c2w - should you have to actually cycle to work?

[martint235]

What about it?

That is money that is made up for the rest of the country. Ergo the taxpayer subsidises your bike.

Now before this gets out of hand, I actually think that although complicated, C2W is a good thing and a good use of tax funds. I do however have an issue with some of the things that the OP is on about where the bike is for someone else or for someone's sprog.

 

[Standoff]

I still dont understand how you have paid for some of my bike?

Oh the government makes up for the tax reduction then?
It's like the scrap page scheme. Someone's subsidising someone else. The government ain't got no money. So that will be the taxpayer! Me!

 

[wiggydiggy]

Oh the government makes up for the tax reduction then?
It's like the scrap page scheme. Someone's subsidising someone else. The government ain't got no money. So that will be the taxpayer! Me!

That is money that is made up for the rest of the country. Ergo the taxpayer subsidises your bike.

Now before this gets out of hand, I actually think that although complicated, C2W is a good thing and a good use of tax funds. I do however have an issue with some of the things that the OP is on about where the bike is for someone else or for someone's sprog.

Thank you. I knew full well what Standoff was previously implying but I hoped we can debate this sensibly without the sarcasm from Standoff, so I was deliberately not playing so to speak. Sorry for being a bit awkward but I agree it doesnt need to get out of hand and we can talk about this sensibly.

Anyway, my point is there are many schemes, incentives, tax breaks - call them what you like - that we may or may not agree with. In this case Standoff's view is the scheme is unworthy and should not be subsidised, but yours (and mine) is that it is albeit we both acknowledge there are some flaws.

I do stand by my view that as a scheme, that costs the general taxpayer a % to run, this is worthy.

 

[Beebo]

At times like this we need Norm, our resident C2W expert to sort this out.

Oh! Why did Norm leave again?

 

[Standoff]

I apologise for any perceived sarcasm.
I don't apologise for my dislike of such schemes!
Someone once said..'government taxes it's people quietly...then gives some of it back flamboyantly!'
This is once such example among many. Got a great idea...don't take it off us in the first place!

 

[DCLane]

I've got a C2W bike and yes, it's to help reduce both the tax I pay and to keep Child Benefit from being reduced by a bit.

I choose to cycle to work 80-100% of the time. The car hardly gets used as a result. However, the C2W bike isn't used much for the commute; I've 5 to choose from and vary them as needed. Does that make me a tax dodger? I don't think so.

 

[martint235]

There are flaws in the system it's accepted it's true. However once it's agreed that it is funded by taxation you can look at whether or not it's worthwhile. From a purely economical view, if say one in 5 bikes purchased helps prevent its owner from becoming obese and needing all the health services entailed in that, then I think it's safe to say it's working. That's before you get in to the more difficult to quantify stuff like how much more effective is a fit and healthy worker.

As I said, my gripe with the system are the people that abuse it and may make it more difficult or less attractive for those who wish to benefit from it in the proper way.

 

[Sara_H]

I dont see how anyone can object to someone else getting a bike at all other than perhaps jealousy. The scheme is available anyone employed (full time?) in the uk and if your company doesnt do it, you can either request that they do or help implement it yourselves.

I'm not an expert on C2W, and its intricacies, but anything that gets more bums on saddles is a winner in my book.

Many of my colleagues have bought bikes on the scheme, most of whom were already dedicated cyclists.
However,I know of at least two who bought bikes intending to use then on tracks at the weeksends with the kids and ended up using the for commuting. That, to me, is a beautiful thing.

 

[wiggydiggy]

At times like this we need Norm, our resident C2W expert to sort this out.

Oh! Why did Norm leave again?

Did he leave? I didnt notice (embarrassed ), he was much better at C2W than I!

I apologise for any perceived sarcasm.
I don't apologise for my dislike of such schemes!
Someone once said..'government taxes it's people quietly...then gives some of it back flamboyantly!'
This is once such example among many. Got a great idea...don't take it off us in the first place!

No probs I just wanted to cut through it, and you dont need to apoligise for not liking it as I know its not to everyone's taste!

There are flaws in the system it's accepted it's true. However once it's agreed that it is funded by taxation you can look at whether or not it's worthwhile. From a purely economical view, if say one in 5 bikes purchased helps prevent its owner from becoming obese and needing all the health services entailed in that, then I think it's safe to say it's working. That's before you get in to the more difficult to quantify stuff like how much more effective is a fit and healthy worker.

As I said, my gripe with the system are the people that abuse it and may make it more difficult or less attractive for those who wish to benefit from it in the proper way.

The abuse is I agree perhaps an issue, I dont have examples myself but that doesnt mean it doesnt take place. Personally I err towards the the ethical side so I've had 2 bikes in 4 years (I could have a different bike each year) but felt what I had was enough.

Many of my colleagues have bought bikes on the scheme, most of whom were already dedicated cyclists.
However,I know of at least two who bought bikes intending to use then on tracks at the weeksends with the kids and ended up using the for commuting. That, to me, is a beautiful thing.

Yup! Got a few examples of that and unfortunately some examples were they end up sitting in the shed, still you take the rough with the smooth!

 

[PocketFrog]

I think it's disingenuous to enter into the C2W scheme if you aren't going to adhere to the spirit of it. I have no problem with someone buying a bike but using another because they are still completing a qualifying journey that might otherwise be done in a car.

 

[Paul99]

For all the people that think that having a tax break in the C2W scheme deprives the government coffers of money, please take into account all of the bikes that people have bought that probably wouldn't have been bought at all, and the tax revenues generated from these sales.

 

[srw]

For all the people that think that having a tax break in the C2W scheme deprives the government coffers of money, please take into account all of the bikes that people have bought that probably wouldn't have been bought at all, and the tax revenues generated from these sales.

Very roughly, the government loses 30% to 50% of the purchase price (depending on marginal tax rates) in foregone income tax and NI. It wins 20% of the purchase price in VAT, and about 20% of 5% (1%) of the purchase price in corporation tax.

So the government is a pretty substantial net loser. And that assumes the bike wouldn't have been bought anyway - most people seem to be using the scheme to buy a bike they would have bought anyway.

 

[Paul99]

Very roughly, the government loses 30% to 50% of the purchase price (depending on marginal tax rates) in foregone income tax and NI. It wins 20% of the purchase price in VAT, and about 20% of 5% (1%) of the purchase price in corporation tax.

So the government is a pretty substantial net loser. And that assumes the bike wouldn't have been bought anyway - most people seem to be using the scheme to buy a bike they would have bought anyway.

And the very busy bike shops, importers etc that have had to employ more staff to cope with the increased sales. What about their income tax and NI?

And all the accessories bought? I've probably spent about £500 since last November on extras, and will probably continue to spend on other cycling consumables.
And assuming that the bike wouldn't have been bought anyway. I had a perfectly servicable BSO but I bought my bike precisely because of the C2W scheme. I may not have otherwise. I don't think most people would have bought the bike at all, unless of course you are assuming that because of the amount of people on this forum that have done so.

Now how are your sums stacking up? Very roughly.

Edit: And then of course we have those that actually realise they love cycling and then spend £x thousands on N+1 etc.

 

[srw]

Paul - you provide the detail behind your anecdotes and I'll tell you. I suspect you can't, because I suspect that (in the grand scheme of things) there is no increase in purchases that wouldn't have happened anyway.

 

[Kestevan]

And

.

all the accessories bought? I've probably spent about £500 since last November on extras, and will probably continue to spend on other cycling consumables.
And assuming that the bike wouldn't have been bought anyway. I had a perfectly servicable BSO but I bought my bike precisely because of the C2W scheme. I may not have otherwise. I don't think most people would have bought the bike at all

Yeah, but you'd probably have blown all the cash you've spent on accessories on other stuff anyway. The Gov was going to get it's VAT etc back anyway.

Given that a significant percentage of people (like me) either work for employers who wont consider the scheme, or are otherwise ruled out I think the better solution would be to get rid of the scheme altogether, and simply scrap VAT on sports goods (or at least bikes).