Why have VAT on bikes?

[marinyork]

Maybe because there is a likelihood that the savings would mostly be garnered from the genuinely luxury end of the market, high end road bikes, tourers, TT bikes, mountain bikes and assorted exotica rather than than the intended target of commuting kit. Yes I know you can argue that any of the above can be used to commute but [I think that] in most cases they wouldn't, they would be bought by experienced cyclists to carry out their intended purpose rather than would-be commuters looking to invest in day-to-day transport. So instead of getting cars off the street all that would happen is that us leisure cyclists would be riding round on more expensive road bikes etc. I'd have Ultegra by now instead of Tiagra, nice. By compelling employers to maintain the various schemes they are attempting to police the use of the bikes that are bought and ensure that they are getting people out of cars.

I presume that's why they legislated the £1000 cap also.

Knonist, the scheme is like it is because it involved very little input. The cycle to work scheme was snuck into the budget by Gordon Brown when he was chancellor, that's why it is like it is and it doesn't conflict with other VAT/EU stuff which was my point.

The £1000 cap has nowt to do with that, that's the OFT's opinion on group credit and the CCA. Again, an easy fiddle and legislative path of least resistance. Again original point, shows how little they'll do and it sucks.

 

[marinyork]

As its a larger sum of money, longer payment plans and greater risk of redundancy.. didn't I explain that?

Having bought a bike at over £700 and lost my job, I think I can be qualified to talk about this. C2W is a massive bonus in terms of spread payments, I think what you've written is nonsense. Adults are quite capable of assessing risk and making their own decisions. £1000 isn't large enough with the big price rises. £1000 is a maximum, there will be plenty of people who spend a lot less.