Road pricing is increasingly proposed as a policy tool to address urban challenges such as congestion, pollution, and infrastructure funding. However, public acceptance of such policies often hinges on perceptions of fairness, particularly regarding cost distribution and revenue allocation. This study investigates how Dutch citizens perceive the fairness and acceptability of road pricing schemes, with a focus on revenue redistribution strategies. The knowledge gap lies in the limited understanding of how the Dutch public perceives the fairness and acceptability of such policies, particularly concerning fairness dimensions, revenue allocation strategies, and socio-demographic influences. Using a three-stage methodology—literature review, expert interviews, and a public survey—this research explores key fairness dimensions, including procedural, distributive, horizontal, vertical, and geographical equity. Findings reveal that fairness perceptions are shaped by factors such as car ownership, residential context, and transparency in communication. Distance-based and emission-based pricing models are generally perceived as fairest, particularly by non-car owners. Preferences for revenue use, such as reinvestment in public transport or tax reductions, significantly influence acceptance. Car owners tend to perceive road pricing policies, including distance-based, emission-based, and congestion pricing, as less fair compared to non-car owners, who generally view these schemes more positively. Moreover, non-car owners show stronger support for allocating revenues to public transport and tax reductions, while car owners prefer investments in road infrastructure. The study highlights the importance of transparent communication, inclusive policy design, and visible societal benefits in fostering public support. By developing a conceptual model, this research provides theoretical insights and practical recommendations for equitable and publicly acceptable road pricing policies in the Netherlands and beyond.