Car tax robbery by government

I’m not talking about “perspective” though, perspective is relative. The price we pay…that has a numerical value…and it can be compared in a chart.

The only person interested in comparing is you, don't assume that everyone else bases their decisions on what someone on the other side of the world pays, just because you do. What someone else pays has literally zero relevance to me.

I care about what I have to pay, and the fact is that EV drivers in the UK have had the rug pulled by the retrospective VED being applied to EVs up to 8 years old.

Other people did, as a reason why HK or Singapore cost more as a justification of why.

Oh, so you just bundle all of "us other people" together then? Pretty sure there's a word for that :rolleyes:
 
The only person interested in comparing is you, don't assume that everyone else bases their decisions on what someone on the other side of the world pays, just because you do. What someone else pays has literally zero relevance to me.

I care about what I have to pay, and the fact is that EV drivers in the UK have had the rug pulled by the retrospective VED being applied to EVs up to 8 years old.



Oh, so you just bundle all of "us other people" together then? Pretty sure there's a word for that :rolleyes:

Post number 5….read the thread. FFS.

Only person…you can’t even get your facts right.

And I know you know I got my facts right because you left out the bit in my post about Ireland costing more, you just don’t have a rebuttal to it so just cut it out.

Look, I try not look at things in a vacuum, you do, that’s where we differ.

The cost of what we pay, has a number. It goes up (most of the time), the end.
 
Last edited:
Post number 5….read the thread. FFS.

Only person…you can’t even get your facts right.

And I know you know I got my facts right because you left out the bit in my post about Ireland costing more, you just don’t have a rebuttal to it so just cut it out.

Yeah, you're right, I missed the post about Ireland. And it changes literally nothing about my response, because I live in *checks GPS* yup, still England.

Look, I try not look at things in a vacuum, you do, that’s where we differ.

Good for you, and as soon as I'm planning to move to a country with a functioning society I'll make sure to take that into consideration. Until then it is - as I already said - completely irrelevant.

The cost of what we pay, has a number. It goes up (most of the time), the end.

Agreed, but when govt. offers zero VED on your car, and then they turn round and say "hah, got you!, now you've bought it you have to pay lol", it does result in quite a lot of bitterness and mistrust. I can totally understand them putting it on new cars, but to apply it retrospectively is a massive **** move.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, you're right, I missed the post about Ireland. And it changes literally nothing about my response, because I live in *checks GPS* yup, still England.



Good for you, and as soon as I'm planning to move to a country with a functioning society I'll make sure to take that into consideration. Until then it is - as I already said - completely irrelevant.



Agreed, but when govt. offers zero VED on your car, and then they turn round and say "hah, got you!, now you've bought it you have to pay lol", it does result in quite a lot of bitterness and mistrust. I can totally understand them putting it on new cars, but to apply it retrospectively is a massive **** move.

I know and I agree it’s a crappy move, I don’t and not debating that….but the overall cost in the end…it’s still reasonable, when not looking in a vacuum.

It is clearly we both are looking at it DIFFERENTLY.
 
I know and I agree it’s a crappy move, I don’t and not debating that….but the overall cost in the end…it’s still reasonable, when not looking in a vacuum.

It is clearly we both are looking at it DIFFERENTLY.
The cost is reasonable - vacuum or not. Less than two hundred quid (in my case) for that ultra convenience is unparalleled by any other choice.

Once/if our public transport is up to scratch, the scales become rebalanced and I will reconsider owning a car.

Until then, the damn government and taxes. Dey took er jerbs!!
 
I know and I agree it’s a crappy move, I don’t and not debating that….but the overall cost in the end…it’s still reasonable, when not looking in a vacuum.

I agree with that to a point, but then if we're not looking at it in a vacuum, we do need to also consider the differences in countries/cultures as you mentioned earlier, rather than just the absolute cost of VED taken in isolation.

In terms of GDP per capita, Singapore is at #1, Ireland is at #3 and HK at #14. We're way down at #28

Our public transport is expensive and unreliable (and pretty much non-existent outside of major cities), and even though we're a relatively small country, not having a car can be a major limiting factor outside of aforementioned major cities, cycling infrastructure leaves a lot to be desired, and our terrain and climate aren't particularly conducive to it either.

In terms of how car ownership/public transported is treated, the UK is a lot more like the US than we are like most European/Asian countries, and a quick Google suggests that the average registration fee (which appears to be their closest approximation of VED) is $40-60 in most states (with a few outliers both higher and lower).
 
