Discussion
MX7 said:
http://www.nextgreencar.com/car-tax/calculator.php
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] MANUAL - £280
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] AUTOMATIC - £490
How can that be when only post 2006 cars pay the higher rate of tax?VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] MANUAL - £280
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] AUTOMATIC - £490
TameRacingDriver said:
MX7 said:
http://www.nextgreencar.com/car-tax/calculator.php
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] MANUAL - £280
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] AUTOMATIC - £490
How can that be when only post 2006 cars pay the higher rate of tax?VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] MANUAL - £280
VOLVO V70 T5 [2001] AUTOMATIC - £490
SO WHAT? That's £195 difference or £16.25 a month which is <3 Gallons of Fuel, or about 75 miles in fuel, or about 4 pints of beer or 40 fags.
If you cant stomach an 4 pint monthly difference in cost terms to drive a car that does comparatively poor MPG, then you should not be looking at buying one.
A 630 on a 56 plate will cost you what £10k, a 530...£7k, thats a £3k difference. Mug
If you cant stomach an 4 pint monthly difference in cost terms to drive a car that does comparatively poor MPG, then you should not be looking at buying one.
A 630 on a 56 plate will cost you what £10k, a 530...£7k, thats a £3k difference. Mug
big_boz said:
SO WHAT? That's £195 difference or £16.25 a month which is <3 Gallons of Fuel, or about 75 miles in fuel, or about 4 pints of beer or 40 fags.
If you cant stomach an 4 pint monthly difference in cost terms to drive a car that does comparatively poor MPG, then you should not be looking at buying one.
A 630 on a 56 plate will cost you what £10k, a 530...£7k, thats a £3k difference. Mug
I would agree - I pay top rate and its an irritation... I know how much it is but I still think, really, that much? If you cant stomach an 4 pint monthly difference in cost terms to drive a car that does comparatively poor MPG, then you should not be looking at buying one.
A 630 on a 56 plate will cost you what £10k, a 530...£7k, thats a £3k difference. Mug
It's an irritation because I probably do around 5-8k per year in my car and it probably emits less co2 or harmful particles than most company / commuter diesels that have a ved a third of what I pay.
bp1000 said:
I would agree - I pay top rate and its an irritation... I know how much it is but I still think, really, that much?
It's an irritation because I probably do around 5-8k per year in my car and it probably emits less co2 or harmful particles than most company / commuter diesels that have a ved a third of what I pay.
My view is that it is of no consequence what anyone else pays, you can either afford to run a car or you can't. If you can't, then don't buy it, buy what you can afford.It's an irritation because I probably do around 5-8k per year in my car and it probably emits less co2 or harmful particles than most company / commuter diesels that have a ved a third of what I pay.
I assume, that if you (the royal you that is not you specifically) are considering buying a £7-10k pound "old" BMW you are not going to be in the market for a brand new BMW 320ED that will cost you 3-4 times as much to buy but feck all in VED but loose you a boat load in depreciation.
If you can't afford the global running costs of a car then don't buy it, simple as that, don't moan about the governments VED price structure, there are far more important things to worry about like getting a better job to earn more money to afford a better car.
A lex said:
VED in the UK is cheap.
Stop complaining!
That doesnt stop the structure of it being rediculous, to be able to have two identical cars, one registered a day after the other and to have to pay nearly double VED on it is plain stupid.Stop complaining!
It wouldnt be so bad if we weren't lead to believe its all so we can save the fairies....
big_boz said:
My view is that it is of no consequence what anyone else pays, you can either afford to run a car or you can't. If you can't, then don't buy it, buy what you can afford.
I assume, that if you (the royal you that is not you specifically) are considering buying a £7-10k pound "old" BMW you are not going to be in the market for a brand new BMW 320ED that will cost you 3-4 times as much to buy but feck all in VED but loose you a boat load in depreciation.
If you can't afford the global running costs of a car then don't buy it, simple as that, don't moan about the governments VED price structure, there are far more important things to worry about like getting a better job to earn more money to afford a better car.
Did you not consider that I may be on about the principle?I assume, that if you (the royal you that is not you specifically) are considering buying a £7-10k pound "old" BMW you are not going to be in the market for a brand new BMW 320ED that will cost you 3-4 times as much to buy but feck all in VED but loose you a boat load in depreciation.
If you can't afford the global running costs of a car then don't buy it, simple as that, don't moan about the governments VED price structure, there are far more important things to worry about like getting a better job to earn more money to afford a better car.
The additional cost is pocket money but that's just plain not relevant...
Sump said:
big_boz said:
My view is that it is of no consequence what anyone else pays, you can either afford to run a car or you can't. If you can't, then don't buy it, buy what you can afford.
I assume, that if you (the royal you that is not you specifically) are considering buying a £7-10k pound "old" BMW you are not going to be in the market for a brand new BMW 320ED that will cost you 3-4 times as much to buy but feck all in VED but loose you a boat load in depreciation.
