I suspect I'll have to wait until Raoul gets back to me to get solid info about European tax policy.

A general observation I'd remind you of is that tax structures always reflect some governmental policy (even if the policy is just to sell tax breaks to the highest bidder). Note that I'm talking about structures and not just the rates. Where a government chooses to tax is a reflection of policy, and balances of tax penalties and tax breaks tell you what the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Given that, it wouldn't be necessary for gas taxes to be allocated to specific funds (although that's what I hear). Even if environmental cleanup and consequential costs like health care come from general funds, high taxes on gas reduces taxes elsewhere, and the end result is the same: Those who consume more gasoline pay a proportionately higher portion of the consequential costs, those who minimize gas consumption pay less. Thus the price of gasoline more accurately reflects the true cost of using it.

Doesn't your Libertarian/Conservative soul cry out for a fairer system of taxation like that? Think of gas taxes as more like user fees--red-blooded American invidualists paying their own way and paying only their fair share!

Please point out where our government pays directly for cleaning up air pollution?

Poor choice of words on my part. Strictly speaking, air pollution doesn't get cleaned up once it's out there, and, rather, it's government regulation that's primarily responsible for reducing pollution before it gets into the air. Prevention saves money later. In the kind of honest cost accounting of which I speak, it's the consequences of air pollution that cost, mostly in medical expenses, but a significant amount too in infrastructure degradation due to acid rain and particulate settling; and downstream costs (forgive the pun) when those toxic byproducts leach into the watershed.