Board logo

Car ownership tax
Rob Lane - 22/9/04 at 03:47 PM

I've just read in Classic weekly that the DVLA are pushing forward a proposal document that will 'tax' ownership of a vehicle whether on road or off.

This would apply to any vehicle even scrap cars stored in barns or in gardens. So much for barn finds then.

It is proposed that the 'levy' be set at £4-50 to start with, until approval is gained from government.

Once approval has been gained then it's the DVLA who set the next years fees and so on. Tony Blair is happy with this as once in DVLAs hands it has nothing to do with government and they can say it's not their doing.

Proposals are for second year at £10 then rising per year thereafter.

The whole thing will raise £155 million with a £4-50 levy, so don't expect DVLA to keep it low

The supposed reason behind this is the fact that DVLA via government are reducing the new car tax fee by £10. So they have to make up the shortfall in their revenue.

So, unused cars will subsidise new car buyers. It really stinks and is the thin end of the wedge.

What next. Road tax plus ownership tax plus road tolls plus congestion charge per town plus motorway fees. Arghhh.

[Edited on 22/9/04 by Rob Lane]


stephen_gusterson - 22/9/04 at 03:53 PM

In singapore you have to buy a license before you are allowed to own a car.

Its something like 1,500 quid, but I think its for life




atb

steve


Rob Lane - 22/9/04 at 04:00 PM

I'm not particularily bothered what other countries do, some are very draconian BUT I am bothered that this country is suffering under President Blair and his cronies.

They have a distinct anti-car policy which is now gathering momentum.

Mostly the government thinks that London is it for Britain, because it's congested, must be that way everywhere else.

Hmm let's see.-----

4x4's are a nuisance in London, let's ban them!

Silly little loud sports cars providing it's driver with enjoyment, ban them.

Using a car for enjoyment, ban it.

Buses are for the masses, but not us politicians, give them the right of way but make us exempt.

-------


Mix - 22/9/04 at 05:13 PM

Why not tax vehicles on physical size and weight? That might sort out the 4x4 'school run' congestion. Alternatively, demand proof that the vehicle is used 'off road' !!

4x4s, a bit of a thing with me, along with caravan convoys.

Mick


andyps - 22/9/04 at 06:44 PM

Hopefully the classic car lobby will manage to stop this happening.

It was proposed a few years ago and they managed to put enough pressure on so it never became law. One good thing that came out of it was that the government made it free to tax "historic" vehicles which was surely related as this came in when the continuous tax was being discussed.

Would be a bad deal for me at the moment as I am sure there are some cars registered to me which no longer exist - will have to sort out the paperwork!


stephen_gusterson - 22/9/04 at 09:19 PM

quote:
Originally posted by andyps
Hopefully the classic car lobby will manage to stop this happening.

It was proposed a few years ago and they managed to put enough pressure on so it never became law. One good thing that came out of it was that the government made it free to tax "historic" vehicles which was surely related as this came in when the continuous tax was being discussed.

Would be a bad deal for me at the moment as I am sure there are some cars registered to me which no longer exist - will have to sort out the paperwork!


govt kinda back tracked on that tho.

originally it was free tax on anything 25 years old.

they got fed up of that and fixed it a few years back. has to be 1973 or before.

these ba^&tards find a way of getting your money

atb

steve


skinny - 23/9/04 at 08:25 AM

i don't see why they just don't scrap car tax and put more duty on fuel. that way, you are being charged simply in proportion to how much you use your car and how thirsty it is.

oh yeah, i can see why, £££


stephen_gusterson - 23/9/04 at 09:26 AM

it would make the amount of tax look far too obvious.


Just think of the costs of owning a car.


you go to work, and then get taxed at 22% or 40% + NI contributions.

you take whats left and buy a new car.

new cars are cost + 8% car tax, then 17.5% VAT ON ALL OF THAT.

Then you have to pay a road tax.

then you have to pay 80% approx vat on the fuel.

then there is the odd 60 quid speeding fine.

and 25 quid if you didnt register it or delcare sorn fast enough.

thats not even taking congestion or road charging into account.

come the revolution.................


atb

che


skinny - 23/9/04 at 10:08 AM

i just really object to having to pay tax on each car i have. if i have 10 cars so what, i can only drive one at a time can't i, i am not wearing out the roads 10 times quicker or causing 10 times more enviromental problems (not that i believe cars are much responsible anyway but don't get me started on that!), not putting 10 times more strain on fire, hostpial, & police services.

i think individuals should they wish to drive a car have to pay a tax, not the vehicles. the same goes for insurance.

and vehicle tax should go towards the impacts of vehicles stated above instead of subsidising everything else, it's f***ed up.

but messers blair and brown would be knee high in the smelly stuff if they did what was fair and common sense rather than what made them stupid amounts of money that they largely waste.



rant over? maybe. just don't get me started again (i'm quite capable of that myself!)


simonH - 23/9/04 at 01:05 PM

i like the aussie idea, your road tax is also basic 3rd party insurance, that way all txed cars are insured. reduces the number of untaxed cars enormousley as there is no need to get anything other than tax, and if you want to borrow your mates car you can and its taxed


binraker - 23/9/04 at 01:06 PM

surely if car owners have to pay all this than so dose public transport, so the bus companies will have less money, so they put up the fares so no one wants to travel by bus cause its too expensive and so are theyer cars = everyone gets P-ed off.

and what about all those lorrys transporting everything to the supermarkets or wearhouses and all the delivery vans to deliver it to your door. thats got to be recouped in the goods you buy so it will cost more to live so people will demand higher incomes so it will become less ecconomically viable to bring companies into the uk and the value of money will go down, thus requiring the inefficient tax office to need more tax to do anything.

maybee im paranoid...


skinny - 23/9/04 at 01:30 PM

forgot to say, funds from private vehicle use also heavily subsidise public transport. that way, anyone just looking to get from a to b gets a good quick convinient service on buses / trains and leaves the roads free for people who enjoy driving - everyones a winner! and lorries are banned from weekends and commuting times...


wilkingj - 23/9/04 at 06:49 PM

quote:
Originally posted by andyps
Hopefully the classic car lobby will manage to stop this happening.

One good thing that came out of it was that the government made it free to tax "historic" vehicles
Would be a bad deal for me at the moment as I am sure there are some cars registered to me which no longer exist - will have to sort out the paperwork!


Oh Dear... Car Tax is going in about 4 years time and will be a tax on the fuel, so the more you use it the more you pay. historic vehicles doing only a hundred or so miles a year will pay very little tax, and the 7Mpg lorries who pollute and wear the tracks into the roads will pay more. I have always supported this view... Especially as it gets those foreign drivers who wear our roads out for free.

Biased... your dead right!

BTW, ALL log books are being withdrawn and within less than 2 years all vehicles that are not either Sorn'd or Taxed, will be removed from the system. They are having a massive clean up, all in line with the new Euro compatible Logbook / V5.

So SORN anything you have NOW, or loose it in the near future.

Its only what I have heard but it seems to be happening and from a bureaucratic point of view (or another step to a Federal European State) sensible.
ie I cant prove or substantiate this, but it seems to be what they are intending.
Geoffw