Brazil's Biggest City Wants To Charge Fees For Uber Rides (engadget.com)

An anonymous reader sends word that Sao Paulo's city hall has proposed levying fees on Uber to operate in the city. Engadget reports: "Many cities try to limit or ban ridesharing services like Uber, but Sao Paulo is trying an uncommon strategy to keep the companies in check: skimming a little off the top. The major Brazilian city has proposed a requirement these services have to buy government credits to cover their distance traveled, with rates changing based on when and where the trip takes place. App makers would also have to support a service that picks up multiple passengers headed in the same direction, although that won't be hard when options like UberPool already exist."

Comments

Sounds like a good idea

[WillAffleckUW]

And if Uber doesn't pay the fees, jail the executives.

Re:Sounds like a good idea

[amiga3D]

They tax everyone else, why should Uber get a free ride?

Re:Sounds like a good idea

[vivian]

The Uber drivers are already paying registration fees, and fuel taxes, which are proportional to mileage, not to mention income tax just like everyone else on the revenue they earn - and that revenue is 100% trackable because it's all electronic - unlike cash - so there's no tax dodging, which can happen with directly negotiated taxi rides. (eg. I'll give you $30 bucks to take me down town - no meter)

In addition Uber (and taxis) helps support the entertainment and tourism industry - the main reason to get a taxi is because you can't drive - either because you are cashed up but don't have a car (eg tourist) or because you want to enjoy a few drinks at the bar / restaurant / friend's party, and are responsibly choosing not to drink and drive.
  In the latter two cases, if you drove yourself you would be spending less on alcohol resulting in overall lower income collected by the restaurant and lower tax revenue collected by the state. Taxi services and Uber actually allow the state to collect greater revenue just by existing, than if they didn't - and the restaurant / bar / entertainment industry should be rallying behind them to make it more affordable for people to get to their businesses for a nig

Re:Sounds like a good idea

[ganjadude]

no... its a simple concept called supply and demand

That word...

[pushing-robot]

Many cities try to limit or ban ridesharing services like Uber, but Sao Paulo is trying an uncommon strategy to keep the companies in check: skimming a little off the top.

If you think that's uncommon, you must not know any governments.

Re:That word...

[rmdingler]

Legalization of a thing previously deemed unsavory or immoral is made proportionately more likely by the ability it has to fill government coffers.

Sharing?

[Anonymous Coward]

ridesharing services like Uber

What's being shared exactly? There is no sharing. People pay money for the services rendered by taxi companies like Uber.

Paulistano here.

[Anonymous Coward]

The guy is supposedly a left-wing one (from the Laborers' Party - "PT"). He's young and has been doing an unconventional government -- he installed a lot of bike lanes (ciclovias) in an attempt to make people use bikes, but we lack the culture to use them these days and São Paulo has a harsh relief -- in some places it could be negotiated with an electric bike, but these are costly and too irresistible for thieves.

All in all, I don't think he's the worse we had, but some people simply hate his party for the insanely expensive and numerous cases of corruption (although it seems he's not involved).

He also reduced our city max speed to 50kmph mostly everywhere (that's about 31mph). Mind you, this is an international tendence and we have such terrible traffic jams that make us go even slower. But people find such speed too slow. Again, from what I've read here and elsewhere going slower probably reduces jams. Then again Brazilians simply love to speed. One of the alleged advantages is a reduction in accidents.

Now, given this panorama, I guess he would allow Uber without any tax whatsoever. And this is what has happened till now.

But conventional taxi drivers would rather start a revolution than have that. There's been a lot of protests and I guess the mayor is trying to come up with some kind of compromise like "See, they're paying, too!" Oh, well...

Can we get rid of the "ridesharing" falsehood?

[dbIII]

One very creepy business practice of Uber is to use the word "ridesharing" to pretend it is casual hitch-hiking of people already going in a direction instead of the taxi service done as piecework that it really is. There are political reasons for this falsehood to evade laws and fees, perhaps unjust laws and fees, but even if they are that is no reason for us to pretend that they are "ridesharing" instead of how it actually operates. Why should we be propagating PR bullshit instead of discussing it in terms of reality? It's like calling a mail order scam a religion.

Re:Same as medallion system

[dbIII]

Initially a medallion system is a source of funds to a government, just not initially at as high a price as they get when demand vastly outstrips supply. When the price is high that's a sign that the people with the granted right to run taxis are using the government to keep out competition by having a high cost of entry - so broken by a few definitions, especially if those who are the only players in the closed market don't bother to supply at certain times and places.
It's an very old sort of system of money for exclusive rights that King John got a bit of criticism for and has been a revenue stream and way to establish closed markets since at least then.

However it's not black and white on this taxi issue. While the laws Uber are deliberately breaking may be bad ones there's still nothing all that wonderful with people doing piecework in their own cars at low returns.