Jump to content


emissions and car tax


Please note that this topic has not had any new posts for the last 3737 days.

If you are trying to post a different story then you should start your own new thread. Posting on this thread is likely to mean that you won't get the help and advice that you need.

If you are trying to post information which is relevant to the story in this thread then please flag it up to the site team and they will allow you to post.

Thank you

Recommended Posts

quick question

 

my brother has a mazda rx8

 

he has just taxed it and cost over £200

 

he only does 4000 miles a year max, so if the car tax rate is based on emissions, why does he pay more than some one doing 12000 miles in a bmw

 

the point i am making is that it is easy to police being the milage is recorded now when the vehicle is given an mot. the results of which are sent to dvla while the mot test is in progress

Link to post
Share on other sites

Two problems with that, how do you confirm the mileage for a vehicle for the first three years before it requires an MOT, and VOSA deal with MOTs not DVLA.

 

But that has always been the argument for putting VED on fuel, the more you used, the more you paid.

Edited by Raykay
Link to post
Share on other sites

have not got a clue to those questions

but a mot does go on the dvla database, or how do the police check it through anpr or pnc

this is the first time he has had to tax it

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no requirement in law for a vehicle to be fitted with a mileometer.

 

MoT goes onto VOSA database, which is accessed by DVLA for on-line VED, etc.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Of course having the VED based on emissions is a nonsense and bears no relationship between cars that actually polute by driving many miles and cars that "potentially" polute by having a high CO2 emission but don't actually drive anywhere.

 

You are following into the misconsception though that the government applies VED charges with any regard for the environment and not as just another name for one of our many taxes which they can dress up and disguise behind their "green" credentials.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm all for paying VED through the fuel. For me, it would be an extra 10p per litre and it would be directly linked to the amount of driving I do.

Frederickson - CCA Sent 11/4/07 - Lost - Claiming back from post office

Connaught Collections - CCA Sent 11/4/07 - No Agreement - returned to client

Lowell - CCA sent 11/4/07 - No agreement - returned to client

Moorcroft - CCA Sent 11/4/07 - No Agreement - returned to client

Red Castle - CCA Sent 11/4/07 - Copy returned but no T&C's

Robinson Way - CCA Sent 16/5/07

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem this still leaves is that by putting it on fuel, you can't differentiate between vehicles that are low CO2 emitters per km and higher CO2 emitters. This would take away any incentive for manufacturers to produce low emitting cars and the incentive for drivers to buy them (and keep them up-to-date with regular new purchases)

 

I, for instance, drive a relatively low CO2 vehicle but do around 25,000 miles per year. I am in the band B, £30 per year VED bracket. If you added 10p to fuel as BorisBeaver suggests, my £30 per year would be replaced by a cost of £296 on my estimated 2,960ltr of fuel I buy per year. Not much of an incentive for me to make sure I buy (and often pay extra for) a modern low CO2 emitting vehicle!

Link to post
Share on other sites

i was under the impression that lower band vehicles are more fuel efficient. however, it is not unreasonable for vehicles which travel more miles per annum to have to pay more than those that sit on driveways as 'weekend cars' . Pay as you go must be a fairer way to deal with VED. The calcs speak for themselves; 4000 miles per annum on a 267g/km emmissions versus average 12k vehicle at emmissions between 150 - 200g/km

Link to post
Share on other sites
The problem this still leaves is that by putting it on fuel, you can't differentiate between vehicles that are low CO2 emitters per km and higher CO2 emitters. This would take away any incentive for manufacturers to produce low emitting cars and the incentive for drivers to buy them (and keep them up-to-date with regular new purchases)

 

I, for instance, drive a relatively low CO2 vehicle but do around 25,000 miles per year. I am in the band B, £30 per year VED bracket. If you added 10p to fuel as BorisBeaver suggests, my £30 per year would be replaced by a cost of £296 on my estimated 2,960ltr of fuel I buy per year. Not much of an incentive for me to make sure I buy (and often pay extra for) a modern low CO2 emitting vehicle!

 

by the way

 

the £240 quoted earlier for ved was for 6 months only

not 12 ouch

Link to post
Share on other sites
i was under the impression that lower band vehicles are more fuel efficient.

 

Not necessarily. they may acheive the low CO2 measurement by being good at cleaning the exhaust fumes before they come out of the exhaust.

 

however, it is not unreasonable for vehicles which travel more miles per annum to have to pay more than those that sit on driveways as 'weekend cars' .

 

They do, by paying over 70p worth of tax on every litre of fuel. That makes my tax contribution somewhere in the region of £2,072 per year, plus my £30 VED!

 

Pay as you go must be a fairer way to deal with VED. The calcs speak for themselves; 4000 miles per annum on a 267g/km emmissions versus average 12k vehicle at emmissions between 150 - 200g/km

 

Again, in principle it sounds fair, but how do you make your 267g/km car pay more than the 150g/km car if they both do 12,000mls per year?

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Recently Browsing   0 Caggers

    No registered users viewing this page.


  • Have we helped you ...?


×
×
  • Create New...