Motor Tax Joke Rates - Any Change Due?

BorneTobyWilde

Vat rate on petrol should be zero or 5%
Why do people need to pay vat when they can't claim it back.

BorneTobyWilde

Vat rate on petrol should be zero or 5%
Why do people need to pay vat when they can't claim it back.

Cantona's Collars

jca wrote: »

Why do you feel you need a SUV as you call it for 3 children? I have 3 children and I drive an Octavia. Plenty of room for everyone, even when they were small with baby bags, buggies etc. This Irish obsession with people carriers gets on my wick. You don't need a 7 seater monstrosity to transport 3 children and you certainly shouldn't get a handout from the taxpayer because you had 3 sprogs. ..

We carpool for school runs.A standard car with a baby seat means the back seats are literally a crush.I could have went for Galaxy or similar but the cost of buying one compared to what I paid for my "monstrosity" was insane plus running costs were similar.
I like the suv and the power of it compared to the toy cars some people feel the need to drive to save a few bob in tax.I'm confident that if i go to pass something on the road,I can do it.In a 1 litre Noddy Car,I'd be terrified trying to go past anything moving faster than a speedwalker.:)
My point is that anyone with kids seems to be financially crucified by the state (maybe that's for another thread). The SUV won't be staying as the baby seats are not going to be needed in a while but for anyone with a large family they (7 seaters) are a must...Why should I want the gov to help out families when they put 23% tax on lifejackets:rolleyes:

BorneTobyWilde

BorneTobyWilde wrote: »

Vat rate on petrol should be zero or 5%
Why do people need to pay vat when they can't claim it back.

The point of VAT is to generate revenue, it's a Tax, that's what the T stands for.
It was raised to 23% to generate more revenue.

jca

StudentDad wrote: »

Well done for missing the point. At the time I was a 'young' driver. The insurance was eye watering and the tax on the car wasn't great either. I needed to travel by car. It's not like we have an amazing public transport system in this country but if you think putting under powered cars onto the roads for long journeys is a good thing good luck to you.

SD

Nowhere in my post did I say putting underpowered cars on the road was a good thing. All I could glean from your post was " poor me with my children why isn't the taxpayer letting me drive a better car" Everyone here was a young driver paying high insurance at one time or another, that isn't an excuse.

Sam Russell

jca wrote: »

Nowhere in my post did I say putting underpowered cars on the road was a good thing. All I could glean from your post was " poor me with my children why isn't the taxpayer letting me drive a better car" Everyone here was a young driver paying high insurance at one time or another, that isn't an excuse.

I understood him to bemoan the incredibly dangerous drivers of high powered large-engined cars that tailgate slower cars. Adjusting the tax rates could free him from having to drive such a noddy car. I do not think he was asking for a handout - merely to be freed from the bullying ignorant drivers that tailgate him - putting him in danger.

Of course, I may be wrong but in my experience it is not all BMW and Mercedes drivers that drive like that - just most of them. :rolleyes:

Supergurrier

Sam Russell wrote: »

I understood him to bemoan the incredibly dangerous drivers of high powered large-engined cars that tailgate slower cars. Adjusting the tax rates could free him from having to drive such a noddy car. I do not think he was asking for a handout - merely to be freed from the bullying ignorant drivers that tailgate him - putting him in danger.

Of course, I may be wrong but in my experience it is not all BMW and Mercedes drivers that drive like that - just most of them. :rolleyes:

You forgot audi drivers, atleast generalise properly.

jca

Sam Russell wrote: »

I understood him to bemoan the incredibly dangerous drivers of high powered large-engined cars that tailgate slower cars. Adjusting the tax rates could free him from having to drive such a noddy car. I do not think he was asking for a handout - merely to be freed from the bullying ignorant drivers that tailgate him - putting him in danger.

Of course, I may be wrong but in my experience it is not all BMW and Mercedes drivers that drive like that - just most of them. :rolleyes:

How would adjusting the tax rates free him from driving a noddy car? If the car tax was removed in the morning he'd be whinging about the price of fuel and wanting a lower rate of tax on fuel for people with more than 2.4 children...

jca

zerks wrote: »

We carpool for school runs.A standard car with a baby seat means the back seats are literally a crush.I could have went for Galaxy or similar but the cost of buying one compared to what I paid for my "monstrosity" was insane plus running costs were similar.
I like the suv and the power of it compared to the toy cars some people feel the need to drive to save a few bob in tax.I'm confident that if i go to pass something on the road,I can do it.In a 1 litre Noddy Car,I'd be terrified trying to go past anything moving faster than a speedwalker.:)
My point is that anyone with kids seems to be financially crucified by the state (maybe that's for another thread). The SUV won't be staying as the baby seats are not going to be needed in a while but for anyone with a large family they (7 seaters) are a must...Why should I want the gov to help out families when they put 23% tax on lifejackets:rolleyes:

None of those points you made in your original post. Children are expensive and at the end of the day with modern contraception, a lifestyle choice. You make your choice you pays the money.

micosoft

zerks wrote: »

Not everybody can afford €20+ grand on a new car "for the cheap tax."

Why does this keep getting repeated? You do not have to buy a "new" car to get cheap motor tax. You can buy an eight year old car and get the "new" cheap motor tax. In two years time you can buy a ten year old car and get the "new" cheap motor tax.

micosoft

StudentDad wrote: »

Well done for missing the point. At the time I was a 'young' driver. The insurance was eye watering and the tax on the car wasn't great either. I needed to travel by car. It's not like we have an amazing public transport system in this country but if you think putting under powered cars onto the roads for long journeys is a good thing good luck to you.

SD

This is just nonsense. There is literally no car <20 years old that is on the road that cannot legally drive to the speed limit and get to speed in a reasonable amount of time. The only person missing the point is yourself - there is never a reason why you "have to overtake" or drive unsafely. If someone chooses to sit on your bumper then so be it. Let them or pull over when safe to do so. Don't claim that "underpowered" cars in a small country are a thing...

jca

micosoft wrote: »

Why does this keep getting repeated? You do not have to buy a "new" car to get cheap motor tax. You can buy an eight year old car and get the "new" cheap motor tax. In two years time you can buy a ten year old car and get the "new" cheap motor tax.

Exactly.

jca

This thread is a bit like a work colleague of mine who has 2 children. Every Christmas it's the same aul whinge out of him, how come you have Santy sorted I've nothing for Christmas I've no money blah blah blah. Christmas comes every year, you know you'll need money for it stay out of the boozer on Friday nights and put the money in the penny bank, Christmas sorted. Buy what you can afford, have as many children you can afford, in other words grow up be an adult and make adult choices and decisions. Don't expect the taxpayer to subsidise your vehicle just because you couldn't be bothered using a condom.

Cookie_Monster

Seweryn wrote: »

Looks like another system based on another idiotic criteria . Yeah, that makes a lot of sense, car tax based on safety...

why is it idiotic? Fuel has tax which covers usage, diesel is exempt but you have to pay by the number of Km done as road user charges (RUC), which allow ag machinery to be exempt without all the nonsense of dyeing etc. RUC covers the cost of state road maintenance and household / business rates covers the cost of local roads in each council area.
So heavy vehicles pay far higher RUC than cars as they do more km and have a much higher impact on the state of the roads.

The safety factor is because the motor tax (Rego) is used to cover ACC which provides you insurance and covers injury costs. Insurance is not compulsory as it's already in Rego.

microsoft wrote:

2. The tax on fuel would punitively charge those who need to travel a lot (say country dwellers) and reduce costs dramatically for wealth people who don't drive much. e.g. a family living in the country side with a third hand Toyota driving every day all the time will pay much more than a millionaire living in Dalkey who takes the Bentley out on a Sunday drive. In essence the Motor tax is redistributive by creating a minimum charge for all drivers, not those who have to travel a lot.

Fuel should be taxed on usage, not rich v poor. Just like electricity or gas or water. Pay by usage is the only way people will ever change destructive habits and actually use public transport or other means rather than remain totally car-centric.

pillphil

micosoft wrote: »

This is just nonsense. There is literally no car <20 years old that is on the road that cannot legally drive to the speed limit and get to speed in a reasonable amount of time. The only person missing the point is yourself - there is never a reason why you "have to overtake" or drive unsafely. If someone chooses to sit on your bumper then so be it. Let them or pull over when safe to do so. Don't claim that "underpowered" cars in a small country are a thing...

Just because I'm a pedant, the G-Wiz and the Twizy 80 both max out at 80kph.

9935452

jca wrote: »

Why do you feel you need a SUV as you call it for 3 children? I have 3 children and I drive an Octavia. Plenty of room for everyone, even when they were small with baby bags, buggies etc. This Irish obsession with people carriers gets on my wick. You don't need a 7 seater monstrosity to transport 3 children and you certainly shouldn't get a handout from the taxpayer because you had 3 sprogs. ..

Nowadays people do seem to need bigger cars when they have children when years ago they made do with what they had.
20 years ago when i was a child , my parents had a golf with 3 kids, a friends family had a starlet with 5 kids,
There wasnt space to carry all the things people consider essential now like buggies - we were carried or walked.

Regarding having to drive underpowered cars. Any car out there is able to do the speed limit. The dicks who tailgate you will tailgate anyone who only does the speed limit so they will tailgate you regardless

Superhorse

jca wrote: »

This thread is a bit like a work colleague of mine who has 2 children. Every Christmas it's the same aul whinge out of him, how come you have Santy sorted I've nothing for Christmas I've no money blah blah blah. Christmas comes every year, you know you'll need money for it stay out of the boozer on Friday nights and put the money in the penny bank, Christmas sorted. Buy what you can afford, have as many children you can afford, in other words grow up be an adult and make adult choices and decisions. Don't expect the taxpayer to subsidise your vehicle just because you couldn't be bothered using a condom.

Your post makes zero sense.

Asmooh

Mango Joe wrote: »

Does this topic ever get aired?

What a rubbish system, people who can afford newer cars pay hardly any tax and poor to average families with lots of kids pay 710 euro a year so they can get kids to school

I was just wondering is it ever likely to be reviewed/corrected??

Any reasonable prospect or mention ever made on any front?

Thanks....

Nothing wrong with the motortax rates.
In the Netherlands we pay based on how heavy the car is not liters.
Example my 1.8 volvo s40
Ireland: 654
Holland: 852

My 1.6 mx5:
Ireland: 514
Holland: 400



Gas price Holland : around 1,50 / liter
Gas price Ireland: around 1,19 / liter



I don't think you have anything to complain.

Bruthal

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

Roads are paid from taxes, but the tax take from the motorist is a lot more than the tax expenditure on services involved in using the road (the road, foot paths, cycle lanes and street lighting)

People wouldn't be complaining as much if the close to 5 billion in tax collected from motorists was then spent on roads, footpaths and street lighting.
They'd still complain though, but not as much

They are right to complain, more at the extortion level than the indirect route to the road. Although the fact it's name was changed to motor tax was to facilitate increasing the price to motorists beyond what's needed for the roads.

Sam Russell

Supergurrier wrote: »

You forgot audi drivers, atleast generalise properly.

I agree, but in defence, the BMW and Mercedes are more obvious on the road.

pa990

I'm not in favour of motor tax being scrapped, or for it to be another extra tax on fuel.

I'd much prefer a flat rate for every private car on the road.
And another flat rate for commercial cars/vans,

Just make it a standard tax, and not let it be a deciding factor as to what size of engine or how polluting it is.

daRobot

Asmooh wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the motortax rates.
In the Netherlands we pay based on how heavy the car is not liters.
Example my 1.8 volvo s40
Ireland: 654
Holland: 852

My 1.6 mx5:
Ireland: 514
Holland: 400



Gas price Holland : around 1,50 / liter
Gas price Ireland: around 1,19 / liter



I don't think you have anything to complain.

We sure do have cause to complain. The Dutch system is worse, sure, but that's like a woman whose husband beats her with a hurley stick each evening, telling then wife who gets the odd slap that she has no cause to complain.

listermint

pa990 wrote: »

I'm not in favour of motor tax being scrapped, or for it to be another extra tax on fuel.

I'd much prefer a flat rate for every private car on the road.
And another flat rate for commercial cars/vans,

Just make it a standard tax, and not let it be a deciding factor as to what size of engine or how polluting it is.

Then how do you propose dealing with Emissions Issues? Which lets face it are not something we should be ignoring like has been done historically.

I mean im not flag waving green bean but Vehicle Emissions are a problem specifically in Urban environments.

Sam Kade

A post 08 1 litre is dearer to tax than a pre 08 1litre.

daRobot

listermint wrote: »

Then how do you propose dealing with Emissions Issues? Which lets face it are not something we should be ignoring like has been done historically.

I mean im not flag waving green bean but Vehicle Emissions are a problem specifically in Urban environments.

The UK have handled it very nicely with their new system, and it's something we should aim to replicate. They base it on emissions for the first year, and flat rate it at 140 pounds per year after that.

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/88361/tax-disc-changes-everything-you-need-to-know-about-uk-road-tax

Table is copied and pasted below

VED tax bands: April 2017 onwards: table
VED car tax bands for cars first registered from 2017 onwards

Emissions (g/km of CO2) First year rate Standard rate
0 £0 £0
1-50 £10 £140
51-75 £25
76-90 £100
91-100 £120
101-110 £140
111-130 £160
131-150 £200
151-170 £500
171-190 £800
191-225 £1,200
226-255 £1,700
Over 255 £2,000

Cars above £40,000 pay £310 annual supplement for five years


Current (pre-April 2017) vehicle VED tax bands: table

CO2 Emissions in g/km (tax band) First year rate Annual rate
Up to 100 (A) £0 £0
101-110 (B) £0 £20
111-120 (C) £0 £30
121-130 (D) £0 £110
131-140 (E) £130 £130
141-150 (F) £145 £145
151-165 (G) £180 £180
166-175 (H) £295 £205
176-185 (I) £350 £225
186-200 (J) £490 £265
201-225 (K) £640 £290
226-255 (L) £870 £490
Over 255 (M) £1,100 £505

Supergurrier

listermint wrote: »

Then how do you propose dealing with Emissions Issues? Which lets face it are not something we should be ignoring like has been done historically.

I mean im not flag waving green bean but Vehicle Emissions are a problem specifically in Urban environments.

Because so much of it is currently being used to help the environment.

Nct keeps cars within emission levels by testing.

Encouraging people to change cars every few years is worse for the planet as it uses more resources and creates more emissions. But money and greed always win out and any excuse to squeeze people.

Save the planet guys drive a 15 year old V8 until it conks

pa990

listermint wrote: »

Then how do you propose dealing with Emissions Issues? Which lets face it are not something we should be ignoring like has been done historically.

I mean im not flag waving green bean but Vehicle Emissions are a problem specifically in Urban environments.

I couldn't give a damn about emissions

maestroamado

I just sent a message to friend lives in outside malaga and this is reply..

Varies from one municipality to another. My 2.0l diesel is €80 pa, and has been for more than 10 years.

i believe there is no tax for the first 4 years, also the quality of the main roads are considerably better.
another factor is it is not necessary to own car as public transport much better than here in outlying areas.

listermint

pa990 wrote: »

I couldn't give a damn about emissions

At least the other 2 lads gave reasoned responses.

