Resend my activation email : Register : Log in 
BCF: Bike Chat Forums


5th Gears answer to new vehicle taxes, buy a bike...

Reply to topic
Bike Chat Forums Index -> General Bike Chat
View previous topic : View next topic  
Author Message

Psychonaut
Spanner Monkey



Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 08:49 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: 5th Gears answer to new vehicle taxes, buy a bike... Reply with quote

Monday 1st Sept episode highlighted the rise in car tax next year, a £240 s2000 owner will be paying around £420 for 1 years tax, even some VW golfs fall into that high tax bracket. The first dodge was to buy a bike instead, they had a GSXR1000 and said the highest bike tax is £60, I was ssssssshushing the TV, don't tell everyone Laughing or get an old car (they had a 2001 Ferrari that could be taxed for £180 odd)


So how long before the Gov't catch on and get us bikers then? no emissions tax for bikes YET. Will the general public let this new way of scamming us slide as usual, probably ! makes me Evil or Very Mad just their way of making a lot of extra cash and force poorer people off the road.
____________________
Prev CBR600RR (06) Orange/Black
CBR1000RR (09) Repsol
Now Ducati 1199 Panigale
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

MarJay
But it's British!



Joined: 15 Sep 2003
Karma :

PostPosted: 09:51 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Re: 5th Gears answer to new vehicle taxes, buy a bike... Reply with quote

Psychonaut wrote:
Monday 1st Sept episode highlighted the rise in car tax next year, a £240 s2000 owner will be paying around £420 for 1 years tax, even some VW golfs fall into that high tax bracket. The first dodge was to buy a bike instead, they had a GSXR1000 and said the highest bike tax is £60, I was ssssssshushing the TV, don't tell everyone Laughing or get an old car (they had a 2001 Ferrari that could be taxed for £180 odd)


So how long before the Gov't catch on and get us bikers then? no emissions tax for bikes YET. Will the general public let this new way of scamming us slide as usual, probably ! makes me Evil or Very Mad just their way of making a lot of extra cash and force poorer people off the road.


The road tax on a GSXR1000 is more than £60. IIRC its £120.
____________________
British beauty: Triumph Street Triple R; Loony stroker: KR1S; Track fun: GSXR750 L1; Commuter Missile: GSX-S1000F; Cheap project: CBR900RR FireBlade
Remember kids, bikes aren't like lego. You can't easily take a part from one bike and then fit it to another.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Greenychris
Nova Slayer



Joined: 01 Mar 2008
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:03 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

If the government catch on then all we have to do is get everyone not to buy tax. They can't punish us all! Cool
____________________
Bike: Honda CB 400. Car: Pug 306 HDI.
'Car is for traveling somewhere in particular because you have to, Bike is for traveling nowhere in particular because you want to.' -skluff
RGE, Ride in peace.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Psychonaut
Spanner Monkey



Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:05 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

MarJay wrote:


The road tax on a GSXR1000 is more than £60. IIRC its £120.


https://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_10012524
£66 to be precise


Motorcycle (with or without a sidecar) (TC17)

Engine size (cc)

Not over 150
£15.00

151-400
£33.00

401-600
£48.00

Over 600
£66.00
____________________
Prev CBR600RR (06) Orange/Black
CBR1000RR (09) Repsol
Now Ducati 1199 Panigale
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Bendy
Mrs Sensible



Joined: 10 Jun 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:11 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Re: 5th Gears answer to new vehicle taxes, buy a bike... Reply with quote

Psychonaut wrote:

So how long before the Gov't catch on and get us bikers then? no emissions tax for bikes YET.


I got the V5 through for my new bike t'other day and noticed that for the first time (of any bikes I've owned, '02 being the newest) the emissions and sound level bits of the V5 are filled in.

So I wouldn't be terribly surprised if it happens sometime soon.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:26 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Hi

Think they have already brought something similar in in Spain.

I would strongly suspect that, should the government continue with electoral suicide by massively increasing car taxes, that the older cars which currently have the lower tax brackets will be severly hammered. Possibly by putting up more tax groups based on engine capacity for them or possibly just ramping them through the roof on the basis that older car = higher emissions.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

iooi
Super Spammer



Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:32 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Even more upsetting is the fact that many cars are actually now less to tax than a 600.......

Plenty of them now come in with £35 RFT......

Don't make sense. RFT should be based on the wear placed on the road, hence why a HGV pays a high fee.
So cars should be double what a bike is. Thumbs Up
____________________
Just because my bike was A DIVVY, does not mean i am......
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 10:38 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

iooi wrote:
Don't make sense. RFT should be based on the wear placed on the road, hence why a HGV pays a high fee.


Possibly, but the main cause of wear is the miles done, and VED does not relate to mileage at all.

The other excuse for VED is taxing CO2 emissions. That could be taxed directly by a tax on the fuel. To me this seems to be the best solution (and if that was seen as unfair on the haulage industry then instead put a higher rate of VAT on fuel and allow the haulage industry to claim VAT on fuel back).

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

aaronb74
Crazy Courier



Joined: 05 Aug 2008
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:01 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart wrote:
Hi

Think they have already brought something similar in in Spain.

I would strongly suspect that, should the government continue with electoral suicide by massively increasing car taxes, that the older cars which currently have the lower tax brackets will be severly hammered. Possibly by putting up more tax groups based on engine capacity for them or possibly just ramping them through the roof on the basis that older car = higher emissions.

All the best

Keith


TBH I can't see them changing it for older cars as one of their main reasons for doing so is to discourage people from buying high polluting cars. It seems there has already been outrage on changing the tax for cars retrospectively as it means people are going to be punished more for having already bought cars which, at the time weren't taxed as badly. People with pre-2001 cars (myself included - 2.8 BMW Very Happy) may not be able to afford to go out and buy a new BlueMotion Polo or something, or in some cases maybe can't even afford to pay higher tax than what they are paying now.

With regards to bikes being taxed on emissions, didn't I read somewhere that pretty much all bikes' emissions are of the levels that, if they were cars, would be 0-tax rated?
____________________
Current bike - 2006 ZX6R
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:23 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

aaronb74 wrote:
People with pre-2001 cars (myself included - 2.8 BMW Very Happy) may not be able to afford to go out and buy a new BlueMotion Polo or something, or in some cases maybe can't even afford to pay higher tax than what they are paying now.


Hasn't stopped them hammering the post 2001 cars (hence my comment on electoral suicide). And imagine the pressure they will get from the greens when they realise that there are people with 2.8L twin turbo cars without cats managing about 20mpg paying a tiny amount of the tax that someone would with a modern and far cleaner car would with the same fuel consumption.

aaronb74 wrote:
With regards to bikes being taxed on emissions, didn't I read somewhere that pretty much all bikes' emissions are of the levels that, if they were cars, would be 0-tax rated?


It depends on how they are measured to be honest. And not sure anyone could come up with a measuring regime that would accuratly reflect the difference. Especially when in some European countries it is not legal to filter while in others it is hence dramatically different comparative speeds between bikes and cars in those countries.

For example, here are the 2010/11 car VED bands with the petrol fuel consumption to go with them (based on 1L of petrol generates 2.5kg of CO2):-

Band A (up to 100g/km CO2) no fee = better than 70.9mpg
Band B (101-110g/km CO2) £20 = 70.2 - 64.5mpg
Band C (111-120g/km CO2) £35 = 64mpg - 59mpg
Band D (121-130g/km CO2) £95 = 58.6mpg - 54.6mpg
Band E (131-140g/km CO2) £115 = 54.2mpg - 50.7mpg
Band F (141- 150g/km CO2)£125 = 50.3mpg - 47.3mpg
Band G (151 to 160g/km CO2) £155 = 47mpg - 44mpg
Band H (161 to 170g/km CO2) £180 = 44mpg - 41.7mpg
Band I (171 to 180g/km CO2) £210 = 41.5mpg - 39.4mpg
Band J (181 to 200g/km CO2) £270 = 39.2mpg - 35.5mpg
Band K (201 to 225g/km CO2) £310 = 35.3mpg - 31.5mpg
Band L (226 to 255g/km CO2) £430 = 31.4mpg - 27.8mpg
Band M (Over 255g/km CO2) £455 = Worse than 27.7mpg

Typical bike mpg seems to be about 45mpg, which puts them into the £155 a year bracket (although these are test mpgs, rather than anything real).

