posted 3 years ago

High Cost Of Road Tax Could Kill Middle-Aged Cars

VED Rates Make High-Carbon Emission Cars Uneconomical

The high cost of road tax could force thousands of middle-aged cars off the road and onto the scrapheap, CAP has reported. But why? According to the vehicle valuation company, the problem is that taxing cars that have high carbon emissions – and were registered on/after March 23rd 2006 - can cost about one-third of their value. After all, Road Tax Band L cars cost £475 per-year to tax and Group M cars cost £490. These high figures theoretically encourage motorists to choose less polluting cars. But putting that to one side, some motorists have been willing to pay these large sums to tax powerful, modern, vehicles that have respectable second-hand values. However, as these cars approach their dotage less people will tolerate the high rates. After all, CAP has revealed that the cost of taxing a Renault Laguna 3.0 V6 24V Initiale Auto 5dr - that was registered in 2006 and has travelled 70,000 miles - is 34.55% of its “clean trade” value. Similar figures apply to the Citroen C5 3.0 V6 Exclusive Auto 5dr and the Fiat Croma 2.2 16V Prestigio Auto 5dr, etc. As such, demand/prices for these - and many other middle-aged vehicles - might soon plummet which could lead to a mass scrapping. CAP is therefore calling for prices in the highest road tax bands to be reduced for older models.

CAP Vehicle Valuation Expert Discuss Road Tax

CAP's Mark Norman said: “We are now in the crazy situation where perfectly good cars have become uneconomical. This means more and more cars will become unsalable and will have to be scrapped long before the end of their useful life.” He added: “Scrapping serviceable cars for the sake of a tax disc makes a mockery of environmental taxes as owners already tend to limit their mileage because the (older) cars are relatively uneconomical. Throw in the carbon footprint of building the cars that replace those that are scrapped and the environmental justification for taxing these cars off the road collapses.” Mr Norman concluded: “The Government should now consider lowering VED rates for cars that fall into the brackets L and M after a certain age. This would prevent this potential waste of vehicles that do relatively little harm to the environment but provide cheap and comfortable transport for thousands of hard-pressed motorists in austerity Britain.”

Have your say - Should users of older cars have to pay so much for road tax when the reason why they are buying older cars is probably affordability. Or should the government encourage them to buy greener cars with the current high taxation on older, less-efficient models?
 

The road tax system does not equate in any way to emmissions it doesn't matter how big an engine is, it is how much it is used, take a look at supercars for sale, big engines, low mileages ! I have two wedding cars, last year on covered 985 miles the other 1200 miles, tax on them is £220 each, there is no way the pair of them pollute as much as a Mini doing 12,000 miles a year. The system is a complete farce designed only to exact the max amount of money Government can take off us !

My whole family all run very old cars where the fuel consumption is a big downside but also the constant repairs that along with all the others like them fund a whole industry of employed and self-employed people and there will be a lot without a job if legislation made old cars scrap. I agree that the whole tax system ignores the cost of road maintenance and accidents. It has always been argued that tax on the fuel would be fairer but now it will need to take account of electric/hybrid cars - tax on tyres?

I live in a rural location on a Scottish island. We pay through the nose already for fuel and I need a reliable vehicle in case of emergency. I'm my husband's carer so we don't have a big income but must pay these exhorbitant tax rates. In cities people can drive around without a tax disc with little fear of being caught. In a small community it would stick out like a sore thumb. Put the tax on fuel and spend the money on the roads so everyone has to pay but equalise the cost of fuel by legislation throughout the UK first.

Road tax in the modern world is as outdated as a tv license, both of which should be scrapped. Put a penny on petrol and then lower mileage users, usually with older cars wouldn't be penallised as they are now.

I drive a 2001 Landrover Discovery 4.0l with a VED of £280 per year. I cover around 3000 miles each year in it, and it runs on LPG. (No reduction for this).our other car, a diesel golf gti costs just £160 per year, and although it is much less polluting, we put far more fuel in it due to covering approx 15000 miles per year in it. A re-think is needed,

Abolish road tax completely. I'd love to drive a Subaru but the tax is too much. Companies who expect their employees to run a car through a car allowance also expect them to buy new "green cars" Who wants to buy a new car with all the uncertainty in the economy?

I have a very old Toyota Lucida which I use as a car/campervan. I always plan my journeys carefully, bearing both running costs and the environment in mind. I would be miles better off with the French system of tax on fuel because I plan all trips with care. My vehicle is more than mere transport....I can't afford to run a car plus motorhome nor buy new!

Government taxation on the motorist in general is getting ridiculous. Why do they not put this to the vote? Afraid of getting vettoed I would assume! The way thinfg are going the general public/the workers of this Country will have little choice but the bus or foot, which could mean loosing their job. Thus mass unemployment. What on earth are they trying to do, reach a stay home society with only the rich working....thus complete shut down of a nation. Think again you idiots!!

VED what a total lot of crap can people not see that this is just another way of the Government pressing the already hard pressed working people to pay in to there pockets isn't it about time that we say no go tax the rich and leave the working people alone.

A lot of people simply cannot afford a new or expensive car, so we make do with what we can afford, unfortunately the government wants us all to buy new cars and pay the VAT on that.. but people who wanna work but live in a rural area but dont earn much, end up either a LOT worse off with high road tax (which never sees the road) or end up off the road and on the dole because where they live has either no regular public transport or it costs more to get to work than to remain at home.. those who drive the most and thus wear out the roads faster.. should pay for it by a much fairer means.. ie: adding a penny or two to fuel.. and those who drive the least, and harm the planet the least should benifit.. rather than be taxed off the road

VED should be abolished. Those that use the road pay for fuel, heavier & more powerful vehicles, those that pollute more; use more fuel. There is already more than enough duty & tax on fuel. As for the tax disc, scrap it and replace it with an insurance disc. If someone hits me I'm not really interested in whether they're taxed, I want to know if they're insured though!

In France the road tax is put on the fuel charge, so those that use the road most pay the most and foreign vehicles also pay. So simple but not in this country, foreign drivers dont pay a penny and I suppose it does keep the DVLC staff employed

I agree with the comment that there is no such thing as a poor member of the Green party.Either that or their parents pay for everything.They don't understand how much things have gone up i.e. petrol, car insurance for women, road tax and second hand cost for "approved" vehicles.

Why is it accepted in the USA and Australia where any mention of nationalisation sends some people into a frenzy. That your road fund licences is also cover for 3 party vehicle use on the road, any further insurance can then be purchased from a private insurance company. The extra money for the 3rd party cover could then be used too make it possible to reduce the numbers of un-licenced vehicles on the road and put some money in the government tax box, the people with the older car would still have the opportunity if they choose, to buy additional insurance such as TPFT; but at least it would mean they are not going to get ripped off twice once by the government and again by the money grabbing insurance companies. Another way could be to stop those in company cars claiming tax and all running expenses as a tax allowance, particularly those with cars that are not required for the job. everybody needs transport to and from work, but not everyone can claim it back from the Tax- man. Rip-off Britain is alive and kicking. Bash the most unfortunate and reward those that know they are able to get away with ripping them off.

Keep it simple - cars 10 yrs old no tax. Cars under 60 bhp no tax, cars 61-100 bhp 150 tax , 101-150bhp 300 tax, 151-200 bhp 600 tax, 201+ bhp 1500 tax - all motorbikes and scooters no tax - all 4x4 unless working 4x4 double the above tax rates - mandatory GPS based speed restrictors on all new cars ensuring all speed limits complied with - saves petrol saves lives stops the ridiculous requirement for any car allegedly needing more than 150 bhp & gets rid if all the Chelsea tractors

Another attempt by the Government to screw the poorer working class, who can only afford to purchase such vehicles. What this country needs is a revolution when are we all going to stand together and say ENOUGH, we need a peoples parliament. Get rid of the fat cats and run this country properly FOR THE PEOPLE!

The green cost of scrapping a perfectly good car and forcing people to buy another is surely questionable, especially when the new vehicle has a greater dependence on things like batteries as in an electrically assisted car or possibly less dependability with the stop / start currently in favour. I think it's really just a way of appeasing the loony left and green heads in politics.

I do not agree with the high VED at all it should be reduced to a nominal figure say £25 for all private cars, £100 for light goods and larger vans with larger goods and very large vans being say £250, the cost of fuel could be increased by a small amount to compensate for the loss of revenue. This mans those who drive the greater mileages pay the greater amount. Also those who have very low annual mileages pay a modest VED and contribute in proportion to their mileage to the supplement for lower VED.

i own a 2004 mazda mx5 1.6 with only 21k miles on clock and totally genuine as it is a good weather car that is only used during what ever summer we are granted,why should i pay over the odds for road tax as i pay the yearly on my all year car that is blue motion energy efficient, i and others that do a restricted mileage and meticulously look after an older car should get a consession rate when paying for 2 or more road taxes

Typical,we are being screwed again,we are all forced to buy new cars when cars only contribute 0.002% of harmful CO2,greedy government again

I have a Saab 95 Aero auto on 07 plates. I pay high road tax but will continue to do so as the car is immaculate, has supercar petformance when i need it and is NCap 5 rated. I would suggest that diesels are banned/taxed off the road and that particulate filters are consigned to the skip where they belong !!

the green party(and associates),just hate the lower paid who have savings to run a car,but can't afford a brand new 'eco' car.price things according to peoples budget-not according to their lower earnings or background.let justice rule.p.s.there is no such thing as a poor member of the Green party.

