Go Back   The 75 and ZT Owners Club Forums > The 75 and ZT Owners Club Forums > The 75 and ZT Owners Club General Forum
Register FAQ Image Gallery Members List Calendar Mark Forums Read
Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 16th June 2019, 12:48   #21
MSS
This is my second home
 
Rover 75CDT, Jaguar XF-S 3.0V6, V'xhall Omega V6 Estate, Twintop 1.8VVT, Astra Estate and Corsa 1.2

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 7,078
Thanks: 283
Thanked 624 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clf View Post
I am one of those who believe the VED should be added to fuel duty (even though we already pay tax(es!!!) on that. I understand that the cost of goods will go up, and haulage firms will have to pay more (but also be able to claim back a lot more too). But the roads are ultimately paid by the government (via various councils and road services etc). So even if the VED added to fuel even had an additional 5 pence per litre added to maintain infrastructure, then it would make it a fairer system, that almost every one who uses a vehicle will pay towards the use and damage. I say almost, as I envisage bilking will increase, pay first will become commonplace and eliminate that.

Road Fund Licence was abolished in 1937

I am of the opposite view. Taxes are dynamic mechanisms that react in response to changes in people behaviour, improvements in knowledge, natural changes etc. and also to drive change. There is no point in limiting the number of tax mechanisms as this will limit the ability to differentiate between target populations for taxing and effecting change.

By all means, put additional tax on fuels to improve funding of chosen programmes, including public transport, but in my view VED on vehicles is an absolute must as a way of containing the problems caused by multi-car ownership per household.
MSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 12:52   #22
MSS
This is my second home
 
Rover 75CDT, Jaguar XF-S 3.0V6, V'xhall Omega V6 Estate, Twintop 1.8VVT, Astra Estate and Corsa 1.2

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 7,078
Thanks: 283
Thanked 624 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by topman View Post
But it has to be picked up on an ANPR camera, this way it's fully on the road or off.

Agreed, which it would not be unless the car passed an APNR system or an APNR system went to the car. The probability of catching an untaxed car using ANPR must therefore be relatively low especially if the car is on the public highway but is not driven very much.
MSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 13:18   #23
clf
This is my second home
 
clf's Avatar
 
MG ZT CDTi

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: carrick
Posts: 7,859
Thanks: 3,494
Thanked 2,657 Times in 1,973 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mss View Post
I am of the opposite view. Taxes are dynamic mechanisms that react in response to changes in people behaviour, improvements in knowledge, natural changes etc. and also to drive change. There is no point in limiting the number of tax mechanisms as this will limit the ability to differentiate between target populations for taxing and effecting change.

By all means, put additional tax on fuels to improve funding of chosen programmes, including public transport, but in my view VED on vehicles is an absolute must as a way of containing the problems caused by multi-car ownership per household.
Having it on fuel would still do that, at least as effectively as it does now with the VED. A person would still have to put fuel into their vehicle, or choose not to fuel it/drive it. Just as they could choose not to tax it?

I do see your logic, but it is in my mind the same as those who change their car to take benefit of a cheaper VED. It would still have to be insured, or insured to remain on the roads, so that would 'control' the abandoned vehicles on the road (via ANPR as it does now). this would also reduce the public expenditure on DVA offices.
__________________


It is not gloss primer .............. it is duct tape silver!
clf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 13:30   #24
topman
This is my second home
 
topman's Avatar
 
MG ZT-T 190

Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 5,493
Thanks: 372
Thanked 647 Times in 534 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by clf View Post
Having it on fuel would still do that, at least as effectively as it does now with the VED. A person would still have to put fuel into their vehicle, or choose not to fuel it/drive it. Just as they could choose not to tax it?

I do see your logic, but it is in my mind the same as those who change their car to take benefit of a cheaper VED. It would still have to be insured, or insured to remain on the roads, so that would 'control' the abandoned vehicles on the road (via ANPR as it does now). this would also reduce the public expenditure on DVA offices.

I think mss is getting at is that governments like to use lots of modest levers, as opposed to few large ones, to discourage or encourage certain behaviours.

As long as this remains so, we'll see taxes that reflect this.
__________________
Like being creative?

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/
topman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 14:18   #25
clf
This is my second home
 
clf's Avatar
 
MG ZT CDTi

Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: carrick
Posts: 7,859
Thanks: 3,494
Thanked 2,657 Times in 1,973 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by topman View Post
I think mss is getting at is that governments like to use lots of modest levers, as opposed to few large ones, to discourage or encourage certain behaviours.

As long as this remains so, we'll see taxes that reflect this.
yes I knew that. I thought it would be obvious though, having a 'modest' additional cost to fuel would manipulate the behaviour of taking less journeys. Thereby reducing emissions or encouraging the transfer to electric power vehicles.
__________________


It is not gloss primer .............. it is duct tape silver!
clf is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 14:36   #26
macafee2
This is my second home
 
Rover 75 Saloon & Tourer

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 14,890
Thanks: 1,630
Thanked 3,032 Times in 2,181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mss View Post
I am of the opposite view. Taxes are dynamic mechanisms that react in response to changes in people behaviour, improvements in knowledge, natural changes etc. and also to drive change. There is no point in limiting the number of tax mechanisms as this will limit the ability to differentiate between target populations for taxing and effecting change.

