We'd like to remind Forumites to please avoid political debate on the Forum... Read More »
📨 Have you signed up to the Forum's new Email Digest yet? Get a selection of trending threads sent straight to your inbox daily, weekly or monthly!
fined £548 for not having road tax, !!!!!!? Need advice
Options
Comments
-
FWIW it's a maximum of two years for making a false statutory declaration as it's not actually done under oath - Perjury Act Section 5. In practice, probably a few months. Either way, paying a few hundred quid seems like a better option.0
-
aquilerian wrote: »This is quickly turning into a "why don't you have road tax"
Yes. It seems to have started shortly after you admitted that you could afford a 3DS...
As you hopefully now understand, the tax is required even if you don't use the car at all. It is only if you declare it to be taken of the road that you do not need to pay itto be expected, I guess. In this circumstance i think it is completely unreasonable to be fined £548 given the severity and location of the incident
It's only a little ore that I pay in tax on each of my cars. It's not a huge amount, in other words. It needs to be larger than the tax would be, and by a decent margin, or else too many people would just not pay it.0 -
Pollution tax is more apt
It's really not. I do 4,000 miles per year, but pay the best part of £1,000 for the privilege. Someone doing 60k miles, burning vastly more fuel, could well be paying next to nothing, despite dumping far more CO2 out.
If it was a pollution tax, then it would be far better to levy it on fuel.0 -
It's really not. I do 4,000 miles per year, but pay the best part of £1,000 for the privilege. Someone doing 60k miles, burning vastly more fuel, could well be paying next to nothing, despite dumping far more CO2 out.
If it was a pollution tax, then it would be far better to levy it on fuel.
Tax is on the emissions rating for the car.
Fuel burnt is the cost per mile0 -
For the average-mileage domestic car driver, maybe. For hauliers, no. I ran the sums a little while back, for a very similar thread elsewhere. To replace VED with additional fuel duty would add about 12p/litre to the price, to be revenue-neutral. For a haulier, that's going to MASSIVELY increase costs.
But the argument that the government makes is that the range of prices is to reflect the amount of CO2 (etc.) that the vehicle puts out. That's pretty much in direct proportion to the fuel used, so taking them at their word, it's sensible to put the entire levy on fuel.
If the govt were telling the truth, my rarely used but ludicrously over-engined C63 would be paying far less than the guy downstairs who does tens of thousands of miles per year in his golf "Blue Motion".0 -
Tax is on the emissions rating for the car.
Fuel burnt is the cost per mile
Yes, I understand that, I'm pointing out that basing it on the rating and ignoring the number of miles actually driven means that it is not measuring pollution, as the govt claims it is.
I don't really mind paying a lot for the privilege of owning and driving my silly cars I just don't agree with the government pretending that the tax I pay on them is pollution based.0 -
It's really not. I do 4,000 miles per year, but pay the best part of £1,000 for the privilege. Someone doing 60k miles, burning vastly more fuel, could well be paying next to nothing, despite dumping far more CO2 out.
If it was a pollution tax, then it would be far better to levy it on fuel.
Apart from the fact that you don't pay "the best part of £1000" for VED, since the top rate is £500, you ignore the fact that there is already substantial fuel duty in place - 58p/litre.
Assuming you're doing 25mpg on petrol (since that £500 Band M VED only applies to the very thirstiest of post -06 vehicles), then you're paying £417 in fuel duty for your 4,000 miles. The 60k mile driver (let's assume 50mpg on diesel) is paying £3,132 in fuel duty.
I think you're getting the first-year "showroom tax" element confused, leading you to think the £1080 for a Band M car is what you'll be paying every year. (It may also be Band L, £860 first year, £485 subsequent, of course - but Band K (£625/£285) still doesn't really qualify for "best part of £1000").
I doubt you'll elicit much sympathy that your tax disc is unfair when you've just paid THAT much for a low-mileage toy. Assuming you didn't buy a petrol Jeep Wrangler (you're not clinically insane?), the cheapest Band M new car is probably the Chevrolet Camaro, and the only sub-3.5litre engines are the petrol versions of the Merc G-wagon and Disco 4. Band L is hardly more prosaic, with stuff like 911 Turbos _just_ creeping over the lower threshold...
Who's paying more?0 -
Apart from the fact that you don't pay "the best part of £1000" for VED
I doubt you'll elicit much sympathy that your tax disc is unfair when you've just paid THAT much for a low-mileage toy.
I've just noticed that you named it as a C63. Furry muff. I s'pose the £10k of VAT on the purchase is irrelevant compared to the £500 of VED? Not to mention the likely £30k+ depreciation over the 12,000 miles you'll put on it over 3yrs.
Near-on £3/mile in depreciation. <wince>
Enjoy it...0
This discussion has been closed.
Confirm your email address to Create Threads and Reply
Categories
- All Categories
- 351.2K Banking & Borrowing
- 253.2K Reduce Debt & Boost Income
- 453.7K Spending & Discounts
- 244.2K Work, Benefits & Business
- 599.2K Mortgages, Homes & Bills
- 177K Life & Family
- 257.6K Travel & Transport
- 1.5M Hobbies & Leisure
- 16.1K Discuss & Feedback
- 37.6K Read-Only Boards