Vehicle Tax - Lib/Dems

  STREETWORK 19:42 25 Oct 2006
Locked

The Lib/Dems have announced that they would introduce a new vehicle tax and tax higher (£300 per year) for 4x4's, but free for electric cars. I belive that they have lost the plot by forgetting what this tax is used for, road repairs, transport, public parking, etc. Some people need such vehicles to get around in and of course for work purposes. I am a 4x4 owner and need it for work and play, it also carries 6 kids to school every day because there is no school bus available for our area.

Have they just lost thousands of voters???...

  beeuuem 20:07 25 Oct 2006

The report was on parking permits in Richmond click here not VED.

  Kate B 20:22 25 Oct 2006

That's an excellent idea. Cars are a major polluter and should be taxed with a green agenda in mind. Furthermore, in a city or big urban area they're a luxury and should similarly be taxed as such.

On a general point, the LibDems for a long time have been to the left on taxing and generally support progressive taxation - ie taxing those who can afford it more than those who can't. Car owners are arguably better off than people who don't have cars and thus under that argument should be taxed.

I accept that cars are not a luxury if you live out in the sticks but I do think everyone should take financial - and fiscal - responsibility for their carbon emissions.

  Jak_1 20:28 25 Oct 2006

I have an ageing escort 1.3, any more tax would be a burdon. The car is not a luxury, try getting a bus to work at 5 am for a 6 am start, even in a city/urban area. The motorist is already taxed to the hilt, enough is enough.

  Kate B 20:39 25 Oct 2006

Motorists always think they're a special case and shouldn't be taxed for the privilege of using their polluting vehicles. Sorry to sound confrontational, and I am sympathetic about the early starts, but it doesn't wash. If you don't want to pay the tax, don't have the car. I've worked night shifts without a car.

  GANDALF <|:-)> 20:43 25 Oct 2006

Try living in rural or semi rural areas where the bus ends at 1800hrs. /sigh. Not everyone lives where there is good public transport.

G

  anskyber 20:47 25 Oct 2006

We perhaps should avoid party political comments if we want this thread to live and I think it should live.

I have no problem at all with the "polluter pays" principle but its pretty hard to enforce. The difficulty I have with the approach, in this case, is parking has very little to do with usage. In fact it could be said the longer the vehicle is parked the less it pollutes, which is why I think it starts to fail the test of relevancy to the main principle.

To that extent it has a hollow ring and I would prefer to see "green" initiatives linked to actual usage, for example increasing fuel tax but abandoning road tax.

Local Councils are in an interesting position these days, money raised by initiatives like this are "ring fenced" and must be used for other transport (usually public transport) projects. Its not another feather bedding ploy as many might think.

It will catch on there is no doubt because the motorist is the soft target here when compared with the more thorny issues of carbon emissions from say buildings which has largely been ignored because its a harder problem to solve. Congestion charges in places like London will soon be linked to C02 emissions as well I am sure.

I worry about the social implications of the approach given that those who can afford the lasrger newer vehicles may be in a good position to pay whereas Jak_1 may not. The Richmond proposals for two higher polluting cars is still however only just over £1 a day to park.

  Kate B 20:56 25 Oct 2006

Good post, anskyber; and Gandalf, I am as I said sympathetic about living in rural areas. Cars aren't a luxury there. But I am deeply unsympathetic to people who insist on having four-wheel-drives and similar in cities. That's just naff showing off.

  LastChip 22:04 25 Oct 2006

right on the button.

A far as I'm concerned, they could ban 4x4's all together on public roads. The roads are pitiful enough, never designed for what in some cases are vehicles approaching the size of commercial vehicles. Give genuine country based vehicles an exemption, IF the owners can prove a necessity.

It's yet another example (in many cases) of complete self indulgence and trying to show off. "My 4x4's bigger than yours"! Why on earth can't people grow up. There are far more important things to be concerned about, rather than a tin box with four wheels.

  STREETWORK 22:26 25 Oct 2006

Who-ahhh

Keep to the thread, do not vent frustration upon people who actually need a 4x4 for work. I agree that you have to bear the question of why in a city do you see 4x4's, but here in the country we need them as reliable forms of transport. No import here, pure british (I hope) land rover.

But why suggest larger tax burdens on people like this when the idea of car tax is to assist in the maintainance of the highway and sustainable transport. Not to offset the cost environmental political correctness.

  walesrob 23:01 25 Oct 2006

Gandalf makes a valid point - I also live in rural area, where the bus operates just 3 times a day, where the nearest town is 10 miles away, so a means of own transport is essential.

What is clear from this thread is that the system needs reforming. So lets see - you buy a new car, lets say a small hatchback costing 8K, which will obviously be a lot more eco-friendly than a much older car. Add on that sales tax. Add on that vehicle excise duty. Add on that petrol tax. Add on to that tax on your car service bills, etc.

Where is all that tax going and how much exactly is it all? Can anyone give us an accurate figure? No!

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

OnePlus 5 review

Alice Saey's mesmerising animation for Dutch singer Mark Lotterman

iPad Pro 10.5in (2017) review

Comment booster votre iPhone ?