New road tax system

[DreXeL]

Absolutely agree with Fox's proposal. We cover relatively low mileage in the Estima yet because of it's C02 figure I have been paying over £400 a year in tax, yet Mr Rep who's real C02 figure puts mine to shame pays a fraction of my Road Tax cost.

It's wrong, the current system is flawed and unfair.

 

[antijoke]

How do I vote for Fox?

 

[Sukh]

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?

Its added to fuel prices so there is nothing to do with any of that. You drive a car = 99.9% buy fuel

 

[DreXeL]

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?

What are you on about?

You don't need to 'monitor' anything. The road tax disc is scrapped, you simply pay more at the pump instead.

 

[robbiemc]

or just enable them to claim it back with a receipt.

Job done.

That probably won't work due to the bureaucracy and potential for fraud -after all receipts don't show the car reg so there would be difficulty in proving you paid for it etc. Plus the likelihood that people will simply lose the receipts.

You could do it annually by recording mileage completed in the previous 12 months, perhaps using MOT as proof, or servicing reports if under 3 years old?

 

[Peerzy]

Thing is would companies ever agree to this? It will cost companies with fleets millions more a year, Government wants to keep companies happy at the moment and stop them from out sourcing work to other countries.

Althought I agree the system would be a lot fairer, it is likely to have a negative effect on the people with power so is unlikely to happen.

 

[The Running Man]

isnt petrol already taxed? doesnt this already and immediately penalise those who do more milage and have higher consumption?

but the idea of roadtax is a tax on the expected emissions...obviously the government wants to force people to use lower emissions cars by making the TCO higher on a higher Co2 emissions vehicle they can reduce demand by inflating the cost? to me it does make some sense.

 

[ubersonic]

isnt petrol already taxed?

Twice, you pay VAT on the tax lol

but the idea of roadtax is a tax on the expected emissions...obviously the government wants to force people to use lower emissions cars by making the TCO higher on a higher Co2 emissions vehicle they can reduce demand by inflating the cost? to me it does make some sense.

What are they doing with it to offset the global warming hoax though? do they use the extra tax from a BMW X5 to plant trees?

As Britain is putting out less pollution now than we used to I think were doing pretty well tbh

 

[Dolph]

isnt petrol already taxed? doesnt this already and immediately penalise those who do more milage and have higher consumption?

but the idea of roadtax is a tax on the expected emissions...obviously the government wants to force people to use lower emissions cars by making the TCO higher on a higher Co2 emissions vehicle they can reduce demand by inflating the cost? to me it does make some sense.

It may make sense, but that doesn't mean it's right. Taxation shouldn't be used to create social policy, only to manage harm. Current taxation on motoring goes way, way beyond the amounts needed to manage the harm motoring, even in a higher CO2 vehicle, causes, and so the taxation can never be considered just.

 

[The Running Man]

Taxation shouldn't be used to create social policy, only to manage harm. Current taxation on motoring goes way, way beyond the amounts needed to manage the harm motoring, even in a higher CO2 vehicle, causes, and so the taxation can never be considered just.

i doint know, isnt that how tax works in this country? you get paid more, you pay a higher amount of income tax? thats not about managing harm, its about managing society and subsiding tax from those who pay less.

you buy a luxury/premium car, you pay more car tax?

because we dont live in a pure capitalist state, those who can pay are asked to do so. a high emissions car is not a required item. it is a luxury. a choice that you can make. you know its gonna be taxed higher, you agree to this when you buy the car.

 

[Dolph]

i doint know, isnt that how tax works in this country? you get paid more, you pay a higher amount of income tax? you buy a luxury/premium car, you pay more car tax?

because we dont live in a pure capitalist state, those who can pay are asked to do so. a high emissions car is not a required item. it is a luxury. a choice that you can make. you know its gonna be taxed higher, you agree to this when you buy the car.

Just because our current taxation practices are unjust and broken, it doesn't follow that it's the only way to do it, or that new measures that continue the broken setup are ok. I don't have a problem with higher polluting cars being taxed more than lower polluting cars, I have a problem with cars (and other items deemed 'sinful) generally being massively overtaxed in an attempt to alter behaviour.

