Off Topic Budget 2015

Currently reading:
Off Topic Budget 2015

Under the new system, some 95 per cent of new cars will be charged a flat rate of £140 in VED after the first year – less than the average £166 paid today.
Mr Osborne said all revenue raised from VED in England would be allocated to a new Roads Fund to build and improve major routes.


Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-raised-used-improve-roads.html#ixzz3fQOyP9m0
Follow us: mailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook
 
.......And yes cyclist's should also contribute, they do also use the roads.
All cyclists?
What about children on bikes?
Do cyclists have to pass a test and be over 18?
Should they have registration numbers?

Horse riders?
Pedestrians?
Joggers?

ALL road users?

Come on, you have to draw a line here. :)

Cheers,
Mick.
 
All road users of course not, just motorists and cyclist's
And little kiddes on bikes on the road, i haven't seen any on the roads that i drive on,and i am glad about that.
 
You live in the wrong place then. :D

Kids on bike here.
Maybe they should be wearing numbers on their backs and be registered with DVLA.

Here's my Cycling Proficiency Test Certificate from 1966.
 

Attachments

  • Cycling Proficiency Certificate copy.jpg
    Cycling Proficiency Certificate copy.jpg
    121.4 KB · Views: 27
You live in the wrong place then. :D

Kids on bike here.
Maybe they should be wearing numbers on their backs and be registered with DVLA.

Here's my Cycling Proficiency Test Certificate from 1966.

Lol! That's only half the story Mick, where's your little Triangle badge then? I've still got mine somewhere in my box of bits in the garage ;)
 
Nice to see a healthy debate going on (y)
Tax rise unfortunately seemed inevitable,due to all the sub <100 gm emission cars being produced .
I do however hope as they have said that most of the money raised will be spent back on the roads for upgrading and repairs as this is badly needed .
Whether they keep their word on this remains to be seen ,we need that spent on roads now though not in 2017-18!!!

The question is, what has the money been getting spent on up until now?! Why are they suddenly behaving like a 'roads fund' is some fantastic new idea??
 
The question is, what has the money been getting spent on up until now?! Why are they suddenly behaving like a 'roads fund' is some fantastic new idea??
I agree all previous Governments have not used it on roads as much as they should of, more like fleeced motorists since i can remember ,dont get me started on fuel duty/tax :D
 
Lol! That's only half the story Mick, where's your little Triangle badge then? I've still got mine somewhere in my box of bits in the garage ;)
I've still got it. :)
Mine is enameled metal. Later ones were only plastic.
I keep it in a box with other stuff. I have considered wearing it when I go riding, but I'm worried I might loose it as it's irreplaceable.

These days, we do Bikeability. Far more involved than Cycling Proficiency. Back in the old days, we did our CP in the school playground marked out with white lines in a mock-up road junction. These days, they go out into the real world and ride through real junctions on real roads. I've helped out locally with the school children, and it's very worthwhile and educational.

I did 30miles today, and tomorrow I'll be doing similar, if not more. I do about 100miles a week on the bike - 5,000miles a year. I've cycled the length and breadth of this country and done John O'Groats to Land's End twice over the years and even done Land's End to John O'Groats and Back. One of my John O'Groats to Land's End rides was on a Raleigh Chopper.
http://lejogandback.blogspot.co.uk
http://jogleonachopper.blogspot.co.uk

Regards to all,
Mick.
 
I doubt all the money will go on roads as it will go to councils first and go into a black hole and very little will be left to fill any black holes!
 
The current road tax system is based entirely on lies anyway so a change was due. A twin air (doesn't have to be a TA can be any small turbo built specifically to take advantage of a blind spot in the testing regime) should not qualify for free tax, it cannot do the stated mpg figures, so you can also bet as they work out the mpg from the tail pipe emissions it does not actually fall under the bar for free tax either.

Realistically It'll do about 45 mpg, which would probably put it in the same tax bracket or slightly below the 1.4 it replaced. Shouldn't be too much of a surprise, around the same power, same fuel type, pushing the same car...they haven't figured out how to make something from nothing just how to fabricate test results effectively. It's not a secret and there was no way the government was going to let it continue, also this will counter that diesels get lower tax despite causing more localised health problems.
 
Last edited:
It's not a secret and there was no way the government was going to let it continue, also this will counter that diesels get lower tax despite causing more localised health problems.


I don't thing it does counter that diesels cause health problems purely on the grounds that when this new system comes into force every single car which emits 1g/km of CO2 or higher will have to pay the same basic amounted £140 a year.

Only in the first year will you have to pay a premium based on CO2 emissions but this is still going to favour Diesel engines which emit less CO2

So as a comparison a new panda 1.3 multijet diesel versus a new 1.2 panda petrol would see the first years tax for the petrol being £160 and the diesel £140, after the first year both would be £140 a year


The other weird thing about this system is there is also a higher rate of tax for cars over £40,000 of £310 a year for the first 5 years.

This means tax on the most expensive and polluting cars will be £2310 for the first year and £450 for the following next 4 years. After 5 years the tax will drop to £140 like every other car on the road.

How this equates to petrol versus diesel? The 5litre petrol Range Rover would cost £2310 for the first year but the 4.4 v8 diesel Range Rover would only cost £1510 and the £140,000 3.0 litre hybrid range rover (which is also a diesel) would only cost £810 in the first year to tax after the first year all three cars would cost £450 a year regardless of the CO2 emissions


After 5 years a 5.0litre v8 Range Rover or a Ferrari, Lamborghini etc would all cost the standard £140 a year which is the same amount as that little panda or a fiat 500 so at that point the most polluting cars pay the same as the least polluting.
 
