Lets say a nominal amount - £5 p/y if it meant that drivers would treat you with a bit more respect.
Afterall, more money is being spent on cycle lanes etc and maybe they could throw in the incentive of better bike storage facilities in town centres etc
I've mooted this point a few times over the past few years and for one I'd be willing. Unfortunately I don't think it would a blind bit of difference but may be worth exploring?
Cheers
Danny B
If the government abolished the illusion of environmental 'road tax' yes...
No way I would pay any sort of tax when a car can get a disc for nowt!
No.
Cheers
Yossarian
No.
My car is zero rated, I haven't had any abuse from other road users about the fact (yet). 😆
No.
I already do. It's called VAT and Income Tax.
...and legitimise the stupids?
Behave.
Compare VED to CO2 emissions, then extraopolate back to zero emissions and I'll take the tax rebate in excahnge for displaying some sort of disc. That would easily pay for some sort of insurance which would help to make "other road users" even more happy. Sounds like win win to me!
"if" it meant drivers were more repectful and careful yes, but they wouldnt be so I'm out!
Ditto all of the above.
No way...pretty sure the highway code covers how a driver should drive and we emit zero emissions (unless you've had curry the night before).
No, more pressure needs to be put on motorist to educate them that cyclist are legitimate road user already.
The thing is you could start saying £5.00 no problem then with 2-3 years its seen as a £xx.00 cash cow or whatever the goverment at the time decided it to be.
So no
No. Never.
No, because why should I pay when some cars don't just to appease the modern moron that life is fair, the next thing they will be bleating I pay more than you, you will never please them, till they actually use the grey matter between their ears for more than remembering which celeb slept with which other vacuous moron.
Futher more I'm sure most of already pay the appropriate VED for our other vehicles, I know I pay two lots one for my car one for my motorbike so does that mean I get extra rights, no I just get to use the road legally in/on those vehicles.
No, I would like to get a tax refund because I cycle to work.
Because I'm not using a car, I'm reducing the wear and tear on the road infrastructure, helping to alleviate congestion and reducing the environmental impact of my travel. I reckon I'm therefore paying more than my fair share through my tax contribution, and should get something back.
A tax refund for cycling would be a great incentive to get people out of their cars.
Also, as noted above, a bicycle is a zero rated vehicle, so it would make no sense to start taxing it when zero rated cars are exempt.
No chance.
And the costs of administering such a scheme would still cost more than £5 per cyclist (or bike?).
It'd be entertaining though to see the Daily Mail readers tied up in knots - simultaneously happy that cyclists were finally paying "road tax" while being outraged that the system would cost millions of pounds every year to administer.
😆
No. Apart from objecting to the general principle. It would be ridiculously expensive to administer, and the retards who actually believe that their 'road tax' gives them greater rights over cyclists will carry on believing this as the cyclists pay less 'road tax'. If you set the tax level the same the drivers will change their bleat to something else.
It's not about the tax.
No, never in One Million years.
Sod off with your selfish ideas 😆
No.
And no VED is being spent on the improved cycling facilities, that's your council tax, which everyone pays
No! If drivers feel so strongly about VED let them start a campaign pf civil disobedience over the issue, blockading London and key motorway junctions with abandoned cats and the like until the tax is scrapped.
[quote=ohnohesback ]No! If drivers feel so strongly about VED let them start a campaign pf civil disobedience over the issue, blockading London and key motorway junctions with abandoned [b]cats[/b] and the like until the tax is scrapped.
But that would be like herding, err, .....
I'm struggling to see why I have to pay tax for both car when I can only use one at a time let alone pay for my bike.
Just scap ved and pay a little more fuel duty
Would I have to pay it on all my bikes or just the ones I use on the road?
What if I have to ride a different one because my normal road bike is knackered?
Nah, I don't think so......
cars then. ****ing tiny keyboard!
No way, and they'd have to catch me first!
When you prise my bike from my cold dead hands...............
if it led to better treatment and increased respect I would pay a nominal fee but it wont so NO
Dibbs - MemberMy car is zero rated, I haven't had any abuse from other road users about the fact (yet).
Your car is ****ing gay.
HTH.
Back on topic, **** no.
Cycling should be encouraged.
Cycle tax/helmet laws et cetera can **** right off.
