> Are there plans to tax traditional cabs by an amount commensurate with their cruising time?
Traditional taxis already pay a steep annual franchise fee to the city (even after it was cut down on recent years, probably in part because less-taxed rideshares reduced the level of franchise fee that was supportable).
Franchise fees also benefits the taxi companies. It constrains the supply to taxis, thus shielding the taxi companies from potential competition. They're paying for protection from competition.
> Franchise fees also benefits the taxi companies.
In the presence of a substitute service not subject to them, they do not.
Actually, since there seems to be both a non-automatic approval process and a franchise fee, they don't really even without such competition; the approval process shields them from competition, the franchise fee is a pure cost. (Of course, there is a linkage between the two, but as long as the process is in place, incumbent taxi firms benefit from minimizing the fee.)
Traditional taxis already pay a steep annual franchise fee to the city (even after it was cut down on recent years, probably in part because less-taxed rideshares reduced the level of franchise fee that was supportable).