Cycle to work: Budget clampdown

[PaulSB]

I believe the phrase "so chuffin what?" leaps to mind. The whole scheme only costs £130m.
EDIT: I believed the mod edited part was relevant and not overly political or controversial but I will comply with mods' wishes. My point was that it's a relatively small amount of money with a reasonable benefit to society, and other sources of tax revenue might be more productive and beneficial.

I imagine that £130m contributes significantly to our beleaguered cycling industry—particularly if it encourages new people into cycling. It’s good for economic growth, innit?

I agree it's a very small amount of money in the great scheme of things. I imagine the Chancellor is scraping around for every £ she can to avoid breaking pledges.

My beef with C2W is that it is unfair when many of these bikes are never used for commuting. I have yet to see an argument supportinh why a proportion of cyclists should benefit from a tax break.

If the government wishes to stimulate and support the cycle industry a system whereby all cyclists benefit would be more appropriate.

I've spent £12,000+ on three bikes in the last 9 years. The oldest of these will be touching 10 years old when it's replaced in spring 2026. If the replacement cost was lower I would have changed it 3 - 4 years ago and that bike would be considered for upgrade in perhaps 2, 3, 4 years. If bikes were more affordable** I would have bought more bikes.

** I fully appreciate I'm very fortunate to be able to afford bikes at this cost. I'm not complaining merely pointing out lower prices would generate greater sales.

 

[Electric_Andy]

I don't understand what the issue is really. It's essentially a line of credit which the direct supplier of a £4000 bike may not offer. The purchaser is reducing their pension contributions whilst they are paying it off, and the employer is saving money by paying pension contributions on a lesser salary which has been cut by the purchase. Yes the environment is possibly the only one losing out if a car is being used to commute anyway, and the bike is taken to some woods on the back of a car to be used. But how are local bike shops suffering because of this, if it's bought from them via the company rather than by the individual; they're still selling a bike?

 

[Gwylan]

It’s low hanging fruit.
Why should you get tax relief on a £4k bike.
I have no issue with it being £2k.
It sounds like they are taking a look and lots of salary sacrifice schemes.

It's peeing in the ocean. There are lots of other, better ways to squeeze the over paid.
They, the over paid, pay people to find ways around taxes and benefits.

 

[Psamathe]

I agree it's a very small amount of money in the great scheme of things. I imagine the Chancellor is scraping around for every £ she can to avoid breaking pledges.

My beef with C2W is that it is unfair when many of these bikes are never used for commuting. I have yet to see an argument supportinh why a proportion of cyclists should benefit from a tax break.

If the government wishes to stimulate and support the cycle industry a system whereby all cyclists benefit would be more appropriate.

My attitude to is is that maybe the Government have done the right thing for the wrong reasons. ie they focused on people commuting but what they did was actually broader support for cycling.

OK, had they been looking to spend money on broader support for cycling then maybe better ways but given how little out governments do for cycling I'd rather have something that helped but didn't achieve their internal justification than nothing.

 

[iandg]

Not before time. I know many people who have spent thousands on bikes under this scheme. Not one of them commutes.

The biggest p*** take I've personally seen is someone who works from home, bought a £7k bike on C2W and uses it to pop out and do hill repeats while on lunch break!!!!

🤬🤬🤬

I'm with this. Too many people using it to buy expensive bikes for weekend leisure with no intention to commute.

It's also biased to higher wage earners, while low wage earners can't get access to the scheme (you're ineligible if the repayment takes you below minimum wage). It's not accessible to retired people, unemployed, sole traders and self employed. It also depends on your employers discretion to join the scheme (when I was working NHS Western Isles wouldn't join).

Cycle to Work schemes needs to operate differently so that everyone can access them, how that happens I don't know.

My wife used C2W to buy her commuting bike (working for NHS Dumfries and Galloway). I'm retired but managed to take advantage of an "Energy Saving Trust" scheme to buy an £1800 Raleigh Trace ebike on a 4 year interest free loan. I had to demonstrate a regular income (my monthly NHS pension payments) to be eligible. Unfortunately the scheme is no longer available.

 

[Drago]

I'm with this. Too many people using it to buy expensive bikes for weekend leisure with no intention to commute.

So it is being said by many, but wheres the evidence?

I dont doubt some folk do, but how many? What percentage? Is it a minor problem, or is it almost universal?

Lots of anecdote, but no actual evidence being touted, and that is a bad basis for a government to take action under any circumstances.

