Aw well, bang went that argument! 😆 (in england only!)

What an utter funt.

Still a tax on emissions though.

? Instead of ved or as well as? Emissions based or flat rate? Ring fenced for transport?

Bah! too late posting 🙂

All the money raised from VED is going to a roads fund.

What’s the rate for zero emission vehicles?

He didnt say.

Is there such a thing as a zero emission vehicle?

How does it change? My car is currently £158(?) every six months.

Osborne later denied that he was an “utter belmlord”.

Onzadog – Member
? Instead of ved or as well as

Money from VED will go into a fund for roads is how he put it.

wanmankylung – Member
He didnt say.

I know, but my post above doesn’t make as good a headline! 😆

hora – Member
Is there such a thing as a zero emission vehicle?

a bike? 😆

a bike?

Not after a prawn phall and two pints of Guinness, no.

No rise in fuel duty with rates continuing to be frozen

Major reform to vehicle excise duties to pay for a new road-building and maintenance fund in England

New VED bands for new cars to be introduced from 2017, pegged to emissions – 95% of car owners will pay £140 a year.

From BBC

I hope that means that Prius owners will no longer get away paying nothing, when their cars are actually evil

haha, true! 🙂

I am paying £265 a year for my 2005 1.6 Toyota Corolla automatic petrol so what’s the big deal? 😮

I hope that means that Prius owners will no longer get away paying nothing, when their cars are actually evil

The manufacturing processes involve some pretty exotic and toxic substances. That said, I’ve absolutely nothing against zero-emission vehicles, provided they’re made to sound like 1970s Italian V12s.

[ninja edit]: When I’m running the country, I’m going to ensure that this requirement is passed into legislation.

95% of car owners will pay £140 a year.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

It’s still not called “Road Tax” though, so we still have a get out clause when tackled by knobs.

95% of car owners will pay £140 a year.

I’ll believe it when I see it.

for NEW cars, which are almost all on strict emissions limits anyway.

for NEW cars, which are almost all on strict emissions limits anyway.

…which they don’t comply with.

So, for us thicko’s then..

He’s changing the “tax” bands for vehicles from 2017 applying to New cars only and calling it Road Tax, correct?
Current vehicles will continue in a VED way, correct?
Or from 2017 New cars only will be subject to VED and Road Tax ?

And, all this based on emissions?

Either way Lads, Tax is Tax, it’s just the point and cost level you pay innit.

…which they don’t comply with.

are you going to expand on this? Manufacturers outright lying or is it that co2 figures quoted are for perfect world running which people in real world driving conditions almost never meet?

It’s still not called “Road Tax” though, so we still have a get out clause when tackled by knobs.

Not really, as by the sounds of his statement it now will actually be used to pay for roads, which is usually the thrust of the “You don’t pay road tax” nonsense.

Thanks George you belm.

Also dupe thread: http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/you-dont-pay-road-tax-1

WTF – we don’t need more roads, we need a varied transport infrastructure and incentives to get people onto smaller vehicles and EV’s.

For once I agree with Chewkw.

How is my my 1.6 petrol taxed like it’s personally ripping penguins a fresh one and pays tax on the petrol too, and a Prius which has 80kg of lithium under the boot is free and doesn’t pay tax on it’s fuel (which is mostly coal and therefore even worse than oil).

WTF – we don’t need more roads, we need a varied transport infrastructure and incentives to get people onto smaller vehicles and EV’s.

Have you not heard? Theres going to be a new choo choo between London and Birmingham. Its going to cost the same as giving the entire population a gold plated unicorn each. Oh… then there’s this

Its even more laughable than Prescotts old ‘Integrated Transport Policy’

Seems fair to me that if you can afford a new car then you can afford to pay road tax. It was always going to have to be revised as more and more cars became exempt. It just wasn’t sustainable.

Good news that they will actually spend money on the roads. Lots more tax should be locked to spending like this. People might not actually mind paying it then.

I just poked Carlton Reid and he is already on the case:

http://www.bikebiz.com/news/read/tories-resurrect-cyclist-baiting-road-tax/018100

Seems fair to me that if you can afford a new car then you can afford to pay road tax. It was always going to have to be revised as more and more cars became exempt. It just wasn’t sustainable.

No problem with that part – it’s the fact it is to be reinstated as a “road fund” to pay for roads that is the issue.

The whole point of Churchill’s dislike for the road fund was that it gave motorists the idea that they owned the road to the exclusion of others.

As the great man stated: “It will be only a step from this for them to claim in a few years the moral ownership of the roads their contributions have created”

That is NOT good news for cyclists!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33447106

New Vehicle Excise Duty (VED) bands are to be introduced, with revenues eventually going towards a new Roads Fund, the chancellor has announced.

For cars registered after 1 April 2017, VED will be transformed into three bands – zero, standard and premium.

George Osborne said the “standard” charge of £140 would cover 95% of all cars. Revenues will be paid into the Roads Fund from 2020-21.

The chancellor also said that fuel duty would remain frozen this year.

Mr Osborne said: “There will be no change to VED for existing cars – no one will pay more in tax than they do today for the car they already own.”

He added that the £140 rate was less than the average £166 that motorists pay at present.

However, the new rates will not apply in the first year after registration. There will be special first year rates linked to a car’s carbon emissions.

And apart from creating a whole new system, or in reality two systems to run in parallel, this does what exactly?

And apart from creating a whole new system, or in reality two systems to run in parallel, this does what exactly?

Opens the door for them to start taxing other road users (i.e. cyclists) so that they “pay their way”?

Or cut cycle funding because it isn’t “paid for”.

a Prius which has 80kg of lithium under the boot is free and doesn’t pay tax on it’s fuel (which is mostly coal and therefore even worse than oil).

Careful, you almost got some of that right.

I agree with you mostly, but remember there’s more to emissions than end to end CO2.

But in any case – it’s an incentive at purchse time, and people do seem unreasonably attracted to £15 road tax per year, even though £140 is a tiny proportion of total cost of ownership.

We’re all doomed 😯

sounds like an excellent way to reduce funding for road building/maintenance to me

VED raises 7bn or so a year?

the highways agency must spend that on traffic cones alone 😉

kimbers is right. The “ring fence” may prevent additional taxpayers money being used to top up the road fund…

Does this mean we have to ride on the pavements now?

AS for “emissions”, this sometmes refers to NOx emissions which cause health problems in cities, and sometimes refers to cutting greenhouse emissions from burning fossil fuels.

Electric cars are better then petrol/diesel ones regardless. People usually start adding up the Co2 emissions from digging up and burning the coal to make the electrics, but forget to apply the same co2 calculations to the cost of extracting, transporting and refining crude oil from under the sea .

Electric motors have other advantages too, which is why its being used for high performance cars like the Koenigsegg, McLaren P1 etc.

Burning carcinogenic respiratory illness causing fossil fuels on built up areas is stupid
Bring on the leccy cars !

and

If the standard covers 95% of cars, it looks like they are removing any incentive for smaller economical cars.