Last edited:
I agree with that to a point, but then if we're not looking at it in a vacuum, we do need to also consider the differences in countries/cultures as you mentioned earlier, rather than just the absolute cost of VED taken in isolation.

In terms of GDP per capita, Singapore is at #1, Ireland is at #3 and HK at #14. We're way down at #28

Our public transport is expensive and unreliable (and pretty much non-existent outside of major cities), and even though we're a relatively small country, not having a car can be a major limiting factor outside of aforementioned major cities, cycling infrastructure leaves a lot to be desired, and our terrain and climate aren't particularly conducive to it either.

In terms of how car ownership/public transported is treated, the UK is a lot more like the US than we are like most European/Asian countries, and a quick Google suggests that the average registration fee (which appears to be their closest approximation of VED) is $40-60 in most states (with a few outliers both higher and lower).

We used to be like Europe, years ago before anyone remembers. But all of the local railways got ripped up and public transport sold off and turned to **** like every other service. If you don't drive and you need to get a town east or west of you, the only option is likely to be an extremely slow and probably late bus service.

The UK is getting poorer because we got rid of all our industry and nothing replaced it, not even a tech industry really. Thatcher and then Blair thought the UK could be a "service economy" (no one else did), but it hasn't worked. Now we can't go back without basically starting again from 200 years ago.
 
Last edited:
"I've been dun robbed by der gurvurnmunt"

Huh, no posts since, was hoping for a follow up.
turk-took.gif
 
Car tax is peanuts compared to what we would be paying if the fuel duty escalator hadn't been frozen for the past 15 odd years we'd be paying huge amounts on fuel duty by now no wonder our roads are being pounded by an endless stream of gas guzzling SUV's.

But your rebuttal to Ireland would be? Would that not be close enough and similar enough for a comparison? Not so much starving children analogy is it ?

Your argument is only "you picked the wrong comparison", but does not actual dispute the fact that the UK is rather reasonable.

Whichever stick I choose, the UK has it better than people think in terms the cost of running a car. That is the point.

p.s. I have a car, but I walk 20mins to the shops instead of driving 5mins. May be I am just weird....I pay over £400 in car tax (VED) and I now drive it like once a month! I do not get my money's worth compared to most.
UK is infact generous and extremely lenient towards car owners

It goes to the government, who spend close on £1Tn a year on defence, health etc.

Maybe a relevant question would be to ask why we’re spending £120Bn per year on interest on our national debt.

One idea that springs to mind is the loss of revenue by rich people offshoring their wealth to avoid paying taxes. Last estimate I saw was that it costs over £40Bn/year.
Want an example, lookup Richard Tice of the Reform party, who’s business is owned by a shell company in a tax haven and who’s girlfriend has moved to Dubai
We're spending it because we're living beyond our means and Rachel from Accounts keeps borrowing more and more and the international lenders aren't sure we can pay it back long term hence increasing levels of interest on an ever increasing mountain of debt. But you know all this already. No wonder anyone with any sense moves it out of reach. But how typical to drag your politics into something completely unrelated.
 
Last edited:
Agreed, but when govt. offers zero VED on your car, and then they turn round and say "hah, got you!, now you've bought it you have to pay lol", it does result in quite a lot of bitterness and mistrust. I can totally understand them putting it on new cars, but to apply it retrospectively is a massive **** move.

Was it really that surprising. Incentives get thrown in the bin once they've done their job. The long term goal is to get everyone into electric cars not dig a deeper pit of debt by promising a tax free vehicle for life.
 
Saw the bait and switch coming a mile off with EVs.

But they played their hand about a decade early. Now the switch will be even slower or may just end up abandonned. People care about what things cost them, not political trends.
 
Last edited:
Car tax is peanuts compared to what we would be paying if the fuel duty escalator hadn't been frozen for the past 15 odd years we'd be paying huge amounts on fuel duty by now no wonder our roads are being pounded by an endless stream of gas guzzling SUV's.


UK is infact generous and extremely lenient towards car owners


We're spending it because we're living beyond our means and Rachel from Accounts keeps borrowing more and more and the international lenders aren't sure we can pay it back long term hence increasing levels of interest on an ever increasing mountain of debt. But you know all this already. No wonder anyone with any sense moves it out of reach. But how typical to drag your politics into something completely unrelated.

Let me ask you this. Are you ok with many of the 1% paying so little tax due to offshoring, that the rest of us (including you and me) are having to pick-up the tab?

Post war, the very rich were massively taxed. Now, they’ve been given a “get out of tax” card by those in power.

Yes, I’m aware that it’s become more difficult to offshore, but there are still loopholes that exist for those 1% rich enough to pay the specialist accountant. Those changes are clearly aimed at the 2-10% who might be getting ideas above their station.
 
