Road Tax

[TimC]

I have just received my road tax reminder for this year. 600 quid, 50 quid a month, the price I pay for emitting huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere from my V6 internal combustion engine.

 

Except I’m not emitting CO2 into the atmosphere………I can see my Jeep now sitting on the drive emitting no CO2 at all. What I’m actually being charged for is having a vehicle which has a high rate of CO2 emission when it is actually driving. Perversely now that I don’t drive my JKUR as much these days it actually emits relatively little CO2, my 1.0l 3 cylinder Renegade emits far more CO2 because I do at least 10 times the mileage in it …… but I pay less tax. My CJ7 pays even less tax, in fact no tax at all, because it is over 40 years old, for some reason this is OK even though its 4.2l 6 cylinder engine must produce enough CO2 to alleviate the recent (and ironic ) CO2 shortage. I suppose that’s OK though because I do even less miles in it that the JK. 

 

Even more perversely the £600 I have to pay for the JK actually encourages me to increase the amount of miles I do in order to get value for money out of it since the £600 applies whether I do 50 miles or 50,000

 

If the powers to be want you to pay for emitting CO2 then why not charge you for the amount you actually emit, km driven x CO2/km instead of just the rate, it makes no sense……but then again nothing much makes sense to me these days, I guess it must be me.

[AlexK]

Unfortunately you’re just one step away from making an argument for road pricing, a fairly toxic idea at the best of times, but almost certainly unavoidable now more people are buying EVs.

 

Road tax has become such a complicated, ridiculous instrument. For my daily driver, I have to pay £490 a year for five years because its first owner ticked a few too many options boxes, none of which have any effect on its emissions.

[V]

I was looking at KJs recently and almost bought one until I found the road tax was £600 just because it was registered after 23 March 2006. I'm fairly certain the post-2006 KJ's will get scrapped quickly as their used values get closer to twice the annual road tax fee. Even converting one to all electric power wont lower the road tax.

 

As far as I know, converting a 2007 KJ to an EV will not change it's road tax class unless the vehicle goes through a BIVA test for a new registration. Only vehicles first registered before 1 March 2001 on PLG class can have an EV tax class after conversion without inspection.

 

Road tax is punitive, pure and simple.

[doodle]

9 hours ago, AlexK said:

Unfortunately you’re just one step away from making an argument for road pricing, a fairly toxic idea at the best of times, but almost certainly unavoidable now more people are buying EVs.

 

Road tax has become such a complicated, ridiculous instrument. For my daily driver, I have to pay £490 a year for five years because its first owner ticked a few too many options boxes, none of which have any effect on its emissions.

i have no problem with road pricing as long as the roads are perfectly maintained and i get to drive what i want! lol

[BLUE STAR]

18 hours ago, TimC said:

I have just received my road tax reminder for this year. 600 quid, 50 quid a month, the price I pay for emitting huge amounts of CO2 into the atmosphere from my V6 internal combustion engine.

 

Except I’m not emitting CO2 into the atmosphere………I can see my Jeep now sitting on the drive emitting no CO2 at all. What I’m actually being charged for is having a vehicle which has a high rate of CO2 emission when it is actually driving. Perversely now that I don’t drive my JKUR as much these days it actually emits relatively little CO2, my 1.0l 3 cylinder Renegade emits far more CO2 because I do at least 10 times the mileage in it …… but I pay less tax. My CJ7 pays even less tax, in fact no tax at all, because it is over 40 years old, for some reason this is OK even though its 4.2l 6 cylinder engine must produce enough CO2 to alleviate the recent (and ironic ) CO2 shortage. I suppose that’s OK though because I do even less miles in it that the JK. 

 

Even more perversely the £600 I have to pay for the JK actually encourages me to increase the amount of miles I do in order to get value for money out of it since the £600 applies whether I do 50 miles or 50,000

 

If the powers to be want you to pay for emitting CO2 then why not charge you for the amount you actually emit, km driven x CO2/km instead of just the rate, it makes no sense……but then again nothing much makes sense to me these days, I guess it must be me.

Yeah I'll be waiting for my £600 bill coming for next month.

If they want a true 'pollution tax' (not that CO2 is a pollutant) adding the duty on to the fuel would be the fairest way.

Ev's burn CO2 as a lot of the electricity used comes from gas. 

I could go on to the ludicrously of it all, as  could you  

Its politics not science, if it doesn't make sense it cant be true ! 

[V]

I am certain we have been on road pricing or mileage pricing for decades. 80% of the cost of vehicle fuel is tax, the more mileage we do the more tax the government gets.

 

The price per litre of unleaded in Saudi Arabia is 36c Euros, diesel is 9c Euros!

[BLUE STAR]

21 minutes ago, V said:

I am certain we have been on road pricing or mileage pricing for decades. 80% of the cost of vehicle fuel is tax, the more mileage we do the more tax the government gets.

 

The price per litre of unleaded in Saudi Arabia is 36c Euros, diesel is 9c Euros!

Yeah you're totally correct.

"A country that tries to tax its self into profit is like a man standing in a bucket and trying to pull himself up by the handle"    Winston Churchill

[digger]

I think it is grossly unfair and aimed by past politicians at those perceived to be most able to pay. 

However in my view its worse, totally dishonest. Why, because our so called 'gas guzzlers are not as bad polluters as they would have one believe. 

Last year my 4.0l YJ had its usual MOT. The garage I go to are very good and strict, which is what I want because I'm not as good crawling about under my cars as I once was. When the emissions were done, the mechanic asked if I minded if he repeated the test. I didn't!  After repeating it he explained that the test kit was regularly checked independently. It had just been done.  He was surprised that my emissions were so low. Less, he said, than many new cars  of around 15/1600 cc which came in for their first MOT!

It was the same this year too and so it is,as well,  with my diesel  WK. Ok this may be because they are properly maintained by me. It must help. I always have to do it again once the dealer has ''done'' the annual service on the WK (because of the warranty terms).

However I suspect that there may be  another reason too!  There seems to be an insatiable need  from the press to make cars more and more powerful. Great fun but,as far as emissions are concerned my motor sport tuning experience may suggest otherwise. After all we know at least one manufacturer was 'on the fiddle' with claimed emissions!   Put simply, if you want more power out then you need to burn more fuel when its in. Therefore it seems logical to me that despite being,maybe , more efficient, modern engines must pump more gas  out !

Then again, perhaps I'm just an old dinosaur!  LOL.

[V]

That's interesting about newer cars polluting more than expected. I would not be surprised if it is down to the ridiculously long oil change intervals that manufacturers say are totally fine.

[BLUE STAR]

1 hour ago, V said:

That's interesting about newer cars polluting more than expected. I would not be surprised if it is down to the ridiculously long oil change intervals that manufacturers say are totally fine.

When my 2007 built JK CRD's MOT was done in July they remarked on the low reading considering the age & mileage.

I had recently changed both MAP & MAF sensors  & change the oil every 3000 - 4000

Also as we are charged on CO2 output, why do they only do a smoke test on diesels & not CO2 (Is it because they are just too efficient)  

[digger]

I like the oil change idea and how good are the sensors. These things apply to mine.

I do know (of course no one should do this) that on many cars the oil breather is fed back into the inlet tract. I think this is how they got rid of the catch pot( which came in after just letting the oily mess drip on the road). I think this was banned in case you spilt it or it overflowed!  On some engines  it passes through a filter. An example is the Jeep 4'0l.  However I'm told that if you temporarily block the pipe, then give car a good blast, then MOT it,  you will get a significant improvement in emission reduction.  Who knows, nobody knows! 

[Raakhee]

Here is a conundrum. My 1.5L diesel Clio IV is rated at 90g/km for CO2 and I pay no tax. My 2L diesel Renegade is at 166g/km and I pay £155. My Renegade is ULEZ compliant but my Clio is not

How is this so?

[John]

I only pay £155 for my jk 3.6 …. I don’t know why …

[TimC]

When did you buy it John? There was a change made based on registration, but I don’t know when it applied from. For newer vehicles the tax is front loaded, very expensive when you buy it ( this usually gets factored in to the purchase price ) and then tapers off after that. Even though, as you say, it’s the same engine with the same emissions. Although yours is a short wheelbase I can’t see it making that much of a difference. 

[BLUE STAR]

22 hours ago, digger said:

I like the oil change idea and how good are the sensors. These things apply to mine.

I do know (of course no one should do this) that on many cars the oil breather is fed back into the inlet tract. I think this is how they got rid of the catch pot( which came in after just letting the oily mess drip on the road). I think this was banned in case you spilt it or it overflowed!  On some engines  it passes through a filter. An example is the Jeep 4'0l.  However I'm told that if you temporarily block the pipe, then give car a good blast, then MOT it,  you will get a significant improvement in emission reduction.  Who knows, nobody knows! 

You can fit an oil catch can, would this improve things ?

Been thinking about fitting one for a while but never got around to it.

Would it be worth it now with 105K on the clock ?

[BLUE STAR]

1 hour ago, John said:

I only pay £155 for my jk 3.6 …. I don’t know why …

Could be due to the gearing. (Check your axle ratios from your build sheet if you've got one) 2 door will be a factor also.

My 2007 CRD JKU came with 4:10's  from the factory (Jeep changed to higher gearing on later models)  and has a higher towing rate so I think the Govt sticks it up me on the presumption I'll be towing with it.

I think they must have  witch doctors deciding polices as there is no sense in anything Govts end up doing.

[John]

3 hours ago, BLUE STAR said:

Could be due to the gearing. (Check your axle ratios from your build sheet if you've got one) 2 door will be a factor also.

My 2007 CRD JKU came with 4:10's  from the factory (Jeep changed to higher gearing on later models)  and has a higher towing rate so I think the Govt sticks it up me on the presumption I'll be towing with it.

I think they must have  witch doctors deciding polices as there is no sense in anything Govts end up doing.

I’m on 4:10’s … I think it’s like Tim c said as it’s a 2017 I think the tax was front loaded so the first owner paid up front … 

as I got it at 6 months old im just paying the £155

[TimC]

10 hours ago, John said:

I’m on 4:10’s … I think it’s like Tim c said as it’s a 2017 I think the tax was front loaded so the first owner paid up front … 

as I got it at 6 months old im just paying the £155

……..that is soooo unfair!

[TimC]

13 hours ago, BLUE STAR said:

 

I think they must have  witch doctors deciding polices as there is no sense in anything Govts end up doing.

Now there is something we agree on

[Raakhee]

Anyone else think we should get a rebate on the past year? I've been working from home so my carbon contribution for my vehicles are minimum. Just putting it out there

[V]

In the last decade I planted 750 trees on my property. I reckon I have a lifetime Carbon Dioxide offset now. I don't believe in the CO2 climate change BS, I just like trees.

 

Have you ever used a hose pipe to water a plant and a gust of wind blew the water flow away from your target?

 

I have a theory that interplanetary gravity causes climate change on all planets with atmospheres.

Black holes have super powerful gravity, nothing escapes them, including light and heat.

If a black hole's gravity can do that then the gravity of Jupiter must be able to influence the direction of solar particle emissions directed at earth and away from earth.

The further away Earth is from Jupiter in angular degrees, the least amount of influence Jupiter has on the solar particle emissions impacting Earth. As soon as Earth's orbit approaches the line of sight between the Sun and Jupiter, I think that Earth will receive more solar particle emissions due to Jupiter's gravitational attraction. I don't believe solar emissions are uniform like the point light source I was taught in physics in school. I believe that the concentration and direction of flow of solar emissions will behave much like a particle fluid under the influence of external forces.

 

Our planet is the plant, solar particle emissions are hose water, Jupiter is the wind.

 

[digger]

What a coincidence and what an interesting theory. I shall consider and discuss it with other friends. I have already spoken to my favourite mathematician. They said like me, how interesting. It certainly makes considerable sense. Gravity is perhaps one of the least understood forces. It is believed now that when the Moon influences our tides by pushing and pulling them there is an opposite and equal reaction on the mass of the Moon. This is causing a measurable movement away from the Earth which is a gravitational effect which some believe is influencing our climate changes.  So , the idea that a huge planet like Jupiter can influence other planets around the Solar system does not seem impossible at all.

I too have planted many trees and am well up into the 700s on various properties I have owned. Although I must admit  656 were in France. However since selling the property in 2008 I have been told that the new owner promptly cut many down! I am going to have a look one day,perhaps on the way to Chambon. Certainly the worst damage that man has caused is the continuous felling of millions of trees for centuries.

 

I also am not convinced about some of the claims made about 'global warming' and the causes of it. I think its happening but why?  Is it wholly our fault!  When I went to school (many years ago) we were told that climate change was coming, that the next Ice age was already 500 yrs overdue. It was explained that all the evidence was to be seen in both soil  and  ice cores. They said that there would be a geologically short period of global warming which would cause melting of the ice around the planet. This was thought to have the potential to dilute the salinity of the seas which would disrupt the ocean currents(I think this has now been shown to happen by analysis of fossil shells) Thus warm currents such as the Gulf stream would change direction or even cease causing redistribution of temperatures and the next ice age! I understand that there are a number of scientists who support this type of view today. However the thought of a coming ice age would be much more scary than a warm up, wouldn't it ! 

Also I have been interested in Volcanos for years. I have had a friend who is a volcanologist. He told me that on average there are about 25 of these erupting at any one time around the Earth. (you don't hear about those that are in the middle of nowhere) and that they alone produce 40% of the world's toxic gases! This seems very different to the constant claims that man alone is causing the changes. After all climate changes have occurred for millennia. Even some of the less active volcanos spew out huge amounts of smoke etc. Anyone who has flown into Mexico city will know what I mean and 'Popocatopetyl' is about 200 miles away! Of course there is also the possibilty that if a sufficient number blew up at the same time then the smoke and ash could blot out the sun's rays causing a sudden cooling too!

[spookie the aardvark]

33 minutes ago, digger said:

What a coincidence and what an interesting theory. I shall consider and discuss it with other friends. I have already spoken to my favourite mathematician. They said like me, how interesting. It certainly makes considerable sense. Gravity is perhaps one of the least understood forces. It is believed now that when the Moon influences our tides by pushing and pulling them there is an opposite and equal reaction on the mass of the Moon. This is causing a measurable movement away from the Earth which is a gravitational effect which some believe is influencing our climate changes.  So , the idea that a huge planet like Jupiter can influence other planets around the Solar system does not seem impossible at all.

I too have planted many trees and am well up into the 700s on various properties I have owned. Although I must admit  656 were in France. However since selling the property in 2008 I have been told that the new owner promptly cut many down! I am going to have a look one day,perhaps on the way to Chambon. Certainly the worst damage that man has caused is the continuous felling of millions of trees for centuries.

 

I also am not convinced about some of the claims made about 'global warming' and the causes of it. I think its happening but why?  Is it wholly our fault!  When I went to school (many years ago) we were told that climate change was coming, that the next Ice age was already 500 yrs overdue. It was explained that all the evidence was to be seen in both soil  and  ice cores. They said that there would be a geologically short period of global warming which would cause melting of the ice around the planet. This was thought to have the potential to dilute the salinity of the seas which would disrupt the ocean currents(I think this has now been shown to happen by analysis of fossil shells) Thus warm currents such as the Gulf stream would change direction or even cease causing redistribution of temperatures and the next ice age! I understand that there are a number of scientists who support this type of view today. However the thought of a coming ice age would be much more scary than a warm up, wouldn't it ! 

Also I have been interested in Volcanos for years. I have had a friend who is a volcanologist. He told me that on average there are about 25 of these erupting at any one time around the Earth. (you don't hear about those that are in the middle of nowhere) and that they alone produce 40% of the world's toxic gases! This seems very different to the constant claims that man alone is causing the changes. After all climate changes have occurred for millennia. Even some of the less active volcanos spew out huge amounts of smoke etc. Anyone who has flown into Mexico city will know what I mean and 'Popocatopetyl' is about 200 miles away! Of course there is also the possibilty that if a sufficient number blew up at the same time then the smoke and ash could blot out the sun's rays causing a sudden cooling too!

But.......................... could the govenment tax Volcanos ?????????????????????b

[digger]

Exactly!

[TimC]

I’m not sure about the gravity theory myself. An interesting one, but I’m not convinced.

What I am fairly sure about is that people usually manage to make things worse. Much like the internet they are an amplifier that has a tendency to amplify bad things more and more often than good things.

So, as usual it’s much more complicated than there being just one cause with one effect ( which is what people like and generally simplify things to ) People also have a ridiculously short attention span. So in the grand scheme of things we are probably on a cycle of planetary warming ……..or possibly we are heading for another ice age after the warming shuts down the North Atlantic drift, I don’t know. I am fairly sure that the planet and the atmosphere is (gradually) changing as it always has, I’m also fairly sure that whatever people are doing will make it worse……..for people. The planet, however doesn’t care, it will be fine and has a much longer attention span than we do.