Road Tax future – crushing High Emissions car prices.

[DimPrawn]

Here is my proposal for the fairest way to set road tax.

Add it to the price of fuel. This has many advantages over our current system is seems like a no brainer to me. Those who use the most fuel and therefore cause the most pollution / use the roads most pay more. Nobody can evade the tax. No expensive civil servants and IT systems in Swansea are needed to administrate it.

So why don't we do it...?

Because 20 small taxes are eaiser to hide than lumping them all toghether into one.

How to run a government rule 237

HTH

[TimberWolf]

Here is my proposal for the fairest way to set road tax.

Add it to the price of fuel.

Amen.

[Chantho]

Petrol heads will always want fast cars as long as they are available. You won't push them into a diesel or town car for the sake of a 27p a day saving in road tax.

Even wealthy petrolheads don't take kindly to being ripped off, and may start to look for ways of reducing their payments to the Treasury (especially when it is clear that the money will be wasted, and not used in any Green way)

[Bagpuss]

So somebody looking for a >200bhp car will settle for an asthmatic petrol or a clunky diesel? I don't think so.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

BMW efficient dynamics, what a load of tosh, their cars have always emmited high C02, so now they lower it a bit and call it efficient dynamics.

A new >200 CO2 car will put out less emmisions than a 7 year old car supposedly <200. Yet the seven year old car will be deemed better for the environment, but it's not just CO2 that causes pollution.

Petrol heads will always want fast cars as long as they are available. You won't push them into a diesel or town car for the sake of a 27p a day saving in road tax.

One of the best ways to cut emissions would be not to keep buying new cars, since the majority of the emmisions come at the point of manufacture. That would make the car manufacturers cry though so as usual, we won't be doing the thing that makes more sense. Selling more and more new "efficient" new cars and trying to force people to junk their old ones isn't good for the environment.

[Peoplesoft bloke]

Here is my proposal for the fairest way to set road tax.

Add it to the price of fuel. This has many advantages over our current system is seems like a no brainer to me. Those who use the most fuel and therefore cause the most pollution / use the roads most pay more. Nobody can evade the tax. No expensive civil servants and IT systems in Swansea are needed to administrate it.

So why don't we do it...?

Agreed the DVLA is a total mess - but we do need some system of keeping track who's got which vehicle, surely? Even if we moved all VED to fuel (which I agree is fairer), we'd have to have some admin.

[dang65]

Here is my proposal for the fairest way to set road tax.

Add it to the price of fuel. This has many advantages over our current system is seems like a no brainer to me. Those who use the most fuel and therefore cause the most pollution / use the roads most pay more. Nobody can evade the tax. No expensive civil servants and IT systems in Swansea are needed to administrate it.

So why don't we do it...?

One of the best ways to cut emissions would be not to keep buying new cars, since the majority of the emmisions come at the point of manufacture.

I think PB's answer applies to this question as much any. If you abolish VED and put all the tax onto fuel instead, then there would be no particular incentive for people to restrict their vehicle ownership to one car. You could go out and buy a 4x4 for any slightly rainy days, a sports car for spins in the countryside at the weekend, a saloon for business trips, a people carrier for family days out etc etc. There would suddenly be rows of semi-abandoned vehicles parked down every street, waiting for their turn to be used.

[Bagpuss]

grrrr DVLA, I forgot to SORN my work car when it was sat on my drive. Got a £50 fine for a car sat on my land.

[DiscoStu]

I think PB's answer applies to this question as much any. If you abolish VED and put all the tax onto fuel instead, then there would be no particular incentive for people to restrict their vehicle ownership to one car. You could go out and buy a 4x4 for any slightly rainy days, a sports car for spins in the countryside at the weekend, a saloon for business trips, a people carrier for family days out etc etc. There would suddenly be rows of semi-abandoned vehicles parked down every street, waiting for their turn to be used.

I don't think road tax is the main deterrent for multiple car ownership.

I'd have thought it would be dictated more by the cost of maintenance, insurance, MOTs etc.

[TimberWolf]

This stuff about CO2 and engine efficiency misses the real issue about where most losses occur. Most of the inefficiency occurs travelling from A back to A, which needn't cost anything.

I propose the following solutions to be investigated for getting from A to A more efficiently:

• Question whether going from A back to A is really necessary
• Try to minimise heating the environment in paths emanating away from and approaching A
• Store the energy used in moving away from A for getting back to A again

E.g.

Use a giant bungee cord
Use roads that run downhill

Can anyone think of any other viable ways of getting from A to A more efficiently?