www.theguardian.com/environment/2019/oct/04/electric-cars-call-for-tax-on-road-usage-to-cover-lost-fuel-revenue
Always seemed a sensible option to me. Charge for time of day also.
Do it cheaply, at MOT and pay a fee based on mileage traveled or do it sensibly with ANPR cameras and you can charge for peak time usage, set off peak rates, even charge for using lane 3 on motorways.
Of course, the number of cloned plates will no doubt rise.
|
|
With cars becoming ever more sophisticated, in future it will be a relatively simple matter to add a device, chip, whatever, to the car's electronic system which will monitor all motoring and will send a signal to a roadside device to show that the system is functioning correctly and reporting the correct amount of tax, duty, whatever is being collected.
|
|
The lost fuel revenue is only the start of it. Think of all the companies and jobs involved in the manufacture and distribution of car parts specific to petrol and diesel vehicles.
|
>> The lost fuel revenue is only the start of it. Think of all the companies
>> and jobs involved in the manufacture and distribution of car parts specific to petrol and
>> diesel vehicles.
>>
I guess electric cars will be more reliable due to fewer parts.
No gearbox required, fuel tank, fuel pump, water pump, engine block, starter motor, catalytic converter, exhaust system, EGR valve, particulate burner thingamajig etc. Mechanical dials are being replaced by LCD panels.
Brakes will probably wear less.
On the other hand, battery manufacturing will increase as will cabling, mining, computer chips, cameras, LIDAR systems, radar systems, multi-processing computer systems to process LIDAR / images, mapping services, steering motors, servicing for these as they probably need to be kept in a tip top condition.
|
Any tax has to be collected easily & at low cost.
Petrol & Diesel - duty is paid as it leaves the refinery - Big cheques, easily collected.
25 years ago we had the Poll Tax - it failed as it was tricky to collect.
Road Tax & fuel duty both pass easy collection test.
|
>> Any tax has to be collected easily & at low cost.
>> Petrol & Diesel - duty is paid as it leaves the refinery - Big cheques,
>> easily collected.
>>
>> 25 years ago we had the Poll Tax - it failed as it was tricky
>> to collect.
>> Road Tax & fuel duty both pass easy collection test.
With the coming of electric cars needing to be plugged into a cable, cometh road pricing.
|
>> >> The lost fuel revenue is only the start of it. Think of all the
>> companies
>> >> and jobs involved in the manufacture and distribution of car parts specific to petrol
>> and
>> >> diesel vehicles.
Most car partial assemblies are built by robots, as is final assembly. Jobs will remain at about the same level.
>>
>> I guess electric cars will be more reliable due to fewer parts.
>>
>> No gearbox required, fuel tank, fuel pump, water pump, engine block, starter motor, catalytic converter,
>> exhaust system, EGR valve, particulate burner thingamajig etc. Mechanical dials are being replaced by LCD
>> panels.
Electric trains break down often enough, in some ways they are less reliable and require more maintenance than cars.
|
The most wasteful use of resources is someone with a car that does tiny mileage.
Stick VED up to £500 for all cars, and raise VAT on electricity produced by burning fossils to 20%.
|
>> The most wasteful use of resources is someone with a car that does tiny mileage.
So if I choose to walk and cycle more and cut down on my car mileage I should be penalised?
|
Penalised by getting fitter and paying less fuel duty?
Sure.
Applauded for having a 2 ton lump of steel, aluminium and plastic that sits idle?
No.
|
|
They will heavily ta electricity. It has been in the U.N, Agenda 21 & Agenda 2030 White Papers for years and years, hence the global smart meter rollout for remote rationing and tariff-shaping.
|
>>So if I choose to walk and cycle more and cut down on my car mileage I should be penalised?
No, you'd be penalised for having a car when you don't need one.
|
|
Far better to penalise e multiple car ownership. More than one car per household should be taxed at a punitive rate encouraging better use of scarce resources.
|
I prefer my taxes to be realistic, hard to dodge, and cheap to collect.
In your scenario I'd register one car at one house and the other car at my second home.
Last edited by: Lygonos on Sat 5 Oct 19 at 20:33
|
>> I prefer my taxes to be realistic, hard to dodge, and cheap to collect.
>>
>> In your scenario I'd register one car at one house and the other car at
>> my second home.
>>
You could but you would be breaking the law if they didn't match the address on your licence.
>>
|
>>You could but you would be breaking the law if they didn't match the address on your licence.
Really?
I wonder where my lease car is registered - sure isn't at my house.
|
>> I prefer my taxes to be realistic, hard to dodge, and cheap to collect.
>>
>> In your scenario I'd register one car at one house and the other car at
>> my second home.
