|
EVs are taxed via energy company profits being captured by the Government.
If you don't like HGVs, stop buying so much stuff and shop local.
Most civilised countries have a toll if you want to drive on a motorway. That's the simplest solution here.
|
|
There can't any fair policy because some will always say policy is unfair to them.
Mileage based policy won't work as people will reset their odometers.
A fixed fee does not work as for same car, both high and low mileage drivers pay the same tax.
I am inclined to say add road tax to fuel. If you don't drive much, you don't pay much.
Don't offer any incentives to EV.
Toll roads are frustrating. People will forget to pay. They will avoid toll roads and non-toll roads will be clogged.
|
Mileage based policy won't work as people will reset their odometers.
That trick could be prevented by making use of the many spy cameras already in operation ?
|
|
They would probably use onboard technology rather than cameras. There is an interesting Wiki page on Vehicle Miles Travelled Tax that outlines a couple of potential approaches. Presumably there would be fines for tampering.
As for just confining EVs to existing power taxes then that is a considerable subsidy even at current high electric prices. The favourable tax regime for EVs will be wound back as the ICE alternatives fall by the wayside.
|
|
There is no "fair" rate. EVs get a good tax deal at present to encourage transition away from ICE - this was never likely to last as the hole in tax revenues needs to be filled.
Fairness is a very loose concept - almost any arrangement can be argued as fair. Mostly it depends on personal circumstances - eg: low mileage drivers want charge on miles driven or energy used, high mileage driver as a fixed amount, possibly depending on vehicle size.
The government concern is:
- will it raise the revenue needed
- is it easy to implement and collect
- will it promote desired behaviours
- how easy is it to evade
- can it be sold as "fair"
|
|
|
|
I am inclined to say add road tax to fuel. If you don't drive much, you don't pay much.
Don't offer any incentives to EV.
Toll roads are frustrating. People will forget to pay. They will avoid toll roads and non-toll roads will be clogged.
I agree that adding VED to fuel is a sensible way forward - for petrol & diesel vehicles at least, it would get around all those who "forget" to renew their VED, and would even bring in some revenue from visitors driving to UK from Europe.
However it doesn't resolve the question of how to charge EVs for their road usage (and I don't agree that this is resolved by taxing utility companies) - I think that eventually the "spy in the sky" will track and trace all our journeys and we shall all be billed for miles travelled.
|
|
How will anyone differentiate between me charging my EV and us running say our tumble drier? You cannot. Or me using the output from my solar pv to charge my EV? So how much ought the rate to be when the cost to me is Zero?
Turning to road pricing yes the simple quick easy low cost answer is add an amount to the fuel. So expect a high tech inefficient system with cameras on every lamp post run by a distant quango headed by some political hack. Costing a Kings ransom.
As regards the EV conundrum perhaps the milage could be recorded annually at the mot and an invoice issued accordingly.
But my suggestion is that by focusing "customers " attention on "paying for the roads" the authorities better deliver the best damned roads on the planet or face our wrath. The days of spending a pittance on the roads and splurging the rest on the usual rubbish are going to be well and truly over.
|
|
|
|
Truck wise, around 1982 ish the max weight was upped from 32 tons on 4 axles to 38 tons on 5, the truck i drove was on 5 axles @ 38 ton with VED of £3200 a year, typically all tractors were on 2 axles and hundreds of trailers were converted to 3 axles running.
1984 i was issued with a new 3 axle tractor but then using a 2 axled trailer, still up around the £3000 ved mark, was issued with a new 3 axled trailer so the VED status was swapped and now cost about £1500 if i recall correctly.
Stupid rates really because anyone who's followed a 3 axles trailer will know its those fixed 3 axles that do the road damage, especially now we're up to 44 tons with talk of it going higher, and will be needed for anyone daft enough to buy an electric tractor for max weight work, anyone's guess how much the batteries will weigh.
You can put any cost on truck VED you want, the only way goods are going to be distributed is by truck of some sort, the cost will go on the end product whatever it may be, however it would give the govt some more fake money to throw around so should happen soon.
EV's won't be charged the full fair rate of taxation on either fuel or VED until there's enough of them on the road, the govt always sweetens the pot to get its latest crusade up and running, Diesel was flavour of the month 5 minutes ago, watch this space.
What i expect to happen is that those of us stubbornly sticking to our ICE cars wil be penalised further every year with the intention of taxing us off the road, when that's complete then they'll come for battery cars.
The end game i am sure is to remove private transport from us plebs and get us back onto buses and bicycles and shank's pony where they assume we belong, the ZIL lanes will be for those rather more equal :-)...it doesn't bother me too much, i'll happily stop driving once they tax my ICE cars off the road, and spend the rest of my days making sure i pay as little tax as legally possible.