No I do not think that just because a vehicle is older it should be taxed off the road I agree with the statement scrapping this vehicle is off not off set when one has to produce a new car to replace it

It certainly does seem incredibly wasteful, both economically and carbon-emission wise, to junk perfectly good, and often quite economical, older large cars simply to replace them with small modern vehicles with lower road tax. I for one will not be driving a tiny car on our overcrowded, HGV-ridden motorways, I value my life and limbs too much. Has anyone considered the cost of more serious injuries and/or deaths from being involved in a high-speed accident in a small 'green' car? Maybe small 'green' cars should pay more insurance to protect the rest of us from their higher repair/write-off costs following an accident?

iv,e just bought a new car that has low imissions so no road tax and also helping the world

I think if you keep and run a car over a certain age,think it may be 25 yrs then the road tax is free any way.

I own a 2004 Jaguar S-type 2.7TD 6 speed manual, when comparing its performance both economically & its carbon emissions against supposedly greener newer cars, albeit that the data supplied by Manufacturers indicate that it should be more economical to drive, this is rarely the case as driving in the real world odes not provide the projections promised by Manufacturers. Although a big car I find it it extremely economical, for its age I would say that it is in relative pristine condition. It has completed in excess of 150K miles & still runs good but when looking to trade in its value is well below that expected. It is a rare version of this model & in time will become a classic. If the approach taken in your report above happens, we will no longer have classic cars on the road & there is a limit to what can be held in museums. This may also apply to many models large or small, do we continue to develop this 'throw away' world we live in or preserve history and our resources to encourage retaining cars that are still eceonmical to run & in a roadworthy condition?

Road tax should be abolished and put on the price of fuel.This would cut down on admin costs and be fairer. Also foreign vehicles entering the UK should pay a road use tax depending on vehicle size each time they enter thus ensuring they contribute. At present large goods vehicles fill up huge tanks on the continent and travel for days around the UK without buying fuel effectively using our roads free of charge.

I am so sorry i don't agree with the comments for higher fuel costs, i work as a taxi driver and put in now about £30 a day in fuel, i don't get much pay out of that. I am dismayed that people think that putting fuel up would drive people on buses, but iv'e got to earn a living to. About older cars i do agree the tax should be lower, for having a car that runs well for years, should be a good thing, I had my last car for 18 years, a nissan primera,a very good runner with no problems. It's a pity that the government don't see the big picture.

I have an 18 year old Nissan 300zx, and a 15 year old Subaru legacy. I choose not to buy less polluting cars, because there is nothing wrong with the ones I have. The government are simply trying to force people to spend money on luxury items to boost the economy whilst introducing 12 BILLION in spending cuts, to BOOST the economy. I'm already paying through the nose on fuel duty for these cars, and as they're effectively classic cars, we should be applauded, not punished, for keeping them on the road.

Thought that I should add that the government are not likely to kill road tax and increase fuel duty - there would be an outcry from both businesses and the public (Quentin Wilson & Co) about the fuel increase, and Conservative held seats tend to be in rural areas where mileages driven are higher. Sorry, when it comes to the environment, Mr. Cameron will get his priorities right, just like any other politician, regardless of content of past speeches.

It is hard up POOR people that have older cars , and they can not afford to do many miles. so one is taxing the poor again , they already have a larger burden of tax in %%%% terms than the RICH.

Regret to point out to Cat Castle, but you have missed the whole point of the article - they are talking about cars register from 2006 - your 350Z would be much higher tax if it were 3 years newer, but would still be a (relatively) old car of little value relative to the tax. Would also agree that it is about time tax was scrapped and put on the price of fuel. Not only would users pay for roads and polution, but it would encourage use of public transport (and thereby create a demand), instead of 'we might as well go in the car since we have already had to pay the tax'

I agree with rover seventy fives comment. I have been saying for years that they should scrap the road tax and put it on the price of petrol/diesel instead. As the ones that use the road more should pay more and the only way you can monitor that is by how much they fill their cars up with. My car was reg in 2000 I have low mileage about 50,000 on clock I don't use it much as can't afford to run it as sadly not working at present and because I can't afford the road tax at the moment I have had to reg with a sorn so not using it at all. I only use it for dropping children off at various places that can't be walked too as it is too far. So basically put it on the fuel and do away with the road tax that would also stop the dodgers too! Lol

internal combustion engine has no future and there's nothing wrong with low emissions while this type of engine prevails.

