Quantcast

Road Tax rates

UKworkshop.co.uk

Help Support UKworkshop.co.uk:

Woody2Shoes

Impressive Member
Joined
5 Jan 2015
Messages
1,518
Reaction score
51
Location
Sussex UK
How do you imagine all the equipment for the "fossil free" generation is made? A turbine takes years to become carbon neutral and that's the best of all of those you quote.
That's a different point. Nothing's for nothing - it costs a certain amount of carbon to build a coal-fired power station or a wind/solar farm. Are you suggesting we should stop using electricity (I'll asssume you don't think we should just carry on burning fossils)? What is happening is, in effect, a "spend to save" measure - not ideal, but better than most of the realistic alternatives.
 

Doris

Middle Class Twit Of The Year 2005
Joined
10 Jul 2011
Messages
374
Reaction score
14
Location
Essex UK
Have a 1999 Toyota Yaris and pay £173 a year. Someone told me that once it reaches 25 years old I won't need to pay tax on it ever again as it consider a classic car. Is this true?
 

artie

Sawdust manufacturer.
Joined
12 Jan 2015
Messages
903
Reaction score
78
Location
Norn Iron
Have a 1999 Toyota Yaris and pay £173 a year. Someone told me that once it reaches 25 years old I won't need to pay tax on it ever again as it consider a classic car. Is this true?
More like 40 years.
 

Noel

Moderator
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
7 Aug 2003
Messages
6,168
Reaction score
71
It used to be 25 yrs to qualify for classic/historic exemption, unfortunately it's now 40 yrs. So a way to go yet.
 

Bob Chapman

Established Member
Joined
23 Apr 2007
Messages
94
Reaction score
0
Location
West Yorkshire
As Andy T says it's not a road tax - although many people, myself included, call it that. However words matter. They convey meaning and the wrong words may convey the wrong meaning. No matter how many of us call it a 'road' tax, the fact remains that it isn't.
In order to drive a motor vehicle anywhere except on private land, a driver needs two licenses. One is to prove physical and mental ability to drive the vehicle safely and is, logically, called a driving license. The second license is to to be allowed to actually drive it somewhere and is a vehicle license. It's not for the road, it's for the vehicle.
This second license is a bit like a fishing license which allows the holder to fish in a river, pond, lake etc. It does not convey 'ownership' of the river and nor does it give the fisherman any extra rights over the river. Other river users eg. canoeists, houseboats or small boys throwing stones, can continue to use the river - often to the annoyance of the fishermen - even though they have not paid any license fee.
In a similar way pedestrians and cyclists have an absolute right to use the roads without paying a fee for a license, although as John Brown points out, many cyclists are, in fact, also motorists and so will have paid for a motor vehicle license which remains unused while they are on their bicycles.
Motorways have the distinction of being the only British Roads where pedestrians and cyclists are not allowed, and in this respect I think they are unique.
Bob
 

Lons

Established Member
Joined
14 Feb 2010
Messages
7,309
Reaction score
108
Location
Northumberland
You are joking, ever seen a pig fly? they will tax you just for owning the vehicle.
They already do if you buy a car with an original list price including accessories that's over £40k you have to pay additional premium of £320- pa for 5 years starting with the second taxable period.
E.g. my car was a 6 week old demonstrator with a list price of £47k, I paid well under £40k, it had to be taxed again from my purchase date which is when the premium rate started so 5 years at £320 is extra tax of £1600 which has absolutely nothing to do with emissions, If I sell it on before then the new owner pays the balance of that tax.
 

sploo

Somewhat extinguished member
Joined
8 Nov 2014
Messages
2,647
Reaction score
74
Location
West Yorkshire
You don't have to pay it, if you don't take it on the road.
True, but that's statistically an unlikely scenario. I.e. if you tax vehicles based on their emission output then they're unlikely to be doing too many miles (and emitting pollutants) if they're not on the road.
 

guineafowl21

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2015
Messages
288
Reaction score
28
Location
Inverness
The second license is to to be allowed to actually drive it somewhere and is a vehicle license. It's not for the road, it's for the vehicle.
The tax is linked to a vehicle, but is only levied if it’s used or kept on public roads. You can keep a vehicle on private land and not pay road tax, because you’re not using the road.
 

marcros

(Trevanion)+1
Joined
11 Feb 2011
Messages
10,260
Reaction score
203
Location
Leeds
What is the argument against adding the "road tax" to the cost of fuel, so that those doing more miles or with less efficient cars pay more, those doing few miles pay less.

