VED becomes a road tax
Comments
-
While that is sensible it won't happen as the road haulage industry kicks off big time whenever it is mooted as it will cost them a lot more.It's quite bizarre that they come up with more and more ridiculous taxation solutions instead of doing the blindingly obvious and getting rid of it altogether (and all the costs that go with it's application and administration) and just sticking it on the price of fuel - thus penalising the heavy users!0 -
Wait, what, my VED is going to drop from £260 to £140 a year? Need to have a coffee and come back to that chart..
Nope. Brand new customers only!!0 -
NEW cars people. NEW cars. No-one's tax is going up or down because you cannot possibly own that car yet.
FWIW, I cannot fathom this system. It makes very little sense. A new VW Up Bluemotion is currently free but will be £140 a year.
My Caravelle is currently £240 a year but, a new one, will be £1200, then £140 but, if you paid over £40k, add the supplement. That's going to hurt that market. But be really good for pre registered cars and discounts. Used market will be brilliant.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
It puts cyclists into the same bracket as horseriders, pedestrians and Nissan Leaf drivers.Indeed, not good news for cycling. As VED will actually pay for the roads the argument that cyclists are somehow 'freeloaders' will only get louder.
I wouldn't worry ....0 -
It's quite bizarre that they come up with more and more ridiculous taxation solutions instead of doing the blindingly obvious and getting rid of it altogether (and all the costs that go with it's application and administration) and just sticking it on the price of fuel - thus penalising the heavy users!
+++ about a million!
I keep saying this - either put extra tax on fuel and make those who drive more, pay more or put up the price of the MOT and make it emissions based, rated by the measured emissions rather than original manuf quoted figures.
Either way, you can do away with a whole government department and alot of beurocracy and enforcement.0 -
The MPS is a 2.3 not a 2.5 (I'm looking at a Cx-7 2.3 turbo)
If this road tax model was used now I wouldn't have my 2ltr Mazda 6, I would have th 2.5ltr turbo all wheel drive MPS version - which puts out nearly double the emissions my car does (I pay £250 a month VED)...So as I have only ever bought secondhand cars, I can look forward to paying £140 road tax irrespective of my cars emissions. Yippee!
Or am I being dumb...
That's pretty much right, unless you buy an electric car.
I'm not sure how this encourages someone like me to go green.
This move doesn't encourage people to go green, but the old system didn't either, it just made people pay more for not doing it, it had no perceivable impact on new car buying decisions (and once they are on the roads they will be sold on and used by somebody) so were a waste of time and effort.Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
This move doesn't encourage people to go green, but the old system didn't either, it just made people pay more for not doing it, it had no perceivable impact on new car buying decisions
Actually it did. We bought a second car a couple years ago and one of the prime requirements was no more than £30/year VED. I'm not saying that it has hugely swung the market but I suspect that a reasonable number of people who were after a low-cost runabout will have factored it into their decision.
_0 -
Yeah, it would have made a difference for me if my car wasn't a hand me down from parents. A 5 series for one person is a bit OTT, and not particularly practical for slinging a bike in.This move doesn't encourage people to go green, but the old system didn't either, it just made people pay more for not doing it, it had no perceivable impact on new car buying decisions
Actually it did. We bought a second car a couple years ago and one of the prime requirements was no more than £30/year VED. I'm not saying that it has hugely swung the market but I suspect that a reasonable number of people who were after a low-cost runabout will have factored it into their decision.
_
But +another million for abolishing the lot and just putting it onto petrol duty0 -
+ 1 for sticking it on road duty. It is also good politics as you paint yourself as helping the planet as well as the little old ladies who drive 3 miles a week0
-
While that is sensible it won't happen as the road haulage industry kicks off big time whenever it is mooted as it will cost them a lot more.It's quite bizarre that they come up with more and more ridiculous taxation solutions instead of doing the blindingly obvious and getting rid of it altogether (and all the costs that go with it's application and administration) and just sticking it on the price of fuel - thus penalising the heavy users!