It's simple >high mileage per annum = high pollution >scrap Road Tax and add it to cost of petrol> the more you use and pollute the more you pay (same as in France)

I have an Audi A3 1.8 2001 which now costs me nearly £300 a year to tax. The car has done 113,000, is in great condition and runs great. Why should I have to prop up the car and credit industry just to get a new car that I can ill afford with all my other outgoings? They really are trying to penalise people on low incomes, who do low mileage and really, in the grand scheme of things, don't leave a massive carbon 'footprint'??

I'm sorry but I would have thought that if you had enough money to fill up a vehicle which has an engine higher than 2.5l, then you should be able to pay the tax that goes with it, irrelevant of how old the car is. I have a 3.5l Nissan 350z which is now ten years old and the tax for my vehicle is £245 which to me is a bargain.

it seems ok now, but what are we going to do if everyone gets a car, and the population increases by 10% a year, where are you going to be able to drive your car? There will be so many people, you will be running them over everywhere, as we run out of space. should be good for a laugh lol

we have 4 cars as a family 3 cost £250 each because they are old my friend who bought a 2010 golf ony pays £20 pa we cant afford new cars it seems very unfair

I drive a late 2006 Jeep 3.0L diesel & can not afford to replace it so I am held to ransom by the Gov. I travel about 5000 miles a year or less so the current Road Tax is very unfair I believe that putting extra tax on fuel & remove road tax all together would be a fairer way of doing it.

In the future there will be no classic sports cars on the road it's not worth paying 500 pounds tax to drive 500 miles a year.

People who can least afford it already pay more tax on these older cars though the criminal rates of fuel duty. It's a just another con to fund more daft wars in countries who don't appreciate the sacrifice of hundreds or British lives. And, of course, it to boots the politically correct green egos and expensive life-styles of politicians who know absolutely nothing of living in the real, miserable, little world they've created. We should vote only for those who promise redress the balance for the motorist -- or don't vote at all.

yeah its crazy payingall this tax i have also bought one of these cars and there safe, and i enjoy motoring and the sound of my car,its one of my enjoyments to drive in the country every now and then why should i be penalised for this as i save on emmisions in other area's where i can .. this is just easy money for the government,

Yet another shameless wide open government cash grab, bigger engined cars already generate more tax, in sales, fuel and running costs but this is not enough. I have an Audi A6 1.9 tdi which costs £145.00 a year to tax. It frequently does long journeys and gets fully loaded. I would like to get the more powerful 2.5 tdi version, but would have to pay an additional £100.00 in road tax for the privilege. Why?! I'm certain it has nothing to do with the emissions...

We pay tax on this v.a.t. on that which line the pockets of the government for their 'well earned' holidays and pay rises and second homes and second cars. Let us lie down like sleeping dogs, but don't you think we should make a stand and say NO MORE!

I do about 5,000 miles per year in one of these late uneconomical 2006 cars. Almost logical when the car was new and doing 20,000 miles per annum, but now totally unfair. It produces less CO2 per annum than my wife's 2012 car doing 25,000 miles per annum, but that car is liable for less than 1/3 of the VED ! Yes, I could buy a new car, but at what real environmental cost ( and depreciation of course)

I own a 2004 Honda Accord with less than 40,000 miles on the clock. I drive less that 5,000 miles per year. It is serviced by a Honda dealer and has FSH. Wonder how that compares financially and 'greenwise' with a new Bentley or Jaguar doing say 30,000 mpy?

Not everyone can afford a new car lets just kick a working man again and see what happens and they wonder why this country's finished

If older high consumption vehicles are driven less miles than modern vehicles then surely they can actually have a smaller carbon footprint than modern Eco friendly vehicles. If the government is really serious about how much carbon us motorists produce then VED should be dropped altogether. Higher fuel tax can recover the lost tax , those that drive less miles and actually produce less carbon will get the break they deserve and those that want to run around doing thousands of miles every month will pay the tax for actually burning the fuel and producing the carbon.