We've seen the golden age of motoring and it's days are numbered.
|
|
|
|
The spy in the sky would be quickly targeted by the clever lot who will take great pleasure in thwarting it.
|
|
|
|
They will avoid toll roads and non-toll roads will be clogged.
Melbourne has the answer to that. When they sold the toll roads to big investment companies part of the contract said that alternative routes would be closed off. So you don't have any choice but to use the toll road.
|
|
|
|
EVs are taxed via energy company profits being captured by the Government.
Hardly. The amount of tax paid on the element of energy company profit that can be ascribed to EV electricity purchase is miniscule. Indeed, ICE vehicle owners face a triple whammy as they not only pay a hefty VED but also effectively pay for the tax on the profits of the fuel and distribution companies - plus the overt tax on every litre of fuel they buy!
Edited by John F on 14/11/2022 at 17:59
|
|
Next time everyone starts whining about EVs 'overloading the grid' I'll let them know it's miniscule.
I don't really think tax can be made fair - everyone that has to pay it thinks someone else should. There should be tax on income and wealth, and nothing else, but somehow I don't think multi-millionaire ruling class are going to go for that option.
|
|
Power supplied to public charging points can be separately metered and taxed. Power to domestic cannot easily be separated between domestic and EV use. Power from domestic PV systems would be difficult to monitor.
Personal opinion - road charging. GPS internet enabled device. Prepayments so no issue of bad debts. Could base charges on time of day and road used to modify behaviours.
Technology could be deployed so that vehicles being used without device could be stopped (although ANPR to stop those without VED or insurance seems to be used very patchily).
All taxes go into one large pot - the amount raised in road taxes is not specifically for roads. The government could easily decide to raise the lost duty and VAT on fuel from income tax or a tax on bananas or dog food if it so chose.
It won't - taxes on vehicles and road use can change behaviours - reduce congestion, avoid more road building, increase public transport us, encourage cycling and walking etc.
|
|
|
Next time everyone starts whining about EVs 'overloading the grid' I'll let them know it's miniscule.
It's the miniscule straw that breaks the loaded camel's back.
|
Next time everyone starts whining about EVs 'overloading the grid' I'll let them know it's miniscule.
It's the miniscule straw that breaks the loaded camel's back.
Perhaps we should have invested in our energy infrastructure instead of relying on gas and finding ourselves in the position we are now.
Edited by corax on 15/11/2022 at 11:21
|
Next time everyone starts whining about EVs 'overloading the grid' I'll let them know it's miniscule.
It's the miniscule straw that breaks the loaded camel's back.
Perhaps we should have invested in our energy infrastructure instead of relying on gas and finding ourselves in the position we are now.
Quite right.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I live in Brittany, France. We don't have any form of road tax, or road pricing here.
|
|
OK but you do have lots of toll roads. We don't.
|
|
The French system is the fair one, those who use the roads the most get to pay for them.
Our system of road taxing is geared, along with many others things, around 'nudging' people to carry out the whims of whoever is in power, 5 minutes ago Diesel was in favour.
|
|
|
For my first few years in Taiwan, the motorways (ironically called freeways American English style) had toll booths at regular intervals. This meant you could use them free for some sections by going around the booths, otherwise I didn’t use them.
Now they have camera gantries at much closer intervals, using OCR. I have heard this can be defeated by reflective coatings on numberplates, but haven’t tried it, so I never use the freeways.
This has a cost in safety, wear and tear, and fuel consumption/pollution. Most people just pay the charge.
|
|
The chancellor has announced that EVs will no longer be exempt from Vehicle Excise Duty. I'm all for the move to EVs but there was bound to be a time when some of the incentives would disappear.
I don't know the details but presumably the zero VED band for some petrol and diesel vehicles would also disappear.
What should also disappear is the exemption for classic cars (any vehicle over 40 years) as there is no logic for it.
|
The chancellor has announced that EVs will no longer be exempt from Vehicle Excise Duty. I'm all for the move to EVs but there was bound to be a time when some of the incentives would disappear.
It's a sop only. As Liam Halligan on GB News (he also writes for the DT) discovered, conveniently not mentioned in the statement but contained within the written report, tax on petrol and diesel will be increased by 12p a Litre in March (effectively ending the 5p cut and adding another 7p on top) - I'm presuming that's before 20% VAT is added as well.
I don't know the details but presumably the zero VED band for some petrol and diesel vehicles would also disappear.
