|
Roughly what will you pay in fuel costs, as a matter of interest?
|
Roughly what will you pay in fuel costs as a matter of interest?
I do about 8000 miles a year, and estimate that I therefore spend about £1700 on petrol a year. That's based on about 300 miles per tank, about £65 to fill up.
I don't protest against the changes being made retrospective because I can't afford them, but because it's immoral.
Edited by BazzaBear {P} on 10/07/2008 at 14:30
|
channel4.com/news/articles/society/environment/factcheck+backdated+car
+tax/2312367
|
|
|
|
I do around 18k miles per year at an average of 30mpg. Non of it paid for unfortunately! So that at 110p per litre is £2996.
I always take my holidays abroad in it though, so although that is a lot you can knock the price of 4 short haul flights per year for 2 people off it.
Its an absolutely superb car though, after 70k miles I still look forward to even the most mundane journey!
|
|
|
|
Mine is up from £210 now to £440 next year and £455 the year after that.
As will mine (funnily enough!).
But hey - the value of the car has probably dropped by £2000 or more, so I'll lose out either way.
So I think I'll keep the fantastic car I've got, thank you very much.
|
Mine is up just by £5 :)
Don't really understand why everyone is furious about this. For most people, rise is not that much. We pay heavy tax everywhere (eg. income tax, fuel duty, TV license, council tax etc.). But people don't shout/complaint as much.
|
|
Yes but they tend to go up with inflation broadly, ie 4-5% a time. Mine this year is up around 110% in one go, on something I purchased 3 years ago
|
|
|
Don't really understand why everyone is furious about this.
I'm furious because I deliberately bought a lower performance car one year ago than I wanted, precisely because it would be more economical to run and tax. Now they stick my car into a much higher tax bracket in one fell swoop, which will cost me 90 quid a year more.
|
"I'm furious because I deliberately bought a lower performance car one year ago"
But haven't these changes been known about for over a year? Didn't Brown announce them whislt chancellor?
|
But haven't these changes been known about for over a year? Didn't Brown announce them whislt chancellor?
No, they were declared in Budget 2008, back in March.
We're furious because the stated aim is a blatant lie. We're furious because making the changes retrospective is immoral. We're furious because the government holds the public is such disregard that they feel able to claim that black is white and get away scott free.
Their arrogance means that they are happy to say something which is clearly and demonstrably untrue because they feel there's absolutely nothing we can do about it anyway.
|
|
|
|
Don't really understand why everyone is furious about this.
Because it won't achieve the stated aim.
Because it so obviously won't achieve the stated aim that it is likely that it is being introduced for other unstated reasons (or our politicians are deeply, deeply stupid).
Because of the retrospective aspect that means that, not only are people's future choices more restricted, but their past choices that they can't undo and that weren't made with any malice in mind are being punished anyway.
Because overall it is a tax increase, not a tax redistribution, but that fact isn't being made clear.
All these things are unacceptable ways for the powers that be to behave. I don't have to be directly affected (I'm not yet - both my cars are pre-2001) to object to the government carrying on like that.
|
|
|
|
As I have said previously and has been identified by others, the increase in VED is irrelevant to most people. Saving £100pa by changing to a lower VED car is crazy. I do no more than 9,000 miles each year at a average of 20mpg = 450 gallons at £6 per gallon = £2,700pa in petrol costs. An extra £200 on the VED is simply four tanks of fuel: - i.e. two extra trips each year to London from my home in Manchester.
The cost of replacing the Outback with a nice two year old 6-cyl diesel executive estate (E280CDi?) will be huge compared to the potential saving in fuel and VED.
So like Bazzabear - I'm keeping the guzzler.
|
Im keeping mine aswell.
As an aside I get nearly 20% better mpg than the official figures, so I should expect a 20% discount on the tax, since it is a pollution tax!!
|
Golf goes upto £125 - not bad for a warm hatch - Does c35k per annum at 50mpg
Shogun goes upto around £400 - Does c8k per annum at 30mpg
In my mind, its the fact that its a lump sum (or 2 if you go 6 months) thats the problem - it means I've got 3 big events now - insurance for Golf £500, insurance for Shogun £600 and now £400 road tax on it as well. If it could be paid monthly (eg council tax - doesn't seem too bad at £183 pcm, whereas £1800 is a lot of money!!), things would be so much better.....
