The Budget - Band G Tax £1000!

clv, can you explain why the following facts are just:

a) An X plate 530i Sport Automatic develops 260g/km of C02. It will remain within the current taxation regieme but will rise to £200 a year.
b) A 51 plate 530i Sport Manual develops 228g/km of C02. Taxation appears to rise to £430 a year.

Can you explain why chosing the lower polluting car means tax thats more twice the amount?

Also it would seem my car is a staggering 3g/km of c02 ABOVE the cutoff which will cost me an extra £130 a year as a result? Huh?

What is going to happen to all the existing cars which will now have enormous tax? How is pricing these off the road in favour of building new cars supposed to be environmentally friendly? My car will never emit the C02 in the rest of its life that will be given off through the construction of a new car?

I do 5k miles a year. This will cost me £430 a year.
A rep does 30k miles a year but will pay under £200 a year in his diesel.

How is that helping?

GT3's Saxo situation really puts this into perspective. £300 a year to tax a 1.6 litre Saxo? Is it really more carbon friendly to scrap his car and replace it with a brand new car?
 
clv101 said:
My answer is a penny in 2000 is not the same as a penny in 2008. If you want to argue otherwise you'll be on your own! :p

When duty is adjusted such that comparisons can be made - duty has been approximately flat.
Click to expand...

But isn't the justification for the several hundred percent tax rate enviromental? Even with the rate flat, it's still a ridiculously high tax rate...
 
OllyM said:
I hope you're going to get rid of it straight away and replace it with a diesel Fabia!
Click to expand...

Funny you should mention it actually. I was planning on doing exactly that!

Only my daily driver 2002 VTS anyway, my 1999 one is safe... for now! (despite the fact the fumes coming out of that one send me dizzy and it does about half the miles per gallon of the other one)
 
clv, can you explain why the following facts are just:

a) An X plate 530i Sport Automatic develops 260g/km of C02. It will remain within the current taxation regieme but will rise to £200 a year.
b) A 51 plate 530i Sport Manual develops 228g/km of C02. Taxation appears to rise to £430 a year.

Can you explain why chosing the lower polluting car means tax thats more twice the amount?

Also it would seem my car is a staggering 3g/km of c02 ABOVE the cutoff which will cost me an extra £130 a year as a result? Huh?
Click to expand...
It’s not my job to show how it’s just. Clearly in that case it isn’t, the world isn’t perfect, there are hard thresholds, there are old regimes and new regimes etc.

What is going to happen to all the existing cars which will now have enormous tax? How is pricing these off the road in favour of building new cars supposed to be environmentally friendly? My car will never emit the C02 in the rest of its life that will be given off through the construction of a new car?
Click to expand...
The question is will this new regime lead to earlier destruction of cars than would otherwise be the case? Only very marginally, no one is going to crush an otherwise fine £8k BMW ‘cos the road tax is £400 rather than £200. The only situation when this tax regime will result in the problem you raise is where the value of the car is not significantly higher than the different between its high tax and the new replacement’s lower tax. So yeah, at the margin, some high CO2 cars that are only worth a few hundred quid might get crushed a year or two sooner than they would otherwise.

This is a small (and wholly acceptable) price to pay to influence the purchasing decisions of new cars.
I do 5k miles a year. This will cost me £430 a year.
A rep does 30k miles a year but will pay under £200 a year in his diesel.

How is that helping?
Click to expand...
As I said above, I’d be happy to see VED scrapped and replaced with another ~15p litre on fuel… I expect you’d agree. Unfortunately this is not politically viable so we have the current system. With all change (even overall neutral change) there will be winners and losers, it seems in this case you lose out. My VED actually drops by a fiver.
 
flat-6 said:
Just want to thank clv for telling it like it is against the barrage of short-termism petrolhead reasoning. I don't have the patience.
Click to expand...

It's not short termism. Infact had these rises applied only to post April 2006 cars, I might even have agreed with the sentiments. Here is a summary of why:

a) Taxing existing cars off the road is nonsensical. It's widely acknowledged that recycling/using existing vehicles is better than building new. Also, it's agreed that as a car gets older, its annual mileage tends to decrease anyway, lessening its effect on the environment.

b) Anyone who bought a new car registered after April 2006 KNEW that it fell into the potential 'Sky is the Limit' band of taxation. They cannot claim ignorance. Somebody with a 2001 car could not have the same said about them

c) Older cars will be removed from the road naturally at the end of their useful life anyway. The buying habits we need to control are newer cars, especially as most new cars are bought by fleets and cover enormous mileage in their first 3 years.

d) The owners of 2006 onwards cars had a choice, when they bought their car, to buy efficient versions. A 2007 330i for example is VERY C02 efficient. A 2002 buyer did not have this choice.

