Review of Road Tax ongoing.
Discussion
I don't agree with scrapping car tax and lumping extra on petrol because petrol is already 50p a litre too expensive. What we're seeing here is a Government trying to claw back lost revenue because their prior policies did exactly what they planned to (for a change) as they persuaded people into smaller cars.
What they're proposing here won't happen, it's a typical case of scaring people into accepting the less brutal alternative they already plan to bring in instead. Softening up the ground for something less horrible. One day the Government will catch onto the fact they actually tax motorists quite enough already and the solution to the deficit is not to tax the motorist more.
What they're proposing here won't happen, it's a typical case of scaring people into accepting the less brutal alternative they already plan to bring in instead. Softening up the ground for something less horrible. One day the Government will catch onto the fact they actually tax motorists quite enough already and the solution to the deficit is not to tax the motorist more.
Bluequay said:
Rego is very expensive in Australia. I just paid $712 for our little Hyundai i20 that we keep out there. That works out at around £480, I then have to pay another $400 (£250) on top of that for the Comprehensive element. In total it costs me less to insure and tax 2 similar cars over here!!
It depends on the state (and some states insurance is compulsory).I paid $535 rego for a 4L V6 Hilux. Insurance was another $500.
How about this.
Stop plundering an ever decreasing pot and increase revenue by encouraging business growth across the board and generate revenue from economic activity. What we need is tax cuts not more tax along with severe Government spending cuts (not the snipping around the edges we have had). As a country we spend to much and then expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.
Stop plundering an ever decreasing pot and increase revenue by encouraging business growth across the board and generate revenue from economic activity. What we need is tax cuts not more tax along with severe Government spending cuts (not the snipping around the edges we have had). As a country we spend to much and then expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.
The AA?
I'm all for scrapping it and lumping it onto fuel...the more you drive, the more you pollute, the more you pay. At present it is unfair. My wife has a Land Rover Disco, we live in a rural area, we will have a child soon and I wouldn't have her driving anything else. She does, at most 4000 miles per year yet has to pay almost £500 a year road tax based on Co2 per KM...meanwhile Johnny Eco in his 1 litre green mobile screams about doing 20000 miles in his car that produces half as much Co2 per KM yet chucks out X times as much in total.
I'm all for scrapping it and lumping it onto fuel...the more you drive, the more you pollute, the more you pay. At present it is unfair. My wife has a Land Rover Disco, we live in a rural area, we will have a child soon and I wouldn't have her driving anything else. She does, at most 4000 miles per year yet has to pay almost £500 a year road tax based on Co2 per KM...meanwhile Johnny Eco in his 1 litre green mobile screams about doing 20000 miles in his car that produces half as much Co2 per KM yet chucks out X times as much in total.
SLacKer said:
How about this.
Stop plundering an ever decreasing pot and increase revenue by encouraging business growth across the board and generate revenue from economic activity. What we need is tax cuts not more tax along with severe Government spending cuts (not the snipping around the edges we have had). As a country we spend to much and then expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.
That's just crazy talk. Stop plundering an ever decreasing pot and increase revenue by encouraging business growth across the board and generate revenue from economic activity. What we need is tax cuts not more tax along with severe Government spending cuts (not the snipping around the edges we have had). As a country we spend to much and then expect the tax payer to pick up the bill.
No. Far better to keep spanking working families with increasing levels of tax.
I note that oxygen remains untaxed.
Lotusevoraboy said:
The AA?
I'm all for scrapping it and lumping it onto fuel...the more you drive, the more you pollute, the more you pay. At present it is unfair. My wife has a Land Rover Disco, we live in a rural area, we will have a child soon and I wouldn't have her driving anything else. She does, at most 4000 miles per year yet has to pay almost £500 a year road tax based on Co2 per KM...meanwhile Johnny Eco in his 1 litre green mobile screams about doing 20000 miles in his car that produces half as much Co2 per KM yet chucks out X times as much in total.
Not to mention that his 1 litre green mobile or hybrid or whatever achieves nothing near the purported official fuel consumption or emission figures because he has to rag the backside off it to keep up.I'm all for scrapping it and lumping it onto fuel...the more you drive, the more you pollute, the more you pay. At present it is unfair. My wife has a Land Rover Disco, we live in a rural area, we will have a child soon and I wouldn't have her driving anything else. She does, at most 4000 miles per year yet has to pay almost £500 a year road tax based on Co2 per KM...meanwhile Johnny Eco in his 1 litre green mobile screams about doing 20000 miles in his car that produces half as much Co2 per KM yet chucks out X times as much in total.
One of my current vehicles produces consumption figures that are the closest to the published figures that I have ever had in any vehicle since consumption figures started. Coincidentally it is also manufactured by Land Rover.
FiF said:
One of my current vehicles produces consumption figures that are the closest to the published figures that I have ever had in any vehicle since consumption figures started. Coincidentally it is also manufactured by Land Rover.
One of mine does too! 12mpg in town, 12mpg on a run 
(Mk9 Jaguar) but hey, if it had been scrapped and replaced every 15 years, it would have been replaced by at least three new cars!martin84 said:
I don't agree with scrapping car tax and lumping extra on petrol because petrol is already 50p a litre too expensive. What we're seeing here is a Government trying to claw back lost revenue because their prior policies did exactly what they planned to (for a change) as they persuaded people into smaller cars.