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Itchy
Super Spammer



Joined: 07 Apr 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 11:59 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Which also completely forgets that a massive amount of pollution is caused in the manufacture and destruction of vehicles...

So sure I may want to buy a Kia Picanto @ 114gc02km and scrap my old Mazda which is something like 160C02gkm.


Butthe manufacture of the Kia requires energy / steel and all sorts of bits , meaning I will have to drive the Kia to the moon and back regularly to save the environment.


its like Smug prius buyers or solar panel types who conveintly forget that the manufacture of such items requires masses of energy too and the more complicated it is = more energy..

Ie the batteries and extra leccy motors and extra weight of these make a difference.
____________________
Spain 2008France 2007Big one 2009 We all die. The goal isn't to live forever, the goal is to create something that will. In the end, your life will flash before your eyes. Make sure it is worth watching.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

chris-red
Have you considered a TDM?



Joined: 21 Sep 2005
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:18 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart wrote:
aaronb74 wrote:
People with pre-2001 cars (myself included - 2.8 BMW Very Happy) may not be able to afford to go out and buy a new BlueMotion Polo or something, or in some cases maybe can't even afford to pay higher tax than what they are paying now.


Hasn't stopped them hammering the post 2001 cars (hence my comment on electoral suicide). And imagine the pressure they will get from the greens when they realise that there are people with 2.8L twin turbo cars without cats managing about 20mpg paying a tiny amount of the tax that someone would with a modern and far cleaner car would with the same fuel consumption.

aaronb74 wrote:
With regards to bikes being taxed on emissions, didn't I read somewhere that pretty much all bikes' emissions are of the levels that, if they were cars, would be 0-tax rated?


It depends on how they are measured to be honest. And not sure anyone could come up with a measuring regime that would accuratly reflect the difference. Especially when in some European countries it is not legal to filter while in others it is hence dramatically different comparative speeds between bikes and cars in those countries.

For example, here are the 2010/11 car VED bands with the petrol fuel consumption to go with them (based on 1L of petrol generates 2.5kg of CO2):-

Band A (up to 100g/km CO2) no fee = better than 70.9mpg
Band B (101-110g/km CO2) £20 = 70.2 - 64.5mpg
Band C (111-120g/km CO2) £35 = 64mpg - 59mpg
Band D (121-130g/km CO2) £95 = 58.6mpg - 54.6mpg
Band E (131-140g/km CO2) £115 = 54.2mpg - 50.7mpg
Band F (141- 150g/km CO2)£125 = 50.3mpg - 47.3mpg
Band G (151 to 160g/km CO2) £155 = 47mpg - 44mpg
Band H (161 to 170g/km CO2) £180 = 44mpg - 41.7mpg
Band I (171 to 180g/km CO2) £210 = 41.5mpg - 39.4mpg
Band J (181 to 200g/km CO2) £270 = 39.2mpg - 35.5mpg
Band K (201 to 225g/km CO2) £310 = 35.3mpg - 31.5mpg
Band L (226 to 255g/km CO2) £430 = 31.4mpg - 27.8mpg
Band M (Over 255g/km CO2) £455 = Worse than 27.7mpg

Typical bike mpg seems to be about 45mpg, which puts them into the £155 a year bracket (although these are test mpgs, rather than anything real).

All the best

Keith


Why bother? Wack it all on fuel and do away with road tax, therefore the people paying most tax will be the ones using most fuel. See it is simple.
____________________
Well, you know what they say. If you want to save the world, you have to push a few old ladies down the stairs.
Skudd:- Perhaps she just thinks you are a window licker and is being nice just in case she becomes another Jill Dando.
WANTED:- Fujinon (Fuji) M42 (Screw on) lenses, let me know if you have anything.
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

aaronb74
Crazy Courier



Joined: 05 Aug 2008
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:26 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart wrote:
aaronb74 wrote:
People with pre-2001 cars (myself included - 2.8 BMW Very Happy) may not be able to afford to go out and buy a new BlueMotion Polo or something, or in some cases maybe can't even afford to pay higher tax than what they are paying now.


Hasn't stopped them hammering the post 2001 cars (hence my comment on electoral suicide). And imagine the pressure they will get from the greens when they realise that there are people with 2.8L twin turbo cars without cats managing about 20mpg paying a tiny amount of the tax that someone would with a modern and far cleaner car would with the same fuel consumption.


The thing is though, as time goes on there will be less and less pre-2001 cars on the road, so it may not even be worth the hassle to the government of changing the bandings for older cars. As I said, I have a 2.8 BMW which, considering the engine size and the fact that it was built when CO2 emissions weren't a particularly big issue, would probably be in quite a high band. The thing is, I only paid £900 for the car and to be perfectly honest, I probably couldn't afford to shell out £440 a year to tax it on top of everything else. At the same time, I can't afford to go and buy a new car that pollutes less. Had I known, however, that I may be faced with such a ridiculous hike in rates, I probably would've bought something completely different at the time. Why should I be punished for something that wasn't an issue when I bought the car?

I'm not saying all old cars are owned by poor people but, like the 10p income tax fiasco, re-banding older cars would hit those with the least ability to pay the higher rates or change their car to avoid them. Eventually those cars will disappear anyway so might as well leave them as they are. If we go back further, what about the even older high polluting cars without cats which are tax exempt?
____________________
Current bike - 2006 ZX6R
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:29 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

chris-red wrote:
Why bother? Wack it all on fuel and do away with road tax, therefore the people paying most tax will be the ones using most fuel. See it is simple.


I 100% agree. Only trouble is that UK fuel is already hideously expensive compared to other countries and the fuel strikes frightened the government so they don't dare add more tax onto fuel.

An extra plus is that by doing away with VED you could do away with a large part of the DVLA. The DVLA costs the country ~£500m a year to run (not counting all the wasted money in chasing up SORN notices and fining people). If you could save half of that it would be a nice benefit.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:33 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

aaronb74 wrote:
Why should I be punished for something that wasn't an issue when I bought the car?


No reason, but the same applies to those being hammered with post 2001 cars. Personally I see no reason for the hideous taxes, but I also see nothing that would stop the government gourging themselves on taxes another group of road users.

aaronb74 wrote:
If we go back further, what about the even older high polluting cars without cats which are tax exempt?


Quite. Suspect they might well be hit. The rolling 25 year exemption ended. And they could argue that those with older "classic" cars are rich enough to pay it.

While I agree with you logically, I also do not trust the government to behave logically on this. What I expect them to do is whatever they can spin things to support.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

iooi
Super Spammer



Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:42 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart.

I fully agree that RFT should be scapped and the duty placed on fuel. So in effect the more you use the more you pay.

But he's a bit of history for you.

This idea has been going on since way back into the 1970's and one of the biggest anti this idea was the BMF and other biker groups.

Why, because who would have been the biggest losers in this....

Your average biker does more miles per year than a average car driver, pays less RFT (well in many cases) and many bikes now runs as near to the same mpg as cars.

Will never happen, the goverment can't do away with the DVLA and needs the money to fund it.
____________________
Just because my bike was A DIVVY, does not mean i am......
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 12:48 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

iooi wrote:
This idea has been going on since way back into the 1970's and one of the biggest anti this idea was the BMF and other biker groups.


I know and I never understood why. Given that bikes are better on fuel and generally do a lot less miles per year.

iooi wrote:
Will never happen, the goverment can't do away with the DVLA and needs the money to fund it.


Can't do away with all of it, but can do away with the large wasted chunk that deals with VED / SORN. And the money to replace it would come from petrol.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

iooi
Super Spammer



Joined: 14 Jan 2007
Karma :

PostPosted: 13:35 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart wrote:
I know and I never understood why. Given that bikes are better on fuel and generally do a lot less miles per year.
Can't do away with all of it, but can do away with the large wasted chunk that deals with VED / SORN. And the money to replace it would come from petrol.

All the best

Keith


Back in the 70's we did a lot more miles. I used to average 50 a day, over a year.
I would have been well out of packet. RFT was like £5 for a 250 and they were talking about 20p a gall.
So over the year you would have been well out of pocket. If you averaged 40 mpg and did 20K a year you were looking at something around £100 a year extra....
Now that was 5 weeks wages back then when i started work.....

Now you can understand why.

Even now i bet many of us do more on a bike than in a car.


Like many things people like to be better off.
So take all these people who have now bought cars at the £35 a year RFT band. How will they feel if its dropped and 20p a ltr is added to fuel... To cover it....

Up in arms for sure and not voting for the Gov that brings it in.
____________________
Just because my bike was A DIVVY, does not mean i am......
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

ajb
Crazy Courier



Joined: 14 May 2008
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:29 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

I don't think my council is alone in promoting powered two wheelers as congestion AND pollution reducing alternatives to cars.

Therefore, if the government are piping the same tune (now I say it, it's probably not very likely lol) you would expect bikes to remain comparitively lower in tax than equivelent cars...

*expect = hope
____________________
CBR125R '05 > CB500 '00 > CBR600F '99
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Visit poster's website You must be logged in to rate posts

freestyler_onli
World Chat Champion



Joined: 08 Nov 2004
Karma :

PostPosted: 17:56 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

My GSXR1000 tax was £64. Cool
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts

Phil_G
Traffic Copper



Joined: 28 Mar 2006
Karma :

PostPosted: 18:25 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Kickstart wrote:
(and if that was seen as unfair on the haulage industry then instead put a higher rate of VAT on fuel and allow the haulage industry to claim VAT on fuel back).

All the best

Keith


I know I can claim the V.A.T back on the diesel for my works van at present, so I see no reason as to why a haulier couldnt get the vat on their fuel back either...
____________________
1997 Kawasaki ER 500 A1:- Once again, Its merely crap Smile
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message You must be logged in to rate posts

Kickstart
The Oracle



Joined: 04 Feb 2002
Karma :

PostPosted: 20:03 - 02 Sep 2008    Post subject: Reply with quote

Phil_G wrote:
I know I can claim the V.A.T back on the diesel for my works van at present, so I see no reason as to why a haulier couldnt get the vat on their fuel back either...


I know there are a few odd rules on VAT for cars. Point was that if they put the VAT rate on fuel was put up to (say) 20% and fuel duty went up 2p a litre, and VED was eliminated. This would (rough figures) work out that the average driver would be no worse off, while those doing less miles would be better off and those doing more miles would be worse off. Basically taxing the CO2 produced (for those who care about it). Just adding to the fuel duty would hit the haulage industry, but spliiting the increase between VAT and VED would mean they could claim the VAT back and again be no worse off.

All the best

Keith
____________________
Traxpics, track day and racing photographs - Bimota Forum - Bike performance / thrust graphs for choosing gearing
 Back to top
View user's profile Send private message Send e-mail You must be logged in to rate posts
Old Thread Alert!

The last post was made 18 years, 52 days ago. Instead of replying here, would creating a new thread be more useful?
  Display posts from previous:   
This page may contain affiliate links, which means we may earn a small commission if a visitor clicks through and makes a purchase. By clicking on an affiliate link, you accept that third-party cookies will be set.

Post new topic   Reply to topic    Bike Chat Forums Index -> General Bike Chat All times are GMT + 1 Hour
Page 1 of 1

 
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

Read the Terms of Use! - Powered by phpBB © phpBB Group
 

Debug Mode: ON - Server: birks (www) - Page Generation Time: 0.18 Sec - Server Load: 0.2 - MySQL Queries: 13 - Page Size: 136.29 Kb