Road tax system needs changing
- Thread starter IKZ4
- Start date
Liverpool
It isn't all about you... 
The RFL influences buying decisions. Your M will be in use for another twenty years maybe more. In the long term, the life of a car ~ ten years, twenty, fifty, whatever, the engine makes a big difference to total tonnage.
I agree that the tax disk should be scrapped though. The total take adjusted into the fuel price. How many people are wasted administrating something so pointless every day?
I would say that though. I do less than 4000 miles a year.
The RFL influences buying decisions. Your M will be in use for another twenty years maybe more. In the long term, the life of a car ~ ten years, twenty, fifty, whatever, the engine makes a big difference to total tonnage.
I agree that the tax disk should be scrapped though. The total take adjusted into the fuel price. How many people are wasted administrating something so pointless every day?
I would say that though. I do less than 4000 miles a year.
CornishRob
Senior member
When I was looking at Ms before I got mine, my Man maths said its only a couple of Hundred pounds extra over a 3.0l or other cars with some performance.
When I drove an M, I decided it was worth it.
However spanking out £475 (which will probably be more from April) is always going to be a bum twitcher!
When I drove an M, I decided it was worth it.
However spanking out £475 (which will probably be more from April) is always going to be a bum twitcher!
So have you heard they are looking at doing away with the Toll booths on the M25 stretch at Dartford... and replacing it with camera operated tolls.
If they get this working, wont b long before introduced at every other busy junction... and still have to pay road tax.
I bet every foreign lorry driver & motorist must be laughing knowing they're unlikely to have to pay
If they get this working, wont b long before introduced at every other busy junction... and still have to pay road tax.
I bet every foreign lorry driver & motorist must be laughing knowing they're unlikely to have to pay
What could bring in more revenue, and annoy millions more drivers (which they seem happy to do on a regular basis anyway), would be to retrospectively change all the VED bands, so that it's based on engine size (or calculated equivalent for turbocharged/supercharged & rotary-engined cars). So you're 1920s 8 litre Bentley that is currently free would now cost £1500 a year to tax 
We all know motorists are just an easy target
They discussed taxing less efficient cars
They discussed taxing those that do more miles
Well they do both those things already via fuel duty. If you drive a low economy gas guzzler you use more fuel and pay more tax
If you drive more than the average you use more fuel and pay more tax
There's no justification other than we have to use our cars because the public transport infrastructure is crap so they know we're an easy source of tax revenue.
The first motorist friendly party is going to get elected on a landslide as the majority of the country is pissed off at the whole lot of them
They discussed taxing less efficient cars
They discussed taxing those that do more miles
Well they do both those things already via fuel duty. If you drive a low economy gas guzzler you use more fuel and pay more tax
If you drive more than the average you use more fuel and pay more tax
There's no justification other than we have to use our cars because the public transport infrastructure is crap so they know we're an easy source of tax revenue.
The first motorist friendly party is going to get elected on a landslide as the majority of the country is pissed off at the whole lot of them
It looks obvious to me that a driver friendly party would do well but it never happens so maybe it is just wishful thinking. To put is another way, we think we are normal but actually we are insane. :voodoo:
Stuart Truman said:
yep..
if you work on the basis that most governments pick an easy fight regarding fiscal matters, you'd be about there...
not really much point in my raising my views here, as they are off topic, and likely to lead to 'discussion' but, it's not just about the cash, there are lots of things that lead to adverse environmental, and economic, impacts that won't be addressed due to the slog they'd face.
the department that costs the government most of all, does least of all, unfortunately; and motorists and smokers and drinkers make up the difference...thank god for jeremy clarkson...
VvrooomM said:
You guys ALREADY have some of the highest taxes on fuel. When are you good folk going to stop (or at least try) giving drugs to the addicts? Your fuel tax is 338% above that in the US. Yikes! Rather than just conceding more taxes to the politicians. Maybe you should start holding their feet to the fire. I don't mean to be a pain or disrespectful. But geez. Your politicians have you so used to high taxes. You just accept them with out even a whimper. I would point out that for all the taxes you good folk put up with. Your just nearly as broke as the US is and we can't hold a candle to your level of taxation. So as a yank looking east. It's easy to see that one can't tax themselves out of trouble.
You get used to it. We get stuff in return. Some lose some gain. Taxation has its place. I find inefficient methods of collecting tax annoying though.
bigdog said:
You don't understand the psyche of the Brits. To generalise, we're an apathetic lot, (but personally, I'm not) and the products of a "class system" in which most people "know their place", and so most people simply can't be bothered to remonstrate at injustice and being shafted: we're used to it!
