Shit yeah, that would be like living in a free country and everything
Until someone drove their 'free' car into your wife and kids, leaving you with no recompense...
Car tax going up ^^^^
- Thread starter jusali
- Start date
Until someone drove their 'free' car into your wife and kids, leaving you with no recompense...
spanglechick
High Empress of Dressing Up
You don't have a problem with it though? Just do as you're told, it's good for the environment to pay more tax
i support 'polluter pays' taxes in principle. I think they should be extended further (and in relation to actual pollution - with massive taxes on air travel). I just don't see the logic behind older cars paying less tax.
nothing to do with "doing as i'm told". but thanks for taking the time and effort to be patronising.
roryer
道可道非常道，名可名非常名
Road pricing is a more obvious solution to straight fuel duty, those that drive most at peak times on busy roads cost the most to acomodate, so should therefore pay the most, a similar principle to peak time rail fares.
The other advantage of this is to remove the fixed costs of motoring, once you pay for the car, insurance, tax and MOT then the marginal cost of driving is quite low, just maintainence, parking and fuel.
There are now some insurance companies introducing pay as you drive.
Car clubs remove the need to buy a car.
If we can get road pricing then we will have succeeded in reducing fixed costs and increasing the marginal costs.
Oh good, so those of us who are good drivers, no accidents, full no claims subsidise the shit ones.....
... err, no thanks...
subversplat
writer of wrongs
I wondered when the "Me, me, me" mindset would appear. How about thinking of it like "All the people that would buy insurance normally being oh-so-generous and helping out all those people who are whacked by uninsured drivers"? A bit more philanthropical, like.Oh good, so those of us who are good drivers, no accidents, full no claims subsidise the shit ones.....
... err, no thanks...
Just going to lead to a lot more "cloned" cars on the road I reckon.
I think its very wrong that it is retrospective over the last 7 years even though it doesn't affect me as mine's pre-2001.
Might write to the government to ask what else I've done in the last few years that they are going to turn round and ask me to pay more tax on!!
Very easy to use VED band calulator here:
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/?deriv=19642
I think its very wrong that it is retrospective over the last 7 years even though it doesn't affect me as mine's pre-2001.
Might write to the government to ask what else I've done in the last few years that they are going to turn round and ask me to pay more tax on!!
Very easy to use VED band calulator here:
http://www.parkers.co.uk/cars/road-tax/?deriv=19642
fredfelt
Mostly unknown member
I seem to be the only on who disagrees. I think that a banded VED system is a good idea. I take for granted that it's a good idea to strive for cars that consume less oil and that we should aim to produce less emmisions from vehicles.
For example my gf brought a car with an engine small enough to be exempt from VED. Without this incentive she probably would have gone for a bigger car. I don't accept that people will buy a new car just for this reason thouth. This mechanism also encourage manufacturers to make cars in low VED emmision bands.
An extra couple of quid each time you full up is not really noticed and will not alter behaviour much. But make that cost an annual payment and people take notice.
I do take your point about the bureaucracy though. But I think the massive difference to consumption patterns when something appears to be free at the point of consumption vs paying for something upfront is worth it.
It may be unfair taxing someone who ownes a really big car and uses it rarely. However if they had a little car they would probably use it just the same amount.
But getting rid of VED and making petrol more pricey to compensate WOULDN'T make it "free at the point of consumption" would it?
It would actually move away from taxing you in one lump, after which "I've paid for it, might as well use it" towards more cost when you actually use it.
There are some things cars are good at, and actually quite economic while doing so: transporting a whole family together with their stuff on a long trip is one of them.
A little hatchback / city car won't be much good for that.
So it penalises the person who has a car for long trips with lots of stuff unfairly, is all.
All people have to do is buy a slightly older car, and they're sorted, though, so its all completely logical!
Giles..
fredfelt
Mostly unknown member
I knew you woudl pick up on 'free at the point of consumption'. I didn't think I would have to explain further than that to get the point across anyway it's clear there are pros and cons for each way and it's clear that we disagree here.
FWIW I think there's a lot to be said for replacing VED with taxes on fuel, because that puts the cost onto car use rather than ownership, thus increasing the marginal cost of driving - which at present is low, which in turn is one reason why Britons drive more than folk in a lot of other countries with similar levels of car ownership. It's also an incentive to use smaller and more fuel-efficient cars, and it achieves some of what road pricing would in terms of putting an additional cost on urban driving, since cars are least fuel-efficient around town. It's a much more sensible idea than a complicated, expensive and intrusive road pricing system.
1927
Funnier than he thinks he is.
haven't read the whole thread so soryy if this has already been done.
Total revenue from excise duty is approx 5billion a year, total sales of diesel+petrol is approx 50billion litres. Do the math, its 10p on a litre innit easy peasy for the chancellor.
Lets say you pay 150pounds a year in tax and average 8litres/100kmh you would be better off if you did under 18750 miles a year! (Is that right, seems high to me but cant see where i fucked up, if I have!!)
Now this figure would be unrealistic because total sales of diesel quoted include haulage industry and they would want a rebate to keep them competitive, but one of the reasons the break even figure will be higher than you might expect is that all those evading excise duty now have to pay up!
Total revenue from excise duty is approx 5billion a year, total sales of diesel+petrol is approx 50billion litres. Do the math, its 10p on a litre innit easy peasy for the chancellor.
Lets say you pay 150pounds a year in tax and average 8litres/100kmh you would be better off if you did under 18750 miles a year! (Is that right, seems high to me but cant see where i fucked up, if I have!!)
Now this figure would be unrealistic because total sales of diesel quoted include haulage industry and they would want a rebate to keep them competitive, but one of the reasons the break even figure will be higher than you might expect is that all those evading excise duty now have to pay up!
weltweit
Well-Known Member
So, I think cars registered before 2001 are exempt no?
We have two cars, each L reg (the reg letter is the first not the last no?)
I have no idea when they were first registered, does anyone know?
But they are also both diesels.
Will I stay one paying the £200 pa road tax or risk one of the new higher levels?
We have two cars, each L reg (the reg letter is the first not the last no?)
I have no idea when they were first registered, does anyone know?
But they are also both diesels.
Will I stay one paying the £200 pa road tax or risk one of the new higher levels?
Why should there be any relationship between Vehicle Excise and "emissions"?
A Prius driven 20,000 miles/year will kill more polar bears than a Dodge Viper that only gets out for the odd week-end blast........
We already have a (huge) tax related to fuel usage, (as well as the VAT that's slapped on top of it) so why should VED have anything to do with CO2 emissions - if there was any environmental concern, then why not factor in NO2 emissions as well - at least that'd tax buses off the road.
subversplat
writer of wrongs
It'll be on your Vc5 certificate
But yes, the first letter is the registation, but they all used to cover two years.
