[Closed] Is there such a thing called Road Tax?

I've been on the end of the "You don't pay road tax" argument more times than I care to remember - not just angry motorists, but work colleagues, family members and of course [i]every[/i] single public internet conversation about bikes. [i]Ever[/i].

So yeah - I'm [i]very[/i] pleased the BBC are highlighting this - though I doubt it will make much odds.

I've already shown that of three cars producing identical emissions only a car driven on the public roads would be required to pay?

I can brew my own beer, drink it and never pay Alcohol Tax.
So by your logic it's really a tax on using pubs and off licences?

Vehicle Tax is [i]not[/i] a tax to use the public roads because everyone can use the roads for free (try walking, or a bike, or a horse).

And it's not even a tax on using a car on public roads, because millions of cars use public roads every day and don't need to pay it.

'Road tax' is a colloquialism, and a perfectly accurate one at that. If one buys three identical cars producing identical emissions, races one on race tracks, rallies one in private grounds, and drives one on the public roads, guess what, only the car driven on the public roads is required to pay a tax..hence 'road tax'. Simple.

Until you consider all the bicycles, agricultural vehicles, electric cars, horses, mobility scooters, all of which are also road users. If it's a 'road tax', why don't they have to pay it? It's exactly the same argument.

Now as to 'road tax' not paying for the roads...really? Next your going to tell me 'alcohol tax' (another colloquialism) doesn't pay for alcohol...

The mistake you're making here is assuming that the great unwashed aren't bloody ignorant. Unfortunately, history has proved time and again that this simply isn't the case. "Road tax" might be a handy colloquialism of arguable validity, but its use perpetuates the widely believed myth that it does, in fact, pay for road maintenance (as demonstrated by some of the anecdotes here).

Language is a powerful thing, and words often carry meaning beyond their literal definition. "****" is a contraction of "****stani" just as "Scot" is a contraction of Scottish / Scotsman, nothing more; but try using it next time you need to refer to a gentleman of said ethnic persuasion and see how far that gets you.

You can argue all you like about what it should be called and whether or not it's a valid term, but the bottom line is that the "road tax" nomenclature is misleading. [i]That [/i]is the simple bit.

I'd be happy to display a "tax disc" - as a zero-rated vehicle that's fine by me and it'd shut up a lot of this crap from drivers.

I'd accept mandatory 3rd party insurance, too (although it's not really workable is it - what would the penalty be, for a start ?)
If it was forced upon us all, and assuming somebody like CTC or BC ran it at something like non-profit basis it'd be cheap and it could also operate as a transport industry and general advocate speaking on behalf of millions of members.

Licensing/MOT - unworkable and needless since you're very unlikely to hurt other road users regardless of the state of your bike and you'd be insured if you did

Northwind - Member

As a VED-paying car owner and cyclist, I might have to go in search of some pre-tax classic cars today and shout at the owners.

You could find some soldiers driving green (coloured green: their emissions are amongst the worst) vehicles, diplomats staff cars, that bloke who drives the prime minister round, ambulancemen, fire engines, coppers and disabled people and shout at them too. Bleddy spongers. And of course Pruis drivers. 😀 [edit] oh i forgot tractors. Them too.

PS just realised today it was a week since I last drove my car. That's about £4.50 'road tax' Ihave paid this week for just having it parked there and instead my clogging the roads with my bike all week.

I'd be happy to display a "tax disc" ... I'd accept mandatory 3rd party insurance, too

It wouldn't shut the ****ers up though would it? Even if we paid more "road tax" than cars, had full insurance, never jumped reds, always rode single file, never filtered, never rode on pavements, and tugged our forelocks to every overprivileged twonk in a car who blats past giving us no room at all, some drivers would still hate us and still want us off "their" tarmac.

In summary: the sort of people who batter on about 'road tax' will never be happy. Good.

Now as to 'road tax' not paying for the roads...really?

Except that motorists claim that because we don't pay VED we don't pay for the upkeep of roads. We know that's not true, and we need to get the debate away from the idea that "road tax" is hypothecated.

I'd accept mandatory 3rd party insurance, too (although it's not really workable is it - what would the penalty be, for a start ?)
If it was forced upon us all, and assuming somebody like CTC or BC ran it at something like non-profit basis it'd be cheap

As a CTC member you get 3rd party cover already as standard. £10M worth IIRC. This alone makes the membership fees worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

Since the great heck train crash there is theoretically no limit to 'liability' payouts for motor insurance, if there was still a limit (iirc the minimum on cheapy third party policies used to be £1m) i wonder how much of the overall cost of motor insurance this would be for a car. (and don't forget the rest of the stuff you get with ctc membership.) This is a nice statistic to trot out in the "cyclists should be insured" debate: if £41 membership [i]includes[/i] £10m cover, the insurance underwriter must be very sure of the actual incidence, risks and consequences of a cyclist-fault accident to offer it that affordably. Out of interest I wonder how much out of that £41 overall membership fee the ctc pay their underwriter/insurer per member?

The simplest response to the "I pay road tax" line is "so do I" - assuming you're part of the car-owning majority of cyclists.

Whilst I think the campaign to get rid of the term road tax is a worthwhile one, a much more useful win would be to get rid of the ludicrous notion that "cyclists" and "motorists" are different people.

If anyone is feeling especially bloody minded, you can point out that the upkeep of the [u][i]local[/i][/u] highways and pavements actually comes from your county council's council/community/poll tax.

So if you're riding on one of your local non trunk roads and some forkwit comes out with the usual cobblers, ask them where they live. If they're not local, tell to them "git orrf moi road".*

* [i]Obviously this argument only works under certain circumstances and is probably only suited to making you feel morally correct/superior[/i]

The simplest response to the "I pay road tax" line is "so do I" - assuming you're part of the car-owning majority of cyclists.

In a startling twist of logic they will then say, without a hint of irony, something about how it is a tax on the individual vehicle not on the road!

🙄

IMO it should be ignored. I don't give a pigs fanny who's paid for what. Just treat people reasonably. Is it really that bloody difficult?

An interesting tactic is agreeing with them:

"You're quite right. I don't understand why we let unemployed folk on the roads either. They haven't paid any income tax have they? In fact I reckon only folk paying top rate income tax should be allowed on the roads. Or at the very least they should be given their own special lanes."

As a CTC member you get 3rd party cover already as standard. £10M worth IIRC. This alone makes the membership fees worthwhile as far as I'm concerned.

Do you not have household insurance then?

...the bottom line is that the "road tax" nomenclature is misleading. That is the simple bit.

How so?

'Alcohol tax' a tax some people pay to purchase alcohol

'Tobacco tax' a tax some people pay to purchase tobacco

'Inheritance tax' a tax some people pay on any inheritance

'Income tax' a tax some people pay on their income

'Road tax' a tax some people pay to use the roads

Exactly which part is misleading, and misleading to who? 😯

Edit: Ah, I see you've already covered this with your

...bloody ignorant...great unwashed...

why do we have to stoop to their level?

Because being right doesn't do you any good when you're under a bus.

Exactly which part is misleading, and misleading to who?

this bit:

'Road tax' a tax some people pay to use the roads

because it isn't. Everybody is entitled to use the roads.

I think it should be a PAYG type tax rolled into the cost of fuel. It's unfair that I have to pay £1065 in the first year then £490 a year subsequently, when people who do many more miles than I do pay less but contribute to polluting the earth far more. It sucks and it's stupid.

However little tax (of whatever nature) someone pays it's still not ok to try to injure or kill them.

Karinofnine - Member

However little tax (of whatever nature) someone pays it's still not ok to try to injure or kill them.

+1