On top of that, we've got a social hierarchy which has developed over hundreds of years, in which there is a strong Masonic hierarchical element hidden within our entire system, where dissent and planned action is spotted and nipped in the bud at an early stage, by ostracism and career suppression for those who don't "play the game", which prevents protest and action from "snowballing" into significant public protest. Likewise, the masses are inveterate consumers of "toys" and people have been encouraged to get into debt to buy their toys, so people would rather play than protest. "The Powers That Be" control our politicians so they've got us where they want us. We had our revolution in Cromwell's time, and a short period as a Republic, but after the restoration of the monarchy (Charles II) in 1660 our political and social system enshrines our injustices. We need a constitution like you have in the US, but it's hard to see how we will ever get one.
Your cards are marked exdos.
exdos said:
Well. Without going into a long dissertation. We are in the same boat. You just had a big head start on us. We started to lose our free will non interference government exactly 100 years ago. When the private federal reserve bank was given the power to print fiat money. And was granted the power to loan money it (the bank) didn't have. I.E. Fractional banking.
When it comes to social engineering through welfare and the so called war on poverty that started in the 60's. That's not worked. For the tens of trillions of dollars spent on anti poverty programs in all those years. The poverty ratio has barely moved but a few tenths of a percent.
Finisterre said:
"You get used to it. We get stuff in return. Some lose some gain. Taxation has its place. I find inefficient methods of collecting tax annoying though."
Of course there is a place for taxation. It's outlined in our constitution. I get mad at the inefficient way in which our politicians spend money. Over spending is the problem. Not under taxation.
Not quite sure what it is you get for the level of taxation you have. Your infrastructure is just as broken as ours. Your roads are reported to be far worse than those in the states. You have an out of control immigration policy that is draining ever bigger amounts of money from the treasury. Your petrol is double the cost of ours. 20%VAT! And yet your national debt/deficit is at record levels just like ours. I pay 8% sales tax in Washington state. Or if I go over to Oregon. I pay zero sales tax. Auto insurance? In the states I was paying 28 quid a month for FULL cover on the Zed. I pay 12 quid a year for auto number plates. Moral of the story. Since the government doesn't take everything I have. I don't need a bloody cent from them to live. And I fall into the lower middle class. I.E. I'm not one of the rich that is insulated from everything.
We don't know either!bigdog said:
It seems that only individuals in the "working" and "middle" classes in the UK pay those taxes too. Rich individuals and larger corporates use elaborate and evasive arrangements to keep their assets and earnings "off-shore" therefore they contribute little to nothing to the Treasury. It stinks.
Just to be perfectly clear. Please don't misconstrue my statements as being Anti UK in any manner. The UK can be the UK. It's not for me to say yeah or nay. As an outsider I find it interesting to compare the differing thoughts on taxes Vs benefits from a non US point of view. I do however find it odd that for all the taxes collected the UK is not that much better off than the US. For those that have visited the US. I think you would agree. The cost of living in the UK is off the chart expensive. We have some American friends in Harrogate that moved there from Turkey. They have been in the UK less than a year and are ready to go back to Turkey or the US. Not because the don't like the UK. They love it there. But they said it is so expensive in the UK that they can hardly afford to go anywhere. It's cheaper to fly to the continent for a holiday than it is to stay on the island.
No offence taken.bigdog said:
Don't worry, there's a lot we hate about our country. :evil: Historically, we've had high taxation here for a long time, and in fact it used to be at 99% for the very rich in the 1960/70s. The nouveau rich in that bracket moved abroad (i.e pop and film stars) and the aristocrats kept their wealth in Trusts to avoid tax.
Tony B.liar and his cronies have destroyed the UK, by developing a "client state", which has effectively created a sizeable proportion of the electorate which is reliant on the "state" for either their employment or benefits, and thus will vote Labour to retain their respective incomes. Mass uncontrolled immigration was part of this policy (i.e. import voters). At the same time, B.liar and Mandelson were courting anyone with great wealth in order to feather their own nests (since they were unable to create their own wealth from real earnings) and have created a culture of corruption in the UK, which has led to our banking collapse from which NOBODY has been imprisoned, and which has cost the tax payer (working and middle classes) a fortune. Why did B.liar move out of politics when he ceased to be PM other than to personally capitalise on the foundations that he'd put in place whilst he was screwing the UK for his own ends as PM?