Also got rather a lot to do with the Civil Service making sure that there are still jobs for the boys!
Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
Yes and no. Civil service doesn't have a lot of love for the Tories, and the current pay freeze (ok, 1% for next 4 years) isn't much appreciated either. Given the cuts Tories are looking to make I'd have thought taking out a department would have made sense for them. And actually made sense in general.
While that is sensible it won't happen as the road haulage industry kicks off big time whenever it is mooted as it will cost them a lot more.It's quite bizarre that they come up with more and more ridiculous taxation solutions instead of doing the blindingly obvious and getting rid of it altogether (and all the costs that go with it's application and administration) and just sticking it on the price of fuel - thus penalising the heavy users!
Also got rather a lot to do with the Civil Service making sure that there are still jobs for the boys!
I'm sure they could arrange some sort of rebate for haulage that gradually gets phased out over the next 10 years.
Ho hum0 -
-
It puts cyclists into the same bracket as horseriders, pedestrians and Nissan Leaf drivers.Indeed, not good news for cycling. As VED will actually pay for the roads the argument that cyclists are somehow 'freeloaders' will only get louder.
I wouldn't worry ....
I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it. At least not at source.
So, your typical too dull to understand how VED works motorist will now be intelligent enough to realise that road tax IS paying for the roads and that anything which emits will be taxed. He'd be wrong on the first point to an extent but our road tax argument has just been significantly watered down to make the explanation far far more convoluted.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
A bicycle does not emit CO2. A Nissan Leaf does not emit CO2.I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it.
A human being emits CO2 all day long whether they're riding a bicycle, driving a Nissan Leaf or sitting in the pub watching the football.0 -
A bicycle does not emit CO2. A Nissan Leaf does not emit CO2.I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it.
A human being emits CO2 all day long whether they're riding a bicycle, driving a Nissan Leaf or sitting in the pub watching the football.
That! And both the bike and the Nissan Leaf will have significant carbon footprint through the supply chain that designed and built them and, in the Leaf's case, in it's day to day use (where do you think that electricity comes from?). So all a load of old bollocks, as is usual with a "green" argument that relies on ONE component of measurement to provide the data by which everything is judged rather than considering the whole sustainability of the product.Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
You're absolutely right - and I've written a thread elsewhere suggesting that PHEVs are an environmental blind alley.
A bicycle does not emit CO2. A Nissan Leaf does not emit CO2.I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it.
A human being emits CO2 all day long whether they're riding a bicycle, driving a Nissan Leaf or sitting in the pub watching the football.
That! And both the bike and the Nissan Leaf will have significant carbon footprint through the supply chain that designed and built them and, in the Leaf's case, in it's day to day use (where do you think that electricity comes from?). So all a load of old ****, as is usual with a "green" argument that relies on ONE component of measurement to provide the data by which everything is judged rather than considering the whole sustainability of the product.
My point about horses, Leafs and pedestrians is that, like cyclists, none will pay VED/road tax/whatever it will be called. We could all said to be 'free-loaders' on road use ....0 -
A bicycle does not emit CO2. A Nissan Leaf does not emit CO2.I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it.
A human being emits CO2 all day long whether they're riding a bicycle, driving a Nissan Leaf or sitting in the pub watching the football.
YOU know that, I know that. But it makes no difference. When using a bike we humans emit C02. That very tenuous link will now be the popular claim of white van men everywhere. It makes no difference whether it is a fallacy. Before we could claim that, even if taxed, we'd be zero rated. Now we cannot. Because it doesn't matter is the bike is stationary or that the bike is not a NEW one. All that matters is that there is a shred of an argument to make. And make it someone will.My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
One of the big contributors in the Leaf's carbon footprint will be from the manufacture of the batteries10
-
One of the big contributors in the Leaf's carbon footprint will be from the manufacture of the batteries1
Not to mention that they can't be properly recycled so are landfill at the end of their very limited life.