There must be a downside to that approach or it would have been done but I don't know what the counter argument is.
 

numpty1

New member
Joined
26 May 2020
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
Location
West Sussex
They already do if you buy a car with an original list price including accessories that's over £40k you have to pay additional premium of £320- pa for 5 years starting with the second taxable period.
E.g. my car was a 6 week old demonstrator with a list price of £47k, I paid well under £40k, it had to be taxed again from my purchase date which is when the premium rate started so 5 years at £320 is extra tax of £1600 which has absolutely nothing to do with emissions, If I sell it on before then the new owner pays the balance of that tax.
Doesn't this show the BBC 1 program RIP OFF BRITAIN is right. The governmrnt encourages yiu to buy a new car,then charge you for doing just that. My Peugeot combi 52 yr 2lt "eco engine" made me purchase, in 2004 Road tax £130 now 200 next likely a lot higher which will make my vehicle worthless and to add turning 80 Nov my insurance due Dec1 will sky rocket like Sheila Hancocks ( Tony's daughter).to £600+ They think you turn into a stock car racer reaching having multiple crashes charging down road at enormous speed of 30 in 30mph zone. Another lot of racketeers. The other is young drivers should have guvenors fitted so their speed is max 50 and when on motorways keeps them in nearside lane.



80.
 

sploo

Somewhat extinguished member
Joined
8 Nov 2014
Messages
2,647
Reaction score
74
Location
West Yorkshire
What is the argument against adding the "road tax" to the cost of fuel, so that those doing more miles or with less efficient cars pay more, those doing few miles pay less.

There must be a downside to that approach or it would have been done but I don't know what the counter argument is.
I always accepted that would probably be the most fair solution (even when I previously used to do a large number of miles per year). That said, it would tax fuel use, but not how the fuel is used. I.e. Someone using 10 litres in an old car may be outputting significantly more pollution than 10 litres being put through a newer design.

Depends what you're trying to tax too; if the argument is that part of the tax is for maintaining roads then a motorbike probably does much less damage than a large car or HGV; even if it then burns the same amount of fuel. However, you don't have a full CAT and filters on a bike, so I suppose it probably outputs more harmful gasses than a car.
 

Terry - Somerset

Established Member
Joined
22 Dec 2012
Messages
506
Reaction score
36
Location
Taunton
Sophistry, Andy, on their part. It doesn't mean in any way that income fron Road tax/Vehicle Exicise Duty is ring fenced for road expenditure/maintenance, and it doesn't mean it'll happen. It's a sound bite - what is the connection between V.E.D and the "National Road Fund"? I think we should be told.:LOL:
Most "road" related "tax" revenue comes from fuel duty £28bn pa - car tax is about £7bn pa.

£28.8 bn for the National Roads Fund seems to be the total for 5 years - ~£6bn pa. Somewhat less than the spend on HS2.
 

Trainee neophyte

[Insert witty and amusing title here]
Joined
12 Apr 2019
Messages
2,227
Reaction score
98
Location
Greece
What we have here is is a very interesting, polite discussion amongst sheep as to what the wolves will be eating for dinner. Tax is theft. It is the removal of your wealth, with the threat of violence if you don't pay. Vinnie the Knife and his maffia friends are complete amateurs compared to government and their ability to steal from the entire population, and get the population to agree to it, too.

The immediate rebuttal to this is the we need government, because who would look after all the poor, sick, hungry, homeless etc, so on and so forth. If you agree to that concept, then we can say that government is enforced charity, with the threat of violence if you don't comply.

Government's only moral role is to enforce property rights, and possibly also collective defence if you like that sort of thing. To my mind, defence doesn't include going to foreign countries and killing people just in case they were thinking of coming over "here" here and killing some of "us".
 

Latest posts

Top