Only for new cars from X point onwards. I still find it an utter disgrace that older cars like mine get taxed to the hilt on VED and yet a newer car (those from 2017 onwards) emitting similar CO2 levels pay only 2/3rds as much.
Far better to drop VED altogether and just put a small amount on that first tax, as it then penalises those who pollute the most by usage as well as the per km CO2 rate. At the very least only apply VED to the first 3 years.
What should also disappear is the exemption for classic cars (any vehicle over 40 years) as there is no logic for it.
Is this still the case? Wasn't there moves to just give a cut-off date to ensure that 'proper' classic (heritage) cars only were included (as they likely do very little mileage and thus contribute little to overall pollution levels), rather than just a rolling 40 year point?
I also suspect there's not that many cars over 40yo anyway, not compared to all others at least, especially when their likely much lower than average mileage is factored in.
It does seem silly that a 1982 ropey old Ford Escort can qualify as well as a Model T, or Roller from the 1920s. I might've said have limits on annual usage, but it's presumably very easy to 'clock' a car that old to avoid being caught via an MOT.
|
|
Fuel duty was last increased in 2011 to 57.95 p per litre and not changed since (save for a "temporary" 5p reduction).
Pump prices in 2011 were ~140p per litre.
Fuel duty is long overdue for an increase - however unattractive that seems.
|
Fuel duty was last increased in 2011 to 57.95 p per litre and not changed since (save for a "temporary" 5p reduction).
Pump prices in 2011 were ~140p per litre.
Fuel duty is long overdue for an increase - however unattractive that seems.
Why is it 'due'? We already pay VAT on this fuel on top of all the other costs and duty, and the amount paid in duty is a fixed amount and already very high in relation to the cost of the product before tax.
I don't see fuel used to heat, cook or poruce power being taxed at anywhere near the same level, and yet fuel for cars, vans, buses, etc is just as crutial to the nation.
I would remind you that prior to the 'freeze' it was subject to an 'escalator' which put it up way more than inflation per year. It would've been far fairer for it to be a percentage, but then it was never about trying to get people to drive cleaner vehciles, but as yet another way of raising revenue that then mostly gets wasted - by all governments.
|
|
|
|
So the price of vehicle fuel increases in line with inflation.
|
So the price of vehicle fuel increases in line with inflation.
Not here. Duty is a fixed amount added to the cost of production, then VAT is added after. Fuel has gone up by far more than the general inflation rate, and this increase in duty will only make it worse. The government has got loads more money due to increased VAT revenues.
|
|
It would add 12p per litre. With inflation at around 10 %, the rise is in line with that.
|
It would add 12p per litre. With inflation at around 10 %, the rise is in line with that.
That's inflation ON inflation. As I said, they already make far more now in taxes from petrol and diesel because of the vastly higher VAT revenues, which will exactly match price inflation. As excise duty is a monetary amount, it does not. Why does a product need two taxes put on it? Other than revenue-raising, what exactly is the point of excise duty on fuel?
As I said, it they want an 'environmental' component, just change the VAT rate as they do for food, children's clothing or, ironically, domestic electricity and natural gas supplies. All thes extra taxes just cost more in employing more bureaucrats to administer it and more otherwise unproductive people in firms.
|
|
<< Why does a product need two taxes put on it? Other than revenue-raising, what exactly is the point of excise duty on fuel? >>
[a] because demand means people will pay up without excessive complaint;
[b] possibly to persuade people to be economical.
|
<< Why does a product need two taxes put on it? Other than revenue-raising, what exactly is the point of excise duty on fuel? >>
[a] because demand means people will pay up without excessive complaint;
[b] possibly to persuade people to be economical.
That's the official explanation, but very few people buy that. If politicians truely wanted the public to buy and use economical, less-polluting cars, they'd ban all fast / powerful cars, large cars (e.g. big SUVs, 4x4xs not owned by people who actually need them).
They do what they can pretend is 'green' and get away with in order to raise as much revenue as possible, very little of which goes to help the average and less well-off to 'go green', most of whom cannot afford to do so.
Rather like VED. It would be far simpler (and cost effective) to raise the same amount via adding to insurance tax (which is normally reasonably proportional to the performance and price of a car), necessitating less bureaucrats to administer it all, saving money.
But when has tax ever got simplier in any Western nation, especially this one? It goes the other way to deliberately make it more difficult for the average Joe (and below) to realise they're being fleeced into penury / state dependency. The only difference between established political parties is the extent to which (under the same circumstances) they'll do so.
|
Rather like VED. It would be far simpler (and cost effective) to raise the same amount via adding to insurance tax (which is normally reasonably proportional to the performance and price of a car), necessitating less bureaucrats to administer it all, saving money.