Your couldnt give a dam is in fact hitting our Health Services and yes ultimately the planet.

Its only in the last 2 years Cities are cottoning on to the fact that some streets traffic actually cause cancer via emissions.

But sure, you couldnt give a dam so whats the point 'like'

Superhorse

Asmooh wrote: »

Nothing wrong with the motortax rates.
In the Netherlands we pay based on how heavy the car is not liters.
Example my 1.8 volvo s40
Ireland: 654
Holland: 852

My 1.6 mx5:
Ireland: 514
Holland: 400



Gas price Holland : around 1,50 / liter
Gas price Ireland: around 1,19 / liter



I don't think you have anything to complain.

Well given the fact you have you know proper roads and we have something akin to pot holed African mud tracks we have a lot to complain about. One example is the road leading out of Greystones up under the railway bridge past the topaz. Anyone who knows this road will tell you the damage their cars have been subjected to because of it. Our roads are a mess and yet it can cost 700 euro plus to tax a 10 year old bang average car here.

daRobot

listermint wrote: »

At least the other 2 lads gave reasoned responses.

Your couldnt give a dam is in fact hitting our Health Services and yes ultimately the planet.

Its only in the last 2 years Cities are cottoning on to the fact that some streets traffic actually cause cancer via emissions.

But sure, you couldnt give a dam so whats the point 'like'

I think that the emissions would have to be factored into any system due to current EU law, but I don't know that with absolute certainty.

It would be interesting to see if any potential change in the system would factor in the very serious health hazards of Diesel, but I would doubt the Irish government would be able to implement such a system due to total incompetence and the political ramifications of such a move, due to the unnecessary prevalence of Diesel cars now on the road following the previous change.

Chris_Heilong

Add tax to diesel(due to dangerous NOX) to bring it inline with petrol and then a reduction of rates would be enough, capped at 800 euro for the biggest engines(largest CO2) and without an increase except every 10 years.

AlanG

Superhorse wrote: »

Well given the fact you have you know proper roads and we have something akin to pot holed African mud tracks we have a lot to complain about. One example is the road leading out of Greystones up under the railway bridge past the topaz. Anyone who knows this road will tell you the damage their cars have been subjected to because of it. Our roads are a mess and yet it can cost 700 euro plus to tax a 10 year old bang average car here.

You have to remember that we have the second highest amount of paved road per person in the world. 22.87 km per 1,000 people. If you want to compare us to the UK (6.33 km per 1,000 people)and Holland (6.63 km per 1,000 people) you would have to stop maintaining about 75% of our road network.
http://www.nationmaster.com/country-info/stats/Transport/Highways/Paved/Per-capita

CiniO

daRobot wrote: »

I think that the emissions would have to be factored into any system due to current EU law, but I don't know that with absolute certainty.

I don't think there's any EU law forcing member states to charge tax on vehicles based on emissions.
Most countries in the EU don't do it anyway.

Nody

kyeev wrote: »

Anyone have a good reason as to why the government shouldn't adopt the Renua (!) proposal to transfer car tax directly onto the price of fuel?

Sounds like a good idea, pay as you go car tax.

I'll add it to my list to berate the GE2016 canvassers with...

Because if your goal (as Government) is to reduce CO2 emission you want to encourage people to use clean cars and not fuel efficent cars (tax on fuel encourages the second one rather than the first). If anything they should encourage people to upgrade their car park more regularly as new cars tend to be more green through the tax system.

CiniO

Nody wrote: »

Because if your goal (as Government) is to reduce CO2 emission you want to encourage people to use clean cars and not fuel efficent cars (tax on fuel encourages the second one rather than the first). If anything they should encourage people to upgrade their car park more regularly as new cars tend to be more green through the tax system.

CO2 emissions (which current tax system is based on) are nearly linearly dependent on fuel consumption.
The higher the fuel consumption, the higher the emissions.
So your argument is not really valid here.

fancy pigeon

Sam Russell wrote: »

I understood him to bemoan the incredibly dangerous drivers of high powered large-engined cars that tailgate slower cars. Adjusting the tax rates could free him from having to drive such a noddy car. I do not think he was asking for a handout - merely to be freed from the bullying ignorant drivers that tailgate him - putting him in danger.

Of course, I may be wrong but in my experience it is not all BMW and Mercedes drivers that drive like that - just most of them. :rolleyes:

Someone gas a huuuuuuuuuge chip on their shoulder with the aforementioned marques...

Yours sincerely, a poster with 2 Mercs and 3 BMW's aka the biggest bastard on Irish roads

StudentDad

micosoft wrote: »

This is just nonsense. There is literally no car <20 years old that is on the road that cannot legally drive to the speed limit and get to speed in a reasonable amount of time. The only person missing the point is yourself - there is never a reason why you "have to overtake" or drive unsafely. If someone chooses to sit on your bumper then so be it. Let them or pull over when safe to do so. Don't claim that "underpowered" cars in a small country are a thing...

I'm assuming from the above that you've never had the pleasure of driving an underpowered bean tin on one of our amazing 'national' roads, with kids on board and some numpty behind you who doesn't have the brain cells to realise that bathing the car in front of him with his beams, will not make said car get out of the way any faster?

Access to a decent car is a necessity in this country but unfortunately cars in Ireland are treated as luxury items, rather than necessary ones. Is there a decent, cheap public transport system? No! Is there an alternative to the car? No! We pay high tax and insurance rates on cars. Underpowered, overtaxed and if you want anything remotely interesting to drive, crucified by insurance rates. It's a recipe for poor road safety and when you add in the asshats in overpowered (by our standards) cars, I'm not surprised at the level of fatalities and crashes on our roads.

SD

Cantona's Collars

If the crazy cost of VRT was cut then maybe we'd all be able to buy decent and newer cars and not worry about the tax rates.Being taxed twice on a vehicle is galling and that's before you factor in the huge rate of tax on fuel.

jca

Sam Kade wrote: »

A post 08 1 litre is dearer to tax than a pre 08 1litre.

But sure that's only a noddy car. These guys want to be driving the biggest vehicle on the road with the taxpayer picking up the tab because they have children.

jca

StudentDad wrote: »

I'm assuming from the above that you've never had the pleasure of driving an underpowered bean tin on one of our amazing 'national' roads, with kids on board and some numpty behind you who doesn't have the brain cells to realise that bathing the car in front of him with his beams, will not make said car get out of the way any faster?

Access to a decent car is a necessity in this country but unfortunately cars in Ireland are treated as luxury items, rather than necessary ones. Is there a decent, cheap public transport system? No! Is there an alternative to the car? No! We pay high tax and insurance rates on cars. Underpowered, overtaxed and if you want anything remotely interesting to drive, crucified by insurance rates. It's a recipe for poor road safety and when you add in the asshats in overpowered (by our standards) cars, I'm not surprised at the level of fatalities and crashes on our roads.

SD

Since when did the tax on bean tins get high? A car is a luxury in every country not just Ireland, just looking at the taxation in other countries should tell you that.

Cantona's Collars

jca wrote: »

But sure that's only a noddy car. These guys want to be driving the biggest vehicle on the road with the taxpayer picking up the tab because they have children.

I'm buying a Limo and getting a PSV license so.Our SUV is the missus' car,an ordinary saloon or hatchback is too small especially if other kids need to be picked up,sure we'll just be selfish and say no to friends or family that might need somebody collected or dropped off-maybe we'll go back to the good old days when we squashed 7 or 8 into a car on a trip to the beach with no seatbelts and always one lying in the back window.

On another topic,just got notice of the impending insurance renewal on MY car (a 1.5l petrol).Bollixes increased it by €200.