Last edited:
I don't thing it does counter that diesels cause health problems purely on the grounds that when this new system comes into force every single car which emits 1g/km of CO2 or higher will have to pay the same basic amounted £140 a year.

Only in the first year will you have to pay a premium based on CO2 emissions but this is still going to favour Diesel engines which emit less CO2

So as a comparison a new panda 1.3 multijet diesel versus a new 1.2 panda petrol would see the first years tax for the petrol being £160 and the diesel £140, after the first year both would be £140 a year


The other weird thing about this system is there is also a higher rate of tax for cars over £40,000 of £310 a year for the first 5 years.

This means tax on the most expensive and polluting cars will be £2310 for the first year and £450 for the following next 4 years. After 5 years the tax will drop to £140 like every other car on the road.

How this equates to petrol versus diesel? The 5litre petrol Range Rover would cost £2310 for the first year but the 4.4 v8 diesel Range Rover would only cost £1510 and the £140,000 3.0 litre hybrid range rover (which is also a diesel) would only cost £810 in the first year to tax after the first year all three cars would cost £450 a year regardless of the CO2 emissions


After 5 years a 5.0litre v8 Range Rover or a Ferrari, Lamborghini etc would all cost the standard £140 a year which is the same amount as that little panda or a fiat 500 so at that point the most polluting cars pay the same as the least polluting.

I would still say it's a step in the right direction diesel will cost the same as petrol to tax after year one, and that's a significant improvement on the current situation. The small difference between the two at point of purchase will very probably be moot given you'd be dropping an additional grand on the diesel to begin with. They want everyone on the bus or in zero emissions vehicles so they were never going to give petrol a tax break. As it is they are effectively dropping tax for any petrol car 1.6 and over and hiking it for the majority of diesels.
 
I would still say it's a step in the right direction diesel will cost the same as petrol to tax after year one, and that's a significant improvement on the current situation. The small difference between the two at point of purchase will very probably be moot given you'd be dropping an additional grand on the diesel to begin with. They want everyone on the bus or in zero emissions vehicles so they were never going to give petrol a tax break. As it is they are effectively dropping tax for any petrol car 1.6 and over and hiking it for the majority of diesels.


Is it a step in the right direction that a 6 year old supercharged 5 litre v8 range rover will cost the same to tax as a 5 year old panda pop and produce nearly 3 times the CO2!?

After the first year on cars costing less than £40,000 the tax will be £140 no matter what engine size or fuel used. This will of course disinsentivise manufacturers from chasing lower and lower emission standards (they're never going to reach 0g/km with any internal combustion engine car),especially as most manufacturers will do a deal in the first year on new cars and effectively absorb the cost of the first years tax.
In addition people need to forget about diesel cars costing more in the first place as they sell for more later down the line, a prime example is the current panda 4x4 (the only panda currently available with a Diesel engine) is exactly £1000 more for the diesel option, however 3 year old panda pop models with a petrol engine are advertised for 4 - 4.5k while diesel models of the same car are advertised at £6k so you will never lose that initial investment, In fact in the long term you might actually gain.
 
It is yes, no one is going to do 20K a year in a car that does 10-15mpg and if the do they are already being hammered in fuel duty and VAT. So the chances are of the 2 the one who has bought the small economical car will be doing the bigger mileage, causing more wear to the road network and more pollution. Yes per km the panda is cleaner but if it does 10 times the mileage which one is more polluting overall?
 
Last edited:
It is yes, no one is going to do 20K a year in a car that does 10-15mpg and if the do they are already being hammered in fuel duty and VAT. So the chances are of the 2 the one who has bought the small economical car will be doing the bigger mileage, causing more wear to the road network and more pollution. Yes per km the panda is cleaner but if it does 10 times the mileage which one is more polluting overall?


Who does 20k a year in a panda ?

If you look at places like auto trader at 10 year old range rovers you'll see they will be averaging well over 100k most of them over 150k miles. Where as 100k in a 10 year old panda is a much rarer occurrence. You will easily find a dozen range rovers with more than 35k miles at a year old but no pandas with that sort of mileage at a year old. The reason being people don't buy small little cars to do big mileages. But to be honest the mileage is kind of irrelevant because mile for mile a big gas guzzling car will still be paying the same as a small cheap fuel efficient car to tax after the first year. And a 3 ton 4x4 will exert far greater damage and wear on the road surface (especially with extra grippy off road tyres) than a little 800kg City car

In terms of green credentials this is very much a backward step, really all it does is aim to put a little more cash in the governments coffers
 
Fuel duty and VAT and fuel already punish those who drive a thirsty car and unlike v.e.d. banding cannot be cheated. The hypothetical Range Rover owner contributes far more to government coffers than the hypothetical panda owner already mile for mile. Then pays VAT on the more expensive parts for the car and servicing.

So why does the tax system then need to hit them again?
 
Fuel duty and VAT and fuel already punish those who drive a thirsty car and unlike v.e.d. banding cannot be cheated. The hypothetical Range Rover owner contributes far more to government coffers than the hypothetical panda owner already mile for mile. Then pays VAT on the more expensive parts for the car and servicing.



So why does the tax system then need to hit them again?


It's got nothing to do with punishment, the whole idea of the current taxing system was to make people more conscious of the environmental impact of their car. If you're happy to spend £100k on the car and getting only 18mpg then spending £500 on tax isn't going to be much of a punishment, now they have effectively removed the incentive to buy a more economic and less polluting car.

Although they may have narrowed the goal posts on the cost of taxing a diesel or a petrol it will still work out Cheeper to tax a diesel from new versus an equivalent petrol car
 
Back
Top