Successfully reported this slideshow.
We use your LinkedIn profile and activity data to personalize ads and to show you more relevant ads. You can change your ad preferences anytime.

Fstpt 15-solo-english

128 views

Published on

usulan tentang pembobotan biaya pajak kendaraan bermotor (PKB) dilihat dari faktor perusak jalan, emisi gas buang

Published in: Engineering
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

Fstpt 15-solo-english

  1. 1. Proposed Vehicle Weighing Factor Value to be Implemented for Determination of Vehicle Tax Rate, VTR (Case study: Province of East Java, Indonesia) By: Anak Agung Gde Kartika Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Email: a.agung.kartika@gmail.com Hera Widyastuti Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Wahju Herijanto Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Susi Wilujeng Lecturer of Environmental Engineering ITS Surabaya Cahya Buana Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Catur Arif Prastyanto Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Budi Rahardjo Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Istiar Lecturer of Civil Eng. ITS Surabaya Aldila Riana Prabawati Post Graduate Student of Transportation Engineering and Management, Civil Engineering ITS Abstract Vehicle Tax Rate, VTR (Pajak Kendaraan Bermotor, PKB), in all provinces of Indonesia are collected based on Permendagri (Ministry of Internal Affair) 23/2011 in which weighing factor of heavy vehicle is stated as 1.3 with no explanation where this value come from as well as how this value is determined. Meanwhile, it is required to calculate the weighing factor based on both Equivalent Damage Factor (EDF) and emission of specified type of vehicle. This paper is trying to propose the value of weighing factor for heavy vehicle in more accountable as well as considering both EDF and emission produced by specific type of vehicle. The result of this paper is that the value of weighing factor of heavy vehicle is summarized based on the wheel configuration, emission of its engine and age of vehicle. Keyword: Vehicle Tax Rate, VTR (Pajak Kendaraan Bermotor, PKB), EDF, emission, East Java. I. BACKGROUND Vehicle Tax Rate (VTR) is one of the potential sources in several provinces in Indonesia. This is because of some reasons one of them which that the number of vehicles registered tend to increases year by year. Province of East Java is one of the province gain high amount of money from this type of tax. As the illustration, in 2010 East Java has collected around IDR 4 Trillions which is counted 58.8% of total Pure-Regional Tax, PRT, (Pendapatan Asli Daerah, PAD) coming from VTR. Furthermore this amount will tend to increase since the number of vehicle registered is getting bigger and bigger each year.
  2. 2. Although this tax has contributed significantly to the Pure-Regional Tax, in 2011, The Government of East Java has increased the percentage of VTR into 15%. The main goals of this policy are both to increase the amount of VTR collected and to reduce the growth of vehicle in East Java. According to the Regulation of Ministry of Internal Affair (Permendagri) No. 23/2011 regarding “Penghitungan Dasar Pengenaan Pajak Kendaraan Bermotor dan Bea Balik Nama Kendaraan Bermotor”, weight factor of VTR should be applied based on these following factors including the impact of vehicle to the road deterioration and its engine emission produced. However, in that regulation, the vehicle weighing factors are defined into two types including light vehicle with weight factor of 1.0 and heavy vehicle with weight factor of 1.3. This can be assumed that the main factors including damage factor and emission of vehicle are less taken into account. Furthermore, the value of 1.3 which has been applied widely for years cannot be explained where that number is coming from and how it is assessed. In 2011, Dispenda (Regional Income Agency) of East Java pointed LPP-ITS to evaluate the weighing factor of heavy vehicle so that it can be applied to the VTR collecting system