The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
In case you have not noticed it goes up annually with the rate of inflation. From April it went up 10.3 %!
The tax paying public is paying for the carbon policy not the GOV. The post is all about a fairer system as much as the lost revenue of EVs which can only be temporary. It is grossly unfair that EV drivers are not paying their fair whack when their emissions are coming out of the power stations.
Drax the so called green provider has been fined in the US for exceeding emission levels and is under investigation in the UK for similar transgressions.
|
|
I meant it hasn't gone up to compensate for any loss from EVs. The tax paying public and the government are the same thing in terms of money.
Drax is a single biomass power station. As previously stated, anyone is perfectly able to switch to a 100% renewable tariff if they wish to reduce their carbon emissions from power generation.
|
I meant it hasn't gone up to compensate for any loss from EVs. The tax paying public and the government are the same thing in terms of money.
Drax is a single biomass power station. As previously stated, anyone is perfectly able to switch to a 100% renewable tariff if they wish to reduce their carbon emissions from power generation.
So you don't think it unfair to 80% plus ICE drivers paying VED and some £60 tax on every £100 they spend on fuel an EV drivers paying zilch and mostly company ones at that.
It is a good Job VED has not gone up to compensate The tax paying public tends to look after its money whereas the GOV does the exact opposite.
Please can you tell me where we can all switch to 100% renewable tariffs. Can a provider cope with this and will it be cheaper for us all? Where oh where is the competition we are all promised or is it something to do with the 30 or so companies that have gone bust at the consumers expense instead of the creditors
|
I meant it hasn't gone up to compensate for any loss from EVs. The tax paying public and the government are the same thing in terms of money.
Drax is a single biomass power station. As previously stated, anyone is perfectly able to switch to a 100% renewable tariff if they wish to reduce their carbon emissions from power generation.
So you don't think it unfair to 80% plus ICE drivers paying VED and some £60 tax on every £100 they spend on fuel an EV drivers paying zilch and mostly company ones at that.
It is a good Job VED has not gone up to compensate The tax paying public tends to look after its money whereas the GOV does the exact opposite.
Please can you tell me where we can all switch to 100% renewable tariffs. Can a provider cope with this and will it be cheaper for us all? Where oh where is the competition we are all promised or is it something to do with the 30 or so companies that have gone bust at the consumers expense instead of the creditors
No, I don't think it's unfair. I don't smoke cigarettes, so I don't pay tax on them.
You can switch to 100% renewable tariff on octopus.
|
|
The tax system has long been used to encourage a different pattern of behaviour - back in the mid 90s it was the switch to diesel. Early adopters do well, with EV the BIK are generous as well as the VED but these things will change when EV gets to a certain critical mass. Road pricing of some variety will be the norm, Cambridge city were researching this over thirty years ago, one of my old lecturers was heavily involved in the studies and the technology has moved on in leaps and bounds since then.
|
|
|
|
|
>>The tax paying public is paying for the carbon policy not the GOV.
The government never pays for anything. It's our money (or our debt) regardless.
That's one reason we need to stop all this abuse of secondary legislation and Henry VIII powers that the current lot is so fond of.
If the government believes it is in all our interests to forgo VED to incentivise substitution of EVs for ICE vehicles then I suppose it's OK, if properly legislated and scrutinised.
Once the change is deemed established, VED will no doubt come back.
|
|
|
|
<< The tax paying public is paying for the carbon policy not the GOV. >>
If the 'GOV' pays, that means the tax-paying public - unless you are suggesting some more should be picked from that magic tree ?
|
|
|
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
If it comes to that, why is there no tax on Vapes, to compensate for reduced revenue from cigarettes (as if the Treasury won't have thought of this already).
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
Because it was abolished in 1937.
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
Because it was abolished in 1937.
Very clever from someone who did not know VED goes up with inflation.
The thread is all about a fair tax for everyone and suggestions in the link. I favour a charge per mile as the more you use the roads the more you pay for private users. Commercial and other businesses should have different rates. Quite how you get people to pay is something else so may be a fair VED for everyone makes more sense as the Gov needs to keep an eye on all vehicle registrations in any case EVs to pay VED from 2025 but at what rates? The GOV cannot keep trying to Tax people off the road as it introduces EVs People need their cars to earn a living. EVs are far too expensive and Ice cars too and manufacturers don't seem to be able to keep up with demand regardless of price. Still how many are actually buying cars but leasing
|
|
I don't remember saying I didn't know that, I said that's not what I'm talking about.
As we've covered countless times and I've just said again, there is no 'road tax' and we have to get away from thinking of VED as road tax. It's not, it's a tax on cars and the fairness is that it's higher the more your car pollutes. EVs aren't getting special treatment, you can buy an ICE car with zero tax too. As Xileno says, it's about incentivising things that the government consider to be beneficial and vice versa.
As I've also said before, the tax per mile is called Fuel Duty. And, yes, there is a tax for EVs because we pay VAT on electricity bills.
|
|
|
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
Because it was abolished in 1937.
I wondered when someone would bring up that pedantic answer. Road tax, VED, it's essentially the same to vehicle owners. To be able to drive a vehicle on the road, you have to pay 'it', but nowadays, the amount you pay for 'it' depends on what vehicle you own and when it was regsitered.
And EVs should pay some form of VED / road tax / whatever you want to call it, precisely because they wear the roads, just like non-EVs, even if they are charged with solar panels, that still doesn't make them 100% eco-friendly, given they use resources to be built (extra materials, including of the tyres, batteries, etc), maintained and even charged via PV.
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
Because it was abolished in 1937.
I wondered when someone would bring up that pedantic answer. Road tax, VED, it's essentially the same to vehicle owners. To be able to drive a vehicle on the road, you have to pay 'it', but nowadays, the amount you pay for 'it' depends on what vehicle you own and when it was regsitered.
And EVs should pay some form of VED / road tax / whatever you want to call it, precisely because they wear the roads, just like non-EVs, even if they are charged with solar panels, that still doesn't make them 100% eco-friendly, given they use resources to be built (extra materials, including of the tyres, batteries, etc), maintained and even charged via PV.
It's not just mindless pedantry. VED has no more to do upkeep of roads than stamp duty.
The fair solution is probably to abolish VED entirely and put it all on fuel duty.
|
The loss of revenue is the cost of reducing carbon emissions, along with a whole load of other (not car-related) costs. I don't think it's unfair on ICE drivers as I have not heard of their VED increasing.
EVs wear out the roads in just the same way as ICE vehicles (if not more due to extra weight) so why should they not pay Road Tax?
Because it was abolished in 1937.
I wondered when someone would bring up that pedantic answer. Road tax, VED, it's essentially the same to vehicle owners. To be able to drive a vehicle on the road, you have to pay 'it', but nowadays, the amount you pay for 'it' depends on what vehicle you own and when it was regsitered.
And EVs should pay some form of VED / road tax / whatever you want to call it, precisely because they wear the roads, just like non-EVs, even if they are charged with solar panels, that still doesn't make them 100% eco-friendly, given they use resources to be built (extra materials, including of the tyres, batteries, etc), maintained and even charged via PV.
It's not just mindless pedantry. VED has no more to do upkeep of roads than stamp duty.
The fair solution is probably to abolish VED entirely and put it all on fuel duty.
Trouble is you may as well say that for any tax these days - they all get put in a general pot to be divvied out as governments anbd councils see fit. National Insurance being the best example.
My point was that the 'tax' we (mostly) pay to be able to run a car is essentially the same 'thing' as was the case before, even if the money doesn't go where it used to.
|
|
|
|
<< The fair solution is probably to abolish VED entirely and put it all on fuel duty. >>
You could call it fair, but one difficulty is that the price of fuel might become uncompetitive with other countries, leading to more buying overseas and maybe even (horrors) smuggling :-)
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
