United States Department of Transportation - Federal Highway AdministrationFHWA HomeFeedback

Status of the Nation's Highways, Bridges, and Transit:
2002 Conditions and Performance Report

Chapter 6: Finance
Skip Navigators
Index
Introduction
Highlights
Executive Summary
Part I: Description of Current System
Ch1: The Role of Highways and Transit
Ch2: System and Use Characteristics
Ch3: System Conditions
Ch4: Operational Performance
Ch5: Safety Performance
Ch6: Finance

Part II: Investment Performance Analyses
Ch7: Capital Investment Requirements
Ch8: Comparison of Spending and Investment Requirements
Ch9: Impacts of Investment
Ch10: Sensitivity Analysis

Part III: Bridges
Ch11: Federal Bridge Program Status of the Nation's Bridges

Part IV: Special Topics
Ch12: National Security
Ch13: Highway Transportation in Society
Ch14: The Importance of Public Transportation
Ch15: Macroeconomic Benefits of Highway Investment
Ch16: Pricing
Ch17: Transportation Asset Management
Ch18: Travel Model Improvement Program
Ch19: Air Quality
Ch20: Federal Safety Initiatives
Ch21: Operations Strategies
Ch22: Freight

Part V: Supplemental Analyses of System Components
Ch23: Interstate System
Ch24: National Highway System
Ch25: NHS Freight Connectors
Ch26: Highway-Rail Grade Crossings
Ch27: Transit Systems on Federal Lands

Appendices
Appendix A: Changes in Highway Investment Requirements Methodology
Appendix B: Bridge Investment/Performance Methodology
Appendix C: Transit Investment Condition and Investment Requirements Methodology
List of Contacts

Highway and Bridge Finance

This section presents information on the revenue sources supporting public investment in highways and bridges, and on the types of investments that are being made by all levels of government. This is followed by a discussion of the current and historic roles of Federal, State, and local governments in highway funding. The section concludes with a more detailed analysis of capital expenditures.

Revenue Sources

Exhibit 6-2 shows that all levels of government generated $128.7 billion in 2000 to be used for highways and bridges. Actual cash expenditures for highway and bridge purposes totaled only $127.5 billion in 2000; the remaining $1.3 billion was placed in reserves by various governmental units for future expenditure on highways or bridges. The $3.3 billion shown as placed in reserves in the Federal column indicates that the cash balance of the Highway Account of the Federal Highway Trust Fund (HTF) grew by that amount during 2000.

    
Exhibit 6-2

Revenue Sources for Highways, 2000 (Billions of Dollars)

 
  FEDERAL STATE LOCAL TOTAL PERCENT
User Charges
Motor-Fuel Taxes
$25.1
$28.7
$1.0
$54.8
42.5%
Motor-Vehicle Taxes and Fees
$4.6
$15.5
$0.7
$20.8
16.2%
Tolls
$0.0
$4.7
$0.7
$5.4
4.2%
Subtotal
$29.7
$49.0
$2.3
$81.0
62.9%
Other
Property Taxes and Assessments
$0.0
$0.0
$6.4
$6.4
4.9%
General Fund Appropriations
$1.2
$4.1
$11.9
$17.2
13.4%
Other Taxes and Fees
$0.1
$2.4
$2.8
$5.4
4.2%
Investment Income and Other Receipts
$0.0
$2.7
$4.8
$7.5
5.8%
Bond Issue Proceeds
$0.0
$8.2
$3.1
$11.2
8.7%
Subtotal
$1.4
$17.5
$28.9
$47.7
37.1%
Total Revenues
$31.1
$66.4
$31.3
$128.7
100.0%
Funds Drawn from or (Placed in) Reserves
($3.3)
$0.6
$1.5
($1.3)
-1.0%
Total Expenditures Funded During 2000
$27.7
$67.0
$32.7
$127.5
99.0%
Source: Highway Statistics 2000, Table HF-10.

Highway-user charges, including motor-fuel taxes, motor-vehicle taxes and fees, and tolls were the source of 62.9 percent of the $128.7 billion of total revenues for highways and bridges in 2000. The remaining 37.1 percent of revenues came from a number of sources, including local property taxes and assessments, other dedicated taxes, general funds, bond issues, investment income, and other miscellaneous sources. Development fees and special district assessments are included under “Investment Income and Other Receipts” in Exhibit 6-2.

The degree to which highway programs are funded by highway-user charges differs widely among the different levels of government. At the Federal level, 95.6 percent of highway revenues came from motor-fuel and motor-vehicle taxes in 2000. The remainder came from general fund appropriations, timber sales, lease of Federal lands, oil and mineral royalties, and motor carrier fines and penalties.

Highway-user charges also provided the largest share, 75.5 percent, of highway revenues at the State level in 2000. Bond issue proceeds were another significant source of funding, providing 12.3 percent of highway funds at the State level. The remaining 14.0 percent of State highway funding came from general fund appropriations, other State taxes and fees, investment income, and other miscellaneous revenue sources.

Many States do not permit local governments to impose motor-fuel and motor-vehicle taxes, or they cap them at relatively low levels. Therefore, at the local government level, only 7.5 percent of highway funding was provided by highway-user charges in 2000. Local general funds, property taxes, and other taxes and fees were the source of 67.5 percent of local highway funding. Bond issue proceeds provided 9.8 percent of local highway funding, while investment income and miscellaneous receipts provided the remaining 14.0 percent.

Q.
Were all revenues generated by motor-fuel taxes, motor-vehicle taxes and fees, and tools in 2000 used for highways?
A.
No. The $81.0 billion identified as highway-user charges in Exhibit 6-2 represents only 80.5 percent of total highway-user revenues, defined as all revenues generated by motor-fuel taxes, motor–vehicle taxes, and tolls. Exhibit 6-3 shows that combined highway-user revenues collected in 2000 by all levels of government totaled $100.6 billion.

    
Exhibit 6-3

Disposition of Highway-User Revenue By Level of Government, 2000

 
  FEDERAL STATE LOCAL TOTAL
Portion used for:
Highways
$29.7 $49.0 $2.3 $81.0
Transit
$5.2 $2.1 $1.0 $8.3
Other
$0.6 $10.5 $0.2 $11.3
Total Collected
$35.5 $61.6 $3.5 $100.6
Source: Highway Statistics 2000, Table HF-10

In 2000, $8.3 billion of highway-revenues was used for transit, and $11.3 billion was used for other purposes, such as ports, schools, collection costs, and general government activities. The $0.6 billion shown as Federal highway-user revenues used for other purposes includes fuel tax proceeds deposited into the Leaking Underground Storage Tank (LUST) fund, as well as the portion of gasohol tax receipts that is retained by the general fund for deficit reduction.

The $5.2 billion shown as Federal highway-user revenues used for transit includes $4.6 billion deposited into the Transit Account of the HTF, as well as $0.6 billion that was deposited in the Highway Account of the HTF that States elected to use for transit purposes. Flexible funding provisions that allow States to reprogram certain highway program funds for transit purposes are discussed in the Transit section of this chapter.

Historical Revenue Trends

Exhibits 6-4 and 6-5 show how highway revenue sources have varied over time. Exhibit 6-4 identifies the different sources of highway revenue since 1921 for all levels of government, combined. Exhibit 6-5 identifies the percentage of highway revenue derived from user charges by each level of government since 1957.

Highways 
  Revenue Sources by Type, All Units of Government 1921-2000
Click here for text description of this exhibit.

