Selling car - new road tax thievery rules??
Discussion
Oddly enough, as things worked out - purely by accident, I am buying a new car in a private sale - deal done and collect on Weds (1st Oct). The owner was going to tax the car for the benefit of purchaser - but it's due to start 1st Oct.
I told him there wasn't any point as we'd both end up paying for October.
According to the DVLA site, I can tax it online using details from the new keeper slip off the V5. I went onto the DVLA site to try to see what it asks for - but there's a radio button that says "existing keeper" on there - I assume that the additional option for "new keeper" will magically appear on 1st October.
I told him there wasn't any point as we'd both end up paying for October.
According to the DVLA site, I can tax it online using details from the new keeper slip off the V5. I went onto the DVLA site to try to see what it asks for - but there's a radio button that says "existing keeper" on there - I assume that the additional option for "new keeper" will magically appear on 1st October.
V8forweekends said:
Oddly enough, as things worked out - purely by accident, I am buying a new car in a private sale - deal done and collect on Weds (1st Oct). The owner was going to tax the car for the benefit of purchaser - but it's due to start 1st Oct.
I told him there wasn't any point as we'd both end up paying for October.
He can still tax it for you as long as he uses the V5C/2 slip and not the V5. If it is done with that, then the tax will stay on the car.I told him there wasn't any point as we'd both end up paying for October.
xRIEx said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
That was always the case, as not everyone sells their tax with their car. Many people would cash the tax in anyway, sell with no tax and the new buyer had to re-tax it. And DVLA would get paid twice for the one month. The only difference is now you have to cash the tax in.
Well yeah, that's the point - they're now enforcing a process which exclusively benefits them to the detriment of the 'customers'. You can cut it whichever way you want, it's still a stealth tax on car sales.FWIW, I've never removed the tax of a vehicle I've sold (or had to immediately tax one I've bought), it's been part of the negotiation.
confused_buyer said:
He can still tax it for you as long as he uses the V5C/2 slip and not the V5. If it is done with that, then the tax will stay on the car.
Does this apply even though it's due on 1st Oct? ETA Thinking about it surely I'd have to take ownership of the car BEFORE 1st Oct - if either of us puts the date of change down as 1st Oct, then that would surely trigger the "new" process?
Edited by V8forweekends on Monday 29th September 14:03
There is another great little stealth tax on it involving 1st registration tax amounts.
Where a car has a higher first tax disc fee, you can't get a refund. Therefore if, say, a dealer registers and taxes a car new as a demo and sells it after 2 months the whole first year tax gets lost and the new buyer has to retax.
Where a car has a higher first tax disc fee, you can't get a refund. Therefore if, say, a dealer registers and taxes a car new as a demo and sells it after 2 months the whole first year tax gets lost and the new buyer has to retax.
daemon said:
The positives are there is now only a 5% charge for taxing your car for six months instead of 12, so a saving there for a lot of people, AND you can now pay your road tax monthly, which may well help people with budgeting.
That can't be right. Apparently this is a money making scheme! 
JB! said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
g7jhp said:
The benefit to the new system is your tax is now aligned with your car insurance.
No it isn't. Most people don't take out car insurance when they get a new car, they just change the car on their existing policy.The way they staggered the tax and insurance tie up has been stupid. It's led to me keeping an old smoker for several months as i didn't want to try to sell it as SORN and i didn't want to have to pay to insure 2 vehicles as the insurance would probably have been more than the car is worth.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Yes, they might make some money on it, but to say it's a money making scheme is total crap. It's certainly a money saving scheme, as not printing and posting tax discs will save millions, and seeing as it's us that pays for the DVLA, that's gotta be a good thing.
You say this and I'm sure it's true, but it won't benefit you and I. We won't ever see any advantage to all these savings. They won't freeze road tax (yes, I know, it's not called that) for two years because they can afford to now they're saving all this cash. All that will happen is that the extra money raised (that which is no longer being spent) will disappear into the vast pot of public money. We, the people, won't get a penny off a litre or a shorter waiting time at our local NHS hospital or anything else. That cash will just vanish. It's a bit like those car parking machines which don't give change. The parking people will tell you that to buy and run those machines is cheaper for them, so the parking can be cheaper. That's nonsense. The parking is the same price as it is in places which give change, just the operator makes slightly more money from the ones which don't give change.
This is, really, the s
tty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would. Simon.
The whole road tax system is a mess anyway.
When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
confused_buyer said:
The whole road tax system is a mess anyway.
When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
They're losing a fortune on fuel revenue too because everyone is buying more efficient diesel, and now petrol cars.When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
As has been predicted, its only a matter of time before they raise taxes on the motorist in some form, but no doubt it'll be a "green tax" and be for our own good.
ferrariF50lover said:
This is, really, the stty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would.
Simon.
