Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts
Showing posts with label tax. Show all posts
Tuesday, 15 April 2008
(un)Taxing Experience
Although it has been feasible for a few years I had never tried to buy my Vehicle Excise Duty (aka the tax disk, Car Tax, Road Tax, etc) over the internet. Why? I preferred the certainty of going in with my documents and the cash and walking out with the correct tax disk. No fear of things getting lost in the post and I always either lived or worked within easy access of a Post Office that could issue tax disks and always had a lunch break long enough to accommodate even the worst Post Office queues. Now I live in a village and I don't know if the local Post Office does Tax Disks and, in any case, the customer service is somewhat variable and the queues depressing and I avoid it wherever possible. As a result I decided to give the online process a try. I checked my bank account to make sure I could afford a year's tax and then I logged on to the DVLA's site. I was impressed with the clarity and simplicity of the process, I think I would have preferred slightly fewer pages to click through but it only took 10-15 minutes to complete. All I need now is for the new tax disk to arrive by post in the next few days and I'll conclude that this was one of the government's more successful IT projects.
Thursday, 13 March 2008
I’m glad I’m not the only one who noticed
Budget time is a great excuse for commentators to come out and tell the world how right or wrong the Chancellor of the Exchequer had got things. One of Mr Darling’s more interesting pronouncements was that money would be set aside for road pricing initiatives. Given that Ruth Kelly had put road pricing “on the back burner”.
The Association of British Drivers noticed this too. It makes you wonder, does one government department not know what the other is doing or is it that politicians will say anything as long as it makes them popular at the time.
I’ve also been following people’s reactions to the budget on the BBC’s “Have Your Say” site. Most people have been complaining about the budget. Some, as you would expect, complain that the revised Vehicle Excise Duty (VED or “Road Tax” in old money) was unfair because it didn’t take account of how much people drove. “What we need is a way of charging people for each mile they drive”. What a stupid thing to say; we have a pay-per-mile system, it is called fuel duty!
The Association of British Drivers noticed this too. It makes you wonder, does one government department not know what the other is doing or is it that politicians will say anything as long as it makes them popular at the time.
I’ve also been following people’s reactions to the budget on the BBC’s “Have Your Say” site. Most people have been complaining about the budget. Some, as you would expect, complain that the revised Vehicle Excise Duty (VED or “Road Tax” in old money) was unfair because it didn’t take account of how much people drove. “What we need is a way of charging people for each mile they drive”. What a stupid thing to say; we have a pay-per-mile system, it is called fuel duty!
Monday, 5 November 2007
We’re not giving up our cars – apparently
Despite ever increasing fuel costs people are not being put off driving, according to a survey commissioned by insurance company esure. As with all such surveys it is not without a touch of hyperbole claiming “a massive majority of motorists in the UK (55%) would never part with their cars in favour of public transport - regardless of cost”. Now if you ask me 55% is not a massive majority, surely it is just over half.
Other interesting “facts” revealed by the survey include one in three people not monitoring the prices in their area. Just over a third of people (37%) wouldn’t consider replacing their car with something more frugal. Rather worryingly (unless you work for the oil companies or are the Chancellor of the Exchequer) 79% haven’t changed their attitude to buying fuel despite the threat of huge price rises. But what will changing buying habits do? When so much of the price of fuel at the pumps is tax retailers don’t have much room to compete on price and since people have to buy fuel there is little incentive for retailers to employ that strategy.
Mike Pickard, Head of Risk and Underwriting at esure, said: "esure's poll shows that public transport may never overtake people's preference for their own cars, whatever the cost. Nowadays, cars are clearly seen as a necessity that people refuse to give up. For many people the absence of cheap public transport means a car is essential in their lives and virtually any price will be paid for petrol.”
He has a point, the inconvenience or absence of public transport makes driving about the only way a lot of us can get to work to earn a living.
"There are simple ways that motorists can prevent their cars from guzzling up their pennies. Driving steadily and carefully, with no excessive braking or speeding, will not only give you more miles for your money, it could also reduce the likelihood of making a claim on your car insurance."
It is easy to forget that high fuel costs actually hit people twice, both in terms of personal transport and transporting the things people buy. Strange as it may sound I don’t actually object to the high level of tax levied on fuel, it is surely the fairest way to tax motoring. What would be nice is a reduction in motoring’s other costs. Perhaps esure should issue a press release promising to reduce everyone’s insurance premiums.
Other interesting “facts” revealed by the survey include one in three people not monitoring the prices in their area. Just over a third of people (37%) wouldn’t consider replacing their car with something more frugal. Rather worryingly (unless you work for the oil companies or are the Chancellor of the Exchequer) 79% haven’t changed their attitude to buying fuel despite the threat of huge price rises. But what will changing buying habits do? When so much of the price of fuel at the pumps is tax retailers don’t have much room to compete on price and since people have to buy fuel there is little incentive for retailers to employ that strategy.
Mike Pickard, Head of Risk and Underwriting at esure, said: "esure's poll shows that public transport may never overtake people's preference for their own cars, whatever the cost. Nowadays, cars are clearly seen as a necessity that people refuse to give up. For many people the absence of cheap public transport means a car is essential in their lives and virtually any price will be paid for petrol.”
He has a point, the inconvenience or absence of public transport makes driving about the only way a lot of us can get to work to earn a living.
"There are simple ways that motorists can prevent their cars from guzzling up their pennies. Driving steadily and carefully, with no excessive braking or speeding, will not only give you more miles for your money, it could also reduce the likelihood of making a claim on your car insurance."
It is easy to forget that high fuel costs actually hit people twice, both in terms of personal transport and transporting the things people buy. Strange as it may sound I don’t actually object to the high level of tax levied on fuel, it is surely the fairest way to tax motoring. What would be nice is a reduction in motoring’s other costs. Perhaps esure should issue a press release promising to reduce everyone’s insurance premiums.
Wednesday, 30 May 2007
Big Brother is watching you...
...but don't worry he can't get you.
Nothing to do with the ever popular TV series, more a question of the wisdom of law enforcement by camera and computer. I drove past a roadside checkpoint which according to the sign displayed was automatically checking everyone's road tax (or Vehicle Excise Duty to be precise) as they drove past. It seemed like a sensible idea and I expected to see the police further up the road waiting to have a word with anyone flagged as un-taxed but the police weren't there. I can only presume that a stern letter and a £80 fine will be sent to the registered keeper for any un-taxed cars the camera identified.
Now maybe I've thought about this too much but if I was going to drive around in an un-taxed car - and go the whole hog and avoid insurance and MOT too - then I would not have it registered to my address. So who will end up getting fined? A few forgetful motorists who keep their cars correctly registered but somehow overlooked the clearly visible date printed on their tax disk. No doubt the fine will act as a sharp reminder to those people not to be so forgetful in future but it is not going to address the hardcore offenders.
Nothing to do with the ever popular TV series, more a question of the wisdom of law enforcement by camera and computer. I drove past a roadside checkpoint which according to the sign displayed was automatically checking everyone's road tax (or Vehicle Excise Duty to be precise) as they drove past. It seemed like a sensible idea and I expected to see the police further up the road waiting to have a word with anyone flagged as un-taxed but the police weren't there. I can only presume that a stern letter and a £80 fine will be sent to the registered keeper for any un-taxed cars the camera identified.
Now maybe I've thought about this too much but if I was going to drive around in an un-taxed car - and go the whole hog and avoid insurance and MOT too - then I would not have it registered to my address. So who will end up getting fined? A few forgetful motorists who keep their cars correctly registered but somehow overlooked the clearly visible date printed on their tax disk. No doubt the fine will act as a sharp reminder to those people not to be so forgetful in future but it is not going to address the hardcore offenders.
Tuesday, 22 May 2007
Road Pricing
Parliamentary consent has been given to allow local authorities to trial methods for charging drivers based on the time of their journey on a particular road. The idea is that the highest charges for using the busiest roads at the busiest times will deter drivers from making un-necessary journeys at peak times and thus keep the roads clear for essential traffic.
Now it is good that the government wants to tackle congestion. The free movement of people and goods is vital to the economy of the nation. The problem is that Britain is densely populated, everyone is crammed into a relatively small area and when we go to work we end up going to the same places.
Sadly the proposed solution appears to be based on flawed assumptions. I would suggest that the biggest flaw is the idea that a big scheme like road pricing is the answer. Grand schemes are a great way of being seen to do something (which government always likes to do), but may divert attention from the boring practicalities of solving the problem. In the case of traffic management small improvements such as redesigning junctions, revising traffic light timings, removing traffic lights where practical and removing “traffic calming” measures may yield greater benefit but won’t make front page news.
Public transport is touted as a way to reduce congestion but it seems that funding for new initiatives will only be granted for local authorities where road pricing schemes are implemented. My fear is that the road pricing will come before any public transport alternative is put in place. You also have to be sceptical of any support for future public transport schemes give that cost-benefit analyses carried out by government always count lost revenue from motorists as a cost.
The biggest problem is that no consideration is given to the fact that there are already incentives to reduce congestion. The biggest incentive is congestion itself; no-one wants to sit in traffic and, where possible, people plan their journeys accordingly. Of course workplaces expect their employees to start on time – and usually the same time - which means sitting in traffic. There is also the question of cost, sitting in a traffic jam burns fuel to no good purpose – anyone stuck in traffic is already in effect paying a healthy sum to the government for the privilege. Assurances that other motoring costs will be reduced are met with understandable cynicism.
Maybe there is a place for road pricing in managing Britain’s road network. Simply raising awareness of the issue is no bad thing. I would suggest that road pricing is better left as a last resort rather than using it as a quick fix.
Now it is good that the government wants to tackle congestion. The free movement of people and goods is vital to the economy of the nation. The problem is that Britain is densely populated, everyone is crammed into a relatively small area and when we go to work we end up going to the same places.
Sadly the proposed solution appears to be based on flawed assumptions. I would suggest that the biggest flaw is the idea that a big scheme like road pricing is the answer. Grand schemes are a great way of being seen to do something (which government always likes to do), but may divert attention from the boring practicalities of solving the problem. In the case of traffic management small improvements such as redesigning junctions, revising traffic light timings, removing traffic lights where practical and removing “traffic calming” measures may yield greater benefit but won’t make front page news.
Public transport is touted as a way to reduce congestion but it seems that funding for new initiatives will only be granted for local authorities where road pricing schemes are implemented. My fear is that the road pricing will come before any public transport alternative is put in place. You also have to be sceptical of any support for future public transport schemes give that cost-benefit analyses carried out by government always count lost revenue from motorists as a cost.
The biggest problem is that no consideration is given to the fact that there are already incentives to reduce congestion. The biggest incentive is congestion itself; no-one wants to sit in traffic and, where possible, people plan their journeys accordingly. Of course workplaces expect their employees to start on time – and usually the same time - which means sitting in traffic. There is also the question of cost, sitting in a traffic jam burns fuel to no good purpose – anyone stuck in traffic is already in effect paying a healthy sum to the government for the privilege. Assurances that other motoring costs will be reduced are met with understandable cynicism.
Maybe there is a place for road pricing in managing Britain’s road network. Simply raising awareness of the issue is no bad thing. I would suggest that road pricing is better left as a last resort rather than using it as a quick fix.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
