In the coalition agreement of 9 April 2025 (Coalition Agreement), the CDU and SPD did not directly address the introduction of car toll charges, despite isolated attempts to do so. However, the designated federal government is certainly keeping this option open. The “Transport” section of the Coalition Agreement states that a “three-pillar model” is being sought, which should also include “user financing”. PPP models for improving transport infrastructure are also to be considered. The federal government wants to examine how the Autobahn GmbH (the federal highway company in Germany) can finance itself in a stable manner in the long term. In this respect, it is conceivable that the issue of car toll charges in Germany will return to the agenda at a later date, so we will now look at approaches for the introduction of such charges.
History
Initial discussions about the introduction of a car toll date back to the 1990s. In 2005, the Merkel I cabinet rejected the idea of privatising the motorway network and introducing such a toll. In the Merkel II cabinet, Transport Minister Peter Ramsauer (CSU) did consider a toll for the future, but this did not then feature in the subsequent coalition agreement.
After the CSU campaigned for the introduction of a toll for vehicles registered abroad during the 2013 federal election campaign, the so-called infrastructure levy found its way into the coalition agreement of the Merkel III cabinet. In 2014, Transport Minister Alexander Dobrindt (CSU) presented a concept that provided for a levy for all cars, but relieved German taxpayers of the burden of motor vehicle tax as compensation. On this basis, German lawmakers passed the Infrastructure Charges Act (InfrAG) in 2015, which came into force in June of the same year. The European Commission considered the new regulations to be discriminatory towards foreign drivers and initiated infringement proceedings. This was not pursued further in 2016 due to a negotiated compromise. However, the practical implementation of InfrAG was suspended for the time being.
In the Merkel IV cabinet, Transport Minister Andreas Scheuer (CSU) finally concluded an operator contract with two private companies to implement the toll. In its ruling of 18 June 2019, the ECJ declared the car toll illegal following a complaint by Austria because the tax relief for German drivers constituted indirect discrimination. Taxpayers suffered losses totalling 243 million euros due to claims for damages by the operating companies.
Current developments
As part of the Coalition Agreement negotiations between the CDU/CSU and SPD, the demand for a car toll has gained new urgency. The CSU’s lawyers’ working group has submitted a proposal to this effect. The aim is an infrastructure charge for all users of federal roads and motorways without exceptions such as tax concessions for German vehicle owners. It is argued that financing the transport infrastructure in line with the polluter-pays principle is necessary at a time when the backlog of renovation work on German motorways is getting worse and worse, meaning that young people have less and less room for manoeuvre. The enormous investments in infrastructure that are currently pending cannot be financed exclusively with debt.
The CSU party leadership promptly distanced itself from the proposals, stating that the car toll proposal was neither in the CDU and CSU election programme nor in the CSU’s Bavarian agenda for the federal elections. However, the proposal of the CSU's lawyers’ working group has prominent advocates, such as former Federal Finance Minister Theo Waigel (CSU), the President of the Baden-Württemberg County Council Joachim Walter (CDU) and Baden-Württemberg Transport Minister Winfried Hermann (Greens). The sentence already contained in the Coalition Agreement negotiation paper of Working Group 4 (Transport and Infrastructure, Construction and Housing), “It will be examined how the Autobahn GmbH can finance itself in a permanently stable manner.” has made it into the final Coalition Agreement. This wording is conspicuously open and offers room for interpretation, including regarding another attempt to introduce a car toll in Germany.
Irrespective of the introduction of a toll, various PPP models are possible, such as the current expansion of the A1 motorway between Bremen and Hamburg or the expansion of the A7 motorway towards the Danish border.
Options available
In principle, various forms of a car toll and other PPP models are conceivable:
Car toll
- Route-based tolls modelled on those in France, Italy or Spain
The distance-based toll system calculates the charges according to the actual distance travelled. When driving onto a toll road, the driver takes a ticket, which is handed in when driving off to calculate the costs based on the distance travelled and vehicle category. Alternatively, payment is made automatically via electronic systems such as the “Telepass”. The advantages of this system are that it is based on the person who caused the journey and is flexible and efficient thanks to contactless technology. Disadvantages include high costs for long journeys, the complex infrastructure and possible problems if tickets are lost, as the highest possible amount is then charged.