within the East Java Province. However, the result still needed to be extended by corresponding with the type of vehicle existed as indicated in Governor Regulation (Pergub. Jatim) No 61/2011. Therefore, this paper will calculate the reasonable value of weighing factor for heavy vehicle instead of just determined by 1.3. Moreover, the weighting factor value will also consider both the EDF and engine emission of specified vehicle. Furthermore the type of vehicle will also be synchronized with the type of vehicle listen in East Java Governor Regulation No 61/2011. II. GOALS The goals of this paper are as follow: 1. To calculate weighing factor of heavy vehicles in correspond with the impact of them to the pavement, in this case their EDF value. 2. To calculate weighing factor of heavy vehicles in correspond with their engine emission produced. 3. To calculate weight factor of heavy vehicles based on combination of both the impact to pavement and engine emission. III. SCOPE The scope of this paper is as follow: 1. Engine emissions of vehicle data are based on opacity of heavy vehicle which is measured in vehicle testing unit of Surabaya Municipality. 2. The weight of each type of heavy vehicle is measured in vehicle scaling unit in 17 scaling unit around East Java.
  3. 3. IV. METHODOLOGY Figure 1 showing the methodology to carry on this research. Some data are needed to be collected. In general data that needed to collected are as follow: a. Data of Weight of Vehicle The data of vehicle weight are obtained from Ministry of Transportation which is measured in 17 vehicle scaling unit around East Java Province. The calculation of EDF of each type of heavy vehicle is based on the Bina Marga formula (Bina Marga 1987) as shown in Table 1. Figure 1. Methodology Equivalent Damage Factor (E) is calculated by using this following formula: Where: P = axle load (Ton)
  4. 4. Triple axle wheel unit will need different coefficient compared to tandem axle; it needs coefficient 0.016 instead of 0.086. Table 1. Axle configuration, type of Vehicle and their Equivalent Damage Factor (EDF) Source: Bina Marga, 1987. It is obvious that the EDF value is depend on the axle’s configuration as well as the weight of the vehicle itself.
  5. 5. In real condition, small change is found in terms of the number of type of heavy vehicle. In fact, there are seven types of vehicle in terms of wheel configuration is found during the survey in vehicle scaling unit including one with triple axles. Those are presented in Table 2. Table 2. Heavy Vehicle Classification b. Data of Vehicle’s Emission Engine emissions of vehicle data are based on opacity of heavy vehicle which is measured in vehicle testing unit of Surabaya Municipality. V. ANALYSIS 5.1. Analysis of Weighing Factor Based on the Relative Value of Engine Emission. Analysis of weighing factor based on the relative value of engine emission is carried out into two assumption, firstly is taking average opacity of each type vehicle found as the relative comparison (Table 3) and secondly is taking maximum opacity found as the relative comparison (Table 4). 5.2. Analysis of Weighing Factor Based on the Relative Value of EDF The calculation of EDF based on the load distribution as indicated in Table 1 with the load as obtained during the load survey at the vehicle scaling unit. The result of the analysis of weighing factor based on the relative value of EDF is presented in Table 5. These values is obtained by comparing the average EDF value of each vehicle with that belongs to Passenger car (Light Vehicle).