Highways Revenue Sources by Type, All Units of Government 1921-2000

 
Year   Billions of Dollars Bond Issue Proceeds Total
USER CHARGES OTHER CURRENT INCOME
Fuel and Vehicle Taxes Tolls Property Taxes General Fund Approps. Other Taxes and Fees Investment Income and Other
1921
$0.1
$0.0
$0.7
$0.1
$0.0
$0.1
$0.4
$1.4
1925
$0.4
$0.0
$0.9
$0.2
$0.0
$0.0
$0.4
$2.0
1929
$0.7
$0.0
$1.2
$0.2
$0.0
$0.0
$0.5
$2.7
1933
$0.7
$0.0
$0.6
$0.4
$0.0
$0.0
$0.2
$1.9
1937
$1.0
$0.0
$0.4
$1.0
$0.0
$0.0
$0.2
$2.7
1941
$1.2
$0.1
$0.4
$0.8
$0.0
$0.0
$0.1
$2.6
1945
$1.1
$0.1
$0.3
$0.4
$0.0
$0.0
$0.1
$1.9
1949
$2.1
$0.1
$0.4
$1.0
$0.0
$0.1
$0.5
$4.3
1953
$3.1
$0.2
$0.6
$1.2
$0.0
$0.2
$1.3
$6.5
1957
$5.6
$0.4
$0.8
$0.7
$0.0
$0.2
$1.2
$9.0
1961
$7.7
$0.5
$0.9
$1.0
$0.1
$0.3
$1.3
$11.8
1965
$9.8
$0.7
$1.1
$1.1
$0.2
$0.4
$1.1
$14.3
1969
$13.0
$0.9
$1.3
$1.9
$0.3
$0.6
$1.9
$19.9
1973
$17.0
$1.2
$1.5
$3.0
$0.4
$1.1
$2.0
$26.2
1977
$19.6
$1.4
$1.8
$5.4
$0.8
$1.8
$2.2
$33.0
1981
$21.8
$1.8
$2.5
$8.8
$1.4
$3.7
$2.6
$42.5
1985
$33.6
$2.2
$3.5
$9.9
$1.9
$4.3
$6.1
$61.4
1989
$41.4
$2.9
$4.3
$10.8
$2.9
$5.5
$5.2
$72.8
1993
$50.8
$3.6
$4.7
$10.6
$4.0
$6.8
$7.8
$88.4
1994
$51.5
$3.8
$4.8
$12.4
$4.3
$7.0
$7.3
$91.3
1995
$55.4
$3.9
$4.9
$13.2
$3.7
$6.6
$8.6
$96.3
1996
$59.7
$4.4
$5.1
$14.7
$4.0
$7.1
$7.8
$102.8
1997
$61.6
$4.7
$5.3
$15.1
$5.0
$7.0
$8.8
$107.4
1998
$64.3
$4.7
$5.8
$14.5
$5.1
$8.2
$9.0
$111.6
1999
$69.1
$5.1
$5.8
$17.2
$6.4
$6.8
$11.3
$121.7
2000
$75.6
$5.4
$6.4
$17.2
$5.4
$7.5
$11.2
$128.7
Sources: Highway Statistics Summary to 1995 Table HF-210; Highway Statistics Tables HF-10A and HF-10, various years.
Percent of Highway Revenue Derived From User Charges, for each Level of Government, 1957-2000
Click here for text description of this exhibit.

Percent of Highway Revenue Derived From User Charges, for each Level of Government, 1957-2000

 
YEAR FEDERAL STATE LOCAL TOTAL
1957
89.0%
83.5%
6.5%
66.5%
1961
92.1%
84.7%
5.7%
69.9%
1965
92.4%
87.7%
6.5%
73.5%
1969
88.1%
82.5%
6.5%
69.8%
1973
81.6%
85.3%
7.3%
69.5%
1977
74.3%
83.2%
6.4%
63.8%
1981
61.5%
79.1%
6.4%
55.6%
1985
78.8%
76.2%
4.7%
58.3%
1989
89.0%
77.2%
6.1%
60.7%
1993
89.0%
78.5%
6.9%
61.6%
1994
88.7%
79.0%
7.3%
60.7%
1995
92.1%
78.5%
6.6%
61.6%
1996
92.2%
76.7%
8.0%
62.3%
1997
91.0%
76.3%
8.1%
61.7%
1998
90.7%
75.9%
7.5%
61.8%
1999
96.4%
73.6%
7.9%
61.0%
2000
95.6%
73.7%
7.5%
62.9%
Sources: Highway Statistics Summary to 1995 Table HF-210; Highway Statistics, various years Tables HF-10A and HF-10.

Some of the variation in revenue sources shown in the graph portion of Exhibit 6-4 is caused by changes in the share of funding provided by each level of government over time; this topic will be discussed later in this chapter. In the early 1920s, when local government bore much of the responsibility for highway funding, property taxes were the primary source of revenues for highways. Property taxes have, however, become a much less significant source of revenue over time, and have dropped to an all-time low of 4.8 percent of total highway revenues in 1999. The share of total highway revenues generated by bond proceeds has fluctuated over time, reaching a high of 32.4 percent in 1954. Since that time, combined highway and bridge programs have become less dependent on debt financing; this share has not exceeded 11 percent of revenues since1971.