We should shape peoples choices for the future, not force their hand for today.

I understand ALL the economical and supply based issues which result in things like this. I understand the use of market based approaches to controlling consumer buying habits. I just disagree with the way its been implemented and it rests ENTIRELY on scrapping the 2006 distinction.

And yes, I would rather pay £1.20 a litre over £1.05 a litre and pay no road tax. My car is not a requirement - it is something I enjoy. As a result, I don't do huge miles in it and I don't pollute the planet much with it either.

The problem is fleets with reps they send all over the country in 'carbon efficient' cars pulloting more than the average old duffer in his 2002 V8 Mercedes which gets an airing every weekend.
 
Last edited:
15ppl would absolutely kill the prospect of my car. £120 per month extra on average would go directly on my bottom line.

Definately stick to pre 2001 vehicles for the time being, makes far more sense. I can see pre 2001 values actually rising in comparison to models registered just after the co2 system was introduced.
 
Dolph said:
But isn't the justification for the several hundred percent tax rate enviromental? Even with the rate flat, it's still a ridiculously high tax rate...
Click to expand...
Justification? You'll have to take that up with the government - I think it's pointless targeting the CO2 emissions from oil. I think they are using CO2 as a reason to drive the efficiency that's needed for energy security reasons. Someone in government has decided the electorate will respond better to the CO2 argument than the energy security argument. Whenever I'm talking about CO2 in Motors - it's only as a proxy for oil use, not for any environmental reason. I've made that clear in several threads.

Duty is historical and a fundamentally good thing! Europe has greatly benefited from having high fuel duty - we are in a far better situation than the US for example. Ridiculously high rate? Not at all in my opinion.
 
High duty has insulted is extremely well from the current oil price situation. America is built on cheap fuel. Theirs has increased 3 fold, ours has gone up by 15%.
 
100% agree with you clv on C02 being a proxy for oil use. When they say CO2 the govt can beat you with two sticks, fuel efficiency and environmentalism. The reality is that these fossil fuels WILL be burnt and hence the CO2 will be released, other than a small amount of capture.

I agree in principle though, its better just to stick the majority of the tax on fuel duty. The reality is though that people will buy millions of new cars and by introducing such measures you can shape their type and how efficient they are.
 
The cars being taxed are already out there - these tax rises won't curb their use unless they are scrapped and replaced with new cars. How is applying this tax retrospectively a good thing?

Once you've paid for a years tax at £stupid you are not exactly going to restrain your use of the car, are you? On the contrary it might even have the opposite effect. I often walk and use public transport - once I've paid £430 I'm getting MAXIMUM use out of the car.

I honestly cannot understand the reasoning behind the decision to apply this to existing cars. They didnt do it last time so why this time? What is it intended to acheive?
 
Its worked out OK for my car, it gives out 189g/km which was at the very bottom of band F and £210 a year. The new scheme takes me to band J and £260 a year then up to £270 the year after not a huge increase.

I certainly don't agree with the increase however it is going to make a lot of people buy more CO2 efficent cars once thats been done to death and 80% of people buy a diesel they will then tax on NOx to raise a few more pennies and people will start moving back to petrols !

The increases is also going to knock the value of high CO2 cars post March 2001 and more than likely increase the value of pre 2001 cars.
 
I think I've worked out a way around it to give us until 2010 before the high tax kicks in - my tax expires at the end of this month, but if I go to the PO and tax it without the reminder I'll have to pay twice for this month but it'll bring my renewal forward to February. Renew it in February 2009 (at the old price) and pay £230 less :)
 
Can't they just let us make our own minds up. If I buy a car thats crap on fuel them I am going to have to put more fuel in it and hence pay more tax.

This tax rule is so stupid, although it does make me think of keeping with pre 2001 cars.
 
OllyM said:
I think I've worked out a way around it to give us until 2010 before the high tax kicks in - my tax expires at the end of this month, but if I go to the PO and tax it without the reminder I'll have to pay twice for this month but it'll bring my renewal forward to February. Renew it in February 2009 (at the old price) and pay £230 less :)
Click to expand...

My plan is similar - tax expires in December. Will then buy 6 months, and in February, SORN the car for a week or two. SORN acknowledgement arrives, cash the tax in (New rules say you can only cash the tax in if youve SORN'd the car or sold it etc), then re-apply for a new tax disc giving me until February 2010.

Yes, its hassle but it will save me £230!

By 2010 I'll either have an E39 M5, and wont care, or an E92 of some description, which is low c02 and hippy friendly.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom