Tax

[Turbo Dezzel zz]

Taxed my car today 20£' felt good 1st time for that,

[LGM]

Mines due this month :(

Edited 15 August, 2012 by LGM

[anewman]

Same boat here, £195. Had it been registered new before 1st March 2001 it would be £135 for the same car.

[biggy7]

£135 for my vrs and £30 for the wife's car

August a very expensive month for me as both cars insurance is up too...

[No.733]

My vRS is only £120, and I'm sure because I've only just taxed it. Are you being bummed for an extra £15 biggy?!

[chopper-lew]

Depends when it was registered. I think the emmissions are slightly different depending when the vRS was made. Mines £135 too.

[Phil-E]

My vRS is only £120, and I'm sure because I've only just taxed it. Are you being bummed for an extra £15 biggy?!

You're right.

It's £125 for certain ones.

It also meant that I thought I would a Yellow green zone sticker for my car (for driving in German cities) but I actually received a green one.

Same boat here, £195. Had it been registered new before 1st March 2001 it would be £135 for the same car.

It's mad isn't it when yoy consider the performance of your little 1.4 but because it is "more polluting" it costs more. Yeh it might have higher CO2 emissions but doesn't chuck out a load of carbon soot like our dervs do!

Phil

[softscoop]

It's mad isn't it when yoy consider the performance of your little 1.4 but because it is "more polluting" it costs more. Yeh it might have higher CO2 emissions but doesn't chuck out a load of carbon soot like our dervs do!

Phil

Shush!!!

The government will be taxing based on soot next and then we'll be screwed.

[Phil-E]

Lol.

If they measures it based on how much ended up on your boot then vRS owners would be screwed. I, on the other hand, would be fine as mine gets blasted at the tarmac by the pointing down pipes!

Phil

[No.733]

I agree (reluctantly). The tax system should really penalise the carcinogenic particulates, not just the CO2 emissions. And it should also depend on your mileage. If you own a 911 Turbo and you do 2,000 miles in it a year, you shouldn't be paying more road tax than Captain Sales Targets in his eco-diesel Mondeo doing 50,000 miles a year at an average of about 110mph.

[anewman]

I personally think the only sensible taxation method is at the pump.

Lower fuel efficiency = more emissions = more fuel.

Driving more = more emissions = more fuel.

I know the above isn't 100% accurate, but it's pretty good in terms of Co2 output.

That way you also provide an incentive for doing all you can to reduce emissions, by reducing use of fuel. VED is just a tax on the vehicle you happen to have, and is often paid more as a necessity. It doesn't directly offer an easy way to reduce emissions. If only everyone had a couple hundred grand in their accounts, they could all go out and buy a zero VED car :no:

Edited 16 August, 2012 by anewman

[Phil-E]

I personally think the only sensible taxation method is at the pump.

Lower fuel efficiency = more emissions = more fuel.

Driving more = more emissions = more fuel.

I know the above isn't 100% accurate, but it's pretty good in terms of Co2 output.

That way you also provide an incentive for doing all you can to reduce emissions, by reducing use of fuel. VED is just a tax on the vehicle you happen to have, and is often paid more as a necessity. It doesn't offer a way to reduce emissions.

Couldn't agree more.

That way someone who only wants a little 1.0 Hyndai i10 for example to just do 5,000 a year (our elderly neighbours srping to mind here) then you are not paying for tax for the whole year when most of the time it's sat on their private drive on not even on the public highway.

Phil