Bend, OR – Oregon lawmakers are grappling with a proposal to impose a 4% tax on tire sales, a move that has quickly sparked intense backlash from residents and business groups alike. As lawmakers seek new ways to fund road and bridge projects, this controversial plan has become a focal point in the debate over the state’s transportation funding crisis.
The tire tax, introduced by Rep. Ken Helm (D-Portland) and Sen. Chris Gorsek (D-Troutdale), is intended to raise about $20 million annually to address a range of environmental and infrastructure concerns. The funds would be directed toward stormwater projects aimed at preventing toxic tire additives, such as 6PPD, from polluting Oregon’s waterways and harming fish populations, particularly salmon. Additionally, a portion of the revenue would support the construction of wildlife crossings and the expansion of the state’s rail system—both of which Helm and Gorsek argue are critical for public safety and environmental protection.
At a public hearing on the bill this week, Becky Anthony, a water quality specialist with the Oregon Department of Fish & Wildlife, testified that the agency is still in the early stages of studying the impact of tire additives on local streams. However, she noted that early indicators suggest the toxins may be contributing to environmental concerns.
Despite the bill’s environmental goals, it has been met with fierce opposition. More than 1,600 written testimonies have been submitted in protest, outnumbering the 240 pieces of support. Many residents, particularly those in rural areas, argue that the tax would impose an unfair financial burden on consumers already struggling with rising costs. “The cost of utilities is through the roof, and now we’re being asked to pay more for tires,” said Steve Woodward, a Keizer resident, in his written testimony.
Critics of the proposal have also raised concerns about the allocation of the tax revenue. While the bill was introduced as an environmental measure, opponents argue that much of the money would be spent on priorities unrelated to pollution, including rail projects and wildlife crossings. “It feels a little bit like a beef tax to encourage people to buy more chicken. That just doesn’t seem fair,” said Darrell Fuller, a lobbyist for car and RV dealers. Some have suggested that the state should find alternative funding sources for rail and wildlife initiatives, rather than imposing new taxes on everyday consumers.
Proponents of the bill, however, defend the tax as a necessary step toward addressing pressing environmental and infrastructure challenges. Environmental groups, including the Western Environmental Law Center, have voiced strong support for the legislation, arguing that the state must take proactive measures to combat pollution and reduce wildlife-vehicle collisions.
The proposal is part of a broader effort by Oregon lawmakers to address a significant funding shortfall in the state’s transportation system. The Oregon Department of Transportation (ODOT) has warned that it needs at least $354 million more in the next biennium to avoid severe service reductions, and up to $1.8 billion more annually to meet its full operational needs. Lawmakers are exploring a variety of revenue options to close this gap, including higher gas taxes, registration fees, and new taxes on services like retail deliveries and electric vehicle charging stations.
Despite the overwhelming opposition to the tire tax, Democrats, who hold a supermajority in both chambers of the Oregon Legislature, have indicated that they are considering it as one potential funding mechanism. House Speaker Julie Fahey has emphasized that while the tire tax is on the table, the specifics of how the funds would be spent are still under discussion. “It is one of the potential funding mechanisms that is on the table,” Fahey said. “What the revenue from that tire tax is spent on is a separate conversation.”
Republican lawmakers, however, have made it clear they oppose any new taxes, including the tire tax. They have instead focused their criticisms on ODOT, accusing the agency of poor financial management and a lack of accountability. Last week, ODOT officials faced tough questioning after an audit revealed that the agency had overestimated its federal funding by more than $1 billion in the previous budget cycle, leading to delays in planned road projects and a new $500 million debt issuance.
State Sen. Bruce Starr, a Republican from Dundee, is spearheading efforts to increase transparency and accountability at ODOT. Other Republican leaders, such as Rep. E. Werner Reschke, have called on the state to reprioritize existing funds rather than burden taxpayers with additional costs. “As a Legislature, we need to stop using Oregonians as an ATM machine each time we have a new idea,” Reschke argued during a recent hearing.
As lawmakers continue to navigate Oregon’s transportation funding crisis, the tire tax proposal has become a key point of contention. While its future remains uncertain, the debate underscores the difficult choices facing Oregon as it attempts to balance environmental goals, infrastructure needs, and taxpayer concerns in an era of fiscal challenges.