Explain how that would work with no disc. You buy a car and agree that the tax will stay in place. Then you get pulled for not having tax. The previous owner denies agreeing to hand over the balance of the tax and says it was agreed he'd cash it in.tty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would. Simon.
Then what?
confused_buyer said:
The whole road tax system is a mess anyway.
When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
Yep, you're bob-on.When they introduced the low tax bands, they didn't expect manufacturers to meet those CO2 levels or people to buy them.
Everyday, several £280+ tax cars get scrapped and several £0-£30 to tax cars go on the road to replace them. In 2-3 years time the revenues from road tax will fall off a cliff to the point it will cost more to run than it raises.
The question is when/if a government is going to have the courage to ramp up costs for the low emissions cars which will royally annoy everyone who bought them because of cheap road tax.
There's a real issue here. Everybody knows the official CO2/economy system has been thoroughly gamed, and the figures arising from it are totally unrepeatable in real life. Yet cars older than a few years old are significantly higher banded. So do they break the CO2-based tax somehow, or do they hit older cars (especially early CO2 taxed) stuff much harder than they intended?
One thing's for sure, when even stuff like Cayennes and Panameras is zero-cost VED, let alone £30 VED on E-classes and 5-series, the total tax income has clearly dropped like a stone. And, when there's a huge budget deficit, you can be it's not going to get ignored for long.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
Explain how that would work with no disc. You buy a car and agree that the tax will stay in place. Then you get pulled for not having tax. The previous owner denies agreeing to hand over the balance of the tax and says it was agreed he'd cash it in.
Then what?
There are a number of perfectly sensible options. Chief among them is that, since the tax belongs to the vehicle and not the driver, that the selling owner is disallowed from refunding the tax. The opposite of what happens under the new scheme. Then what?
The refunding of tax under certain circumstances is permitted (scrapping, sorning, exporting etc) but not at change of ownership. This way, at least cars aren't being taxed twice in a month and the [justified] calls of profiteering on the part of the Government are not so loud.
There are electronic options too, many and varied, all of which would mean that cars would not be taxed twice in a month.
Simon.
TwigtheWonderkid said:
ferrariF50lover said:
This is, really, the stty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would.
Simon.
Explain how that would work with no disc. You buy a car and agree that the tax will stay in place. Then you get pulled for not having tax. The previous owner denies agreeing to hand over the balance of the tax and says it was agreed he'd cash it in.tty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would. Simon.
Then what?
TooMany2cvs said:
Yep, you're bob-on.
There's a real issue here. Everybody knows the official CO2/economy system has been thoroughly gamed, and the figures arising from it are totally unrepeatable in real life. Yet cars older than a few years old are significantly higher banded. So do they break the CO2-based tax somehow, or do they hit older cars (especially early CO2 taxed) stuff much harder than they intended?
One thing's for sure, when even stuff like Cayennes and Panameras is zero-cost VED, let alone £30 VED on E-classes and 5-series, the total tax income has clearly dropped like a stone. And, when there's a huge budget deficit, you can be it's not going to get ignored for long.
What they need is some way of taxing these cars on their actual emissions, instead of the rubbish calculations from Europe. If only there was some way of taxing people on the actual fuel they use...There's a real issue here. Everybody knows the official CO2/economy system has been thoroughly gamed, and the figures arising from it are totally unrepeatable in real life. Yet cars older than a few years old are significantly higher banded. So do they break the CO2-based tax somehow, or do they hit older cars (especially early CO2 taxed) stuff much harder than they intended?
One thing's for sure, when even stuff like Cayennes and Panameras is zero-cost VED, let alone £30 VED on E-classes and 5-series, the total tax income has clearly dropped like a stone. And, when there's a huge budget deficit, you can be it's not going to get ignored for long.
shakotan said:
TwigtheWonderkid said:
ferrariF50lover said:
This is, really, the stty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would.
Simon.
Explain how that would work with no disc. You buy a car and agree that the tax will stay in place. Then you get pulled for not having tax. The previous owner denies agreeing to hand over the balance of the tax and says it was agreed he'd cash it in.tty end of the stick for the motorist (for the millionth time). The old system of having a little disc was certainly out of date, since nothing needs to be made of paper any more. However, this daft system of not being able to transfer tax is silly. The tax relates to the car, not the owner, so a change of ownership without any change to the car needn't affect the tax. The decision that it should was made by Government and, as we well know, any decision made by Government is made to benefit Government. That does, eventually and in a vastly reduced way, benefit you and I, but not to the same extent that the extra money in my pocket would. Simon.
Then what?
What if the buyer doesn't want the tax, as he may be exporting the vehicle, or not going to be using it for a few months? Or a trader who doesn't want to pay out for tax on a car that may sit in stock for a long time.
Sorry, compulsory transfer of tax is a rubbish idea.
Gassing Station | General Gassing | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff