VED to become a legitimate road tax?

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

Melonfish

Evil Genius in training.
Location
Warrington, UK
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20122355

A disturbing article from the bbc. essentially they wish to tier the charges according to what road you use.
now correct me if i'm wrong but a 1.4l petrol car will give off as much on an A road as it will on the motorway right?
so aren't they just legitimizing the argument that its a road tax?
also
The government is currently looking at a number of different ways that roads could be owned and paid for.

so there we have it, looks like they're considering bringing back road tax after all. i wonder what band we'll all be in?
pete
 

Hip Priest

Veteran
As far as I know, the motorways are the only roads which are paid for directly from VED, so it makes sense in a way. Anyway, the government are trying to ease congestion, so taxing cyclists would be the worst thing they could do. It'd never happen.
 

srw

It's a bit more complicated than that...
Barking mad. The last thing they should be doing is encouraging people off the motorways onto the smaller roads.
 

Lanzecki

Über Member
It's a tax based upon how much damage you could be doing to the environment. Bleeding stupid if you ask me. We have a few toll roads around here and people activly aviod them to pay the 1 80 it costs. Instead they happily pay in fuel and wear and tear. People will just do the same if they do this to motorways.

I wonder how much it would cost for that sort of infrastructure. But then again they'll loose that in another budget.

Cyclists will still be exempt. This is a non-issue for us.

Not to mention that the daily mail was mentioned.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
It's a tax based upon how much damage you could be doing to the environment. Bleeding stupid if you ask me. We have a few toll roads around here and people activly aviod them to pay the 1 80 it costs. Instead they happily pay in fuel and wear and tear. People will just do the same if they do this to motorways.

I wonder how much it would cost for that sort of infrastructure. But then again they'll loose that in another budget.

Cyclists will still be exempt. This is a non-issue for us.

Not to mention that the daily mail was mentioned.

Are'nt the Toll Roads, in the Republic of Ireland, classed as "motorways" anyway? Part of the M7(Limerick/Dublin) is one such road. And as you say people will drive round, rather than pay to use it.

But if any part of the VED/VD is used to support the roads that everyone has access to, then it does become another argument as to why we as cyclists should be treated as second class as "we don't pay it". Maybe now would be the time for a mass application from cyclists, to pay VED/VD. This would then put us an equal footing as those who claim that we do not pay it, so we have fewer rights compared to them on the roads.
IF this mass application is carried out & is successful, we will then be able to say that we are now paying it. The downside to this is that due to the cost of implimenting the scheme for cyclists, the cost for motorists would rise by about £60-£80 per year for a car in a middle bracket of VED/VD. And all because they wanted cyclists to pay the same as them.

A better way of increasing revenue, in my opinion, would to be make the 20-25% that should be paying it, but choose not to, to actually pay it. This would do two things. Lower the number of untaxed vehicles on our roads & lower the amount that the average driver has to pay. Hand in hand with that, would be the fact that with an increased number of legally taxed vehicles on the roads, the number of uninsured vehicles should fall. Thus leading to a drop in premiums.

However that last part is unlikely to happen, as the government would not want to upset the vehicle driving public. They'd seek a softer target.
 

Lanzecki

Über Member
Are'nt the Toll Roads, in the Republic of Ireland, classed as "motorways" anyway? Part of the M7(Limerick/Dublin) is one such road. And as you say people will drive round, rather than pay to use it.

Yes in theory they are, The only one that I don't think is a motor way is the limerick tunnel. While the signs arre green and speeds are 100kph, there are other signs saying no bikes, Mopeds, Horses (with or without carts).

But if any part of the VED/VD is used to support the roads that everyone has access to, then it does become another argument as to why we as cyclists should be treated as second class as "we don't pay it". Maybe now would be the time for a mass application from cyclists, to pay VED/VD. This would then put us an equal footing as those who claim that we do not pay it, so we have fewer rights compared to them on the roads.
IF this mass application is carried out & is successful, we will then be able to say that we are now paying it. The downside to this is that due to the cost of implementing the scheme for cyclists, the cost for motorists would rise by about £60-£80 per year for a car in a middle bracket of VED/VD. And all because they wanted cyclists to pay the same as them.

Toll roads are un-linked from VED and general taxation, but paid for by Private industry. In theory the toll fee is supposed to pay for the upkeep and initial building work. This would NOT support the theory that if you don't pay VED then you cannot use them since you pay as you use the road. Mr Churchill abolished road tax as such to stop one type of road user from claiming ownership. Personally changing this is a massive stop backwards IMHO. That said I didn't read that in the original piece as linked by Melonfish. Close, but it's an increase in VED if you use larger or more primary roads.

To do that would be an administration nightmare. Far easier to put free flow Toll systems in (you don't pay at a booth, but over the phone/internet etc). Not that that is a perfect system.

A better way of increasing revenue, in my opinion, would to be make the 20-25% that should be paying it, but choose not to, to actually pay it. This would do two things. Lower the number of untaxed vehicles on our roads & lower the amount that the average driver has to pay. Hand in hand with that, would be the fact that with an increased number of legally taxed vehicles on the roads, the number of uninsured vehicles should fall. Thus leading to a drop in premiums.

If only. I still don't understand why people are allowed to keep the car if it's not taxed of declared off road. Not that the irish system is any better.

I favor paying everyone pay a flat fee tax disk. Then increase the VAT on fuel. The more you drive the more you pay. Why should I pay €253 for commercial VED when the little old lady that drives a 1.6 Focus and drives to the shops a few times a week pay the same. Those that do the milage pay for it. And this comes from someone who used to drive 80000 a year.

Ohh, the answer? The screams from drivers and trucking companies. Voters.

However that last part is unlikely to happen, as the government would not want to upset the vehicle driving public. They'd seek a softer target.

Exactly right in a nutshell. The government generate massive income from VED, VAT on vehicle sales, VAT on Fuel, Dutys and all sorts of other stealth taxes. The problem is that drivers are also all able to vote.

it's worth saying that most of us are drivers as well as cyclists. Therefore we pay VED. Yes, it's on that vehicle, but if we don't use it for commuting etc we save wear on the roads and environment and allow people that cannot or won't use other forrms of transport faster access to their work. We are doing good for the community for cycling!

next we'll have foreign trucks and cars paying a bill as they leave the country.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
Out of curiosity (That thing which killed the cat), who paid for the TollRoads to be constructed in the Republic of Ireland. The very same people who paid for the "motorways" to be built. And that cost wasn't met by the revenue raised on car tax.

Every household in the Republic paid for them. Whether they can use them or not, not whether they do use them.

You're going to be paying for them for a good few years to come as well!

I'm all for a mass attempt of every cyclist in this country trying to register their vehicles in the same week. The increase to the motorist will be a simple case of you should have been a bit more careful in what you wished/asked for.
 
D

Deleted member 1258

Guest
But if any part of the VED/VD is used to support the roads that everyone has access to, then it does become another argument as to why we as cyclists should be treated as second class as "we don't pay it". Maybe now would be the time for a mass application from cyclists, to pay VED/VD. This would then put us an equal footing as those who claim that we do not pay it, so we have fewer rights compared to them on the roads.
IF this mass application is carried out & is successful, we will then be able to say that we are now paying it. The downside to this is that due to the cost of implimenting the scheme for cyclists, the cost for motorists would rise by about £60-£80 per year for a car in a middle bracket of VED/VD. And all because they wanted cyclists to pay the same as them.
.

The question here is why would we want to pay two lots of VED? I already pay VED on my car, why would I want to pay it on my bike as well.
 

classic33

Leg End Member
The question here is why would we want to pay two lots of VED? I already pay VED on my car, why would I want to pay it on my bike as well.
If you had two cars, you'd have to pay it on both. Non transferable between vehicles.
 

Drago

Legendary Member
The term VED was dropped some years ago, typical BBC lazy journalism. T'is just now just the appropriately named VD (with government forms and websites now referring to it a Vehicle Licence), not a penny of which goes directly to any road or infrastructure as it all goes directly to the exchequer. It's just a convenient means of raising revenue from the motorist, not a means of subsidising road building and maintenance.

Not owning a car I'm not remotely fussed, and the last car I personally owned was only £20 anyway.
 
D

Deleted member 26715

Guest
But surely the easiest way around all of this is to remove the VED/Road Tax from all cars & place it as extra duty on fuel, so if you do 3k a year you pay for 3K's worth of road use, if you do 50K you pay for 50K's worth of road use, the more efficient your car is the less you pay.

I don't understand why they have to make it so difficult.

Alan...
 

martint235

Dog on a bike
Location
Welling
Apart from the negative initial publicity, I think it's better that VD is done away with and the revenue raised from increasing the tax on fuel. True the initial headlines will be very negative but the people that use their cars the most will pay more but with incentives to buy more fuel efficient vehicles.

A two-tier VD system will just lead to the situation you see in some areas of France where huge trucks will drive down the most inappropriate roads just to avoid the tolls.
 
Top Bottom