The NY/NJ Port Authority’s Holiday Gift for the For-Hire Vehicle & Bus Industries
The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey (PANYNJ) is making licensed ground transportation operators and their passengers pay more – again – without demonstrating that higher fees are justified, proportionate, or effective. Under the banner of capital investment and enforcement, the Port Authority voted to approve a sweeping package of increases that will double airport access fees for for-hire vehicles (FHVs), raise tolls across its bridges and tunnels, and dramatically increase bus and terminal fees. For the licensed black car, limousine and livery industry, these measures raise a fundamental question: Why are compliant operators and riders shouldering escalating costs while long-standing enforcement failures and data gaps remain unaddressed?
The Port Authority had proposed doubling the FHV pickup and drop-off fees from $2.50 to $5 at JFK, LaGuardia and Newark starting March 15, 2026. However, push back from the FHV industry caused the PA to revise its proposed FHV fee schedule and will now phase in the FHV fee increase, consistent with the schedule for taxis: increases to $3.50 in March 2026, increases to $4.50 in March 2027, and increases to $5.00 in 2028. This increase will apply uniformly to all FHVs – limousines, black cars, liveries and high-volume for-hire services – while taxis will continue to pay no drop-off fee and only a modestly higher pickup fee of $2.00 in March 2026 (up from $1.75), with two additional 25-cent increases in 2027 and 2028. For FHVs, the result is a $10 mandatory round-trip surcharge imposed on operators and riders who already shoulder substantial regulatory and operating costs.
The Port Authority’s Stated Rationale
From a funding perspective, the Port Authority explains that it relies heavily on non-toll and non-fare revenue sources (including fees) to support capital investments. According to the Port Authority, the fee increase is tied to its 2026-2035 Capital Plan, which includes a new initiative called “Operation Legal Ride.” This program is described as a 10-year, $100 million investment aimed at combating illegal airport transportation activity, specifically targeting unlicensed operators who harass passengers, solicit illegal rides and undercut legitimate drivers.
In a presentation to industry stakeholders, the Port Authority declared “war on the predators who harass passengers by offering illegal rides and who steal business from hard-working drivers.” Operation Legal Ride will deploy new enforcement tools, including license plate readers, AI-assisted CCTV, expanded databases of unpermitted drivers, enhanced coordination with the NYC Taxi & Limousine Commission (TLC), and a strengthened deterrence strategy to eliminate repeat offenders. On paper, these goals are laudable. In practice, the proposal raises questions about timing, fairness, and credibility.
A Fee Structure Untethered from Operational Reality
The taxi and FHV industry is not opposed to enforcement or infrastructure investment. To be clear, the industry stakeholders are opposed to raising fees without first demonstrating need, proportionality or results.
In a December 2025 letter to the Port Authority, the University Transportation Research Center (UTRC) – a federally funded research consortium at City College of New York – urged the Port Authority to pause the proposal and conduct a comprehensive, mode-specific analysis before moving forward. The UTRC cited its many relevant reports for the Port Authority’s consideration.
UTRC’s Luxury Limousines & Airports: “First Class” Ground Transportation Partners (2024) and The Airport of the Future (2023) reports both emphasize that airport access fees should be mode-specific and proportionate to actual usage. Yet the Port Authority’s proposal ignores these distinctions entirely, charging limousines and black cars the same fee as Uber and Lyft, while continuing to charge taxis less, despite their comparable or greater infrastructure needs, including queueing areas, holding lots and curbside management resources.
The Port Authority has asserted that the fee increases are intended to “align” taxi and FHV pick-up and drop-off charges with those imposed by peer airports. However, in a presentation to the industry, the Port Authority acknowledged that its current taxi pick-up fee is less than one-half the peer-group average, and that – even after the proposed three-year phase-in – the taxi rate will remain significantly below the current peer-group average.
Claims of “alignment with peer airports” therefore ring hollow. National benchmarking shows that PANYNJ’s fee structure is an outlier, not a norm. To support its claim that the fee increase is reasonable, the Port Authority cites the $5-$6 fees charged at airports such as LAX, San Francisco and Washington-Dulles. But there is a critical omission in that comparison: those airports charge only for pick-ups, whereas the Port Authority charges for both pick-ups and drop-offs.
When evaluated on an apples-to-apples basis, the Port Authority’s current FHV fees are already aligned with peer airports, and the new fees will place them well above peer norms. The result is not alignment, but a materially-distorted fee structure that overcharges FHVs while continuing to undercharge taxis relative to their actual airport footprint.
Small Businesses Asked to Pay First, Again?
For licensed FHV operators, the fee increase is not a theoretical policy exercise. It is an immediate cost that must be passed on to customers. “As the President of the Chauffeured Transportation Association of New Jersey (CTANJ), which represents all licensed limousine and ground transportation providers in our state, we are deeply concerned about the… 100% increase in airport access fees for For-Hire Vehicles,” said Michael P. Rose, President of CTANJ. “This increase [will] place an undue burden on small businesses and the passengers who choose legal, licensed operators.”
When the Port Authority adopted the existing fee structure in 2019, it promised improved driver facilities, better queue management and stronger enforcement against illegal operators. Six years later, those commitments remain largely unmet. For many in the industry, Operation Legal Ride sounds uncomfortably familiar – another future-oriented enforcement promise being used to justify immediate fee increases, without accountability for past failures.
Enforcement Promises vs. Enforcement Reality
No one disputes that illegal and unlicensed operators are a serious problem at the region’s airports. The question is whether the Port Authority should be raising fees on compliant operators before proving it can effectively enforce existing rules.
UTRC’s report, Combating Illegal and Unlicensed For-Hire Vehicle Drivers (2025), prepared with The Black Car Fund and CTANJ, documents widespread in-terminal hustling and online illegal activity – particularly at JFK Airport – occurring openly and repeatedly in plain sight of enforcement personnel. An investigation by CATNJ found that rogue operators continue to operate daily at airports, costing the Port Authority millions in lost fees each year. According to CTANJ President Mike Rose, “Licensed operators are at a competitive disadvantage because we must pass these fees on to our clients, while illegal operators do not.”
The irony is that every illegal trip results in lost access fees, penalties and revenue for the Port Authority. Raising fees on licensed operators while allowing illegal operators to continue unchecked is not revenue optimization – it is revenue leakage. If Operation Legal Ride is truly a priority, many operators ask why meaningful, visible enforcement has not already been implemented using the millions in access fees previously collected.
Choosing Winners and Losers: The Port Santa’s “Naughty & Nice List”
The fee hike also entrenches inequities among travelers and operators. The new fee structure “blatantly favors yellow taxis while squeezing the riders and drivers who rely on FHVs,” said Ira Goldstein, Executive Director of The Black Car Fund. “A Manhattan taxi rider pays nothing to get dropped at the airport, while working-class families from the outer boroughs [will] be hit with new fees simply because they depend on FHVs.”
Despite the Port Authority’s claim that taxis and FHVs are both part of the “lifeblood” of its airports, the fee structure tells a different story – one that continues preferential treatment for taxis while imposing disproportionate costs on other modes that serve underserved communities. As Director Goldstein put it, “That isn’t transportation policy. It’s the Port Authority choosing winners and losers, and it punishes the very communities taxis have ignored for decades.”
Black cars and limousines are cooperative players who help reduce airport congestion and should be on Santa’s “nice list”, as opposed to the hustlers, illegal solicitors and other vehicles that clog the airport roadways and create congestion. Taxicabs, while a valuable and essential part of the ground transportation ecosystem, seem to always obtain preferential treatment. For-hire vehicle industry advocates argue that they do not promote service to underserved communities. While taxis may be more affordable as a service, the disparity between fares and fees is so great at this point that the Port itself has created unfair competition and an uneven playing field, when it should be bringing the industries together rather than picking favorites.
A Better Holiday Gift for the Industry?
The chauffeured transportation industry does not oppose investments in enforcement, modernization or fair funding mechanisms. What it opposes is a fee-first, data-later approach that ignores research, past experiences and market realities. In sum, the industry should receive their gifts of past promises to enhance enforcement before they pay any additional fees, as it is impossible to get a refund for fees paid if the Port does not deliver on its promises. Unlike returning holiday gifts in stores, tolls and fees go up and never come down.
The issue is of such concern that even the National Limousine Association (NLA) has become involved, writing a letter in which the possibility of legal action and litigation was raised. There is nothing like a nice lawsuit to stuff into the Port’s stocking in response to its gift of coal tolls to the industry. The CTANJ, the NLA and the UTRC have all urged the Port Authority to:
- Release a transparent, mode-specific impact analysis;
- Demonstrate measurable enforcement results against illegal operators;
- Reevaluate fee levels based on actual operational burdens; and
- Engage meaningfully with licensed operators before imposing changes.
Until those steps are taken, Operation Legal Ride risks becoming yet another promise funded on the backs of compliant operators, while the underground market continues to thrive. For an industry built on professionalism, safety and compliance, that is not aligned with best practices. It is a repeat of past mistakes.
Buses are NOT Spared from the Port’s Holiday Cheer: Airport Fees are Only One Piece of a Much Larger Cost Increase
In addition to airport access fees, the Port Authority is increasing tolls across its bridges and tunnels (Lincoln and Holland Tunnels, the George Washington Bridge, the Bayonne Bridge, the Goethals Bridge and the Outerbridge Crossing). For autos and motorcycles, the Port Authority is phasing out the existing $2 E-ZPass off-peak discount that applies during substantial portions of the day, including weekday off-peak hours and large weekend windows. The discount would be reduced by $0.50 per year over four years, beginning January 2027, ultimately eliminating the off-peak incentive entirely in January 2030.
At the same time, the Port Authority is implementing sweeping changes to bus tolls, which is an area of particular concern for group transportation, commuter services, and charter operators. Currently, all buses pay an $18 toll. Bus tolls will be restructured into three new categories beginning July 11, 2026, and escalate annually:
- Minibuses will see tolls rise to $21 in 2026, followed by annual increases reaching $27 by 2034.
- Two-axle buses will increase to $23 in 2026 and then escalate sharply to $50 by 2034.
- Three-axle buses will jump to $25 in 2026, climbing to $55 by 2034.
Off-peak E-ZPass bus tolls will be set at 80% of peak rates, while Toll-by-Mail charges will be calculated at 145% of peak E-ZPass rates. After 2034, bus tolls will be subject to annual inflation-based increases tied to the Consumer Price Index (CPI). These toll increases will be compounded further by proposed changes at the Port Authority Bus Terminal and the future Midtown Bus Terminal (MBT). Among the proposals under consideration are new arrival fees for revenue bus trips – meaning operators would pay for departures, as they do today, and for arrivals.
Short-haul bus arrival and departure fees will begin at $2 and increase annually, with a substantial additional increase when the new MBT opens. Long-haul bus fees will start at $30 per arrival and departure, escalate annually, and then be recalculated at 2.5 times the short-haul rate once the new terminal opens. Minibus fees will be set at 75% of the short-haul rate.
In the new MBT, all bus fees will be subject to automatic annual increases of at least 3%, with additional “true-ups” to keep pace with expense growth. CPI-based escalators for gate and parking fees will be replaced with a flat 5% annual increase and a new parking fee of $3.4 million per month – nearly triple the current rate – also subject to automatic escalation.
Can We Hope for a Happy, Healthy & Affordable New Year?!
Airport access fees, bridge and tunnel tolls, bus tolls and bus terminal arrival and departure fees are all moving in the same direction, at the same time, and largely borne by the same set of compliant operators and passengers. For licensed FHV and bus operators, these increases stack on top of one another. Each new fee compounds the last, and each ultimately flows through to the traveling public.
The industry stakeholders do not oppose investment, enforcement or modernization – it opposes a fee-first approach that raises costs while relying on future promises to justify present burdens. Before imposing additional airport access fees, the private ground transportation industry feels that the Port Authority should have first shown that illegal operators – who pay none of these charges – are being meaningfully removed from the system and published a transparent, mode-specific impact analysis. The Port Authority did neither and risks driving passengers toward unregulated operators, weakening compliant small businesses and eroding trust in the fairness of the system.
Very conveniently, the fees were pushed ahead with little to no notice on an abrupt schedule coinciding with the retirement of Rick Cotton as Executive Director of the Port, to clear a path for the NY Governor’s incoming Executive Director, Kathryn Garcia. Not only is the timing poor, suspicious and wrong on all levels, but the change appears to be portrayed as a “done deal.” This change was not on anyone’s holiday gift wish list, and the industry and the passengers it serves do not deserve coal in their stockings after all of the inconveniences suffered with airport redevelopment construction, rising air travel costs and inflation, and a lack of enforcement to protect the public from illegal and unsafe operators.
