It's the virtually nil company car tax on electric vehicles which has allowed it, these schemes are available to private sector employers as well.
The system was originally designed so that your income tax was replaced with company car tax, which gave people an incentive to pick more efficient cars but without reducing the overall tax take significantly. If they picked a Range Rover they'd pay absolutely loads of tax, if they picked an efficient car they'd pay similar or perhaps make a small tax saving, pushing them towards a more efficient car.
Then it was decided to have the rate on zero emissions car set to virtually zero. So lets consider the effect of this and imagine you earn £60,000 a year and are deciding between a BMW 430i or a BMW i4 40e. I pick this model because they are basically the same car, only one is full EV and one is petrol.
So, you save tax at 40% and NI on the monthly cost of the lease, and this is replaced by company car tax instead. For the example above, the monthly tax due on each car would be:
BMW i4: £36.58
BMW 430i: £572.66
1 litre Ford Focus: £266
Clearly if you take the i4 then the huge saving in tax and national insurance is not being replaced by any meaningful company car tax. This therefore makes the cost of the i4 exceptionally cheap given its a £55,000 car and also reduces the governments tax take by hundreds of pounds a month. Who is paying for this? If you took the 430i instead - a 2 litre petrol so hardly a V8 Range Rover - the tax bill is so huge that I'd imagine absolutely nobody picks one of these anymore.
So you end up with people thinking its totally normal to drive £55k cars for £500 a month (Whilst not realising or not caring that it also reduces your pensionable pay as well), when it isn't and it surely cannot last for ever.
And where is the lost tax revenue coming from?
The system was originally designed so that your income tax was replaced with company car tax, which gave people an incentive to pick more efficient cars but without reducing the overall tax take significantly. If they picked a Range Rover they'd pay absolutely loads of tax, if they picked an efficient car they'd pay similar or perhaps make a small tax saving, pushing them towards a more efficient car.
Then it was decided to have the rate on zero emissions car set to virtually zero. So lets consider the effect of this and imagine you earn £60,000 a year and are deciding between a BMW 430i or a BMW i4 40e. I pick this model because they are basically the same car, only one is full EV and one is petrol.
So, you save tax at 40% and NI on the monthly cost of the lease, and this is replaced by company car tax instead. For the example above, the monthly tax due on each car would be:
BMW i4: £36.58
BMW 430i: £572.66
1 litre Ford Focus: £266
Clearly if you take the i4 then the huge saving in tax and national insurance is not being replaced by any meaningful company car tax. This therefore makes the cost of the i4 exceptionally cheap given its a £55,000 car and also reduces the governments tax take by hundreds of pounds a month. Who is paying for this? If you took the 430i instead - a 2 litre petrol so hardly a V8 Range Rover - the tax bill is so huge that I'd imagine absolutely nobody picks one of these anymore.
So you end up with people thinking its totally normal to drive £55k cars for £500 a month (Whilst not realising or not caring that it also reduces your pensionable pay as well), when it isn't and it surely cannot last for ever.
And where is the lost tax revenue coming from?