Budget

[Steve Firth]

And it shows (again) what a pointless load of old tat the Toyota Pius is.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Lowest emission petrol/diesel vehicles pay 30 quid and there are a number of these. IMHO is it necessary to check vehicle ownership details once a year and this provides the method of doing so. And there's no reason why it should be free.

[Adrian]

Dave Plowman (News) ("Dave Plowman (News)" ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Jerry is, of course, wrong. As usual.

There are two cars which are currently available from UK dealers which fall into Band A - the Polo Bluemotion & the Seat Ibiza Ecomotion.

If Smart got their arses in gear and imported the ForTwo diesel, it would also be band A - as any parallel imports would be. There's several companies parallel importing Smart ForTwo diesels.

Oh, and band B is £35 petrol or diesel, or £15 "alternative fuel". Which includes the Pious & the Civic IMA.

Albeit a massively flawed one.

There's plenty of other cars which get zero-rate VED, too, of course. Some of them are _very_ polluting indeed...

[The Natural Philosopher]

Indeed. Its cheaper to run a Transit van than many medium sized cars. VED wise.

Why? Tory voters don't drive Transits by and large.

[Clive George]

You don't understand the difference betweeen "zero" and "small" do you...

[:Jerry:]

Yes, and what does that 30 quid represent to an OAP (thus a fixed income) who does 100 miles pa, travelling to and from the post office (assuming she still has one) and church once a week, in real terms it's costing him/her more than the highest VED mean for the so called "Gas guzzlers" being driven 60k pa driving to and from Scotland each week.

IMHO is it necessary to check vehicle ownership details once a

That could be done for free, paid from an increased fuel duty, just as it is (in effect) done with those who chose to own 'Historic' vehicles.

[:Jerry:]

Only if one doesn't bother reading what I said, but then trolls never allow the fact to get in the way, the fact is ANY value of VED is unfair to those who's vehicles spend 98pc of the year sitting in the driveway.

[:Jerry:]

WWWHHHHOOOOOSSSSASHHHH

Yes I do, unfortunately you do not, re-read what I said until you do.

[Adrian]

:Jerry: (":Jerry:" ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Compared to the cost of depreciation and/or MOT, insurance and maintenance? Fuck all.

[Adrian]

:Jerry: (":Jerry:" ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Sorry, Jerry, but there is no way on this earth that you can spin

to be anything other than incorrect. I notice you snipped the bit which showed you why it was incorrect. The Honda Insight is not the only Band A vehicle.

[Clive George]

The VED on a small car is a small part of the running cost. Yes, I understand that. The VED is probably non-zero. Yes, I understand that.

You're the one who claimed there were no band A cars, and then denied you were wrong about that. You're also wrong about the "small part of the cost" thing.

WRT your OAP example - other costs, eg servicing, depreciation, insurance, fuel will all come out to a lot more than the VED. That's what "small part of the running cost" means.

[The Natural Philosopher]

What high VED does is to penalise low mileage people and benefit high mileage people.

There is nothing that couldn't be done simply by raising fuel duty. Apart from winning the next election..

I heard a comment on Radio2 on wednesady to the effect that 'some pwopl are turning down higher paid jobs further from home, because teh extra salary doesn;t cover the extra commuting costs'

That's what is needed..and thats nothing to do with VED, its to do with high fuel costs.

I cant say exactly what a typical pensioner has to drive, but the samples I know of are generally driving something that is pretty old, does sub 3000 miles a year, and barely generates any carbon as a result. It is also not particularly fuel efficient.

The opportunity cost to replace this with a newer cheapar car is beyond most retired people. They are stuck with seeing yet more of their meager pensions clawed back in rising fuel costs , fuel costs and VED costs..as they have to drive even further to get to the post office.

Another case is e.g. a Motor caravan. Most of those do sub 2000 miles a year. But they are taxed like a van doing 70,000 miles a year. Its cheaper to fly than have a camper..

So lets all fly instead!

OR SORN stuff. I took one vehicle off the road completely..it still runs up and down te garden but that's it. No tax, insurance or MOT required!

Clutch is iffy as are the plugs and the brakes have packed up..but apart from that its fine ;-)

Doesn't even get serviced..at 50 miles a year why bother?

>

[Adrian]

The Natural Philosopher (The Natural Philosopher ) gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

I've just taxed one of mine.

It's done 700 miles in the last 2.5yrs. It's been taxed most of that time.

[Clive George]

Won't stop him trying though...

[The Natural Philosopher]

No.

The situation of most reited peole is that they have, from when they were working, a little capital, represented often by te hiuse, its fixtures and fittings, and a car, all bought and paid for about the time they retired.

That car realistically has to last 20 years, and after 10 it has almost zero value.

ALL that counts is the cashflow between a slender pension, and the cost that are heaped on to their 'capital assets.

Council tax. Road tax. MOT Insurance. Inheritance tax.

To an extent insurance is comptitioe and thats fine.

The rest are politically derived and bear no relation to the actual use to which their capital assets are put.

I.e. council tax is not based on how many miles they drive on local roads, or how much rubbish they generate.

VED is not based on it either. Nor is the MOT.

These are manifestly UNFAIR taxes as it happens.

E.g, if you invest money in a nice eco friendly house, you get taxed on it. If you live in a council flat and invest teh money in a fund, you don't.

Better still, if you dont invest any money at all, and just live and die like a chav, the state will pay you instead of taxing you.

Ergo, people who scrimp and save are in a minority, and chavs are everywhere. Why not? its what the government will pay to to be!

[Clive George]

...

You do know that inheritance tax doesn't actually apply until you die? At which point you don't need to worry about your slender assets/whatever.

(and doesn't apply to stuff transferred to surviving spouse either).

[Stuart Noble]

You sound like a bit of a pikey yourself

[Dave Plowman (News)]

Presumably you mean exempt vehicles made before '73? Complete nonsense. Most who own such a vehicle are perfectly able to pay VED. More so than those running a car on a limited budget.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

I doubt there are any pensioners living on just the OAP who can afford any car. Those retired people who can might be rich or poor. Same as any other.

[Dave Plowman (News)]

But it's not high. It's peanuts.