>>
>>
Tax second houses, no one needs them sat there most of the time doing nothing
|
>>Tax second houses, no one needs them sat there most of the time doing nothing
Pay full council tax and use very little of their services.
|
>> >>Tax second houses, no one needs them sat there most of the time doing nothing
>>
>> Pay full council tax and use very little of their services.
>>
That's what someone with a second car might say.
|
"Tax second houses, no one needs them sat there most of the time doing nothing"
Two suits in the wardrobe? Tax 'em or wear both.
|
>> "Tax second houses, no one needs them sat there most of the time doing nothing"
>>
>> Two suits in the wardrobe? Tax 'em or wear both.
>>
Yeah sure why not.
|
>> Far better to penalise e multiple car ownership. More than one car per household should
>> be taxed at a punitive rate encouraging better use of scarce resources.
>>
So two people in low paid jobs who both need to drive to work would be hammered?
|
|
No One would be hammered. The plain fact is that we have to reduce the number of cars on the road . In reality most household do not absolutely need multiple car ownership. We have to accept there is no gain without pain.
|
A flat fee per car does it all for you.
2 cars? Double the tax.
No wonder tax law and avoidance is a national sport.
|
>> The plain fact is that we have to reduce the
>> number of cars on the road . We have to accept there is no gain without pain.
>>
So you're going to set an example, then?
Whenever people advocate punishment taxes (Or indeed any extra tax) it always seems to apply to the lifestyles of other people, never their own.
|
>> So you're going to set an example, then?
>>
>> Whenever people advocate punishment taxes (Or indeed any extra tax) it always seems to apply
>> to the lifestyles of other people, never their own.
>>
I would accept that it would be an environmental necessity. Sometimes the greater good overrides our individual rights.
|
>Sometimes the greater good overrides our individual rights.
Greater good? Who decides what the "greater good" is? You?
|
>> Greater good? Who decides what the "greater good" is? You?
Government.
Are you willing to argue that individual right to burn coal in household grate trumps greater good of absence of smog?
|
>>Far better to penalise e multiple car ownership. More than one car per household should be taxed at a punitive rate
That's two different things;
On the multiple car ownership I agree there is an argument for increased tax. But on the multi car households I do not. It should surely be related to how many drivers in the household?
|
|
One of the problems facing cities is the sheer number of cars cluttering our roads and indeed pavements and to a large degree inhibiting the growth of more environmentally sound transport methods.
|
>It should surely be related to how many drivers in the household?
Taking a look at three adjacent houses in our close.
An older couple who moved in about a year ago who we've nicknamed "the drug dealers". They have a top of the range Merc CLS and Range Rover but do very little mileage because they hardly ever move off their driveway.
Next door to them is a middle-aged couple with two young boys at a private school about ten miles away. Dad sets off for work at 6am each morning in a VW Polo and gets home around 6pm. Mum works from home and does the school run in an F-Pace which is also the family car.
The next house along is a house-share by three guys and one girl. I guess they're in their 20s. They have two Fiestas, a Focus and a Civic between them. Two of them work shifts at the local hospital, one of them seems to work regular 9 to 5 hours but is away many weekends with the Territorial Army. No idea what the remaining guy does during the day but he also has an evening job.
Which one deserves "punitive taxation" for multiple car ownership?
|
>>So if I choose to walk and cycle more and cut down on my car mileage I should be penalised?
>> No, you'd be penalised for having a car when you don't need one.
Just because someone chooses to walk and cycle more, it doesn't necessarily mean they don't need a car.
|
>> The most wasteful use of resources is someone with a car that does tiny mileage.
>>
That's me with a 12 year old petrol car that sometimes does less than eight miles a week and a bus pass I no longer use as my time is too precious.
>> Stick VED up to £500 for all cars,
I have been paying that or more for 5 years:-(
I will continue keeping the car as in my circumstances it is quite difficult and expensive to change.
|
My RFL is currently £40.77 pcm, paid by DD. And average 24mpg since I bought the car two years ago. Doesn’t bother me and helps fill govt coffers with tax.
The only folks whom it will affect eventually are the dozens of smaller charities who will get less of the 95% of my estate when I croak
The cars not environmentally friendly, but anywhere less than 1.5 miles I walk, even if it’s lashing sideways rain. My lifestyle, and rural location, means that a car is pretty much a necessity....drive up to the Lakes to go walking regularly, take my old Mum on 70 mile weekly visits to her sister in a nursing home. A cheap runaround would do the job. But what the heck.
Living and working in a big city I could probably do without a car
|
Well I am sure no one saw this coming ;-) - Duncan