What they're proposing here won't happen, it's a typical case of scaring people into accepting the less brutal alternative they already plan to bring in instead. Softening up the ground for something less horrible. One day the Government will catch onto the fact they actually tax motorists quite enough already and the solution to the deficit is not to tax the motorist more.
How's about we just get out of Europe and stop splurging dosh on that?What they're proposing here won't happen, it's a typical case of scaring people into accepting the less brutal alternative they already plan to bring in instead. Softening up the ground for something less horrible. One day the Government will catch onto the fact they actually tax motorists quite enough already and the solution to the deficit is not to tax the motorist more.
martin84 said:
I don't agree with scrapping car tax and lumping extra on petrol because petrol is already 50p a litre too expensive.
lets assume the government are not going to give up any revenue from the motorist, what better way can there be of taxing us? its about as efficient a tax as there is with almost zero collection costs, very minimal evasion and taxes us in direct proportion to how much we drive, with the added 'benefit' of punishing those with higher mpg's. conversely ved costs a fortune to collect, suffers from evasion, employs thousands to administer and enforce and creates absurd bands with no baring whatsoever on ones actual use of the roads. ved is a stupid tax and should be added to fuel duty...perdu said:
V88Dicky said:
Let's just go back about 20 years and charge everyone a flat rate for VED.
Once they started with different bands, it was only ever going to end in tears.
I have strong feelings in me water (yes matron, still taking the pills) that this is the best way around it all.Once they started with different bands, it was only ever going to end in tears.
I don't expect it will happen.
Charging minimal duty/tax for driving cars was bound to cause revenue to fall eventually...
Who'd a thought it?
'xcept us.
fbrs said:
martin84 said:
I don't agree with scrapping car tax and lumping extra on petrol because petrol is already 50p a litre too expensive.
lets assume the government are not going to give up any revenue from the motorist, what better way can there be of taxing us? its about as efficient a tax as there is with almost zero collection costs, very minimal evasion and taxes us in direct proportion to how much we drive, with the added 'benefit' of punishing those with higher mpg's. conversely ved costs a fortune to collect, suffers from evasion, employs thousands to administer and enforce and creates absurd bands with no baring whatsoever on ones actual use of the roads. ved is a stupid tax and should be added to fuel duty...We really are in a downward spiral arent we..
fbrs said:
lets assume the government are not going to give up any revenue from the motorist, what better way can there be of taxing us? its about as efficient a tax as there is with almost zero collection costs, very minimal evasion and taxes us in direct proportion to how much we drive, with the added 'benefit' of punishing those with higher mpg's. conversely ved costs a fortune to collect, suffers from evasion, employs thousands to administer and enforce and creates absurd bands with no baring whatsoever on ones actual use of the roads. ved is a stupid tax and should be added to fuel duty...
I think you underestimate how much evasion there actually is of fuel duty. A recent Panorama investigation showed how huge the black market for white diesel is in the UK. It is massive, much bigger than you'd think. The Government are literally spending millions on policing this and even respectable businesspeople running haulage firms are now saying they face a choice between using illegal fuel or going out of business. Fuel is 50p too expensive already.I could get on board with scrapping car tax, but we can't add any more to fuel duty without making ourselves horribly uncompetative. French diesel is already 30p a litre less than ours, you'd have to widen that gap to at least 50p a litre to make up the gap from scrapping VED. How could the Government push that as a good idea when their argument for cutting the top rate of income tax is it makes us uncompetative in comparison to other countries?
If I was tasked with raising more money from VED I'd do the following;
Change the first year rates to a system whereby the first owner pays 2% of the cars value for the first years tax. For example a Ford Focus 1.6 in Band G would cost £170 to tax first time. If that car cost around £16,000 that'd rise to £320 for the first year. It'd work well because even if the dealer knocked a few quid off to give the buyer the perception of dodging the higher tax, 2% of whatever the buyer pays still goes to the Government.
There's around 33 million registered vehicles in the UK with a total tax take of £7billion in VED, so around £210 per car. Switching pre-2001 cars to a flat tax rate of £195 a year and post-2001 cars to £245 a year would simplify the system. It'd skew - or maybe rebalance - the market for sure, because the Prius would no longer have a £10 tax disc and older small cars currently on cheap tax would then cost £195 to tax. Overall I think we'd double the take from the 'first year rates' and raise more from all the rest while giving PH's guzzlers a tax break
Change the first year rates to a system whereby the first owner pays 2% of the cars value for the first years tax. For example a Ford Focus 1.6 in Band G would cost £170 to tax first time. If that car cost around £16,000 that'd rise to £320 for the first year. It'd work well because even if the dealer knocked a few quid off to give the buyer the perception of dodging the higher tax, 2% of whatever the buyer pays still goes to the Government.
There's around 33 million registered vehicles in the UK with a total tax take of £7billion in VED, so around £210 per car. Switching pre-2001 cars to a flat tax rate of £195 a year and post-2001 cars to £245 a year would simplify the system. It'd skew - or maybe rebalance - the market for sure, because the Prius would no longer have a £10 tax disc and older small cars currently on cheap tax would then cost £195 to tax. Overall I think we'd double the take from the 'first year rates' and raise more from all the rest while giving PH's guzzlers a tax break
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff