RIP Car tax

DonDaddyD

The tax disc will become null and void as of October next year. Motorists will no longer need to display it in their vehicles as we move to an electronic system. Also the vehicle tax application will be made simpler.

All of which is supposed to tackle by enforcing harsher penalties on uninsured motorists. My initial thoughts were, whats to stop a person buying a car and driving it around the less savory parts of London knowing they have no insurance/license.

Any thoughts? Will this help to improve things on the road or potentially make them worse?

Source:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25398499
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25223631

Discuss

asprilla

I don't think it will have an impact.

I forgot to change my tax disc over for six months and nothing happened. Given the offence is failure to display a valid tax disc rather than have VED for your car I was committing a crime. However, since I had VED and ANPR would have shown this to be the case nothing happened.

No-one looks at tax discs.

There is someone driving around South London with a copy of my number plate anyway (this is a bonus when 'making good progress' on the motorway).

cyclingprop

I thought it was called road tax? </troll>

edhornby

as asprillia says, the police check on the APNR database and they know if you are untaxed/untested/uninsured so if they spot you it's blue lights and 'wind down the window sonny' they don't need to look at the printed disc

DrLex

Personally, I wish the Government had removed discs/disks completely and put 15p/litre on fuel.
As to the OP, ANPR has been in use for years, so can't see why there should be a flood of untaxed/uninsured vehicles in the skankier parts of London, unless he's thinking more of the likely increase in Bulgarian and Romanian numberplates... </rightwingtroll>

daviesee

DrLex wrote:

As to the OP, ANPR has been in use for years, so can't see why there should be a flood of untaxed/uninsured vehicles in the skankier parts of London, unless he's thinking more of the likely increase in Bulgarian and Romanian numberplates... </rightwingtroll>

Someone is testing the water for cheaper motoring.

DrLex

daviesee wrote:

Someone is testing the water for cheaper motoring.

*cough* red diesel *cough*

daviesee

DrLex wrote:

daviesee wrote:

Someone is testing the water for cheaper motoring.

*cough* red diesel *cough*

Additional cheapness then.

SteppenHerring

I don't know if it's been improved but the data can be dodgy.

I've long thought: 1) get rid of the VED, add the cost onto fuel 2) create an "insurance disk" that has to be displayed. Mind you, colour printers these days ...

tgotb

DrLex wrote:

*cough* red diesel *cough*

You're not supposed to drink it :shock:

EKE_38BPM

SteppenHerring wrote:

I don't know if it's been improved but the data can be dodgy.

Hopefully they've improved things in the six years since that story.

markhewitt1978

SteppenHerring wrote:

I don't know if it's been improved but the data can be dodgy.

I've long thought: 1) get rid of the VED, add the cost onto fuel 2) create an "insurance disk" that has to be displayed. Mind you, colour printers these days ...

Rough calculations a few people have done suggests the cost to add onto fuel would be 11-16p per litre. Which would not be palatable to most.

daviesee

markhewitt1978 wrote:

Rough calculations a few people have done suggests the cost to add onto fuel would be 11-16p per litre. Which would not be palatable to most.

Rough calculations shows me breaking even a 13p/litre so it is not too far off and would possibly encourage less car use.
Gets my vote.

markhewitt1978

Wheres for me any more than 1p per litre would end up costing me!

DrLex

daviesee wrote:

Rough calculations shows me breaking even a 13p/litre so it is not too far off and would possibly encourage less car use.
Gets my vote.

Just re-taxing my occasional-use planet-killing 4x4 and I'd be better off at anything up to 60p per litre.
However, more than 13p a litre would increase costs on my more frugal, yet daily-used-for-school-run hatchback.

bompington

The trouble with extra fuel duty is that it penalises people who live in rural areas. This may not in itself be such a bad thing - living a long way from where you work, shop or play is a luxury - but there are enough pressures towards mega-urbanisation as it is.

Plus I've just got a new job with a 45-mile-each-way commute...

DrLex

Oh, indeed, plus the transport associations' lobbyists would work hard to prevent it.
However, it does have the benefits of being unavoidable (notwithstanding red diesel), thereby saving admin costs and would encourage less vehicle use or more efficient vehicles. Sadly, motorists would still find another (erroneous) reason to moan at cyclists...

daviesee

bompington wrote:

The trouble with extra fuel duty is that it penalises people who live in rural areas. This may not in itself be such a bad thing - living a long way from where you work, shop or play is a luxury - but there are enough pressures towards mega-urbanisation as it is.

Plus I've just got a new job with a 45-mile-each-way commute...

Which is a prime example of why this Country is in such a mess.
There used to be more employment spread over more areas where people lived nearer their employment.
Nothing personal, just a good example.

bompington

daviesee wrote:

bompington wrote:

The trouble with extra fuel duty is that it penalises people who live in rural areas. This may not in itself be such a bad thing - living a long way from where you work, shop or play is a luxury - but there are enough pressures towards mega-urbanisation as it is.

Plus I've just got a new job with a 45-mile-each-way commute...

Which is a prime example of why this Country is in such a mess.
There used to be more employment spread over more areas where people lived nearer their employment.
Nothing personal, just a good example.

True. I'm always a bit surprised on the continent by the amount of industry spread around rural areas: personally I love "unspoiled" (i.e. empty) countryside, and I can understand the efficiencies of concentrating things into small areas, but if you compare the west coast of Norway, for example, with the west coast of the Highlands - similar terrain, weather, and transport difficulties - but in Norway there are viable communities, in Scotland there's almost nothing, and it's mainly because Norway has prioritised rural development.

daviesee

bompington wrote:

...and I can understand the efficiencies of concentrating things into small areas,..

A new debate could be opened up into efficiencies.
It is true that it is cheaper to centralise everything but if the employees have to travel then their wages have to cover this. I submit London or Aberdeen wages as a prime example. The low skill/poorer/cheaper workers may be centralised but the high skilled/wealthier/expensive workers tend to travel.
What is more efficient. Centralised industry, or centralised workers?

davmaggs

The trouble with VED is that it's become a fair whack of money per individual vehicle, so it's started to become prohibitive to own several motors designed for different tasks.

For example my Dad typically had a nice car for the family, and a car for odd jobs.In my case I'd like to have a small elderly van/SUV for runs to the tip and other projects, and have a car that is efficient for distance mileage.