If you can't afford the global running costs of a car then don't buy it, simple as that, don't moan about the governments VED price structure, there are far more important things to worry about like getting a better job to earn more money to afford a better car.
Did you not consider that I may be on about the principle?I assume, that if you (the royal you that is not you specifically) are considering buying a £7-10k pound "old" BMW you are not going to be in the market for a brand new BMW 320ED that will cost you 3-4 times as much to buy but feck all in VED but loose you a boat load in depreciation.
If you can't afford the global running costs of a car then don't buy it, simple as that, don't moan about the governments VED price structure, there are far more important things to worry about like getting a better job to earn more money to afford a better car.
The additional cost is pocket money but that's just plain not relevant...
Besides there is no "on principle" basis for an argument here, complaining about one small element of the global cost of running a car is totally irrelevant. Would you go into a restaurant and upon ordering the most expensive thing on the menu (which you can not afford) ask for certain ingredients to be omitted or replaced with a cheaper alternative to reduce the cost...no you wouldn't as that would be ludicrous.....
VED is part of running a car in this country, if you don't like it no one is being forced into paying high rate VED are they? perhaps to begin with those wanting a new car post the cut off in 2006 got a bad deal but not now, if you choose to buy a post cut off 06 car on a high rate that is your choice.
In this specific case, there are plenty of pre-cut off 05/55/06 plate 630's kicking about that will be on the £275 (i think) max, get one of them, problem avoided, makes the 530 look expensive to tax, but wait there is still the issue of it costing c£3k more to buy for a car that is basically the same but with less doors, less practicality etc....which "on principle" means you are being ripped off by paying more for something with less.....
TameRacingDriver said:
£210 difference might be pocket money to some of you, but in the real world, to most people, that is a significant amount of money. And not all "Band M" cars are high powered V8s, some post 2006 fairly average family cars fall into that category.
TRD, back to my point, if £210 (£17.50 a month) is a lot of money to someone they probably shouldn't be driving a car at all, as £210 IS f
k ALL in terms of the total annual cost of motoring.big_boz said:
TRD, back to my point, if £210 (£17.50 a month) is a lot of money to someone they probably shouldn't be driving a car at all, as £210 IS fk ALL in terms of the total annual cost of motoring.
Fair enough, although perhaps a more realistic way to look at it is £490 a year is £41 a month, which is a fair chunk for a piece of paper - that's about 250 miles of fuel in the Puma.k ALL in terms of the total annual cost of motoring.Agree though if that's a problem buy a cheaper car. I still think its unfairly structured and a rip-off, though.
TameRacingDriver said:
Fair enough, although perhaps a more realistic way to look at it is £490 a year is £41 a month, which is a fair chunk for a piece of paper - that's about 250 miles of fuel in the Puma.
But the Puma doesn't cost £490 in tax 
The cars with £490 VED won't be getting anything like as good a mileage.TameRacingDriver said:
Fair enough, although perhaps a more realistic way to look at it is £490 a year is £41 a month, which is a fair chunk for a piece of paper - that's about 250 miles of fuel in the Puma.
Agree though if that's a problem buy a cheaper car. I still think its unfairly structured and a rip-off, though.
Ah but you already agreed with me in another thread that you bought your high rate motor without think about the full cost of the experience Agree though if that's a problem buy a cheaper car. I still think its unfairly structured and a rip-off, though.
I am having a slow day so lets do some maths........and ignore insurance
So lets say the 630 does what 30MPG? (33MPG if you believe some PH's but i will use 30) at 7k miles a year that will cost about £1500 of fuel a year, plus its going to loose what 10% of its value in that same year, so another £1000, plus the MOT and service will be what another £250 at least. so that's a total of c.£2750, not accounting for any other eventualities, so plus the VED and you are looking at say £3250 for one years motoring....Agree? where the VED is 15% of the total....now ramp the miles up a bit to say 10k and the fuel cost goes up £600 so its cost you £3650 for you motoring for the year.
Now the 5 is going to cost the same in all respects as the 6 but you save £190 in VED annually, which over 10k miles is 0.5% of your total annual motoring cost......there is no argument here, "on principle" or otherwise, its a half a % difference in overall cost.
Mr2Mike said:
But the Puma doesn't cost £490 in tax The cars with £490 VED won't be getting anything like as good a mileage.
Never said it did cost that, just saying that the £41 PCM of tax that a Band M costs would give 250 miles of driving in my cheaper car, which to some people (those not on PH, obviously) is still a fair little chunk of money. The cars with £490 VED won't be getting anything like as good a mileage.I am not that skint myself, but I see some people who barely scrape by with a single spare penny to their name, although clearly, said people who be quite foolish to own a car with that VED duty, but then not everyone is an expert on cars, may not realise that their Mondeo V6, when they buy it, costs that much in tax.
I guess I was just trying to illustrate, poorly perhaps, that £500 a year is a fairly high expense for some individuals / families, for what may not be an extravagant car.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff