50 replies to this topic

[charliedurrant]

Absolute nonsense.

I do note that one of your minis is 1964 and the other is exempt or on the cusp (1973)..........I am being cheeky I know...

Charlie

[Cooperman]

My Innocenti is not tax exempt and I had the '64 car long before the exemption came in, so I had to tax it and pay so that I could do just a few rally miles in it each year. However, if I was prepared to put petrol in it to do around 10 to 12 mpg, then how could I comnplain about a bit of road tax, despite paying a lot of raod tax on my road car/tow car?
I just think it's very selfish for owners of classic car 'toys', which is what they are (I even refer to my 'toys' in the workshop) when families all over the country are being asked to accept increased taxation and inflation. If I was told my '64 car was going to have to have a 'paid for' road tax disc, I could hardly complain bearing-in-mind that if I can afford such a car it's my choice.
This is not just about Minis, it's about all post '72 classics, many of which are worth a small fortune. If, as group, we are seen to be so selfish, we won't be in a position to take the moral high-ground when our classic motoring is further restricted.
If your car is a luxury toy used only for fun, then road tax is not unreasonable as it is affordable. If it's a daily driver doing a highish mileage, why should it not be taxed as every other day-to-day car doing a similar mileage?

[charliedurrant]

This is not just about Minis, it's about all post '72 classics, many of which are worth a small fortune. If, as group, we are seen to be so selfish, we won't be in a position to take the moral high-ground when our classic motoring is further restricted.
If your car is a luxury toy used only for fun, then road tax is not unreasonable as it is affordable. If it's a daily driver doing a highish mileage, why should it not be taxed as every other day-to-day car doing a similar mileage?

That's why it should be on fuel, but, as per my post about income tax and vat (I actually started to hum the 'Only Fools and Horses' tune) nothing is just.

I wonder why it was the case in the first place that the X years rule was in place..I can see why it was removed for income puposes but why was it there originally?

[Kam]

this is a repost i think, and it usually ends up in an arguement

Not e-petitions no! They are important, like this one

http://www.theminifo...pic=205368&st=0

I've signed my screen with a sharpie for the first one and just done it again for this one, hopefully they'll see my signature and it will make a difference

[villa3]

Any sensible government would scrap tax and put it on petrol,much fairer on all.An insurance disc could replace the tax disc along with an mot one.

[se_juggles]

oh yes we love to see one of there on here... bring on the argument!!!!!!!!!!!!!! i mean discussion 0.o

[Kam]

Any sensible government would scrap tax and put it on petrol,much fairer on all.An insurance disc could replace the tax disc along with an mot one.

Sorry I didn't understand your reply? your not talking in forum or even human manner there, you need to be more clearer when you say (or type) things as people won't have a scooby what your on about?

You lost me here.......

Any sensible government

Please explain

[Cooperman]

Many have long thought that to not have road tax, but to add it to the tax on fuel would make good sense. From what I read that would put betwen 7p and 10p per litre on petrol and diesel and anyone doing less than about 15000 miles per annum would benefit, whilst those having to drive over that would lose out. Businesses would lose out and have to put their operating and distribution costs up.
With regard to public sector workers going on strike, when Gordon Brown 'raided' private pensions a few years ago I didn't notice any unions going on strike to maintain my pension investments.
The methods of taxation to raise what the country needs to operate and how that revenue is used is a matter for the elected government. We could argue all day about how that is to be raised, and raised it must be, but to ask the general public to, effectively, subsidise those who can afford often very valuable classic cars which they drive as a hobby, is ludicrous at any time, especially in the present financial situation. What other hobbies should we subsidise? Should we also not have fishing licences for anglers, or no VAT on fine arts materials, or tax breaks for glider pilots like tax free fuel for our winches (which would help me and which we don't get). Where would this stop?
Of course taxation is not fair for all and I've never understood why there was a 25-year exemption for classics in the first place as it never seemed fair to exempt those who could afford 2nd, 3rd or 4th cars as classics from paying tax for their hobby.

Edited by Cooperman, 30 November 2011 - 10:24 AM.

[purple_fly06]

Done!! Strength in numbers!

[1984mini25]

I wonder why it was the case in the first place that the X years rule was in place..I can see why it was removed for income puposes but why was it there originally?

From what I can remember it was the last Tory government giving the rich a tax brake on there ‘toys’ witch was latter then froze to the date it is now by labour in 97 (ish)

[Mini_Magic]

Well there will certainly be no chance of it happening if everyone has that attitude..

So where do you suggest the government gets its money from instead?

Someone has to foot the bill to pay for road work etc.

If this was a petition to review the whole road tax system, then I'd sign it.

[jagman.2003]

I wonder why it was the case in the first place that the X years rule was in place..I can see why it was removed for income puposes but why was it there originally?

From what I can remember it was the last Tory government giving the rich a tax brake on there ‘toys’ witch was latter then froze to the date it is now by labour in 97 (ish)

Almost right. It was introduced to give low yearly mileage vehicle owners a break. Why should a car only insured to do less than 3k miles a year pay as much as a company rep. racking up 30k. Then when it was frozen it introduced a ridiculous situation where cars with only a few months age difference have different base values. I had a car that was 2 months out & will never become classic status. If it's a rich toy, tax is nothing to the owner. If it's a weekend project or hobby why should you spend the full amount for such low mileage.

Edited by jagman.2003, 30 November 2011 - 01:15 PM.

[charliedurrant]

Many have long thought that to not have road tax, but to add it to the tax on fuel would make good sense. From what I read that would put betwen 7p and 10p per litre on petrol and diesel and anyone doing less than about 15000 miles per annum would benefit, whilst those having to drive over that would lose out. Businesses would lose out and have to put their operating and distribution costs up.

Good point

With regard to public sector workers going on strike, when Gordon Brown 'raided' private pensions a few years ago I didn't notice any unions going on strike to maintain my pension investments.

Perhaps if there was an e-petition at the time Gordo grabbed some revenue from private pensions it may have made a difference.

I'll probably be working till I'm 80 (if I'm alive). My pension, which I've been paying in 10% to for 15 years is pants, I've had a pay cut for the last 3 years due to inflation v pay rises - that's my way of contributing by not grumbling (of course I could be rubbish at my job).


Same debate going on at

http://pistonheads.c...1050188&d=0

Charlie

[The Matt]

OK, IMO, no I don't think any car should have "historic vehicle" status. 25 years ago is currently 1986. So, we're talking the days of mass-produced Euro-boxes coming into their own.

Do people really class a Mk3 Cavalier as a historic vehicle?

The whole VED thing is such a sham anyway. If the government want to have a rate of tax based on:
a) How many miles are done per year
b) How much that vehicle polutes the environment

The ONLY fair way to do that is to incorporate it into the cost of fuel, you use more, you pollute more, you pay more tax. BUT, the e-petition is about whether you think a 25 year old, or 30 year old car should gain historic vehicle status. IMO, no it shouldn't. There will very soon be far too many cars that fall into the tax exempt bracket then.

[Cooperman]

I have a good friend who is Greek and she has emailed me several about the dreadful situation there because of the country's debt. They have VAT at 23%, their wages and pensions have all been reduced. There are roits, strikes and civil unrest. Fuel and food is becoming hard to find and very expensive.
We may have a difficult period ahead, but at least we are not part of the Euro-crap currency, thank goodness.
The big problem we face if we pump money into our economy is that when we had difficulties years ago and stimulated the economy with big projects, the money earned by the workers bought cars built in Dagenham or Longbridge, a TV made by Pye in Cambridge, a washing machine made by Hotpoint in Llandudno and so on. Now when we do this the money buys cars made in Korea, TV's made in China and washing machines made in India. So our taxes which are used for these big projects really help the economies of those countries.
We can't reduce taxes at this time on anything really, let alone to help people with their hobbies, classic cars or anything else and to even suggest it is a little selfish IMHO.