![[TW]Fox](/data/man-of-honor/2009.png){kind=avatar}
The road tax system in this country is utterly ridiculous. It is based on the principle that the less CO2 your car emits, the less it'll cost to tax. This is sound in theory if you beleive in global warming crap. For the purposes of this thread lets pretend global warming crap can be stopped by us all driving a Prius. This thread is not about that.
But the system is disproportionate. If you buy a tediously horrible Golf Bluemotion diesel and then do 45k a year in it trying to flog people carpets, with your foot hard to the floor in the outside lane of the Motorway getting 40mpg not 70mpg, you will pay £35 a year in road tax.
If you drive a BMW 320d ED, where BMW have become experts at getting very low CO2 figures, yet in reality you get 50mpg, you will pay £35 a year in road tax.
If you drive a 2007 Mercedes E500, which you purchased as a retirement gift and waft to the Golf club twice a week and take Dorris out on Sundays, covering 2000 miles a year, you will pay £445 a year in road tax.
This is a load of crap.
I propose a new system.
Calculate the average road tax bill in the UK. Lets assume simply for the case of argument that it is £200.
Take the average annual mileage as being 12,000 miles a year.
Calculate the average combined fuel economy figure of the UK fleet.
Then, increase fuel duty to such an extent that the average UK motorist driving an average car doing average mileage at the combined fuel consumption figure will see a yearly fuel bill increase equal to the average amount of annual vehicle excise duty.
Then scrap vehicle excise duty.
This will have the following effects:
a) The rep in his stupid Golf will now pay a fortune more tax as he hammers it to death up and down the Motorway. This is fair and just - he drives more, he emits more CO2, he should pay more.
b) The amount of tax you pay will now be directly proportional to how much CO2 you really emit - not the paper figure in the brochure, but the REAL figure, as CO2 emissions are roughly proportional to fuel usage. Therefore if you take the effort to drive more economically, you will pay less tax and emit less CO2. If you cant be arsed, you'll pay more tax and emit more CO2.
c) Mr Retired person who hardly uses his Mercedes wont pay much tax, which is fair and just, as he doesn't use much fuel or emit much CO2.
d) There will be no need for the massive administration costs of road tax nor any need to SORN a vehicle. Have a 1982 classic in the garage you rarely use? No worries, only pay tax when you use fuel.
I can infact see absolutely zero downside to this plan, if we assume that taxing CO2 is the way forward (Lets not argue against this assumption - this thread simply advocates a replacement for the current system based on the same assumptions).
Taxation as a form of command and control should shape consumer decisions and consumer behaviour. Currently, vehicle excise duty incorrectly shapes consumer decisions and has no effect on consumer behaviour.
My method will fix this.
Discuss.
But the system is disproportionate. If you buy a tediously horrible Golf Bluemotion diesel and then do 45k a year in it trying to flog people carpets, with your foot hard to the floor in the outside lane of the Motorway getting 40mpg not 70mpg, you will pay £35 a year in road tax.
If you drive a BMW 320d ED, where BMW have become experts at getting very low CO2 figures, yet in reality you get 50mpg, you will pay £35 a year in road tax.
If you drive a 2007 Mercedes E500, which you purchased as a retirement gift and waft to the Golf club twice a week and take Dorris out on Sundays, covering 2000 miles a year, you will pay £445 a year in road tax.
This is a load of crap.
I propose a new system.
Calculate the average road tax bill in the UK. Lets assume simply for the case of argument that it is £200.
Take the average annual mileage as being 12,000 miles a year.
Calculate the average combined fuel economy figure of the UK fleet.
Then, increase fuel duty to such an extent that the average UK motorist driving an average car doing average mileage at the combined fuel consumption figure will see a yearly fuel bill increase equal to the average amount of annual vehicle excise duty.
Then scrap vehicle excise duty.
This will have the following effects:
a) The rep in his stupid Golf will now pay a fortune more tax as he hammers it to death up and down the Motorway. This is fair and just - he drives more, he emits more CO2, he should pay more.
b) The amount of tax you pay will now be directly proportional to how much CO2 you really emit - not the paper figure in the brochure, but the REAL figure, as CO2 emissions are roughly proportional to fuel usage. Therefore if you take the effort to drive more economically, you will pay less tax and emit less CO2. If you cant be arsed, you'll pay more tax and emit more CO2.
c) Mr Retired person who hardly uses his Mercedes wont pay much tax, which is fair and just, as he doesn't use much fuel or emit much CO2.
d) There will be no need for the massive administration costs of road tax nor any need to SORN a vehicle. Have a 1982 classic in the garage you rarely use? No worries, only pay tax when you use fuel.
I can infact see absolutely zero downside to this plan, if we assume that taxing CO2 is the way forward (Lets not argue against this assumption - this thread simply advocates a replacement for the current system based on the same assumptions).
Taxation as a form of command and control should shape consumer decisions and consumer behaviour. Currently, vehicle excise duty incorrectly shapes consumer decisions and has no effect on consumer behaviour.
My method will fix this.
Discuss.
Whatever next. 
