Hypothecated VED?

User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Road Tax

Post by Mick F »

It seems like the old Road Fund is going to be resurrected. :oops:

Mrs Osborne's little boy has been standing up in the Commons and stated that the Road Fund is to be brought back, and taxation raised from cars will pay for the roads.

Major reform to vehicle excise duties to pay for a new road-building and maintenance fund in England
Mick F. Cornwall
Braveheart
Posts: 82
Joined: 28 Oct 2009, 12:45pm
Location: West Sussex

George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by Braveheart »

Quickly summarised

"Major reform in Vehicle Excise Duties to pay for a new road building and maintainance fund"
..... they may take our lives.... but they'll never take our FREEDOM!!
Mark1978
Posts: 4912
Joined: 17 Jul 2012, 8:47am
Location: Chester-le-Street, County Durham

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by Mark1978 »

Announced that revenues from VED will now be put into a 'road fund' to pay for the roads.

So the usual cry of "you don't pay road tax" will only get louder and more angry. Not good, not good at all.
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by beardy »

The democratically elected government is just doing the sort of thing that sort of government does.
It would have been a surprise if the Greens came out with such an idea.

It is just making official what has been defacto until now. Cars own the roads and peds, horses and cyclists are irrelevant*.


*Is this still an "in" buzz word amongst the powers that be?
iviehoff
Posts: 2411
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 4:38pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by iviehoff »

beardy wrote:The democratically elected government is just doing the sort of thing that sort of government does.

It is a shame so few people noticed in how many important areas the coalition partner in the previous government had been a restraint to that sort of government doing that sort of thing, focusing instead on some areas where they had been unable to achieve restraint.
stewartpratt
Posts: 2566
Joined: 27 Dec 2007, 5:12pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by stewartpratt »

It's worth pointing out that VED revenue was almost exactly the same as the cost of what it's now hypothecated for.

And that the remainder of all motoring tax revenues is almost exactly the same as the public sector cost of clearing up road collisions.

So drivers pay for the roads where cycling has long been prevented, whether by statute or by sheer traffic terrorism, and they pay for the cost of clearing away bodies and debris.

But all the tarmac that anyone's remotely likely to cycle on are still paid for by local taxation, which people without cars pay for just as much as do those with. (Never mind the fact that the rate of car ownership is marginally higher among those who regularly cycle than those who do not.)

Of course, idiots and right-wing media and the professional trolls it employs will say that drivers pay for the roads, but they have always said this and even now they will be no more correct than they ever have been. Private motoring remains a heavily subsidised mode of transport.
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by 661-Pete »

iviehoff wrote:It is a shame so few people noticed in how many important areas the coalition partner in the previous government had been a restraint to that sort of government doing that sort of thing, focusing instead on some areas where they had been unable to achieve restraint.

Maybe you have a point there - time to stop haranguing the 'Condems' (or 'Loberal Dimocrats' as I preferred to name them) and restore their proper designation. They've surely been punished enough! The ex-MP of the constituency next to mine, Norman Baker (unseated by a Tory, of course) was by all accounts a fairly decent guy - though I robustly disagreed with some of his utterances - and he was certainly strong on transport/environment issues. After the election he announced he was retiring from politics. Will he reconsider, I wonder? I would be happy to see him back in in 2020 - if I live that long!
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by 661-Pete »

One thing it will certainly lead to, this change: whole forests' worth of extra paperwork. At least it will provide work for all those civil servants the Gov probably wanted to sack anyway....
Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
User avatar
661-Pete
Posts: 10593
Joined: 22 Nov 2012, 8:45pm
Location: Sussex

Re: Road Tax

Post by 661-Pete »

Suppose that this room is a lift. The support breaks and down we go with ever-increasing velocity.
Let us pass the time by performing physical experiments...
--- Arthur Eddington (creator of the Eddington Number).
beardy
Posts: 3382
Joined: 23 Feb 2010, 4:10pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by beardy »

I guess the point of a name change is that once it is for roads instead of environment, you can then remove all those pricing bands based on emissions and charge new ones which reflect that a Prius uses as much road as a Porsche.
delap
Posts: 38
Joined: 26 Nov 2012, 4:40pm

Hypothecated VED?

Post by delap »

A whole new angle to the tired old online arguments?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-33447106

Discuss
User avatar
Mick F
Spambuster
Posts: 56359
Joined: 7 Jan 2007, 11:24am
Location: Tamar Valley, Cornwall

Re: Road Tax

Post by Mick F »

Yeah, but I got there first. :lol:
Mick F. Cornwall
iviehoff
Posts: 2411
Joined: 20 Jan 2009, 4:38pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by iviehoff »

beardy wrote:I guess the point of a name change is that once it is for roads instead of environment, you can then remove all those pricing bands based on emissions and charge new ones which reflect that a Prius uses as much road as a Porsche.

According to the Beeb, VED will still be banded on emissions, but since 95% of cars will pay £140 it may as well not be.

As someone pointed out, though not very obviously, there are separate budgets (at least in England) for trunk roads (Highways England) - which far from being all A-roads - and the rest, being much the greater part of roads, which are funded by local authorities (county or unitary level). Is this road fund going to be for trunk roads only? I can't see an answer.

It's a bit of a retrograde step. Generally road funds are urged on developing countries to try and get them to spend enough on roads. As countries mature, they usually become able to fund roads from central funds without the risk of spending too much on something else, and thus the restraints of hypothecation become less necessary.
MikeF
Posts: 4339
Joined: 11 Nov 2012, 9:24am
Location: On the borders of the four South East Counties

Re: Hypothecated VED?

Post by MikeF »

The bad news is that I'm sure he said VED would provide all road funding. I listened to his speech but that fact isn't reported in BBC News.
Motorists will claim with justification that cyclists don't pay "road tax" :( - unless they have a car as well.

Edit - Found it. https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/chancellor-george-osbornes-summer-budget-2015-speech

"In total we’ll only raise the same amount of revenue from VED in the future that we do today – but that revenue will be secure for the long term.

And I will return this tax to the use for which it was originally intended.

I am creating a new Roads Fund.

From the end of this decade, every single penny raised in Vehicle Excise Duty in England will go into that Fund to pay for the sustained investment our roads so badly need."


Maybe it won't provide all road funding, but motorists will ignore that!
"It takes a genius to spot the obvious" - my old physics master.
I don't peddle bikes.
Psamathe
Posts: 17650
Joined: 10 Jan 2014, 8:56pm

Re: George Osbornes budget 2015 - Nooooooooo

Post by Psamathe »

If VED is staying (pretty much) the same, if road building is continuing as per existing plans then seems nothing more than "sound and fury, signifying nothing". Government income same, road building expenditure same - basically VED goes into one pot and money then used towards road building whereas previously VED went into a different pot some of which went to road building.

But if it's an excuse to increase VED then far more honest to just say "we are going to increase VED" rather than dress it up with some internal irrelevant accounting changes to make it look like something important is happening.

But I agree about motor vehicle drivers being "you don't pay road tax" - though I think it is few who hold that opinion and most cyclists have the response "but I actually do (for my car(s))". So, my initial thoughts are it is just poor Gideon trying to make it look like he's doing something without actually doing anything (not the fizziest drink in the fridge our Gideon).

Ian
Post Reply