- Vignette solution as in Switzerland or Austria
The vignette solution is based on a time-limited authorisation to use the road network, which drivers purchase in advance. Vignettes can be offered for different periods of time and are often dependent on the type of vehicle and environmental friendliness. The charges are flat-rate and independent of the actual distance travelled. The advantages are simple implementation, low collection costs and uncomplicated use without technical infrastructure such as toll stations. Disadvantages are the lack of polluter-pays billing, as occasional drivers pay just as much as frequent users, as well as possible legal problems in differentiating between domestic and foreign drivers.
- Toll for every kilometre driven or climate toll
The mileage-based toll, also known as the climate toll, calculates the charges per kilometre driven and considers factors such as vehicle type, environmental friendliness and road type. The toll is recorded using modern technologies such as GPS systems, toll boxes or smartphone apps, which precisely document the distance travelled. The advantages of this system are that it is based on the polluter-pays principle, promotes low-emission vehicles and provides sustainable funding for transport infrastructure. Disadvantages are the high implementation costs for the technical infrastructure, possible data protection concerns when recording journeys and annual operating costs, which could make the system expensive.
Existing PPP models for motorway expansion
- Expansion model (“A-model”)
In the so-called A-model, the operator plans and builds the expansion of a motorway section and maintains and operates the entire section. The operator must (proportionately) finance its services. Under the A-model, the operator receives a traffic volume-dependent payment from the state in return, based on the heavy vehicles toll.
- Availability model (“V-model”)
In the V-model, the PPP contractor also carries out planning, construction, operating and maintenance services on a specific section of road over a long-term period. It must also make its own financial contribution. The calculation of the remuneration differs from the above “A-model” in one central point: the contractor receives an “availability fee” that is independent of the volume of traffic.
Legal considerations
In its ruling of 18 June 2019, the ECJ declared the planned German car toll charges to be unlawful due to a violation of the prohibition of discrimination under Article 18 TFEU. The Court found that the economic burden of the toll would de facto lie exclusively on foreign vehicle owners, as German drivers were to be relieved by being fully compensated through a reduction in vehicle tax. This constitutes indirect discrimination on grounds of nationality. In addition, the system impairs the free movement of goods and services, as it increases transport costs and thus negatively affects the competitiveness of foreign products and services in Germany. To ensure compliance with EU law in the future, the following aspects must therefore be considered:
No compensation for German residents: Eine vollständige oder teilweise Kompensation der Maut durch Steuervergünstigungen oder andere Maßnahmen für deutsche Fahrzeughalter darf nicht erfolgen. Eine völlige Neugestaltung des deutschen Kfz-Steuersystems scheint aufgrund der Steuerhoheit der Mitgliedstaaten gleichwohl nicht völlig ausgeschlossen.
Equal treatment of all users: The economic burden of the toll must be distributed fairly among all users, regardless of their nationality or the country in which the vehicle is registered.
Proportionate pricing: Short-term vignettes or other time-limited options must not be disproportionately expensive, as this could indirectly penalise foreign drivers.
PPP models for motorway expansion (A-model or V-model described above) must regularly comply with antitrust procurement law. In many cases, the public sector is obliged to put the operator concession or PPP contract out to tender in a competitive procedure.
Outlook
The Coalition Agreement of 9 April 2025, with its open wording on the financing of transport infrastructure, leaves room for the introduction of car toll charges in Germany, which has long been established in many European countries. In view of the state of the motorway infrastructure and the considerable need for funding, such a debate is long overdue. After all, the funds from the special infrastructure fund will not be sufficient for this purpose and budget consolidation must not be lost sight of. It is feasible to organise any toll in accordance with EU law.
Our services for companies:
We advise companies (construction companies, investors and concession operators) and the public sector comprehensively on the realisation of PPP and concession models, in particular on public procurement and EU state aid law, construction and planning law and contract law.