Of course not. The tax issue is beside the point, I've more often heard that cyclists 'get in the way', are a 'nuisance', are dangerous. The presence or absence of a tax disc (which would have to be zero-rated anyway as a bicycle emits no co2) wouldn't change those misconceived ideas.
Nope.
If they made car drivers pay as well - but more for their increased usage
And horse riders
And pedestrians when they deign to cross the road
And truck drivers and bus drivers and passengers on buses and taxis
In fact call it a toll...and then ill just go off road
No, but I'd pay for a more reliable type of insurance, like drivers get. That said, the bulk of the cost you'd be paying would be to cover the chance of damaging their vehicles.
Tragically I'd pay £5/year towards an advertising campaign to educate drivers in what VED actually is, who pays for the roads and legal cycle maneuvers such as riding 2 abreast.
I'd even be up with balancing the tables out and making cyclists run some sort of CBT before road riding.
If the government abolished the illusion of environmental 'road tax' yes...
Why is it an "illusion"? How many Band A cars do you reckon there would be on the streets if we didn't have VED?
(Graded congestion charge works well too!)
Just scap ved and pay a little more fuel duty
Wouldn't be as effective. Calling it out separately makes people aware of it.
Not many folk would base their buying decision on a 45.5mpg car over a 45mpg one, but they would be influenced towards a Band C versus Band D car (even though it likely makes less of a difference to their bottom line)
To be honest for every idiot car driver there's also a cyclist who needs educating in the ways of the road.
Red means stop, even if you're on a bike.
Dark? Turn your bike lights on (or buy some if you don't have them).
etc...
no.
roads have existed for a long long time. long before cars were invented. motor vehicles have to pay because they are driving on pedestrians/ horse riders roads and their dangerous, destructive vehicles are damaging everything, our roads, our health, our planet, etc.
bikes, which are iron horses as far as im aware, do none of those things, they dont even damage the roads as much as pedestrians.
why should bikes pay? to build cycle lanes? the idea is to keep the cars away from the bikes, not the other way around.
Why is it an "illusion"?
Because my 18yr old hunk of Japan's finest is far more environmentally friendly than modern crap that has an expected life of only 9yrs, yet costs more in tax.
Because my Jag has produced less pollution in the last twelve months than Johnny Guardian reader's blue motion.
Two at a guess.
Warning Graham: I'm on the cider.
No.
Pedestrians, bicycles and horses have a 'right' to use the road. Drivers are invited to apply for a licence that will enable them to use the roads.
Surely a zero emmision vehicle should be attracting a rebate of....£200/yr ish based on VED charges. i could almost retire if all my bikes were included!
PhilC - MemberSurely a zero emmision vehicle
I hate that phrase applied to cars, even when it's spelled correctly.
They're not zero emission, they have just moved the emissions from the car to somewhere else.
No.
The tax i pay on fags, beer, tvs, petrol, bike parts, wages, music, etc, all pay for the roads.
It's not like a pushbike wears out tarmac.
I'd happily pay loads of money if it meant some kind of cycle utopia, but for some of the reasons stated above, I'm out.
It is one of the most simple activities. One step up from walking. I paid tax when I bought the bike. I pay tax on the flapjacks and Jelly Babies I eat to fuel up when I ride it. I pay tax when I stop for a coffee, or enter a sportive. It would worry me a lot if we started putting restrictions on the bike itself. The need for tax, MOTs, insurance, etc. How would kids ride, and at what point would they start paying their way? It takes the innocence away. And in the context of the thread, would feed stupidity.
Interestingly they were discussing the 'Road Tax' issue on Radio 4 yesterday, about 8.45am.
my bicycle might be emission free, but the rider generally isn't.
re ved for bikes, practically it just wouldn't work. you'd have to register all existing bikes, sorn the ones that are off road, and what about home made ones and so on. and then it's not many steps away from an mot and insurance too.
Because my 18yr old hunk of Japan's finest is far more environmentally friendly than modern crap that has an expected life of only 9yrs, yet costs more in tax.
Well no. If I go out and buy a new Band A car tomorrow then I won't be paying any VED on it, but the VAT and registration means I'd be paying more total tax than your existing car 😀
Because my Jag has produced less pollution in the last twelve months than Johnny Guardian reader's blue motion.
Because you don't drive your Jag presumably?
But as I said VED doesn't work by making people pay for their actual emissions - it works by making them think about their emissions.
Warning Graham: I'm on the cider.
😆 noted - I'll leave it at that