I do like that idea - all vehicles have to have insurance so adding on the insurance seems like a good idea and stops people 'forgetting' to tax the vehicle.
|
Rather like VED. It would be far simpler (and cost effective) to raise the same amount via adding to insurance tax (which is normally reasonably proportional to the performance and price of a car), necessitating less bureaucrats to administer it all, saving money.
I do like that idea - all vehicles have to have insurance so adding on the insurance seems like a good idea and stops people 'forgetting' to tax the vehicle.
Judging by TV programmes, plenty of drivers don't bother with insurance - it's almost impossible for them to avoid paying fuel duty
|
|
Taxes go into a central Treasury pot from which it is disbursed as the government see fit to NHS, education, defence, prisons, arts etc etc. It is targeted based on ease of collection, equity/fairness, and to modify behaviours. There is no logic for the split between tax, NI, VAT, motoring taxes, import duties, corporation tax etc.
Taxing fuel use to change behaviours is an entirely legitimate and fairly effective policy. It encourages people to (a) have regard for fuel economy when selecting a vehicle, and (b) limiting vehicle use.
As it happens, over the next 15 years fuel duties will effectively be phased out as the country transitions to EVs - which will no doubt be subject to some form of taxation reflecting usage and behaviour change (road pricing?).
IMHO it is a complete waste of effort complaining about fuel duties - neither the chancellor or his shadow would seem to have any intention to do anything about it.
|
As it happens, over the next 15 years fuel duties will effectively be phased out as the country transitions to EVs - which will no doubt be subject to some form of taxation reflecting usage and behaviour change (road pricing?).
This country or any other can not transition to 100% EV over the next 15 years.1
1 Insufficient capacity to produce the electricity required (unless a dozen nuclear power plants are built and on stream, with 'green' objectors overruled)
2 Insufficient production capacity and raw materials for the required batteries. (mining of hundreds of tons to produce material for each battery - and how are 200 ton mine trucks to be powered?)
3 Battery powered HGVs are yet to be demonstrated as practicable, even if so developed, logistics and economics will need major redesign. Past experience of government performance in huge projects gives low confidence int his happening
|
As it happens, over the next 15 years fuel duties will effectively be phased out as the country transitions to EVs - which will no doubt be subject to some form of taxation reflecting usage and behaviour change (road pricing?).
This country or any other can not transition to 100% EV over the next 15 years.1
1 Insufficient capacity to produce the electricity required (unless a dozen nuclear power plants are built and on stream, with 'green' objectors overruled)
2 Insufficient production capacity and raw materials for the required batteries. (mining of hundreds of tons to produce material for each battery - and how are 200 ton mine trucks to be powered?)
3 Battery powered HGVs are yet to be demonstrated as practicable, even if so developed, logistics and economics will need major redesign. Past experience of government performance in huge projects gives low confidence int his happening
The following is taken from the National Grids websites:
The most demand for electricity in recent years in the UK was for 62GW in 2002. Since then, the nation’s peak demand has fallen by roughly 16% due to improvements in energy efficiency.
Even if we all switched to EVs overnight, we believe demand would only increase by around 10%. So we’d still be using less power as a nation than we did in 2002 and this is well within the range of manageable load fluctuation.
So no issues with all the charging.
Lithium is a common material for EV batteries but there is plenty to go round - with further investment. Which ones are in short supply?
The mine trucks no doubt along with the HGVs will be diesel powered for a while longer, although there is a lot of developments in HGV's
|
As it happens, over the next 15 years fuel duties will effectively be phased out as the country transitions to EVs - which will no doubt be subject to some form of taxation reflecting usage and behaviour change (road pricing?).
This country or any other can not transition to 100% EV over the next 15 years.1
1 Insufficient capacity to produce the electricity required (unless a dozen nuclear power plants are built and on stream, with 'green' objectors overruled)
2 Insufficient production capacity and raw materials for the required batteries. (mining of hundreds of tons to produce material for each battery - and how are 200 ton mine trucks to be powered?)
3 Battery powered HGVs are yet to be demonstrated as practicable, even if so developed, logistics and economics will need major redesign. Past experience of government performance in huge projects gives low confidence in this happening.
At my age I may not see my forecast of dystopian collapse come to fruition , I fear for my children's future but can do little to help other than encourage them to learn useful survival skills.
|
|
There is already sufficient capacity to generate the electricity required as long as it's not all required at the same time. We use much less electricity than we did 15 years ago. The issue is that all the unused capacity is in coal-fired stations, which we really don't want to turn back on (not least as it kind of defies the low carbon purpose of EVs).