By all means, put additional tax on fuels to improve funding of chosen programmes, including public transport, but in my view VED on vehicles is an absolute must as a way of containing the problems caused by multi-car ownership per household.
what is your proposal as an alternative to multi car ownership when public transport is not a viable option? We became a multi car family so my children could take part in sport as without 2 cars we had no way to transport them to and from events.
I have 2 cars and a bike, I can only use 1 at a time so how does me owning more then 1 vehicle become a problem?

macafee2
macafee2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 14:42   #27
macafee2
This is my second home
 
Rover 75 Saloon & Tourer

Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Lincoln
Posts: 14,890
Thanks: 1,630
Thanked 3,032 Times in 2,181 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by topman View Post
But it has to be picked up on an ANPR camera, this way it's fully on the road or off.
I can sorn it and still park on the road just as I can not tax it and drive on the road, what has sorn now gained?

put a tax disc in the window and a member of the public may note no tax and call the police, there, we now have extra eyes checking for tax
Not saying this was done but people could be asked to report no tax

no tax, should not be on road
sorn, should not be on the road
no sorn and no tax but parked in the garage, fine as in financial penalty
no sorn and no tax but on road, fine as in financial penalty

no worse off not having the sorn system

macafee2
macafee2 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 15:01   #28
Comfortably Numb
Posted a thing or two
 
Rover 75 Saloon

Join Date: Dec 2017
Location: Penrith
Posts: 1,336
Thanks: 165
Thanked 303 Times in 241 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mss View Post
I feel that most of you chaps make this too complicated for yourselves.

VED is a tax associated with the privilege of owning or using a vehicle that may use a public highway at some time during the period in question. If a vehicle is VED'd, it is a reasonable assumption that it will occupy a public highway at some time and therefore has a risk to third parties associated with this possibility. Whether you actually drive the vehicle is a red herring in that this act would require additional insurance covering the specific driver in addition to the insurance providing cover for the car. If you are not intending to keep a car on a public highway, or drive it, then why not declare SORN as this reflects its correct status and your intention.

A vehicle on a public highway has a risk profile in relation to other highway users irrespective of whether it is occupied by a driver or not and whether being driven or not.
As I said in my opening post, if I am only taking my car off the road, and switching the insurance to another vehicle, rather than unnecessarily insuring 2 vehicles when one is in my garage with the engine out, if I SORN it, I lose the tax for the rest of that month, and when I put it back on the road, I have to pay 2 installments of tax up front, one of which I will not get the benefit of until I sell the car. I have for a long time thought it would be far simpler and fairer to put the tax on fuel, even though I am a high fuel user. That way, you pay depending on the car you have and the way you drive and distance. And you can't avoid paying it. Then, to be legal, your car needs insurance and an MoT, both of which are on the Police database. Next thing is, they'll put up the price of an MoT, and state that it expires with change of ownership, as well as yearly! And I don't care what you call it, VED is still a TAX on driving my CAR on a ROAD - so CAR TAX or ROAD TAX!
Comfortably Numb is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 15:06   #29
MSS
This is my second home
 
Rover 75CDT, Jaguar XF-S 3.0V6, V'xhall Omega V6 Estate, Twintop 1.8VVT, Astra Estate and Corsa 1.2

Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Suffolk
Posts: 7,078
Thanks: 283
Thanked 624 Times in 440 Posts
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by macafee2 View Post
what is your proposal as an alternative to multi car ownership when public transport is not a viable option? We became a multi car family so my children could take part in sport as without 2 cars we had no way to transport them to and from events.
I have 2 cars and a bike, I can only use 1 at a time so how does me owning more then 1 vehicle become a problem?

macafee2

It becomes a problem for those living around you if you have three vehicles but parking space for only one. This is a widespread problem in cities leading to antisocial behaviour.

In terms of proposed solutions, I have many that address the short-term and others addressing the long-term. These range from exponentially increasing taxes for multi-car households without private parking spaces to licence to have more than one child per household.
MSS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 16th June 2019, 15:06   #30
Ray L
Avid contributor
 
rover 75 saloon

Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Worcester
Posts: 187
Thanks: 14
Thanked 49 Times in 27 Posts
Default Road Tax Swizz

As the number of electric vehicles is going to greatly increase in the coming years the total income produced by adding more to the tax on petrol/diesel is progressively going to decrease.

The fairest tax is on mileage usage.

My suggestion is to make the charge annually (like the existing vehicle tax) but based on the mileage shown on the annual MOT.

Should a vehicle be sold or scrapped during the year the mileage should be verified by a MOT station then the mileage cost due at that time would be paid by the seller/scrapper.at the same time as they notify the DVLA of the change.

Any clocking would perhaps be deterred by a very extensive ban and heavy fine.
Ray L is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 18:05.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Copyright © 2006-2023, The Rover 75 & MG ZT Owners Club Ltd