New road tax system

ive only skim read the thread so may have missed it, but im sure the last time one of these threads came up, someone posted that fuel prices link to some sort of measurement index and increasing them to "pay" for road tax would ruin our price index. Not sure what it was though...?
 
What about tax free cars ?

Better system than currently, both here and in the UK.


But, I still think the income should be used on, ta ta ta daaaa, roads, and not to fill holes in the financing...
 
[TW]Fox;16946253 said:
They will now pay RFL. In practice this is not a huge problem as almost all people who are RFL exempt do reasonably low mileage anyway so would not face huge additional cost. Most classic cars, for example, are RFL exempt yet do very low annual mileage anyway. Most people who are exempt for disability reasons again do not cover huge mileage.

This system wont benefit everyone - there will be some of us who will pay more tax, but there will be some of us who pay less, others who pay the same, and crucially it allows us to directly control how much RFL we pay.
Click to expand...

snowdog said:
What about tax free cars ?
Click to expand...

I answered this question earlier.
 
Didn't see it mentioned, but this method would also bring money in from foreign registered trucks, cars etc
 
Like i said earlier in the thread while it maybe a "fairer" tax system it doesn't mean it is win-win for everybody.

There will be thousands of people out there who commute large distances, either as a part of their job or because there is little jobs around their area that are already struggling to survive who will suffer under such changes.

To use fox's example, while it maybe fairer is it right to reduce the tax bill of a retiree who's spent £50k on a mercedes by £200 while screwing over the guy that commutes 100 miles a day making minimum wage?

A truely fair tax system is an illusion, the rich will always pay more than the poorer regardless of what resources or services they use.

/edit just as an fyi i am very much playing devils advocate here, i do like the proposed system, i would personally come out even in terms of road tax liability, but i do question whether it is right.
 
but the guy who commutes 100 miles a day is actually polluting the environment more ? surely thats fairer.

If its part of his job, then work will pay it anyway, and what poor people commute 100 miles a day ?? poor people generally dont commute at all, they go down the post office to cash their giros ...

If they are commuting 100 miles a day, they are already paying a wopping ammount in fuel anyway. Thats a tank of fuel twice a week depending on the car, fuel tank etc.. So not exactly poor if the job is worth them paying £120 a week in petrol.
 
MrLOL said:
but the guy who commutes 100 miles a day is actually polluting the environment more ? surely thats fairer.
Click to expand...

Only if the taxation is ringfenced for dealing with the consequences of the pollution (and taxation is already far higher than needed for that). Otherwise it's entirely unfair, just like council tax and excessive sin taxes such as that on tobacco or alcohol.
 
Great Idea - I like it!

Couple of issues that would stop adotoption though, mainly becuse they want it to be inconvieniet to keep a car sorn/taxed because:

- They make a loads on fines
- They proabably make loads on scrapping/selling vehicles they get NCP to dispose of for uncompliance
- People scrap them to avoid the hassel - remember the government wants you to by new cars to help prop up the motor industry
 
I think we should keep the current system but make it more even and fair. I wouldn't want to worry about my mileage affecting my road tax. Much rather have a set amount and not have to think about it. That is of course unless the amount PA went down considerably :)
 
Last edited:
I read the thread and couldnt help but be incredibly amused at the way people seem to act as if its going happen, its not, so either bow to your government overlords and get a green machine or a boring diesel, or spread your cheeks and pay the tax.
 
Dolph said:
Only if the taxation is ringfenced for dealing with the consequences of the pollution (and taxation is already far higher than needed for that). Otherwise it's entirely unfair, just like council tax and excessive sin taxes such as that on tobacco or alcohol.
Click to expand...

well no

it wouldnt be any different to the current system - just fairer. This thread isn't about making radical changed.

Before we can get away from charging cars based upon their co2 emissions, we have to wait for it to be commonly accepted knowledge that global warming due to human co2 production is balderdash. Doubt that will happen in my lifetime tbh.
 
MrLOL said:
well no

it wouldnt be any different to the current system - just fairer. This thread isn't about making radical changed.

Before we can get away from charging cars based upon their co2 emissions, we have to wait for it to be commonly accepted knowledge that global warming due to human co2 production is balderdash. Doubt that will happen in my lifetime tbh.
Click to expand...

It doesn't have to be accepted, the impact of CO2 emissions just has to be quantified, and taxation placed to provide mitigation of the damage caused. The maths has already been done.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/6972759.stm

I fully support the idea that something with social harm consequences should have a levy placed on it to mitigate those costs, the problem is our levy is completely disproportionate to the social harm, and further that high fuel taxes don't actually discourage usage in a meaningful way because private transport is largely price inelastic...

Disproportionate sin taxes are always unfair.
 
I agree with your idea Fox but how could you monitor useage? Trackers as a standard on a big database? Or just mileage/mpg = fuel used?

Is reducing a cars mileage against the law?
 
[TW]Fox;16948102 said:
Most people who are exempt for disability reasons
Click to expand...
I don't agree with this. A disabled person by definition will need to use their car more due to their mobility problems (I know, I'm disabled).
However this could easily be addressed by upping the mobility segment of their benefits in line with an average so it's not really a big problem.
 
Can I introduce a clause to this scheme?

I.e, if I drove to work 'the back way' where there are more trees, won't they start absorbing my carbon emissions sooner vs me driving to work on the carriageway where there are more cars to fewer trees. Therefore, I should pay less.
 
!bluetonic! said:
Can I introduce a clause to this scheme?

I.e, if I drove to work 'the back way' where there are more trees, won't they start absorbing my carbon emissions sooner vs me driving to work on the carriageway where there are more cars to fewer trees. Therefore, I should pay less.
Click to expand...
Welcome to road pricing!
 
PMKeates said:
Welcome to road pricing!
Click to expand...

I'd have no problems with road pricing as an alternative to excessive taxation... We'd either save a lot of money, or have the best roads in the world if we kept paying current prices. I'd also fully support the RAC's suggestion to remove the road network from government control to prevent the money being squandered or redirected.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom