rail, intermodal ports, etc., they will use their bonding power to raise capital. If there’s no benefit or a negative impact, NIMBY will apply. Politicians who ignore that probably won’t get re-elected.