As I said, if you want to be green then you need to look at the whole life cycle of the product and how sustainable that is, not just what does or doesn't come out of the exhaust!Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
One of the big contributors in the Leaf's carbon footprint will be from the manufacture of the batteries1
Issue is more around emissions than around total carbon footprint.
Though the impression I get from the car industry is that when electricity is used to power the car, the car operates much more energy efficiently as well.
let me put it this way, I'd much rather be sitting in traffic with a bunch of electric cars as a cyclist than a bunch of diesel engines.0 -
One of the big contributors in the Leaf's carbon footprint will be from the manufacture of the batteries1
Issue is more around emissions than around total carbon footprint.
Though the impression I get from the car industry is that when electricity is used to power the car, the car operates much more energy efficiently as well.
And that answer perfectly demonstrates the problem.
The issue shouldn't be around the emissions of the car, they should be around the emissions of the factories that made it, the ships and lorries that transported all the parts around the world, the emissions from the power plant that provided the energy to make it etc. AND the proportion of the car that can recycled once it's working life is over. The argument should be about the sustainability of the product with regard to environment, economy and social impact and NOT about what comes out of the exhaust.
As for you quoting the car industry saying that the electric cars they produce are great.............Trail fun - Transition Bandit
Road - Wilier Izoard Centaur/Cube Agree C62 Disc
Allround - Cotic Solaris0 -
You fell straight into the trap of thinking it had an effect, you bought a second hand car, so the gas guzzler you may otherwise have bought was sold to and driven by someone else, its the new car buying decisions you have to effect as once teh cars are on the road they stay there, someone spending 70K on a Range-Rover which costs £2 a mile in depreciation doesn't care about the VED. That is why it had no perceivable impact.This move doesn't encourage people to go green, but the old system didn't either, it just made people pay more for not doing it, it had no perceivable impact on new car buying decisions
Actually it did. We bought a second car a couple years ago and one of the prime requirements was no more than £30/year VED. I'm not saying that it has hugely swung the market but I suspect that a reasonable number of people who were after a low-cost runabout will have factored it into their decision.
_Currently riding a Whyte T130C, X0 drivetrain, Magura Trail brakes converted to mixed wheel size (homebuilt wheels) with 140mm Fox 34 Rhythm and RP23 suspension. 12.2Kg.0 -
So, your typical too dull to understand how VED works motorist will now be intelligent enough to realise that road tax IS paying for the roads and that anything which emits will be taxed. He'd be wrong on the first point to an extent but our road tax argument has just been significantly watered down to make the explanation far far more convoluted.
exactly, it had felt like we were just beginning to get a consensus built among the media who had mostly stopped printing daft stories about VED, and through the conciousness of the average motorist how VED really worked and why its nonsensical to claim cyclists should pay a "road tax"
and now, it doesnt matter a jot if the hypothecation of this only funds certain new roads, all the average motorist heard from Georges statement
"...new roads fund from the end of this decade – every single penny raised from VED in England will go into that fund to pay for that sustained investment our roads so badly need"
is "every single penny raised...fund...roads" and unconciously decided that it was something therefore called a road tax again, they wont understand its still emission based, they wont understand it only applies to new vehicles, or it only funds certain "new roads" and that theres still a barrel load of everyone elses money funding the roads so it doesnt matter a damn if I as a cyclist pay no VED.
and we are right back to "cyclists get all that infrastructure and dont pay a penny, my road tax pays for that as its a road,get out of my way Im a motorist" based arguments.0 -
Just stand tall with a D-Lock in your hand and tell him to fark off then.
A bicycle does not emit CO2. A Nissan Leaf does not emit CO2.I'm not sure it does. Whilst it applies to new cars the truth is that a cyclist does emit C02. A Nissan Leaf does not, as I understand it.
A human being emits CO2 all day long whether they're riding a bicycle, driving a Nissan Leaf or sitting in the pub watching the football.
