Not before time - tax disc to go
08 December 2013, 03:56 PM
#32
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suppose the alternatives aren't much better, either:
a Government monitored black box in every car that measures mileage (err, no thanks).
An annual check alongside the MOT that generates a bill based on the odo reading. This would need to be an annual check on the anniversary of purchase.
Toll roads (would suit me as most of my driving is on country lanes).
a Government monitored black box in every car that measures mileage (err, no thanks).
An annual check alongside the MOT that generates a bill based on the odo reading. This would need to be an annual check on the anniversary of purchase.
Toll roads (would suit me as most of my driving is on country lanes).
09 December 2013, 09:01 PM
#36
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mid-year makes no difference to a check on the anniversary of purchase just as a car manufactured mid year needs a mid year MOT. Equally, can you imagine the queue at the local testing station if you decreed that all cars needed doing at the same time.
You'd also need a suitably large bill in the case of someone choosing not to get 'measured' to provide some motivation to get it done. Perhaps double the top price bracket.
10 December 2013, 01:15 AM
#37
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Warrington
Posts: 4,554
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mid year as in 'between purchase anniversaries', not 'end of June'. Hardly anyone sells their car on the anniversary of purchase.
All tax returns have to be done at the same time, and they're a lot more complex than a mileage reading.
What's a 'top price bracket'? Thought this suggestion was mileage related. You know the rate for each vehicle.
All tax returns have to be done at the same time, and they're a lot more complex than a mileage reading.
What's a 'top price bracket'? Thought this suggestion was mileage related. You know the rate for each vehicle.
10 December 2013, 09:20 AM
#38
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: UK
Posts: 275
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mid year as in 'between purchase anniversaries', not 'end of June'. Hardly anyone sells their car on the anniversary of purchase.
All tax returns have to be done at the same time, and they're a lot more complex than a mileage reading.
What's a 'top price bracket'? Thought this suggestion was mileage related. You know the rate for each vehicle.
All tax returns have to be done at the same time, and they're a lot more complex than a mileage reading.
What's a 'top price bracket'? Thought this suggestion was mileage related. You know the rate for each vehicle.
I mentioned price brackets in recognition of the fact that there would need to be a pricing structure in place with a cap. By all means charge by the mile, but that structure needs to be reasonable. Without this we’d risk pricing haulage and taxi firms off the road. So, there’s a need for a proportionate penalty to encourage people to submit their information.
In relation to tax returns, you’re quite right; they are significantly more complex. However, they have a deadline, not a submission date and can be submitted any time from the end of the financial year right up to the end of January the following year meaning that, in practice, they don’t all land at the same time. Although it’s doubtless that people will leave it as late as possible, that’s just human nature.
What’s important to remember is that it was one of three ‘back of a beermat’ ideas I put forward as an alternative to the current system. Sadly, there’s no white paper sat on my desk waiting for approval in the commons and equally zero hours of research put into the practicalities.
Unfortunately though, the government are clearly not overly concerned about the state of our roads. Instead they it seems far easier to find public favour by talking about pollution and ‘saving the world’ which, makes us gas-guzzling high performance car owners public enemy number one.
19 January 2014, 10:32 AM
#39
Scooby Regular
Thread Starter
iTrader: (9)
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: .
Posts: 20,035
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I knew there would be something in it for the government.... there always is! From another forum, can't verify if this is true or not but it sounds about right for the money grabbing scum some of you call politicians.
Originally Posted by Another forum
Proposals to get rid of paper tax discs from October 1 this year will carry a sting in the tail for everyone buying a used vehicle after that date: they will have to tax it immediately instead of being able to take on the vehicle’s existing unexpired tax.
While ostensibly a move to stop fraudsters, the tweak to the rules could lead to a windfall for the Treasury.
The ‘Draft Clauses and Explanatory Notes’ for the proposed Finance Bill 2014 say:
“…it will no longer be possible to transfer the benefit of a vehicle licence when there is a change of registered keeper. As a consequence of this, where there is a new registered keeper he/she will be obliged to take out a new vehicle licence when the vehicle to which the vehicle licence relates is transferred to him/her. The reason for now preventing vehicle licences being transferred from registered keeper to registered keeper is to avoid a new registered keeper unknowingly keeping an unlicensed vehicle. For example, in the absence of a paper licence a vehicle may be purchased supposedly with the benefit of a vehicle licence. The new keeper would believe that the vehicle was licensed, but the former keeper could apply for a refund of VED without the knowledge of the new keeper resulting on the new keeper having an unlicensed vehicle.”