Since the passage of the Federal- Aid Highway Act of 1956 and the establishment of the Federal Highway Trust Fund, motor-fuel and vehicle tax receipts have consistently provided a majority of the combined revenues raised for highway and bridge programs by all levels of government.

After peaking at an all time high of 73.5 percent of highway revenues in 1965, the share represented by highway user charges dropped to 55.2 percent in 1982. As shown in Exhibit 6-4, since that time, the percentage has rebounded and stabilized in a range of about 60 to 62 percent.

A corresponding pattern can be observed in the percentage of Federal highway revenue derived from highway user charges as shown by the Federal line in Exhibit 6-5. During the early years of the HTF, over 90 percent of highway revenues at the Federal level came from fuel and vehicle taxes. From the late 1960s to early 1980s, this percentage declined, to a low of 61.6 percent in 1981. During this period, Federal motor-fuel taxes did not increase, and a growing percentage of Federal highway funding came from other sources. In 1981, general fund revenues of $2.6 billion provided 25.1 percent of total highway funding. Since 1981, Federal motor-fuel taxes have increased significantly, and Federal general fund revenues used for highways have declined. As a result, the portion of Federal highway revenue derived from highway user charges has increased, reaching an all time high of 96.4 percent in 1999.

Exhibit 6-5 shows that the share of State government highway funding contributed by highway user charges has declined over time. From 1997 to 2000, the percentage dropped from 76.3 percent to 73.7 percent. Over the same period, States grew more reliant on debt financing, as bond proceeds grew from 10.2 percent to 12.3 percent.

Highway user charges have never been as significant a source of highway revenue at the local government level as at the Federal or State levels, for the reasons outlined earlier. In the early to middle 1990s, the share of local government highway funding derived from highway user charges rose, reaching a level of 8.1 percent in 1997. However, this pattern has reversed itself, and the share dropped to 7.5 percent in 2000.

Q.
Why did the percentage of Federal revenue for highways derived from highway user charges increase sharply between 1998 and 1999?
A.
In 1998, 4.8 percent of total Federal revenues for highways came from interest income credited to the Highway Account of the HTF based on its invested balance. Due to a legislative change, starting in Federal fiscal year 1999, the HTF no longer earns interest on its balances. With this revenue source eliminated, the Federal highway program now relies even more heavily on motor-fuel and motor-vehicle taxes for funding.

Highway Expenditures

Exhibit 6-2 indicates that total expenditures for highways in 2000 equaled $127.5 billion, and identifies the portion of this total funded by each level of government. Exhibit 6-6 classifies this total by type of expenditure and by the level of government. The “Federal,” “State,” and “Local” columns in this table indicate which level of government made the direct expenditures, while the “Funded by…” columns indicate the level of government that provided the funding for those expenditures. (Note that all figures cited as “expenditures,” “spending,” or “outlays” in this report represent cash expenditures rather than authorizations or obligations).

    
Exhibit 6-6

Direct Expenditures for Highways, by Expending Agencies and by Type, Billions of Dollars, 2000
 
CURRENT EXPENDITURES FEDERAL STATE LOCAL TOTAL PERCENT
Capital Outlay
Funded by Federal Government
$0.3
$24.4
$1.0
$25.8
20.2%
Funded by State or Local Govt's
$0.0
$23.2
$15.7
$38.9
30.5%
Subtotal
$0.3
$47.6
$16.7
$64.6
50.7%
Non-Capital Expenditures
Maintenance
$0.2
$9.1
$14.9
$24.2
19.0%
Highway and Traffic Services
$0.0
$3.8
$2.9
$6.8
5.3%
Administration
$1.8
$5.5
$3.0
$10.3
8.1%
Highway Patrol and Safety
$0.0
$5.7
$5.0
$10.7
8.4%
Interest on Debt
$0.0
$3.0
$2.0
$5.1
4.0%
Subtotal
$1.9
$27.2
$27.9
$57.1
44.8%
Total, Current Expenditures
$2.3
$74.8
$44.6
$121.7
95.5%
Bond Retirement
$0.0
$3.1
$2.7
$5.7
4.5%
Total All Expenditures
Funded by Federal Government
$2.3
$24.4
$1.0
$27.7
21.7%
Funded by State Governments
$0.0
$52.1
$14.9
$67.0
52.6%
Funded by Local Governments
$0.0
$1.3
$31.4
$32.7
25.7%
Grand Total
$2.3
$77.9
$47.3
$127.5
100.0%
Source: Highway Statistics 2000, Table HF-10.

While the Federal government funded $27.7 billion (21.7 percent) of total highway expenditures of $101.3 billion in 1997, the majority of the Federal government’s contribution to highways consists of grants to State and local governments. Direct Federal spending on capital outlay, maintenance, administration, and research amounted to only $2.3 billion (1.8 percent). The remaining $25.4 billion was in the form of transfers to State and local governments.

State governments combined $24.4 billion of Federal funds with $52.1 billion of State funds and $1.3 billion of local funds to make direct expenditures of $77.9 billion (61.1 percent). Local governments combined $1.0 billion of Federal funds with $14.9 billion of State funds and $31.4 billion of local funds to make direct expenditures of $47.3 billion (37.1 percent).

Types of Highway Expenditures

Current highway expenditures can be divided into two broad categories: non-capital and capital. Noncapital highway expenditures include maintenance of highways, highway and traffic services, administration, highway law enforcement, highway safety, and interest on debt. Highway capital outlay consists of those expenditures associated with highway improvements, including land acquisition and other right-of-way costs; preliminary and construction engineering; new construction, reconstruction, resurfacing, rehabilitation, and restoration costs of roadways, bridges, and other structures; and installation of traffic service facilities such as guardrails, fencing, signs, and signals. Bond retirement is not part of current expenditures, but it is included in the figures cited for total highway expenditures in this report.

As shown in Exhibit 6-6, all levels of government spent $64.6 billion on capital outlay in 2000, or 50.7 percent of total highway expenditures. Highway capital outlay expenditures are discussed in more detail later in this chapter.

Current non-capital expenditures consumed $57.1 billion (44.8 percent), while the remaining $5.7 billion (4.5 percent) went for bond redemption. Most Federal funding for highways goes for capital items. Noncapital expenditures are funded primarily by State and local governments. In 2000, State and local noncapital expenditures were close to equal, as State governments spent $27.2 billion while local governments spent $27.9 billion. The majority of maintenance expenditures occurred at the local government level, or $14.9 billion (61.6 percent) of the $24.2 billion total.

Historical Expenditure and Funding Trends

Exhibits 6-7 and 6-8 provide historical perspective for the 2000 values shown in Exhibit 6-6. Exhibit 6-7 shows how the composition of highway expenditures by all levels of government combined has changed over time. Exhibit 6-8 shows the amounts provided by each level of government to finance those expenditures and the share of funding provided by the Federal government for total highway expenditures and for highway capital outlay.

Expenditures 
  for Highways by Type, All Units of Government 1957-2000
Click here for text description of this exhibit.

Expenditures for Highways by Type, All Units of Government 1957-2000

 
  Billions of Dollars
Year Capital Outlay Maintenance and Services OTHER NON-CAPITAL Debt Retirement Total
Administration Highway Patrol & Safety Interest On Debt Total Other Non-Capital
1957
$5.6
$2.2
$0.4
$0.3
$0.3
$0.9
$0.5
$9.3
1961
$6.8
$2.7
$0.5
$0.3
$0.4
$1.3
$0.7
$11.5
1965
$8.4
$3.3
$0.8
$0.5
$0.5
$1.8
$0.9
$14.3
1969
$10.4
$4.3
$1.1
$1.1
$0.7
$2.9
$1.2
$18.8
1973
$12.2
$5.9
$1.7
$1.9
$1.0
$4.7
$1.4
$24.2
1977
$13.1
$8.6
$2.4
$2.8
$1.3
$6.5
$1.6
$29.8
1981
$19.7
$12.2
$3.4
$3.9
$1.7
$9.0
$1.6
$42.4
1985
$26.6
$16.6