Cartax - about time.

[Jumper118]

can't we just burn all the trees and get it over with

 

[crinkleshoes]

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/88361/tax-disc-changes-everything-you-need-to-know-about-uk-road-tax

About time - every car that uses fuel is bad and damages the planet (as well as every car with 4 wheels damages the infrastructure of the country but that's another argument). If you can afford a new car what's a few hundred quid extra. It's nice to see them heavily taxing the worst offenders. Will hopefully make people think more.

I assume sarcasm.

If not...

I challenge you to a duel sir...



All these absolute morons that think CO2 is a good way to tax cars is absolute stupidity... have to laugh at the "burn all the trees" comment when it's so easy for people who can't understand basic science to forget that CO2 is actually FOOD for trees hahahahahahahahaha

Just put it on the petrol please. The current system is silly and everyone knows it. Of the 3 cars in our household the cheapest one to tax is also the most polluting as it does 3 times the mileage as the others.

No... diesel... a 60mpg diesel polutes more than a 30mpg petrol

 

[George Hincapie]

That would tax everybody, this new way the rich pay for the damage a new car does when it's purchased and the non rich get a better deal.

It should tax everyone equally. Poor people buy new cars too

No... diesel... a 60mpg diesel polutes more than a 30mpg petrol

But no-one gives a **** about the environment. Practical considerations tend to come first.

 

[Tute]

It should tax everyone equally. Poor people buy new cars too

I wouldn't consider myself "rich" but I like cars, call it a hobby. I can easily see myself buying a car that cost over £40,000 within the first five years of it being sold.

Why should I get reamed for extra money for wanting to have nice things?

Seems to me that the £40,000 band should be more like £75,000, that way the actual rich get to pay it and not just hard working people that want something nicer than an eco-crapbox.

 

[chaparral]

But no-one gives a **** about the environment. Practical considerations tend to come first.

Your 100% right

Last year they even tried putting a TAX on bicycles over here
http://guernseypress.com/news/2016/11/08/bring-back-the-bike-tax-call-runs-into-opposition/

 

[Jumper118]

I assu


All these absolute morons that think CO2 is a good way to tax cars is absolute stupidity... have to laugh at the "burn all the trees" comment when it's so easy for people who can't understand basic science to forget that CO2 is actually FOOD for trees hahahahahahahahaha

ik its food for trees................... by burning them all would release all the co2.

 

[robj20]

ik its food for trees................... by burning them all would release all the co2.

Epic high school science fail.

 

[Nasher]

I think the mentality is 40k+ cars generally have bigger engines and use more resources to make, so pollute more. But most decent EVs cost more than that as well due to the amount of batteries in them :/

 

[Minstadave]

I think the mentality is 40k+ cars generally have bigger engines and use more resources to make, so pollute more. But most decent EVs cost more than that as well due to the amount of batteries in them :/

I find it strange and very un-Tory. It's just another revenue stream at the end of the day.

I could understand the previous system, it drove down CO2 rightly or wrongly. This new system seems much more designed purely to bring in money for the treasury. After the first year it doesn't matter how much CO2 you chuck out, as long as it's more than zero everyone pays the same rate (apart from the nice car 5 year penalty).

 

[Nasher]

Well the Tories probably don't pay for their own cars like us peasants

 

[roboffer]

I was looking at leasing an E-Class Estate AMG E220d after April, the RRP is £40,725 which will mean I have pay an extra £26 per month more to the government for the £40k threshold and another £11 for the new CO2 bands.

Surely just like houses where people price them just under the stamp duty thresholds manufacturers will just reduce them under £40k slightly.

As Fox says though, starting adding some extra options and the band goes up. They need to decide if they are taxing the cost, or the emissions. Seems a little muddled at the moment.

 

[ttaskmaster]

It should tax everyone equally. Poor people buy new cars too

No we don't.
At best, we might get finance, but generally we buy some cheap pile of junk for £600. We might get lucky and find something reasonable in the 13-16 year old bracket for £2k, but that's stretching it...

But no-one gives a **** about the environment. Practical considerations tend to come first.

Yup - Because fancy environment-saving cars cost more than my gross annual salary new, while cheap 2nd hand diesels that get decent mpg cost a few month's (net) salary.

I wouldn't consider myself "rich" but I like cars, call it a hobby.

If it's only a hobby, you're either rich or work in the industry.

Why should I get reamed for extra money for wanting to have nice things?

If it spews out more crap, you pay more.
If not, then there's no reason at all.

 

[crinkleshoes]

ik its food for trees................... by burning them all would release all the co2.

Don't forget the tree-farts... it would remove all of those from future atmosphere pollution

 

[ubersonic]

Epic high school science fail.

So you think burning trees creates no CO2?

 

[xs2man]

So you think burning trees creates no CO2?

No, but trees do release the O2 part from the CO2. So burning them doesn't release all the CO2, as most of the O2 part has already been expelled. It will release a lot of the C component though... So he is correct when saying burning trees doesn't release ALL the CO2 "eaten" by the trees.

 

[chaparral]

Hence me saying I know it's not as simple as sticking 10p on a litre But as others have already stated, based purely on emissions why should a diesel rep-mobile doing 60k miles a year not pay more VED than a V8 who only comes out on sunny days and does <5k a year?

There must be a "fairer" system that most people could at least rationalise..

It be more like 50p more per litre..

That what they did over here back in 2008 when they cancelled the road tax.
They put around 50p per litre extra onto the price of fuel

 

[adolf hamster]

I think the mentality is 40k+ cars generally have bigger engines and use more resources to make, so pollute more. But most decent EVs cost more than that as well due to the amount of batteries in them :/

Tbf, building them better means they last longer, rather than the current crop of tiny engine mahoosive turbo diesels that are computerised completely that'll do 100k then bam the turbos gone or the electrics bug out and the whole thing gets scrapped.

 

[robj20]

No, but trees do release the O2 part from the CO2. So burning them doesn't release all the CO2, as most of the O2 part has already been expelled. It will release a lot of the C component though... So he is correct when saying burning trees doesn't release ALL the CO2 "eaten" by the trees.

As well as that you would have to factor in that if you did burn all trees you would probably starve mankind of oxygen.

 

[ubersonic]

No, but trees do release the O2 part from the CO2.

Well yeah, but the post I replied too was a guy mocking somebody for jokingly saying burning trees would release CO2, which is true.

 

[wesley]

quick question about the "first year rate"

if i buy a 2006 golf R32 in May 2017, the first year rate would be £1,120 then £515 yearly after that

is that right?