StudentDad

jca wrote: »

Since when did the tax on bean tins get high? A car is a luxury in every country not just Ireland, just looking at the taxation in other countries should tell you that.

Cars being a luxury is a problem here where there isn't a viable alternative to the car. I probably wouldn't care all that much if there was cheap and reliable public transport available. However, that isn't the case. The result? People need cars. Forcing people into small underpowered cars is a problem. They are fine if you need a little run around to go to the shops. Add in kids and long journeys with luggage and there the fun begins. For me its a safety issue. Getting a 'decent' car in this country shouldn't be a luxury where a car is a necessity.

SD

Seweryn

StudentDad wrote: »

Cars being a luxury is a problem here where there isn't a viable alternative to the car. I probably wouldn't care all that much if there was cheap and reliable public transport available. However, that isn't the case.

Do you know why we do not have properly operated public transport in this country?

Why we do not do anything to change this?

jca

zerks wrote: »

I'm buying a Limo and getting a PSV license so.Our SUV is the missus' car,an ordinary saloon or hatchback is too small especially if other kids need to be picked up,sure we'll just be selfish and say no to friends or family that might need somebody collected or dropped off-maybe we'll go back to the good old days when we squashed 7 or 8 into a car on a trip to the beach with no seatbelts and always one lying in the back window.

On another topic,just got notice of the impending insurance renewal on MY car (a 1.5l petrol).Bollixes increased it by €200.

That's a good idea.... at the thick end of 90 a throw for the knowledge test 250 for the licence for 5 years with continual checks to make sure you're tax compliant, 6 monthly nct and suitability tests if your limo is over 10 years old a grand minimum for insurance ( the increases were for everyone not just the private motorist) I think it's easier just to pay the higher private tax.. There's no way out of it guys they have us by the nuts. Pay up or shut up...

Cienciano

I drive a Rover 75 2L diesel, costs €710 a year to tax. Funny reading on the English rover forums, they're giving out about the crazy price to tax the 4.6L petrol version - £475 a year

Nody wrote: »

Because if your goal (as Government) is to reduce CO2 emission you want to encourage people to use clean cars and not fuel efficent cars (tax on fuel encourages the second one rather than the first). If anything they should encourage people to upgrade their car park more regularly as new cars tend to be more green through the tax system.

What if you do 3,000 km per year? The cost of scrapping a car and building a new one isn't the most sensible option when it comes to being green.

I think one thing is sure, the government won't lose out on motor tax money, and if they do it'll be rejigged fairly quickly to balance the books.

StudentDad

Seweryn wrote: »

Do you know why we do not have properly operated public transport in this country?

Why we do not do anything to change this?

Is that a trick question? Perhaps you're being rhetorical?

SD

Cienciano

Seweryn wrote: »

Do you know why we do not have properly operated public transport in this country?

Why we do not do anything to change this?

Because it costs a lot, requires thinking that goes beyond our 4 year election cycle and we have a fairly scattered population. Also, if you need the car for weekends, you have to pay large sums of money on tax and insurance just to leave it sitting in the driveway, so no incentive to use it less.

StudentDad

Cienciano wrote: »

Because it costs a lot, requires thinking that goes beyond our 4 year election cycle and we have a fairly scattered population. Also, if you need the car for weekends, you have to pay large sums of money on tax and insurance just to leave it sitting in the driveway, so no incentive to use it less.

A few years ago a relative of mine wanted to visit. Public transport was a dead loss. It was quicker, cheaper and easier to go pick him up on the other side of the bloody country than use public transport. That's insane!

SD

CiboC

New motor tax rules to come into place in the UK for next year:

http://www.autoexpress.co.uk/car-news/consumer-news/88361/tax-disc-changes-everything-you-need-to-know-about-uk-road-tax#

Have a look, it's a brilliant revision of the system that I only wish we would copy!