We need evidence before such a statement can be sensibly used as a call for action.

Excellent point about low earners missing out due to minimum wage thresholds. However, I would regard that as a reason for the scheme to me modified or replaced anew.

 

[iandg]

So it is being said by many, but wheres the evidence?

I dont doubt some folk do, but how many? What percentage? Is it a minor problem, or is it almost universal?

Lots of anecdote, but no actual evidence being touted, and that is a bad basis for a government to take action under any circumstances.

We need evidence before such a statement can be sensibly used as a call for action.

Excellent point about low earners missing out due to minimum wage thresholds. However, I would regard that as a reason for the scheme to me modified or replaced anew.

A quarter (25%) of users said they did not use the bicycle they obtained through the scheme for cycling to work.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-scheme-quantitative-and-qualitative-research

But only 6% of scheme users bought bikes over £2K

 

[Drago]

So 75% of those that participate use thr bikes as intended. That undermines the government's position straight away.

Thats not a bad hit rate at all, and with such a solid foundation the government should be looking at ways to further improve an already pretty good compliance rate rather than undermine someone who simp,y wants a really nice bike to ride to work and who is, by their own figure, 75% likely to do so.

Each one of those 75% represents two less daily car journeys, less pollution, less road death, improved health and wellbeing...and reduced duty income for the exchequer, which may be a factor behind it. I mean, do the government really want less carmise and thus less taxstiln and duty income? That may be cynical, but from what we've seen of our leaders in recent years its hard not to be.

 

[Dadam]

A quarter (25%) of users said they did not use the bicycle they obtained through the scheme for cycling to work.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...-scheme-quantitative-and-qualitative-research

Yes, but 74% did do (the other 1% are recorded as didn't know or couldn't remember)

In any case, 63% did not cycle to work before the scheme, and did so after. I think that's pretty positive.

Also it does not say what proportion of the 25% still cycle to work more than previously. They may have got a fancy weekend bike on the scheme but that may have enabled them to set up another bike for commuting and hence commute more.

 

[teeonethousand]

I think encouraging people to cycle to work is a great idea where possible but..it should be an encouragement to cycle rather than buy.

My suggestion would be to enable people to claim mileage for cycling from home to office/back - business monitors it for honesty like any other expenses but deducts what they pay out from their tax payment to government.

Same mileage rate for everyone regardless of income level or bike and an incentive as either full car cost V no cost and some money back.

 

[iandg]

Of the 63% who did not cycle to work prior to joining the scheme.

35% stopped cycling to work after the scheme
59% were car users


Also interesting is that only 33% of users of the C2W scheme would select the scheme as "the ideal scheme" with the majority in favour of other hypothetical schemes.

 

[Animo]

I suspect the scheme has overall been a net benefit for the economy.

Always hacked me off though that as a self-employed person I've been unable to take advantage.

 

[iandg]

Yes, but 74% did do (the other 1% are recorded as didn't know or couldn't remember)

In any case, 63% did not cycle to work before the scheme, and did so after. I think that's pretty positive.

Also it does not say what proportion of the 25% still cycle to work more than previously. They may have got a fancy weekend bike on the scheme but that may have enabled them to set up another bike for commuting and hence commute more.

35% of the 63% didn't cycle after the scheme

 

[iandg]

I suspect the scheme has overall been a net benefit for the economy.

Always hacked me off though that as a self-employed person I've been unable to take advantage.

One of the disadvantages of the scheme that I have mentioned in a post above. My last employer didn't offer the scheme so I've never been able to use the scheme. I also object to the fact that the scheme is biased towards higher earners with low paid workers unable to access the scheme (but I've already said that above).

If the scheme could be accessed by a larger percentage of the workforce (low waged etc.) I don't think I'd be that bothered about the 25% who have no intention of commuting. And yes, jealousy is part of this - when I lived in Stornoway employed by NHS Western Isles I couldn't access the scheme but cycled to work in all but the worse weather. Police, council workers did have access to the scheme and I went out on Hebridean CC rides with those who had bought "bling" through the scheme but never cycled to work (and took the bikes into work in the back of a car on the club training night).

 

[lazybloke]

From Graunian online this morning:

One government figure told the newspaper: “Cycle to work should be about helping ordinary commuters switch to greener travel, not giving tax breaks to high earners buying £4,000 e-bikes for weekend rides in the Surrey Hills. Taxpayers shouldn’t be footing the bill for luxury leisure.”

But i'd still be able to use salary sacrifice on an ID Buzz?