But hey, never mind. I'm keeping the truck though!
|
Golf goes upto £125 - not bad for a warm hatch - Does c35k per annum at 50mpg Shogun goes upto around £400 - Does c8k per annum at 30mpg
To me, the fact that the tax for the car that uses 700 gallons of fuel is less than a third of the tax for the car that only uses 267 gallons makes a mockery of the whole thing.
|
|
Absolutely. It's the burning of the fuel that creates the pollution, bunging all the tax on fuel is the only fair way. Political suicide at the moment though.
|
Absolutely. It's the burning of the fuel that creates the pollution bunging all the tax on fuel is the only fair way. Political suicide at the moment though.
I'm not sure whether it would be political suicide or not. And anyway, they're comitting that at the moment. It would be a rise in fuel duty, which obviously sounds hugely unpopular right now, but most people thinking about fuel duty aren't considering it in the context of never having to buy a tax disc again.
It is a somewhat radical change, which usually generates instinctive objection even for good ideas, but it has fairness and the likelihood of having success going for it. It's got to be an easier sell than the current madness.
|
|
|
|
My C-Max drops £10 this year, then goes up by £5 the next. Makes no logical sense!
Eventual cost will be £115, which isn't too bad.
|
Xantia is unaffercted is it's pre 2001.
Berlingo 1.9D goes up by £100. Enough to make me exasperated but only the equivalent of a tank and a bit of diesel; not within a zillion miles of making me change it.
|
|
My planet polluter - Alfa 1.6 will go up to £260. Would I have bought a diesel had I known about the tax to fill the broke government coffers? No.
|
|
Im quite happy about the changes. as it stands, we will be £15 better off across our two cars. Not often you gain in taxation :-)
|
The wider picture for many, me included, is the sudden surge in depreciation on their vehicle. An extra £100 on the annual VED on my car has equated to a couple of thousand slashed off the trade-in value in a matter of weeks. It makes me bitterly frustrated because it is the best car I have owned and I really don't want to get rid of it but am tormented by watching the value go into freefall. Should I join the sheeple and race to the nearest dealer, politely accept an insulting part-ex against some yawnsome 1.2 litre econobox or, god forbid, a diesel supermini at some hugely marked up price?
I can live with the £300 VED and my 25-30mpg......but the depreciation makes me weep. Almost as much as the thin-lipped sanctimonious individuals who pompously preach that we should have foreseen this disgraceful act by Gordon and his sneering cohorts.
|
If only my Boxster S was 19 days older. I'll never vote labour again and I suspect that applies to so many people. 9 million will be worse off, 4 million better off, that makes so much sense.
|
>>I can live with the £300 VED and my 25-30mpg......but the depreciation makes me weep. Almost as much as the thin-lipped sanctimonious individuals who pompously preach that we should have foreseen this disgraceful act by Gordon and his sneering cohorts.<<
You might well remember that some of those so described, also lost money on bigger cars.
However, of course you should have seen it coming, anyone who has any interest in current affairs should have done, but there are many who unlike me, can afford to take the hit.
We jumped before out Forester was worth pennies - as it is just a month or so after we traded ours in, similar cars are barely making what we traded in at for retail.
|
In reply to De Smythe:
Unless the car with the £100 VED increase (what is it out of interest?) no longer meets your needs or has massive faults just hang on to it. Eventually sheeple will get the hang and some logic will return.
|
Yes, going up from £210 a year to £430.
I'm not entirely sure what this is supposed to make me do, really. Sell my car? But then surely somebody else would buy it..
|
|
My Boxster remains unchanged as it's pre 2001. So in your face, 1.6 hatchback drivers!
|
Being a 1.6 hatchback driver myself, mine goes up to £300 in a couple of years. What makes it worse is that the rating for my Astra is 1g/km is at the start of Band I, so I don't want to drive a car that has to pay the same as a 2.2 Vectra automatic (which I hired last week)! If I wasn't doing more mileage, hence the impeding purchase of a diesel, then I'd going for a bigger petrol engine so it makes my tax worthwhile. Or you can read that as "well I might as well get a bigger & faster one then as its not going to make much difference".
|
One of our cars is going up from £210 to £300 per year to tax, and whilst it is an increase far in excess of inflation, it's not really that much in the grand scheme of things.