YOU know that, I know that. But it makes no difference. When using a bike we humans emit C02. That very tenuous link will now be the popular claim of white van men everywhere. It makes no difference whether it is a fallacy. Before we could claim that, even if taxed, we'd be zero rated. Now we cannot. Because it doesn't matter is the bike is stationary or that the bike is not a NEW one. All that matters is that there is a shred of an argument to make. And make it someone will.
Either that, or just go - Na na na na na. And blow kisses.The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
One of the big contributors in the Leaf's carbon footprint will be from the manufacture of the batteries1
Issue is more around emissions than around total carbon footprint.
Though the impression I get from the car industry is that when electricity is used to power the car, the car operates much more energy efficiently as well.
And that answer perfectly demonstrates the problem.
The issue shouldn't be around the emissions of the car, they should be around the emissions of the factories that made it, the ships and lorries that transported all the parts around the world, the emissions from the power plant that provided the energy to make it etc. AND the proportion of the car that can recycled once it's working life is over. The argument should be about the sustainability of the product with regard to environment, economy and social impact and NOT about what comes out of the exhaust.
As for you quoting the car industry saying that the electric cars they produce are great.............
You're too focussed on climate change to get what I'm driving at.
Emissions are a much more immediate pollution issue - especially in London which is regularly breaching EU limits.
And I'm fairly sure the efficiency of electrical powered cars is borne out in the fuel efficiency of hybrid cars.
See it right from F1 through to road cars - principally because if you can store the energy, you can harvest the wastage from things like braking.
Sure, if you want to look at carbon emissions, you're right. But that's not the only issue here.0 -
Nice idea, wrong time. There just aren't enough zero emission cars available at the moment which are practical, useful and cheap enough available to the public at the moment. And it seems to punish people who are looking to buy a new car with a relatively efficient small petrol/diesel tdi car who might just say 'well if it isn't going to cost me much more in VED after the first year then I might as well get a new car with a bigger engine, or a 2nd hand car with an even bigger engine'
All this is going to cause is a weird spike and then trough for the car industry, and cause the 2nd hand market to go crazy.
Anyone have any idea how much C02 an average cyclist puts out per km?0 -
Anyone have any idea how much C02 an average cyclist puts out per km?
It doesn't matter. Because the cyclist sourced their carbon from food, which uses CO2 fixed from the atmosphere only a short time ago. Unlike fossil fuels which uses carbon fixed millions of years ago.0 -
Of course it matters. White van man will now be googling to ascertain if cyclists are zero emission. The answer he will find is that they are about 21g. So they are not. It doesn't matter whether the vehicle being used is zero emission and that the person driving a car is adding to their emission in any event. What matters is the headline that they will use.
Or something...... My blog: http://www.roubaixcycling.cc (kit reviews and other musings)
https://twitter.com/roubaixcc
Facebook? No. Just say no.0 -
You fell straight into the trap of thinking it had an effect, you bought a second hand car, so the gas guzzler you may otherwise have bought was sold to and driven by someone else, its the new car buying decisions you have to effect as once teh cars are on the road they stay there, someone spending 70K on a Range-Rover which costs £2 a mile in depreciation doesn't care about the VED. That is why it had no perceivable impact.This move doesn't encourage people to go green, but the old system didn't either, it just made people pay more for not doing it, it had no perceivable impact on new car buying decisions
Actually it did. We bought a second car a couple years ago and one of the prime requirements was no more than £30/year VED. I'm not saying that it has hugely swung the market but I suspect that a reasonable number of people who were after a low-cost runabout will have factored it into their decision.
_
Actually, we ended up buying new (though that wasn't our initial intent)...0 -
However after the first year everyone except zero emissions pays £140 per year.
Unless your car cost more than £40,000 in the first place in which case it's £310 per year for the first five years and £140 thereafter.
Got it? Good
It says cars over £40k "pay a supplement of £310 per year on top of the standard rate" for the first five years. So that might mean, say £2310 in the first year (assuming the highest emissions rate), then £500 for years 2-5, then £140. Doesn't it?0
