Perhaps massive transit vans etc should be paying through the nose for tax then as they take up such road space
they already do £225 a year regardless if you use it all day every day or just for 3 car shows a year
all a bit :Offtopic: though
Volkswagen emissions scandal
- Thread starter gadge
- Start date
Currently reading:
Volkswagen emissions scandal
they already do £225 a year regardless if you use it all day every day or just for 3 car shows a year
all a bit :Offtopic: though
I wonder how the conversation/discussions went when the government decided on the upcoming tax system?
Picture them sat round a table arguing......
Picture them sat round a table arguing......
Well based on what puntofan01 the £225 isn't enough
Euro 4 and 5 vans up to 3.5 tons are only £140 a year to tax
But they should all be taxed to hell, we can't have people selfishly earning a living
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
With regards to your 1st comment, I never said that people should have to justify their choice of car, all I said was that if they choose to buy what can very reasonably be classed as a luxury car, then they should expect to pay more to tax it. What, may I ask, is wrong with that? I choose to own a supermini, therefore, I should pay more road tax than someone who drives a city car.
With regards to your 2nd comment, yes: the vast majority of cars will indeed be scrapped or banger raced when they become old and worthless. And yes, a certain amount of 4x4s will die on farms rather than going to a scrapyard when they fail their mot. However, this has no relevance to road tax.
With regards to your 3rd comment, please don't take this the wrong way, but you come across as someone who is rather comfortably well off financially, so you can't seem to grasp the fact that some people quite simply cannot afford a "clean" car, be that 1 bought outright or a monthly repayment for 1. A lot of people can only afford to run an old banger and these people shouldn't have to pay an arguably excessive amount of tax, purely because their car is of an older design. As much as anything, you argue that people shouldn't have to justify why they drive a huge car, so therefore, why should people who struggle financially have to justify why they drive an old "unclean" car?
Part of the reason I made the original comment about going back to an engine size based tax system, as has already been mentioned by StevenRB45, is due to the fact that ALL manufacturers have come up with ways of essentially cheating on the test, and as such, the tax is based on an inaccurate emissions result. Hence, I suggested that an engine capacity based system would be far less likely to be open to abuse.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
And how will each test be the same, rain and external air temp etc all make a difference, hence lab tests where it can all be monitored and regulated.
Cobblers, my PHEV is a 1.8, yet puts less crap out than most 1.0/1.2's, so how does your logic work here?
Road hogging, please.
What about a large engined small sports car that doesn't road hog then
Why? They've still only 4 wheels on the road like every other tom dick and harry, Perhaps massive transit vans etc should be paying through the nose for tax then as they take up such road space
With regards to the 1st comment, fair enough, I accept we are stuck with a lab test. However, the test still needs to be redesigned, so as to be more difficult for manufacturers to deceive.
With regards to the 2nd comment, your point is? Emissions data would still be published, so if you wish to buy a car specifically for its low emissions, you can, and you'll still be able to enjoy a financial saving at the pump.
With regards to your 3rd comment, I agree, hence someone with a large engined car would pay more tax.
With regards to your 4th comment, large vans are a necessary evil, the same as lorries, which take up even more road space. However, we have to have vans and lorries, as they deliver the things we need in our daily lives.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
They're tories, so they just thought "how can we make driving a little cheaper for rich people"!! :what::thumbdown:
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
Well based on what puntofan01 the £225 isn't enough
Euro 4 and 5 vans up to 3.5 tons are only £140 a year to tax
But they should all be taxed to hell, we can't have people selfishly earning a living
Damn, you're so correct!
Below is the e-mail that I received -
If you follow any sort of media, you’re sure to have heard the stories about emissions testing for diesel engines.
We wanted to take this opportunity to bring you some more positive news and deliver this message from our company Executive Vice President, Jim Farley.
FORD EMISSIONS COMMITMENT
Given the worldwide attention and news coverage related to diesel emissions tests, we at Ford want to make sure our position on these key issues is clear.
First, our vehicles and engines – including our advanced-technology diesel engines – meet all applicable emissions requirements. Importantly, we do not have any so‑called “defeat devices” in our vehicles.
We also fully support efforts to ensure that test procedures more closely match the real‑world conditions that customers experience under normal driving. That is why we have supported the development of a European Real Driving Emissions initiative that is going into law in Europe.
Ford is committed to offering customers high fuel efficiency and low emissions through what we call the “power of choice.” We offer a variety of choices ranging from our EcoBoost-powered petrol vehicles and advanced technology diesels to hybrids, plug-in hybrids and full electric vehicles.
Visit www.ford.co.uk or your local FordStore or Ford dealer to learn more about Ford’s newest vehicles, technology and our commitment to Go Further.