My wife and I probably spend around £100 between us in petrol and diesel every week. The last tyres I bought were nearly £140 each. Having to find an extra £90 per year is not going to make much difference to either our total motoring expenditure or our standard of living.
I believe it would be fairer to abolish road tax altogether and increase fuel duty to compensate. Even though, as a high mileage driver, I would be worse off under this system it is probably the fairest way for the government to milk the motorist for money.
|
>However of course you should have seen it coming anyone who has any interest in current affairs should have done but there are many who unlike me can afford to take the hit.
I purchased the car in October last year (Astrai SRI 200 turbo) and did actually wonder at the time whether it was the right decision, bearing in mind the labour govts' snowballing manic hatred of all things car-like. I only do a maximum of 8K miles per year, don't drink, don't smoke, don't pursue any expensive hobbies (pouring petrol into the Astra notwithstanding) and I really liked the car so went ahead.
In my worst nightmare I did not "see it coming" that the govt would cast a spell of tail-spin depreciation on the car just a few months later! Truth be told I would sell it now if I could afford to take a hit on the meagre p/ex value but I can't. Not for any reason of disliking the car, far from it, but more to stop being a victim of persecution by the comrades at no. 10
4 legs good, 2 legs better....
|
Ironically, I may well take the opportunity to trade up to a 2L petrol (currently have 1.8).
why ?
Because my tax for next year will be £260 anyway (car emits aprox 183g/km) but the band at this level is quite wide and carries onto up 200g/km.
So if I find a 2L petrol car that I like, I can trade up and know that the tax won't be any more. And suck my teeth in whilst haggling going "Ooooo well, see, it's the tax innit, it'll be £400 I've heard...."
This assumes that said 2L petrol engined car will emit less than 200g/km of course!
Of course, my cars' value will go down, but that's par for the course. Price it right and it'll find a buyer, we're only talking a few hundred quid difference (about a years tax....)
Or the government might change their minds and narrow the 181 - 200 band and then roger anyone whose just bought a 2.0 petrol.
Edited by The Gingerous One on 11/07/2008 at 10:18
|
In 5 years time, I would fully expect the persecution to increase further. Given that the green issue has been brewing for some time, the vast majority of people should have been aware about the latest tax hikes.
What actually made us change our vehicles was not road tax, although that was a sweetneer, but petrol prices. With a Subaru that did 30 mpg and a van that did 37 mpg, trading up to the Kia ( 45 mpg ) and the Daihatsu ( 59 mpg ) has made a huge difference to our fuel bills which have effectively halved and given that we do 20k a year between the two cars, its a nice saving.
Oh and not all small cars are unpleasent. Ive owned big powerful cars in my time, but small cars can be alotta fun.
|
Par for course with this lot; still to be convinced the opposition (by name only) will do anything different, other than juggling some figures to make their potential voters feel better.
Suppose we're back in limbo, guessing whats to be announced in the autumn.
The backbenchers have had their bit of publicity crying wolf yet again, and they've been assured the matter will be resolved (keep raking it in lads), does anyone out there believe any politician anymore.
And we meanwhile can only hope to make some sort of reasoned decision what to do about our vehicle choices.
I'm going to leave it until the next year, hopefully have a better idea of the foreseeable vehicle and fuel prices after this coming winter of redundancies and repossessions. Give a chance for the vast majority of the motoring public to finally realise whats happened when their ved bills come through the door in 09, should see some bargains next year, assuming of course that we keep our jobs as well....but never fear someone will be along to tell us we should have foreseen it-;)
Some of the dealers i visit are having some very upmarket cars traded in for much more economical ones now, and it seems to be escalating, 2 large BM's and a Lexus last 2 weeks for small hatches....
|
However of course you should have seen it coming anyone who has any interest in current affairs should have done
Don't start this again!
I'm afraid that is rubbish. Anyone who looked into the likelyhood of such things would have seen that every time the VED bands have been amended in the past the changes have never been applied to cars already on the road. As such, going on the only evidence there is, they would have expected the same to happen again.
On this occasion the government has made a U-turn on this policy because the lure of extra ill-gotten gains to negligently waste became too much for their sticky fingers to resist.
Anyone who bought their car before March of this year, when they first declared they were going to do this (and hid it pretty deeply in a massive document, as they knew that it was immoral and would anger) is perfectly entitled to feel ripped off at this point.
