Does it make sense.....

DAIR · 23 Feb 2011 at 15:28

For owner of big petrol guzzlers / sporty cars (who rarely drives) to be taxed more than those who own "economical" cars?

Mr. Joe owns a V8 Grand Tourer. He only drives it during the weekend.

Mr. Bloggs owns one of the new 1.2 litre eco cars.... You know the ones which allow him to drive through London without having to cough up a penny for the C-Charge Zone. Mr.Bloggs drives his car almost everyday!

Who is apparently (I use this word because not everyone believes we're causing Global Warming....... BUT if we are...) causing more damage to our wonderful planet Earth?

Judgeneo · 23 Feb 2011 at 15:30

Its impossible to set a different tax for each person. So if your going to tax depending on fuel consumption, I don't see any other way than the current system

Dup · 23 Feb 2011 at 15:38

Judgeneo said:
Its impossible to set a different tax for each person. So if your going to tax depending on fuel consumption, I don't see any other way than the current system

Abolosh or have a smaller flat fee on the yearly green/"road" duty and inflate the fuel tax. That in theory is a much fairer system as the government gets more money from the people who use the most fuel.

That however could be vastly harsh on people who drive for a living who could end up paying much much more than they do now. But it's fairer than subsidising that on people who happen to drive a large engined car 5 miles a week.

DAIR · 23 Feb 2011 at 15:41

Dup said:
Abolosh or have a smaller flat fee on the yearly green/"road" duty and inflate the fuel tax. That in theory is a much fairer system as the government gets more money from the people who use the most fuel.

That however could be vastly harsh on people who drive for a living who could end up paying much much more than they do now. But it's fairer than subsidising that on people who happen to drive a large engined car 5 miles a week.

lol

Lets be real... its a lot better than the current system. Mr.Joe is paying around four times more than someone who is doing real damage to the Earth by driving everyday.

naefeart · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:07

I don't think either system is fair - the amount of duty we pay on fuel is too high

Matt82 · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:10

we already pay tax on petrol anyway

they are therefore being taxed more already as their engines consume more

DAIR · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:14

Matt82 said:
we already pay tax on petrol anyway

they are therefore being taxed more already as their engines consume more

True.... But cars only give off CO2 when switched on!

Gaygle · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:15

lol at anyone thinking car tax for more polluting vehicles is anything to do with saving the planet.

DAIR · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:18

Gaygle said:
lol at anyone thinking car tax for more polluting vehicles is anything to do with saving the planet.

I know it has nothing to do with that lol. Just funny they make out its to save the earth and make our air cleaner!

DM · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:19

Sod that for an idea, i pay as i go by buying petrol, thats tax enough.

naefeart · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:26

DAIR said:
I know it has nothing to do with that lol. Just funny they make out its to save the earth and make our air cleaner!

Indeed, like anything we do will affect the amount of pollution generated by the US, China and India.

Matt82 · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:43

DAIR said:
True.... But cars only give off CO2 when switched on!

But. a low poluting car doing 50k miles a year will polute more than a gas guzzler that does 200 miles a year.

strictly speaking the amount you polute will be proportionate to the amount of fuel you use.

therefore the tax on the fuel should be sufficient.

isnt road tax for maintaining the roads?

DAIR · 23 Feb 2011 at 16:56

Matt82 said:
But. a low poluting car doing 50k miles a year will polute more than a gas guzzler that does 200 miles a year.

strictly speaking the amount you polute will be proportionate to the amount of fuel you use.

therefore the tax on the fuel should be sufficient.

isnt road tax for maintaining the roads?

lol I wish.... Pretty sure thats the local authorities job.

SeatIbiza · 23 Feb 2011 at 17:20

DAIR said:
lol
than someone who is doing real damage to the Earth by driving everyday.

Lol - please don't tell me you believe this!

Cars do no "real" damage to the earth when you compare it to coal fired power plants, industry and commercial buildings.

The output of all the cars in this country wouldn't put a dent in teh output of the coal powered power palnts of China for example.

VED is set on CO2 output of the car no matter if you do 1 mile or 1 million miles. It is a fairly retarded system but relatively fair as none of them are that expensive - most people spend more on their monthly phone bill than you do on the HIGHEST VED band.

Then you pay further tax per mile you drive in the fuel you use. The more you drive the more you pay.

Westyfield2 · 23 Feb 2011 at 17:26

This is why the only motoring tax should be on fuel. That way how many miles the car does (and fuel consumed) affects the tax paid.

Kinda funny really, Westfield in the garage costs the most to tax of all our cars... yet will emit less over a year than any of the others because it'll do soo few miles!

Moeks · 23 Feb 2011 at 17:32

DiamondMark said:
Sod that for an idea, i pay as i go by buying petrol, thats tax enough.

I couldn't agree more, I had a bit of a ramble about this once.

I do think it's fair enough that people with cars that use more fuel pay more, but they do it simply by using more fuel, it balances it's self, buy more fuel ...pay more motoring tax. And people with more fuel efficient cars pay less for the same miles travelled as they buy less petrol ... 'simples' as that ruddy meerkat would probably say.

Pay as you go motoring that does not unfairly penalise anyone.

Duke · 23 Feb 2011 at 17:37

Yep put it on fuel instead. Won't happen though

Moeks · 23 Feb 2011 at 17:39

Duke said:
Yep put it on fuel instead. Won't happen though

That's not quite what I meant, we pay more than enough tax on fuel as it is, remove the road fund license entirely. Or, slash the tax on fuel massively, and don't add VAT on either, as it's a tax on a tax then, which is just sickening and charge a nominal road fund license fee, maybe even tie it to a permanent plate like many Canadian and US localities which will stop the whole 'latest plate' shenanigans, then again it'd also irrevocably alter our car market, people would buy less new cars and keep cars longer, pushing the used market values up dramatically.

There will always be a tax on fuel, so those that use more of it will always pay more because of that. Taxing an already high tax though is not fair and charging so much for a road fund license in addition is also just silly.

ChrisJSY · 23 Feb 2011 at 20:17

We don't have this tax over here yet, but if we did I will be against it, I understand a case for case system is impossible, (even on a small island) but there are legitimate claims as the OP in which the person with the more uneconomical car actually does less because he/she doesn't drive as much.

It matters a lot to me because I do drive an uneconomical car with a growling v8 but I don't drive daily often weeks apart, I've never driven to work (always walking distance) so why should I have to pay a tax for pretty much, nothing? When other more economical cars are on the roads every single day! Almost ;]

It would be nice if they could implement some sort of mileage categories too but unlikely, as far they are concerned it's more money to them.

MrFunex · 23 Feb 2011 at 20:37

I have a 5.0 V8 that has NEVER seen more than 28 mpg even on a long, steady motorway journey. I live just over a mile away from my place of work and on this drive I average between 6 and 10mpg.

People I work with own cars of varying economies, but some drive 45+ miles each way to work. Some of the diesels I would imagine are getting 50-60mpg.

I produce less CO2/emissions on my commute than they do, but yet I am seen as the big polluter and the one harming the environment.