[wizee]

What's subjective is the threshold of what is considered "dangerous". I do agree improving visibility would be a good thing, and incentivizing safer designs through taxation could be good. Insurance prices already do that to an extent. I do agree that SUVs and pickup trucks have become taller than necessary in recent years; pickups from the 1990s were appreciably lower and had better visibility without being any less useful for moving things around.

The CAFE exemptions for SUVs and trucks compared to cars don't make sense to me and encourage maximizing vehicle footprint, so changing those rules would make sense. What else do you consider "subsidies" for this size of pickup trucks? Not being subject to the "chicken tax"? (not directly relevant to me as I'm in Canada)

[hnav]

In the US it's CAFE gaming, 6000LB GVW tax incentives and arguably fuel, registration and tolls aren't (sufficiently) scaled with vehicle size. The chicken tax thing definitely contributes even to Canada's market since it's relatively rare for automakers to consider it separately from the US one.