  6. 6. Table 3. Weighing Factor based on relative average opacity. 1 Truck Type 1 Umum Diesel Fuel 43.56 2 Truck Type 1 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 29.83 0.60 1.25 3 Truck Type 1 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 53.67 0.77 1.25 4 Truck Type 1 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 48.47 0.69 1.25 5 Truck Type 2 Umum Diesel Fuel 40.34 6 Truck Type 2 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 29.87 0.60 1.25 7 Truck Type 2 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 39.63 0.57 1.25 8 Truck Type 2 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 47.76 0.68 1.25 9 Truck Type 3 Umum Diesel Fuel 45.50 10 Truck Type 3 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 24.50 0.49 1.25 11 Truck Type 3 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 32.67 0.47 1.25 12 Truck Type 3 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 66.40 0.95 1.25 13 Truck Type 4 Umum Diesel Fuel 18.50 14 Truck Type 4 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 - 0.00 1.25 15 Truck Type 4 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 12.00 0.17 1.25 16 Truck Type 4 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 25.00 0.36 1.25 17 Truck Type 5 Umum Diesel Fuel 40.88 18 Truck Type 5 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 26.09 0.52 1.25 19 Truck Type 5 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 53.60 0.77 1.25 20 Truck Type 5 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 50.80 0.73 1.25 21 Truck Type 6 Umum Diesel Fuel 40.88 22 Truck Type 6 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 0.00 0.00 1.25 23 Truck Type 6 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 0.00 0.00 1.25 24 Truck Type 6 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 54.00 0.77 1.25 25 Truck Type 7 Umum Diesel Fuel 25.50 26 Truck Type 7 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 15.00 0.30 1.25 27 Truck Type 7 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 0.00 0.00 1.25 28 Truck Type 7 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 36.00 0.51 1.25 Emission Relative Factor Avg Opacity Standaard Quality ComparisonNo Vehicle Type Age Fuel
  7. 7. Table 4. Weighing Factor based on relative maximum opacity. Table 5. Weighing Factor based on the Relative Value of EDF with the Passenger Car (Light vehicle) as the Baseline. 5.3. Analysis of Weighing Factor Based on the Combination between EDF and Engine Emission This analysis combine the two previous analyses in order to have both EDF and emission produced are taken into account. However, in order to have both of them are fairly adopted, the weighing factor of each factor need to be defined before. According to previous study (Dispenda Jatim and LPPM ITS, 2011) it is stated that the weighing proportion of EDF and Emission is 56% and 44% respectively. This proportion is used in order to calculate the weighing factor of heavy vehicle based on the combination between EDF and Emission. 1 Truck Type 1 Umum Diesel Fuel 94.00 2 Truck Type 1 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 82.00 1.64 2.05 3 Truck Type 1 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 93.00 1.33 1.66 4 Truck Type 1 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 94.00 1.34 1.68 5 Truck Type 2 Umum Diesel Fuel 94.50 6 Truck Type 2 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 85.00 1.70 2.13 7 Truck Type 2 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 93.00 1.33 1.66 8 Truck Type 2 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 94.50 1.35 1.69 9 Truck Type 3 Umum Diesel Fuel 94.00 10 Truck Type 3 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 35.00 0.70 1.25 11 Truck Type 3 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 35.00 0.50 1.25 12 Truck Type 3 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 94.00 1.34 1.68 13 Truck Type 4 Umum Diesel Fuel 25.00 14 Truck Type 4 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 - 0.00 1.25 15 Truck Type 4 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 12.00 0.17 1.25 16 Truck Type 4 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 25.00 0.36 1.25 17 Truck Type 5 Umum Diesel Fuel 87.00 18 Truck Type 5 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 72.00 1.44 1.80 19 Truck Type 5 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 87.00 1.24 1.55 20 Truck Type 5 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 86.00 1.23 1.54 21 Truck Type 6 Umum Diesel Fuel 91.00 22 Truck Type 6 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 - 0.00 1.25 23 Truck Type 6 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 - 0.00 1.25 24 Truck Type 6 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 91.00 1.30 1.63 25 Truck Type 7 Umum Diesel Fuel 36.00 26 Truck Type 7 < 5 Tahun Diesel Fuel 50 15.00 0.30 1.25 27 Truck Type 7 5 - 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 - 0.00 1.25 28 Truck Type 7 > 10 Tahun Diesel Fuel 70 36.00 0.51 1.25 Max Opacity Comparison Emission Relative No Vehicle Type Age Fuel Standaard Quality PC Type 1 Type 2 Type 3 Type 4 Type 5 Type 6 Type 7 EDF (avg) 0.0004 0.008076 0.263792 4.221052 34.00278 0.016368 0.186136 0.296604 Relative EDF value 1.00 20.19 659.48 10552.63 85006.96 40.92 465.34 741.51 Vehicle Classification
  8. 8. The result of the analysis can be summarized in Table 6 and Table 7. Table 6 shows the result based on the combination of EDF with average opacity while Table 7 show the result based on the combination of EDF with maximum opacity of vehicle. Table 6. The Calculation of Weighing Factor (combination of EDF and Average Opacity) EDF Emission 0.56 0.44 1 T.1.2L 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 2 T.1.2H 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 3 T.1.22 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 4 T1.2+2.2 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 5 T.1.2-22 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 6 T.1.22-22 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 7 T.1.22-222 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 1.44 1.44 1.51 1.51 1.51 Weighing Factor 1.44 1.44 1.44 2.00 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.44 1.0087 Calibration EDF relative Relative emission Factor EDF Relative Relative Weighing Factor 1.0002 1.0078 1.1241 2.0000 1.0005 1.0055 10552.63 85006.96 40.92 465.34 1.44 1.44 2.00 2.00 741.51 No Vehicle Type Age 20.19 659.48
  9. 9. Table 7. Calculation of Weighing Factor (combination of EDF and Maximum Opacity) VI. Conclusion and Recommendation It is concluded that the weighing factor of VTR for heavy vehicle are varied depend on the age, axle configuration as well as the emission produced. Table 8 summarizes each type of vehicle. EDF Emission 0.56 0.44 1 T.1.2L 0-5th 2.05 5.20 6-10th 1.66 3.64 >10th 1.68 3.71 2 T.1.2H 0-5th 2.13 5.50 6-10th 1.66 3.64 >10th 1.69 3.75 3 T.1.22 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.68 3.71 4 T1.2+2.2 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 5 T.1.2-22 0-5th 1.80 4.20 6-10th 1.55 3.21 >10th 1.54 3.14 6 T.1.22-22 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.63 3.50 7 T.1.22-222 0-5th 1.25 2.00 6-10th 1.25 2.00 >10th 1.25 2.00 Minimum 20.19 1.25 Maximum 85006.96 2.13 Desired Coeff maxs(N) 2 Baseline 1 1 EDF PC baseline/Emission PC baseline 0.0004 1 No Vehicle Type Age EDF Relative Relative Weighing Factor 659.48 1.0078 2.98 2.17 2.21 Calibration Weighing Factor EDF relative Relative emission Factor 20.19 1.0002 2.85 2.16 2.19 2.00 2.00 2.00 10552.63 1.1241 1.51 1.51 2.26 741.51 1.0087 1.44 1.44 1.44 465.34 1.0055 1.44 1.44 2.10 40.92 1.0005 2.41 1.97 1.94 85006.96 2.0000
  10. 10. By looking at the configuration of the wheel axle as well as the registered type of vehicle, the weighing factor can be chosen accordingly in order synchronize the right coefficient. Table 8. Proposed weighing factor for VTR VII. REFERENCES Bina Marga (1987) Metode analisa komponen Dispenda Jatim dan LPPM ITS (2011) Study Penelitian Bobot Kendaraan Bermotor Sebagai Dasar Pengenaan Pajak Kendaraan Bermotor. Avg Opacity Max Opacity 1 T.1.2L 0-5th 1.44 2.85 6-10th 1.44 2.16 >10th 1.44 2.19 2 T.1.2H 0-5th 1.44 2.98 6-10th 1.44 2.17 >10th 1.44 2.21 3 T.1.22 0-5th 1.51 1.51 6-10th 1.51 1.51 >10th 1.51 2.26 4 T1.2+2.2 0-5th 2.00 2.00 6-10th 2.00 2.00 >10th 2.00 2.00 5 T.1.2-22 0-5th 1.44 2.41 6-10th 1.44 1.97 >10th 1.44 1.94 6 T.1.22-22 0-5th 1.44 1.44 6-10th 1.44 1.44 >10th 1.44 2.10 7 T.1.22-222 0-5th 1.44 1.44 6-10th 1.44 1.44 >10th 1.44 1.44 Weighing Factor No Vehicle Type Age

×