The Conservatives on Rolling Classic Car Tax

[johnfm]

martin84 said:

The public would be annoyed if they cut those things because there is plenty of money to pay for that. The Government spends too much money on nonsense. Dont we spend double the VED take on giving aid to nations with space programs?

Plenty of money?

Plenty of 'borrowed' money you mean?

[GavinPearson]

Riley Blue said:

B Huey said:

GavinPearson said:

Plus foreign vehicles driven in the UK would then pay tax according to usage, increasing revenues further.

Or they could will fill up before they get here.

Johnny Foreigner's being doing that for years, why would they want to fill up here - even now?

The petrol they bring over gets consumed, after a tankful they would have no choice but to contribute. Some revenue is better than none.

[gareth_r]

A change that would result in reduced Treasury income from VED? Not a chance!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18277311


Speaking in the House of Commons earlier in May, Treasury Minister Chloe Smith said: "The government announced in the Budget that they will consider whether Vehicle Excise Duty should be reformed to support the sustainability of public finances and to reflect the improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency.


English translation: "Ha ha! Suckers!".

Edited by gareth_r on Friday 8th June 09:27

[shakotan]

gareth_r said:

to reflect the improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency.

I don't understand this at all?

Because cars are more fuel efficient, but cost more to run because of the increase in fuel costs, VED should go up!?

[Murph7355]

shakotan said:

I don't understand this at all?

Because cars are more fuel efficient, but cost more to run because of the increase in fuel costs, VED should go up!?

Ignore the cost of fuel. Their aim to get more efficient cars on the roads has worked. So they are looking to now remove the carrot of reduced VED.

As mentioned, the reason they won't get rid of VED is why bother when they can tax you twice for essentially the same thing (VED and fuel duties)...

Ref revenue drops, to be honest until we get the country's finances on an even keel I think they should put a stop to any changes that cut revenue or give away more "free" stuff.

Focus ALL changes on cutting expenditure (which could include a revenue neutral change that costs less to administer), and the. As that gets under control start looking at tweaks elsewhere.

[BoRED S2upid]

Typical response from a politician. OP you will never hear from them again, this will be looked at for a few seconds and binned. Standard response to anything yes you have a good point but thanks to Labour we are unable to do anything until we sort out their mess, they will use this for the next 5 years.

[GavinPearson]

shakotan said:

gareth_r said:

to reflect the improvements in vehicle fuel efficiency.

I don't understand this at all?

Because cars are more fuel efficient, but cost more to run because of the increase in fuel costs, VED should go up!?

Kinda crazy when you consider that the most efficient vehicles pay zero car tax, and the least pay a fortune. As the Inland Revenue know the amount of car tax collected and the amount of fuel sold it would be easiest to just add the cost of maintaining roads to fuel.