Skip to content

America Spends $7.3 Billion a Year Paying Affluent People to Drive to Work

Every day, the streets of American cities are more clogged and polluted at rush hour because the federal government pays people to drive to work.
America Spends $7.3 Billion a Year Paying Affluent People to Drive to Work

Every day, the streets of American cities are more clogged and polluted at rush hour because the federal government pays people to drive to work.

The culprit is the commuter tax benefit, a $7.3 billion annual subsidy that mainly offsets parking costs for people who drive to work. The people who benefit the most are high earners who drive into the U.S.’s biggest, most congested cities and can write off the maximum $255 per month in tax-free income.

The tax break for car commuters is not only regressive, it also generates traffic at exactly the worst time — rush hour — and in exactly the worst places — the central areas of major cities, according to a new study from TransitCenter and the Frontier Group [PDF].

Placing a finger on the scale of people’s commute decisions can have a profound influence on behavior. A model developed by Virginia Tech researcher Andrea Hamre estimates that in five cities — Washington, DC, Baltimore, Philadelphia, Newark, NJ, and New York City — a subsidy solely for parking at work would reduce transit’s share of the commuting pie 25 percent, compared to scenario with no commuter subsidy.

The federal government does allow transit commuters up to $255 a month in pre-tax income to offset the cost of fares. But people can claim it only if their employer offers the benefit. The parking subsidy is much more widely used — the government spends $7.3 billion a year on it, compared to $1.3 billion for transit.

Cities would be better off if both subsidies were eliminated. TransitCenter estimates that without the commuter tax benefit, 66,000 fewer people would drive to work in the 25 largest U.S. cities.

As long as the commuter benefit persists, local governments can at least help even the playing field. A number of cities, including New York, DC, and San Francisco, have ordinances requiring most employers to offer the transit benefit to their workers.

Photo of Angie Schmitt
Angie is a Cleveland-based writer with a background in planning and newspaper reporting. She has been writing about cities for Streetsblog for six years.

Comments Are Temporarily Disabled

Streetsblog is in the process of migrating our commenting system. During this transition, commenting is temporarily unavailable.

Once the migration is complete, you will be able to log back in and will have full access to your comment history. We appreciate your patience and look forward to having you back in the conversation soon.

More from Streetsblog New York City

Opinion: Sean Duffy’s ‘Golden Age’ of Dangerous Streets

Ethan Andersen
December 15, 2025

‘I’m Always on the Bus’: How Transit Advocacy Helped Katie Wilson Become Seattle’s Next Mayor

December 12, 2025

Watchdog Wants Hochul To Nix Bus Lane Enforcement Freebies for MTA Drivers

December 11, 2025

More Truck Routes Are Coming To A Street Near You

December 11, 2025

Upstate County’s New Bus Service Will Turn A Transit Desert Into A Rural Network

December 11, 2025
See all posts