Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
![]() |
|
London Transport (uk.transport.london) Discussion of all forms of transport in London. |
Reply |
|
LinkBack | Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Andrew P Smith" wrote in message
... In article , dave F writes So it's back! Should big car owners face higher tax charges? http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3202590.stm I remember this topic been discussed on this NG before the CONge$tion charge was introduced. I still believe large engine capacity engines and above average car length vehicles should face an extra tax. Also should company's that provide company cars be charged a double vehicle tax? daveF This article refers to the vehicle excise duty (road tax) which is already cheaper for small cars. Unfortunately it's only cheaper for newer cars. I think the cutoff was 2000 or 2001 - certainly slighter more recent that the age of my car (Sep 1999). Which means that although my car has an economical diesel engine that does 50 mpg with a correspondingly low level of CO2, I get taxed at the same rate as if my car were a petrol-engined car in the most polluting band. Still, it's only £40/year - not enough to rant and rave about. Sad though that the DVLC couldn't do the job properly and make the scheme apply to *all* cars, using the manufacturers' published fuel economy and CO2 figures. I'm very much in favour of a two-tier taxation system for company cars that charges the company (not the driver) an extra VED on top of the rate for private citizens. Unfortunately, any increase in VED on company cars would not be absorbed by the company's profits (as it should be) but would end up being passed on to the customer - and hence ultimately the private citizen. |
#2
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article m, Martin
Underwood writes Unfortunately it's only cheaper for newer cars. I think the cutoff was 2000 or 2001 - certainly slighter more recent that the age of my car (Sep 1999). Which means that although my car has an economical diesel engine that does 50 mpg with a correspondingly low level of CO2, I get taxed at the same rate as if my car were a petrol-engined car in the most polluting band. Still, it's only £40/year - not enough to rant and rave about. Sad though that the DVLC couldn't do the job properly and make the scheme apply to *all* cars, using the manufacturers' published fuel economy and CO2 figures. Didn't realise there was a cut off date. I agree that the DVLC/Govt should make the rule apply as you describe. I'm very much in favour of a two-tier taxation system for company cars that charges the company (not the driver) an extra VED on top of the rate for private citizens. Unfortunately, any increase in VED on company cars would not be absorbed by the company's profits (as it should be) but would end up being passed on to the customer - and hence ultimately the private citizen. Same with my company I fear. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
#3
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Andrew P Smith" wrote in message ... In article m, Martin Underwood writes Unfortunately it's only cheaper for newer cars. I think the cutoff was 2000 or 2001 - certainly slighter more recent that the age of my car (Sep 1999). Which means that although my car has an economical diesel engine that does 50 mpg with a correspondingly low level of CO2, I get taxed at the same rate as if my car were a petrol-engined car in the most polluting band. Still, it's only £40/year - not enough to rant and rave about. Sad though that the DVLC couldn't do the job properly and make the scheme apply to *all* cars, using the manufacturers' published fuel economy and CO2 figures. Didn't realise there was a cut off date. The new emission based rules are only valid for new cars after a certain date (older cars are rated by engine size IIRC) I agree that the DVLC/Govt should make the rule apply as you describe. I think the problem is that before this became an issue not all cars had the necessary tests done and as modifications were made to squeeze cars into a lower band, a 1997 car cannot use the 1999 value (and it's unrealistic to go back and test all the earlier cars) tim I'm very much in favour of a two-tier taxation system for company cars that charges the company (not the driver) an extra VED on top of the rate for private citizens. Unfortunately, any increase in VED on company cars would not be absorbed by the company's profits (as it should be) but would end up being passed on to the customer - and hence ultimately the private citizen. Same with my company I fear. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
"tim" wrote in message
... "Andrew P Smith" wrote in message ... In article m, Martin Underwood writes Unfortunately it's only cheaper for newer cars. I think the cutoff was 2000 or 2001 - certainly slighter more recent that the age of my car (Sep 1999). Which means that although my car has an economical diesel engine that does 50 mpg with a correspondingly low level of CO2, I get taxed at the same rate as if my car were a petrol-engined car in the most polluting band. Still, it's only £40/year - not enough to rant and rave about. Sad though that the DVLC couldn't do the job properly and make the scheme apply to *all* cars, using the manufacturers' published fuel economy and CO2 figures. Didn't realise there was a cut off date. The new emission based rules are only valid for new cars after a certain date (older cars are rated by engine size IIRC) Exactly - and the engine size thing discriminates against diesels which tend to have larger engines without being more polluting. In terms of fuel economy (and therefore presumably C02 emission), a 2-litre diesel can be equivalent to a 1-litre petrol. And I know which I'd rather drive! (I borrowed a 1.1 petrol Peugeot 106 the other day while my car was being serviced [£980 for 72k service and new clutch - aargh!] and it was horrendous: although its engine was quite nippy when the car was going slowly, the poor thing ran out of puff at about 50 mph and had no 50-70 acceleration which made it a liability for overtaking on the dual carriageway. It also was very sensitive to the slightest change of accelerator pressure at high speed. And it felt as if it needed another two gears - the engine was screaming away at nearly 4000 rpm at 70. And I'd forgotten just how much benefit power steering is when you're manoevring in a tight space!) |
#5
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In article , tim
writes I think the problem is that before this became an issue not all cars had the necessary tests done and as modifications were made to squeeze cars into a lower band, a 1997 car cannot use the 1999 value (and it's unrealistic to go back and test all the earlier cars) Hmmmm, yes valid point. -- Andrew Electronic communications can be altered and therefore the integrity of this communication can not be guaranteed. Views expressed in this communication are those of the author and not associations or companies I am involved with. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Rail commuters face 20% rise in ticket prices as cap is axed - Evening Standard | London Transport | |||
Major Watford projects face axe as spending slashed | London Transport | |||
DLR Fare Hike | London Transport | |||
Question for TomTom owners | London Transport | |||
The effects of a road congestion tax | London Transport |