Last edited:
Side question for everyone, do you ever look at the price of fuel these days? Or care?

I personally don't look/care, because I choose to own cars that do rubbish mpg anyway, that only run on premium fuel, versus something pratical.
Everything about the ownership is expensive, be it OEM or aftermarket parts/modifications, tax and insurance. But I never regret any of it, because I always get in and out of the car with a childish grin, so it's worth it to me.

As I highlighted in post #5, England are lucky that we aren't paying Irish VRT prices!

Even in the 90's if you owned a 1.6L or higher, you'd be paying the same amount as someone with a big litre V8 made in the same era... It's always been stupid, price wise.
Wether you have a stock boring car or something fast/modified, you still get ripped off one way or the other, it is what it is, you cant change it.
 
I don't want to give the powers that be any ideas but I think I know the next **** move for vehicle tax - vehicle weight based taxation.

Heavier vehicles wear the roads down quicker, are generally bigger so take up more lane space and use more energy (fossil and electricity) to move around. So the heavier your car is the more you pay, particularly targeting those in SUVs and ironically EVs.

Echoes of Gordon Brown's 'dash for diesel' for sure; encourage as many people in to EVs and then pull the rug and tax them to the balls.
 
I don't want to give the powers that be any ideas but I think I know the next **** move for vehicle tax - vehicle weight based taxation.

Heavier vehicles wear the roads down quicker, are generally bigger so take up more lane space and use more energy (fossil and electricity) to move around. So the heavier your car is the more you pay, particularly targeting those in SUVs and ironically EVs.

Echoes of Gordon Brown's 'dash for diesel' for sure; encourage as many people in to EVs and then pull the rug and tax them to the balls.

Definitely anything over 2 tonnes should be paying a lot more tbh. At that point it's just getting ridiculous.
 
Last edited:
I see this claim regularly but how much evidence is there what a say 2T car ‘wears out the road more quickly’ than a 1.5T car?

Yes the 2T car has a bit more energy but does that actually equate to a material amount when you consider the road surface is built for trucks weighing 44T and potentially more for oversized loads.

I’d expect it to be within measurement error and road wear has much more to do with how people drive than the weight of the car. E.g. heavy acceleration, braking, cornering speed will have more impact.
 
Definitely anything over 2 tonnes should be paying a lot more tbh. At that point it's just getting ridiculous.
Exactly!

That's probably 90% of road traffic these days :cry: .
Which is mental when you think about it, is that we don't live in America etc with massive wide roads, so why driving cars too big/long for roads/car park spaces?
Why are these cars deemed suitable for our roads/market?

A 3 series now is bigger than a 7/8...

The 2006 E92 3 series, are made of mixed materials like alluminum, plastic, steel, which are used wherever possible on panels like the boot/bonnet/wings, and on the 325i/330i models they used magnesium/alluminium composite for the N52 engine block, all to keep things light but maximise space/handling, it also meant it didn't need bigger brakes than the previous generation E46 330i model, thus keeping the weight down again, ironically a 325i E92 can be 1420KG depending on spec, and a E46 325i Ci (coupe) starts at 1385KG, then compare how much bigger/luxurious a E92 is, without being too big, and the room inside is way better utilized than new cars today on a weight versus size ratio.

An RS7, is a 4 seater with no headroom in the back, why not a 5 seater for a start, and why give it the coupe roofline that only allows people sub 6 foot to barely sit in the back or just kids, yet it's huge? Other than fitting like 5 bodies in the boot, it's just wasted space. Yet an S8 from the 90's, all the leg room/head room and the luggage capacity.

I understand that we have to have crash structures, but you'd be surprised how well a lot of lighter tin can older stuff from the early 2000's crash, the 2001 Civics, have an NCAP 4/5 rating for adults in a crash and 3/4 for pedestrians, and they weigh 1165-1250KG https://www.euroncap.com/en/ratings-rewards/latest-safety-ratings/en/results/honda/civic/15543 and that's just a cheap little civic.

We all saw that Top Gear years ago showing all of the Euro NCAP ratings of each car, then ending on ironically, how lethal something big like a Range Rover crashes, impaling your legs with the A pillar even if you're Richard Hammonds height, so big doesn't always mean safe - yes I know nowadays the crash technology is obviously way better, but it doesn't have to be 2 tonnes and above to achieve it.

There are so many 2+ tonne cars now that are still ICE, so why are they so heavy yet feature barely any extra cabin space/seating?
 
Back
Top Bottom