The resources needed for batteries at the moment are indeed very high, but the metals can be recycled. If their extraction is a concern, a good place to start looking to reduce is in phones and laptops.
|
There is already sufficient capacity to generate the electricity required as long as it's not all required at the same time. We use much less electricity than we did 15 years ago. The issue is that all the unused capacity is in coal-fired stations, which we really don't want to turn back on (not least as it kind of defies the low carbon purpose of EVs).
The resources needed for batteries at the moment are indeed very high, but the metals can be recycled. If their extraction is a concern, a good place to start looking to reduce is in phones and laptops.
How many coal fired power stations did they keep active, or even mothball just in case needed which anyone sensible would have done, the decisions to make them irrecoverable could be regarded as acts of betrayal.
|
There is already sufficient capacity to generate the electricity required as long as it's not all required at the same time. We use much less electricity than we did 15 years ago. The issue is that all the unused capacity is in coal-fired stations, which we really don't want to turn back on (not least as it kind of defies the low carbon purpose of EVs).
.
At least having the pollution source in one place means you have a chance of mitigation. Car on capture etc. Not that carbon capture is easy and can be quite dangerous if one of the pipelines carrying the CO2 leaks and I believe it's only putting off the problem until later.
|
|
<< I believe it's only putting off the problem until later. >>
Tell us all about it. That's what most politics amounts to. It's called short-termism, or thinking no further ahead than winning the next election.
|
|
|
Fuel duty is punitive enough, many folks are struggling now,
|
|
|
|
I still find it an utter disgrace that older cars like mine get taxed to the hilt on VED.
Depends how old. My 2005 Audi predates the Mar 2006 VED threshold so only £340 this year instead of £630 if registered four months later. Although grateful, I no idea why this date was chosen and the reasoning behind it.
What should also disappear is the exemption for classic cars (any vehicle over 40 years) as there is no logic for it.................Is this still the case?
Certainly is. Logical or not, it must be the source of incalculable human happiness for a small group of pensioners who have watched their workhorse (e.g. a reliable well made TR7) evolve into a classic car - which doesn't require an MoT so no temptation to 'clock' it. Hopefully the next stage is to become a rare work of art, in order to add a zero or two to its value ;-?
Wasn't there moves to just give a cut-off date to ensure that 'proper' classic (heritage) cars only were included........It does seem silly that a 1982 ropey old Ford Escort can qualify .....
I hope Escort buffs don't read this!
Edited by John F on 18/11/2022 at 09:20
|
|
<< a reliable well made TR7 >>
You don't often see those words in the same sentence .... :-)
|
<< a reliable well made TR7 >>
You don't often see those words in the same sentence .... :-)
More like a contradiction-in-terms, rather like the CIA. ;-)
|
|
|
<< Wasn't there moves to just give a cut-off date to ensure that 'proper' classic (heritage) cars only were included (as they likely do very little mileage and thus contribute little to overall pollution levels) >>
... and by the same token contribute very little fuel tax.
|
|
|
|
|
OK but you do have lots of toll roads. We don't.
I live in Brittany, France. We don't have any form of road tax, or road pricing here.
Ethan Edwards posted.
"OK but you do have lots of toll roads. We don't."
Brittany does not have autoroutes - three lane motorways which are toll roads in France.
In Brittany, which is not regarded as being as belonging to France by the locals, we have an excellent network of dual carriageways, all toll free.
About 9 or 10 years ago Sarkozy's government tried to impose an "ecotax" on heavy vehicles using these roads.
This is what happened in many locations before the idea was forgotten.
www.youtube.com/watch?v=iqQvG_YK1o0&ab_channel...1
The historical reason that there are no toll roads in Brittany is shrouded in the mists of time.
When it comes to tolls, Brittany prides itself on the fact that there simply are no tolls in the Brittany region and this has been the case for some time now. Some deem that the origin for this fact goes back as far as 1532 when Anne de Bretagne abdicated Brittany to France through her marriage to King Charles VIII upon the condition that ” no toll shall ever be levied on either road or bridge”. Others opine that another reason for this exemption was that of the Great Charles De Gaulle. It was his way of saying ‘thank you’ to Breton soldiers who fought in the war. Others believe that De Gaulle deemed that Paris was the great centre of Europe and the roads of Brittany led to nowhere of particular importance, therefore requiring no toll.. The more cynical say the reality for ‘no tolls’ is simply down to politics!. At the end of the 1960′s the roads of Brittany were not classed as motorways and the Bretons have made sure that they protest loudly against any change to this age old rule.
Edited by focussed on 20/11/2022 at 00:31
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
