Electric vehicles

[paulrbarnard]

Yet is the missing word.

Do you think the government can afford to lose all that income from Road Tax bearing in mind they will also be losing the duty on fuel ! That duty will end up on charging points .

Doubtless they will introduce some form of usage related charge.

But for goodness sake stop calling it road tax. There has not been a road tax since 1937. Road tax is the fall back criticism of every anti cyclist in the U.K. Complete idiots who think they own the road because they pay road tax are one of life’s curses.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Can't recall the exact details but I read some research on this that indicated that the impact on battery life (due to V2X) turns out to be very small; to the degree that it's likely not a problem.

It’s somewhat dependent on the use case but the current thinking is that the 2G part will only be 10 to 20% of capacity so no significant impact to the battery at all.

 

[Sachakins]

Can't recall the exact details but I read some research on this that indicated that the impact on battery life (due to V2X) turns out to be very small; to the degree that it's likely not a problem.

Yes, I've read that extract too, but the overall result was far less conclusive, as they found it difficult to do an accelerated are degradation test.
Since degradation is little early on, but rate of accelerated decay grows as depletion cycles mount,so still up for debate.

 

[user 43593]

But for goodness sake stop calling it road tax. There has not been a road tax since 1937

Yes, but... almost all folk I know referred to the paper disc displayed on the vehicle as a "tax disc". One would expect our parliamentarians to actually know what term to use.

As recently as 12th july 2023, Hansard notes that at 10:56, Robbie Moore used many words in a speech on Abandoned Vehicles: Public Highways and these words included the terms, "untaxed" and "tax disc". This suggests that the words are still in common usage. Given this usage, I am not sure that it is reasonable to criticise the public for misinterpreting and ascribing the terms their common use meanings.

 

[Sachakins]

Doubtless they will introduce some form of usage related charge.

But for goodness sake stop calling it road tax. There has not been a road tax since 1937. Road tax is the fall back criticism of every anti cyclist in the U.K. Complete idiots who think they own the road because they pay road tax are one of life’s curses.

Just because the tax to use road was name changed to vehicle excise duty from road fund licence does not mean it isn't a tax to use the road, since without it it is illegal to keep a vehicle on the public highway, even kept on private land that has unfettered public access us not allowed.

The reasoning behind the change to VED, was to allow the government to use the tax for purposes other than road building and repairs. So the change to an Excise Duty allowed them to add it to general taxation pot.

Since this pot also incorporate road infrastructure, then its only a game of semantics your playing over Road Fund Licence vs Vehicle Excise Duty.

 

[user 43593]

Just because the tax to use road was name changed to vehicle excise duty from road fund licence does not mean it isn't a tax to use the road, since without it it is illegal to keep a vehicle on the public highway, even kept on private land that has unfettered public access us not allowed.

The reasoning behind the change to VED, was to allow the government to use the tax for purposes other than road building and repairs. So the change to an Excise Duty allowed them to add it to general taxation pot.

Since this pot also incorporate road infrastructure, then its only a game of semantics your playing over Road Fund Licence vs Vehicle Excise Duty.

Agreed! It is the continuing nature of the demand that places it within the realms of taxation. Although some taxes are payable just once, where the payment is demanded and must be paid regularly, on pain of some penalty or another, it can fairly be regarded as a tax.

q.v. The TV licence fee. This demand equates to a tax because without paying it, one cannot watch legally BBC or live television without being charged for the offence as a criminal. Furthermore, the government are the final regulators of the tax paid to the BBC.

 

[John Brown]

Doubtless they will introduce some form of usage related charge.

But for goodness sake stop calling it road tax. There has not been a road tax since 1937. Road tax is the fall back criticism of every anti cyclist in the U.K. Complete idiots who think they own the road because they pay road tax are one of life’s curses.

Agreed, and also, let's not forget that the vast majority of cyclists who annoy drivers do pay VED, as they own a car that they've left at home.

 

[Blackswanwood]

Just wondered if we should add something about sharpening as it’s usually less contentious than the cyclist/driver debate

 

[Sachakins]

Agreed, and also, let's not forget that the vast majority of cyclists who annoy drivers do pay VED, as they own a car that they've left at home.

I did own a car and a motorbike. Both which had to have the VED paid, even though only possible to use one at a time.
Maybe if the cyclist owner had to to pay an eqivilant VED on the cycle and the car, then a bit more sympathy may be given to them.
Just because they pay VED on the car makes no difference or is a an excuse to use the road. I paid on my car, so why did I have to pay again on the bike, but the cyclist gets to duck out of a fair and valid charge for their bike!