Jim Farley
Although I know that most cars do not achieve the stated figures, at least I have not been deceived and cheated like VW owners have - which is utterly disgusting and disgraceful from a large company like VW who just bask in their past glory.
I do honestly believe that it is only VW who have had the audacity to do this only.
If you follow any sort of media, you’re sure to have heard the stories about emissions testing for diesel engines.
We wanted to take this opportunity to bring you some more positive news and deliver this message from our company Executive Vice President, Jim Farley.
FORD EMISSIONS COMMITMENT
Given the worldwide attention and news coverage related to diesel emissions tests, we at Ford want to make sure our position on these key issues is clear.
First, our vehicles and engines – including our advanced-technology diesel engines – meet all applicable emissions requirements. Importantly, we do not have any so‑called “defeat devices” in our vehicles.
We also fully support efforts to ensure that test procedures more closely match the real‑world conditions that customers experience under normal driving. That is why we have supported the development of a European Real Driving Emissions initiative that is going into law in Europe.
Ford is committed to offering customers high fuel efficiency and low emissions through what we call the “power of choice.” We offer a variety of choices ranging from our EcoBoost-powered petrol vehicles and advanced technology diesels to hybrids, plug-in hybrids and full electric vehicles.
Visit www.ford.co.uk or your local FordStore or Ford dealer to learn more about Ford’s newest vehicles, technology and our commitment to Go Further.
Jim Farley
Although I know that most cars do not achieve the stated figures, at least I have not been deceived and cheated like VW owners have - which is utterly disgusting and disgraceful from a large company like VW who just bask in their past glory.
I do honestly believe that it is only VW who have had the audacity to do this only.
That's what I believe also.
But those who speculate better seem to know that everyone was doing it apparently.......
But those who speculate better seem to know that everyone was doing it apparently.......
I believe everyone was and is involved in "playing the game" I.e building and tuning cars specifically to do well in testing, with little to no hope of reaching the claimed figures except in a lab.
This upholds the letter of the regulations if not the spirit, VW decided to go their own way for commercial advantage and I hope it costs them every Euro they made due to it and more.
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
Personally, I believe the whole industry needs to be investigated. Ford can be ruled out of the NOx emissions scandal, so fair play to them.
I agree that what VW has done is genuinely attrocious. If it is found that they are the only car manufacturer group who have employed these devices, then I hope that they get a very hefty lawsuit against them.
OP
OP
I've been reading all this with great interest. Tax is a funny thing - we all have to pay it and there will be all sorts of reasons why the government charge more for some vehicles and not for others. At the end of the day the suits at number 10 are never going to come up with a tax system that keeps everyone happy. I agree a lot with AndyRKett but will also add I can't help but feel that larger gas guzzlers are nothing more than cash cows that the government can tax heavily to keep the polar bears happy .......HOWEVER you are forgetting about a small but passionate group of people in this debate and that's classic car owners. Their hobby (which is also mine) is a very broad church. From fiat 126's to giant classic range rovers and although they don't pay if their built before a certain date there are a great deal that do. Some of these people only take there cars out three or four times a year. Should they more when their car probably spends 350 days a year in a garage? A tad unfair I think after all someone who chooses to but a 1980 BMW 5 series isn't nessarcary rich or a car snob they just like old cars and love driving them, but how else can it can be done so it's just one of those things.
Last edited:
OP
OP
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2014
- Messages
- 4,579
- Points
- 828
I also love classic cars, and they haven't been mentioned in the above discussion purely because we're referring to cars made since the change in tax system in 2001. Personally, I would agree with yourself that the rolling 30 year exemption should be reintroduced.
Agreed
It's a given that most manufactures design cars to achieve the best in the current testing regimes, but to lie and actually design and put into the cars made a cheat device is beyond comprehensible.
I hope they get everything coming to them.
Be interesting to see if they continue to win every group comparison tests in the car mags when the advertising budget runs out.
Always wondered how the Polo that was so so when it was first launched 5 or so years ago is now the best supermini
I hope they get everything coming to them.
Be interesting to see if they continue to win every group comparison tests in the car mags when the advertising budget runs out.
Always wondered how the Polo that was so so when it was first launched 5 or so years ago is now the best supermini
OP
OP
It's this quote that makes me bring up the classic car subject. To say someone buys a "needlessly huge" car is suggestive of that persons attitude like they buy a Range Rover because they want to feel important or brash so therefore they must pay more....... But there are those who simply enjoy maintaining and driving range rovers (or any other old or aging big car)
Couldn't agree more, VW doesn't really make any great cars, but their image is of a company that makes perfect product.
