IS YOUR CAR OVER 25 YEARS OLD AND YOUR STILL PAYING TAX?

Doesn't bother me :dontknow:  :roll: Would be nice if it was rolling again though, but I also doubt it ever will. After all if everyone stuck to the cars they had then who would be needing finance for cars?  :?

I've had a few tax exempt cars and although that is a deciding factor in say picking between a 73 and a 74 model, the condition of the car itself is more important to me. After all you could spend ?1000's fixing up an old nail thats tax exempt or buy a tidy non-exempt model.

It would appear the general concensus is split into two camps,one side wanting tax exemption for vehicles over 25 years old and the other side who wouldn`t accept the money it saved them,even under the threat of death.

Who wouldn`t admit to feeling a bit put out when having to tax their cars(over 25 years ) having only used them for a few days during the previous 12 months?

Having said that,a point which I don`t think has been raised yet,is the much cheaper car insurance for classic/limited mileage vehicles,including multi-vehicle cover.

Swings and roundabouts.

SEAN1151 said

It would appear the general concensus is split into two camps,one side wanting tax exemption for vehicles over 25 years old and the other side who wouldn`t accept the money it saved them,even under the threat of death.

It's not that simple though.  It was introduced to help save to classic cars and our motoring heritage.  It did it to some extent.  As we enter the mass production era of cars then the 25 year rolling tax free status becomes more expensive.  I don't know how to look it up but it would be interesting to compare number of cars from 1973 on the road to the number of cars from 1983.  

I'm not willing to pay more tax somewhere else if they have to claw that lost revenue back  just so Granny Doris can use her 1982 Lada Riva tax free!!

I'm all in favour of a tax dodge so if it were offered, I'd take it! Its kinda insulting people's intelligence to say people wouldn't accept the money, and a wrong conclusion to draw.

My point is that the road tax system in general, is a broad sweeping brush and is unfair on low-use cars in general, not just classics in particular. Its already been rejected by the government so signing that petition will do NOTHING, you can trust me on that!

So I'm suggesting a better method MIGHT be road pricing. The general consensus from above though, is that in fact the fairest way would be to put most/all the tax burden on fuel, so it refects USAGE not just OWNERSHIP.


Put it another way: how would you feel if the Mk1 Golf OC officially supported a 25 year tax exemption, and neatly split the club in half by implication, not representing 1985 and younger cabbys? Fair on them?

paul_c said

Put it another way: how would you feel if the Mk1 Golf OC officially supported a 25 year tax exemption, and neatly split the club in half by implication, not representing 1985 and younger cabbys? Fair on them?

It's a rolling cut off though :roll: so next year the '85s would be in, the year after the '86s and so on. If you have a decent car that you have put time and money into but it happened to be a '90 cab I think you would more likely hold onto it than jump ship just to save the tax value.

Perhaps another way this could work would be for the government to reinstate the rolling exemption, but to save half the Mk1OC saying "it's not fair" they could continue from the 1973 cut off date. In effect making it a 35 year rolling cut off?

Is that fairer children?  

LOL - we're not really children. Compared to previous threads on it (which normally decend to name-calling of Brown) this is a pretty good debate on the whole topic. I've made my suggestion but welcome others too, to see if there's a better way. (I kinda accept that tax of some kind is an inevitibility of life).

Lovely ideal world you live in because you've got a Mk1!!   What about all the uneconomical s**t that was made in the late 70's and early 80's???   Yes it would be nice to see more Mk1's and a few other things, but I bet any government wouldn't want to give any more incentives to keep a few of the absolute heaps that are on the roads alive any longer.

It was done to save CLASSIC cars.  It saved some of them (probably) now the stuff you are talking about saving aren't classics, I don't want a Chevette or a Maxi clogging up my Sunday afternoon thrash!

Maybe in 20 years lift it to 1980.  Then in another 20 lift it to 1990.  It was legislation to save a few classics, not preserve cr P .

paul_c said

LOL - we're not really children.

I know Paul, it's just the fairness argument seems a bit daft. I agree that it's a good balanced argument though. I tend not to get involved in stuff like this as it seems to end in bickering!

The best compromise I see is as suggested, starting from 1973 and rolling from there onwards. So in 2019 my 1983 golf will be tax exempt. It's not much of an incentive to hold onto it for 10 years just for free tax, but in 10 years time there won't be the the same numbers around that there currently are. So the cost to the government in lost revenue won't be as great.

Also Rhys the cut off date isn't prejudiced against any particular car, it's just about the date it was produced. In 10 years time the cars your brandishing cr P will be classed as 'real' classics - in fact they already are.

The Daewoo Nexia will never be a classic. It may however, given a hell of a lot of luck, make 25 years old.

There's no way I can disagree with that!  

LOL   

It's a good point though - those cars which become classics (and as such are things which we should give tax free status to) were usually well received at the time - E.g Golf Gti, Mini etc.

How about instead of the 25 year rolling tax period, at 25 years old a panel decided if that car is worthy of free tax.  Austin Montego - add to the bin pile, Fiat Spyder -free rent!!

For that matter why is it more expensive (in tax) for a 1.6 than a 1.5? I'm sure one doesn't use much more than the other, and certainly some of them will be identical anyway.

Road tax by engine size is an even bigger mess up if you ask me.

I thought originally the 25yr was basically, right you've paid 25 years of road tax the car has paid its dues?

Its a bit hard to say what a goverment will do to be honest, they twist and turn on every decision they make, so its not too unlikely that they'll scrap road tax eventually anyway.

Madferret said

For that matter why is it more expensive (in tax) for a 1.6 than a 1.5? I'm sure one doesn't use much more than the other, and certainly some of them will be identical anyway.

Exactly - its unfair to have step change cut off points. If all the tax were loaded onto fuel, you'd simply pay for usage. And if you drive like a granny, you'd be taxed like a granny….etc

Indeed…. I think personally the goverment has lost sight of what taxes are supposed to do what and it all gets put into a general pot. A lot of current tax laws seem to be counter productive, as indeed a lot of normal laws for that matter.

What system do they have in other countries regarding Road Tax?

If my tax money fills in one pot hole and in turn stops some twunt ripping his wishbone off for dragging his Mk1 round on his mega low 'coilies' I'm a happy man  

my mk1 is mega low on 'collies'  

I signed it anyway. I think the roads around where I live are some of the worst in the uk.

Road Tax doesnt actually go on roads, it goes to the treasury

Madferret said

Road Tax doesnt actually go on roads, it goes to the treasury

that doesn't surprise me :cry:  … sign me up !

Beenie said

my mk1 is mega low on 'collies'  

I signed it anyway. I think the roads around where I live are some of the worst in the uk.

must be good at dodging those potholes  :wink:

I wouldn't mind the Road Tax being abolished, and money being put on the tax on petrol.  But then when nearly ( or maybe more ) all of the cost of petrol is TAX, then I get a little jarred.  I think something close to 80% of the cost of a litre is TAX …. and people moan that BP & Shell made a lot of money last year … errr …. what did the Government make ??

Perhaps the Government should run the country by taxing the tax payer and not the motorist …. or would that be somewhat unpopular with the voter ?

Well it doesnt really matter where the money comes from as it all goes round, what is a bit unfair is that people who hardly use the car are taxed at an equal rate to people who use it for popping down to the shop at the end of the street.

It seems to be common sense that abolished road tax and tax on fuel would actually save money and thus be a more efficient use of tax. They be no paper work for road taxing, less red tape means less cost and more to actually spend where its supposed to be, the downside would be the loss of jobs.