This update of the highway cost allocation study is the seventh in a recent series begun in the early 1980's by the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet and the Kentucky Transportation Center. The primary objectives were to determine the level of revenue contribution and cost responsibility for each class of highway user. The base year of the study is FY 1995; the most recent time period for which revenue and cost data were available. Highway use or travel activity data for calendar year 1994 was the most recent available. A basic premise of the study was that only state maintained highways were of interest in recouping the costs expended to construct and maintain the system. In 1994, this system comprised 27,300 miles of the 72,900 miles of roads and streets in Kentucky, while accommodating 84 percent of all travel.

There were 17 highway user classes with which revenue contribution and cost responsibility were associated. Primary sources of revenue included fuel taxes, registration fees, usage taxes, tolls, and other motor carrier and federal taxes and fees. Primary expenditure categories included construction (subdivided into the six categories), maintenance and traffic, administration, and enforcement. Construction expenditures were subdivided into planning and design; right of way; utility relocation; grade, drain, and surfacing; resurfacing; bridges; and miscellaneous.

Results from the analysis indicate that cost responsibility is borne most heavily by passenger cars and motorcycles with 45.93 percent; followed by heavy trucks with gross weights of 60,000 pounds or more at 26.73 percent. Pickups and other vehicles registered in the 6,000-pound category were responsible for 19.99 percent of the cost. Other groups of vehicles totaled 7.35 percent of the cost responsibility.

The efficiency of highway-related tax collection was a secondary objective of the study. It was found that the efficiency of collection was about 81 percent tor the weight-distance tax and 78 percent or more for the heavy-vehicle surtax and the carrier fuel surtax.

Report Date


Report Number


Digital Object Identifier



The contents of this report reflect the views of the authors who are responsible for the facts and accuracy of the data presented herein. The contents do not necessarily reflect the official views or policies of the University of Kentucky or the Kentucky Transportation Cabinet. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The inclusion of manufacturer names and trade names is for identification purposes and is not to be considered an endorsement.