I don't care about the money - but I care a lot about the lying and the immorality, and I still would even if it were not affecting me personally.
|
Much as we might grumble about motoring costs we do know one thing for sure. It is, always has been, and will continue to be a significant expense to most people. I am trying to take the view that you just have to put a personal value on things. Some will take the necessarily practical stance and choose the most economical solution to their transport needs. Others may choose to be less careful because they gain pleasure from their cars and are able and / or prepared to pay extra for that.
An analogy you could use is your choice of holiday. A five star package would be expensive but might seem worth it to some even if it financially stretches them. A cheap camping holiday might bring just as much fun but in a different way. Similarly, a premium bottle of wine might please some whereas a pleasant but inexpensive one might actually suit others better.
Within reason, it's about what "floats your boat". We may loath the apparent continued persecution of the motorist but thank goodness, so far at least, it still remains up to the individual to make choices based on their needs, preferences and pocket.
We must not allow ourselves to be ground down. We must represent our views ad nauseam to our MPs. Though they often seem to forget this they are actually supposed to be working for us, not against us.
Edited by Shoespy on 11/07/2008 at 11:26
|
My Volvo was registered on.... 1 March 2001. Therefore up from £210 to £300. Registered 1 day earlier it would be at £185.
Please tell me how a) this is fair and b) it will help the environment.
Is it illegal to hope for a military coup?
|
Link to the current Downing Street petition:
petitions.pm.gov.uk/UNFAIR-VED/
|
>> However of course you should have seen it coming anyone who has any interest in >> current affairs should have done Don't start this again!
Pity you then went on and did start it all again, BB! And I agree with the original poster, and as you know don't agree with you! ;)
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is that by splitting the bands down even more some people will be better off - if we assume that the Gov actually wanted a set amount of income from this exercise then for someone at the lower end of the old bands splitting the old bands will make them better off than they would have been if the old bands had been kept.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Mine will jump to £300 next year from £210 now. As the current disk expires at the end of April 2009, I will send it back at the end of February for a refund and get a new one in March at the current price. I just hope I remember to do it!
|
Mine will jump to £300 next year from £210 now. As the current disk expires at the end of April 2009 I will send it back at the end of February for a refund and get a new one in March at the current price. I just hope I remember to do it!
Teriffic idea. Does it mean, though, that you'll have to keep your car off the road for two weeks or so from the end of February until mid-March, as you can only apply for a tax disc two weeks before it's start date?
|
|
Just have to get the old disk back (or "Post Marked") by the last day of February. Buy a new disk on 1st March (or maybe even 28th Feb) and you're away. Maybe a couple of days off the road at worst.......... try the bus!
|
|
|
If I still had my Mazda 6 then it would be going upto £270 pa - but I now have my June2000 Primera so that's only £185 - and I think I prefer the Primera overall.
I don't think any of the main political parties are going to do any favours for motorists. I wish at least one of them would reduce the duty on diesel to match our European partners, but there seems little hope of that.
The price of motoring is going to outpace inflation for the foreseeable future, IMO.
I've spent the last 10+ years slashing my mileage from about 25k pa to about 6k pa now, and reducing my motoring spend overall.
I hope most of you will continue to pay huge sums of tax - because I really don't want to :-)
|
|
|
|
|
I believe the friend of the people government has closed this loophole. There are only certain conditions now where they will cancel a tax disc, eg selling the car
|
I believe the friend of the people government has closed this loophole. There are only certain conditions now where they will cancel a tax disc eg selling the car
I don't know how closed it is, but I don't think it's completely closed. One of the ways you can get a tax disc refund is to declare SORN. I did this recently with a car that ended up being written off. Obviously I wasn't interested in retaxing it, but out of interest I asked DVLA if there was a form I had to use to un-SORN again. But apparently all you have to do is buy another tax disc.
So you could declare SORN and get a tax refund then go out and buy a full year of tax. If you try and buy a new tax disc before they've finished processing the refund of the old one, I've no idea if that would cause a problem or not. And obviously for the period the car is SORN'd you'd need to keep it off the road. But if you can cope with that and it saves you £100 it might be worth it.
For all I know there might be a much simpler way of doing it.
|
|
Another way of postponing the increase would be to tax you car for six months if it becomes due in August or September, then buy a 12 month disc in January or February before the changes are implemented.
|
|
|
|
|
|