 

[The Running Man]

but what is fair is subjective.

the government hasnt stopped people from driving these cars by banning them, which feasibly it could do. it just makes you pay through the nose for the privalege.

its not as though these are essential things, like basic food stuff or water is it? its a luxury tax aimed at those with the money to pay. Given the national debt income/expenditure issue the government has, and how it cannot renegade on things it is paying for this means that tax has to be recouped in other ways. higher taxation of luxury items is simply a way of doing this without harming the average man in the street who just wants to drive a 1.2 cheaply.

 

[Dogbreath]

i doint know, isnt that how tax works in this country? you get paid more, you pay a higher amount of income tax?

Income tax isn't a "sin" tax.

 

[The Running Man]

no but its an example of how tax rates vary depending on the situation

 

[Dolph]

but what is fair is subjective.

the government hasnt stopped people from driving these cars by banning them, which feasibly it could do. it just makes you pay through the nose for the privalege.

its not as though these are essential things, like basic food stuff or water is it? its a luxury tax aimed at those with the money to pay. Given the national debt income/expenditure issue the government has, and how it cannot renegade on things it is paying for this means that tax has to be recouped in other ways. higher taxation of luxury items is simply a way of doing this without harming the average man in the street who just wants to drive a 1.2 cheaply.

But why? Why should the government do this?

Taxation should not be used to excessively punish the successful.

 

[Dolph]

no but its an example of how tax rates vary depending on the situation

Not a very good one though, because stepped income tax bands are also unjust. It's effectively an appeal to tradition, rather than an attempt to refute the point.

 

[The Running Man]

But why? Why should the government do this?

Taxation should not be used to excessively punish the successful.

because like i said this isnt a capitalist country. it is a state welfare country. you cannot have both, nor can you have the best of both either. i dont forsee it changing either.

i think your choice is -

-accept that the UK is priced for everyone

-move to another country

countries with public health service, welfare, benefits will always have to tax the highest earners more to make up for the funding shortfall, or else making live 'unlivable' for the masses. the easiest and most sensible option is to make those who CAN pay more.. pay more.

you have benefitted from the schooling system, the NHS, now you have to pay it back. some people cannot pay it back. so those who earen more have to take on more of the burden. its pretty obvious really.

 

[PMKeates]

-move to another country

So anyone who dares challenge the direction of the country should just.. move? Good luck supporting the welfare state when all the wealth generation has moved elsewhere!

you have benefitted from the schooling system, the NHS, now you have to pay it back. some people cannot pay it back. so those who earen more have to take on more of the burden. its pretty obvious really.

Benefited? I guess that depends how you see it. I happen to think that, in reality, I haven't benefited very much at all. If my parents would have had the choice (and freed up money) to do as they felt right, I'm sure I'd have enjoyed better services. The welfare system in this country is rubbish. It's attempting to provide services that it has little hope of providing well.

Another question - I never chose to use those health/education services. In fact, it was a crime for me not to. Why should I have to pay for something, forever, that I was forced to use? It's virtually slavery.

 

[Dolph]

because like i said this isnt a capitalist country. it is a state welfare country. you cannot have both, nor can you have the best of both either. i dont forsee it changing either.

i think your choice is -

-accept that the UK is priced for everyone

-move to another country

countries with public health service, welfare, benefits will always have to tax the highest earners more to make up for the funding shortfall, or else making live 'unlivable' for the masses. the easiest and most sensible option is to make those who CAN pay more.. pay more.

you have benefitted from the schooling system, the NHS, now you have to pay it back. some people cannot pay it back. so those who earen more have to take on more of the burden. its pretty obvious really.

Thankfully, the people and the new government generally disagree with you. The state in the UK is far too big, far too ineffective and not of a great benefit to the country as a whole.

That doesn't mean I want to abolish the whole thing, but there is certainly scope for both reform and reduced spending, which in turn results in reduced and readjusted taxation...

 

[snowdog]

but what is fair is subjective.

the government hasnt stopped people from driving these cars by banning them, which feasibly it could do.

Ha if they would, the people would burn down the House of Commons, viva la revolution. If the government would ban cars altogether here, I'd be part of an angry mob in no time, some things go too far.