The reasoning makes a certain amount of sense, although the ability to instantly check any vehicle’s tax status online at the www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk website rather blows a hole in the idea that there’s no way the new keeper could tell whether his vehicle was taxed or not.
A cynic might say that since you can only get refunded for complete remaining months of VED, the government stands to scrape up a lot of part-months of extra tax revenue. Official figures show that around 7 million used vehicles get a change of ownership each year. If, on average, each has half a month’s worth of VED remaining, that’s 3.5 million extra months of VED being paid each year. The equivalent of 291,666 years’ worth. If we estimate that the average annual VED cost per vehicle is £200 (a fair guess given the spread of rates), then that’s somewhere in the region of 58.3 million pounds windfall to the tax man. Every year. Not a bad haul, really.
While ostensibly a move to stop fraudsters, the tweak to the rules could lead to a windfall for the Treasury.
The ‘Draft Clauses and Explanatory Notes’ for the proposed Finance Bill 2014 say:
“…it will no longer be possible to transfer the benefit of a vehicle licence when there is a change of registered keeper. As a consequence of this, where there is a new registered keeper he/she will be obliged to take out a new vehicle licence when the vehicle to which the vehicle licence relates is transferred to him/her. The reason for now preventing vehicle licences being transferred from registered keeper to registered keeper is to avoid a new registered keeper unknowingly keeping an unlicensed vehicle. For example, in the absence of a paper licence a vehicle may be purchased supposedly with the benefit of a vehicle licence. The new keeper would believe that the vehicle was licensed, but the former keeper could apply for a refund of VED without the knowledge of the new keeper resulting on the new keeper having an unlicensed vehicle.”
The reasoning makes a certain amount of sense, although the ability to instantly check any vehicle’s tax status online at the www.taxdisc.direct.gov.uk website rather blows a hole in the idea that there’s no way the new keeper could tell whether his vehicle was taxed or not.
A cynic might say that since you can only get refunded for complete remaining months of VED, the government stands to scrape up a lot of part-months of extra tax revenue. Official figures show that around 7 million used vehicles get a change of ownership each year. If, on average, each has half a month’s worth of VED remaining, that’s 3.5 million extra months of VED being paid each year. The equivalent of 291,666 years’ worth. If we estimate that the average annual VED cost per vehicle is £200 (a fair guess given the spread of rates), then that’s somewhere in the region of 58.3 million pounds windfall to the tax man. Every year. Not a bad haul, really.
19 January 2014, 11:17 AM
#40
Why doesn't that surprise me, one iota. 
If it turns out to be the case, then that's a very subtle, and sneaky, change to the 'rules'.
If only they could put as much creative effort into PROPERLY trying to turn around the country's various ills, rather than - yet again! - targeting the bloody hapless motorist for a few extra quid.
But then, as we all know, it's a ready-made, 'shooting fish in a barrel'-esque, easy target... "so why not."
*sigh*
If it turns out to be the case, then that's a very subtle, and sneaky, change to the 'rules'.
If only they could put as much creative effort into PROPERLY trying to turn around the country's various ills, rather than - yet again! - targeting the bloody hapless motorist for a few extra quid.
But then, as we all know, it's a ready-made, 'shooting fish in a barrel'-esque, easy target... "so why not."
*sigh*
Last edited by joz8968; 19 January 2014 at 12:19 PM.
19 January 2014, 07:02 PM
#43
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Like it or not, governments gotta make money somewhere. Just so happens that as you say, the motorist is a easy target.
19 January 2014, 07:22 PM
#45
Scooby Regular
Join Date: Apr 2013
Location: Berks
Posts: 4,224
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With 34.5 million registered vehicles in the UK targeting motorists is probably the best way to spread it around fairly. I doubt there are many other ways you could get the equivalent of >50% of the population.
19 January 2014, 07:35 PM
#50
Yeah, the lost amount isn't gonna put people off one way or the other.
More, the principle of the thing.
But, that said, it's small beer revenue in the grand scheme of things.
...So from that point of view, I guess it's quite a 'clever' way of trawling in some extra revenue -- in that it's effectively 'invisible' lost money for most motorists.
More, the principle of the thing.
But, that said, it's small beer revenue in the grand scheme of things.
...So from that point of view, I guess it's quite a 'clever' way of trawling in some extra revenue -- in that it's effectively 'invisible' lost money for most motorists.
Last edited by joz8968; 19 January 2014 at 07:37 PM.
Thread
Thread Starter
Forum
Replies
Last Post