After all they pay VAT on the bike, so pay a VED to, its only fair.

 

[John Brown]

I did own a car and a motorbike. Both which had to have the VED paid, even though only possible to use one at a time.
Maybe if the cyclist owner had to to pay an eqivilant VED on the cycle and the car, then a bit more sympathy may be given to them.
Just because they pay VED on the car makes no difference or is a an excuse to use the road. I paid on my car, so why did I have to pay again on the bike, but the cyclist gets to duck out of a fair and valid charge for their bike!

After all they pay VAT on the bike, so pay a VED to, its only fair.

They're not polluting.

 

[paulrbarnard]

Just because the tax to use road was name changed to vehicle excise duty from road fund licence does not mean it isn't a tax to use the road, since without it it is illegal to keep a vehicle on the public highway, even kept on private land that has unfettered public access us not allowed.

The reasoning behind the change to VED, was to allow the government to use the tax for purposes other than road building and repairs. So the change to an Excise Duty allowed them to add it to general taxation pot.

Since this pot also incorporate road infrastructure, then its only a game of semantics your playing over Road Fund Licence vs Vehicle Excise Duty.

It breath taking how people embrace a fancy because it suits their narrative.

VED is a tax similar to VAT. You use a car you pay a tax on the car. In recent times that tax has been tied to the level of pollution it produces. VED absolutely is not a tax to support the roads or a ‘license’ to use the roads. If it was EV would not be permitted of the roads.

 

[paulrbarnard]

I did own a car and a motorbike. Both which had to have the VED paid, even though only possible to use one at a time.
Maybe if the cyclist owner had to to pay an eqivilant VED on the cycle and the car, then a bit more sympathy may be given to them.
Just because they pay VED on the car makes no difference or is a an excuse to use the road. I paid on my car, so why did I have to pay again on the bike, but the cyclist gets to duck out of a fair and valid charge for their bike!

After all they pay VAT on the bike, so pay a VED to, its only fair.

True colours shining through.

 

[Sachakins]

It breath taking how people embrace a fancy because it suits their narrative.

VED is a tax similar to VAT. You use a car you pay a tax on the car. In recent times that tax has been tied to the level of pollution it produces. VED absolutely is not a tax to support the roads or a ‘license’ to use the roads. If it was EV would not be permitted of the roads.

Wrong. Just because the VED is zero on an EV does not mean its not required to have a valid VED.. You still have to apply for a VED each year, without it, it is illegal to have or use it on a public highway. So without a VED you cannot use it, so yes VED is a license to use the roads.

 

[RogerS]

..... even kept on private land that has unfettered public access us not allowed.
.....

Eh? Can you please point us to chapter and verse please? What about people who have a public footpath through their land? Doesn't make sense.

 

[RogerS]

Agreed, and also, let's not forget that the vast majority of cyclists who annoy drivers do pay VED, as they own a car that they've left at home.

'vast majority'....interesting phrase. Do you have any evidence ? Or just wishful thinking ?

 

[RogerS]

They're not polluting.

So ? What on earth has that got to do with whether or not something should be taxed or not ? No logic to your statement.

 

[Sachakins]

Eh? Can you please point us to chapter and verse please? What about people who have a public footpath through their land? Doesn't make sense.

You answered your own question, that's a footpath.

 

[RogerS]

It breath taking how people embrace a fancy because it suits their narrative.

VED is a tax similar to VAT. You use a car you pay a tax on the car. In recent times that tax has been tied to the level of pollution it produces. VED absolutely is not a tax to support the roads or a ‘license’ to use the roads. If it was EV would not be permitted of the roads.

Doesn't make any sense at all and you have ignored his first sentence. It is illegal to drive a car or motorbike etc on the road without paying a charge. Call it Road Tax, call it VED...it matters not one wit. It is still a tax. Or are we playing semantics ?

 

[RogerS]

You answered your own question, that's a footpath.

I don't understand your statement. Please can you clarify. Where is the legislation that you are suggesting rides roughshod over the concept of SORN ?

PS I don't have any issue at all with the rest of your viewpoint.

 

[John Brown]

So ? What on earth has that got to do with whether or not something should be taxed or not ? No logic to your statement.

The VED is linked to emissions. It may not be equitable, accurate or to your liking, but that's the way it is. I have no doubt that you knew this already.