Budget changes - impact on EVs?

[nowty]

Don't forget the compulsory smart meter on EV chargers ........... that's where tax generation and charging control will come from .......
George

Not on my 8kW commando socket dumb one it won't.

[marshman]

__

[ecogeorge]

Maybe a mileage charge calculated at every MOT..???
George

[Krill]

Prove that the mileage has been on UK roads, no MoTs for 3 years...just put the tax on tires and brakes!

[Oldgreybeard]

The thing that really bugs me is that VED collects many times more revenue than the government spends on roads or transport infrastructure, has done ever since they got rid of road tax way back in 1936. Road tax (a.k.a. the Road Fund Licence) was abolished because even more than 80 years ago it was generating more revenue than was being spent, so the government decided to remove the hypothecation so they could get their hands on the piggy bank sitting in the road fund.

Taxing fuel as well as taxing cars for being on the road seems inherently unfair, particular for those in rural areas where there is sparse or non-existent public transport, so even people that cannot really afford to run a car have to give up other things just to do basic things, like get their kids to school, or buy food.

Both VED and fuel duty are unfair taxes, as neither follows the sound basic principle espoused by Marx "From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" (and no, I'm not a communist).

[spread-tee]

To VED or not to VED? all irrelevant scratching around at the margins really, I see no investment for the future of any note, A couple of hundred billion spent on decent health, energy and transport infrastructure would have done the economy a power of good..............but no

Desp

[Mart]

It's a shame that incentives for BEV's are being reduced, especially as the growth (as a %age) of BEV's in Europe has fallen behind that of China and the US. But I suppose they have to make their money somewhere.

VED has little to nothing to do with roads anymore, if it did cars would pay next to nothing and trucks would pay an absolute fortune, passed on to us via higher cost of goods.

Compare a heavy car at around 2tonnes running on 4 tyres at around 40psi, to a 44tonne truck running on 14 or 16 tyres, with the 6 rear supersingles at around 130psi. Actual road damage tends to be from the harder impact of harder tyres, bearing greater weight. Damage often occurrs a metre or two after a small dip or lump, as the weight of the truck pounds down.

Forgotten the exact number, but I think truck damage is around 5,000x greater than that from cars.

Similar argument for bikes and scooters on local raods (not designed for regular HGV use), as they do no damage whatsoever. Very environmental, so long as you don't take on an artic, as I once did. Ouch!

Not picking on trucks, they do an essential job, and we have to pay for them one way or another, but VED for road cost (wear and tear), rather than road use, is mostly a farce now.

[Oldgreybeard]

Yes VED ceased to have anything to do with roads and funding them in 1936. It's been a "luxury goods tax" and a part of general taxation ever since then and generates a great deal more revenue than is ever spent on roads or associated infrastructure. It's in the same classification as the duty payable on other items deemed non-essential, like alcohol and tobacco. The thinking when "road tax" was abolished all those years ago was that cars were luxury items, only owned by those that could afford them, and I think that was probably right for the time.

Car ownership didn't become very widespread until the 1950's and 60's, pre-war the vast majority of people walked, rode bikes or used public transport. For example, in 1936, when "road tax" was abolished, there were around 3 million cars on UK roads, in 1971 the number of cars in the UK reached 10 million, and today there are around 33 million. In 1936 road tax (a.k.a. the Road Fund Licence) was already raking in far more money than it cost to build and maintain the UK's roads. Although road building and maintenance costs have risen a great deal since then, the revenue from VED has risen a great deal more.

It's interesting that people still make some sort of false connection between the money for building and maintaining roads and the revenue from VED. Often seems to come up in relation to cycling, with the oft-heard, and obviously false, comment from some motorists that cyclists have no right to use roads as they don't pay for them. It's a bit like saying that someone that's teetotal, or who doesn't smoke, shouldn't have access to any other government funded service or facility, as they don't pay the duty levied on alcohol or tobacco.

The alternative to not having VED would be to increase other forms of taxation, as ultimately the government wants to raise enough money to do what it thinks needs to be done. With around half the population having cars, and around half the population in work, there is a fairly strong argument to just abolish VED and increase income tax to cover the loss in revenue. To my mind that would be a lot fairer, as income tax depends on earnings, whereas VED doesn't.

[Countrypaul]

Looking at the OBR information it appears VED only raises about £7.2B, with road spending around £12B, but fuel tax raises nearly £30B.
There being about 33million cars and 1/2 million HGVs

[Burble61]

MM, there are NOW, but even as recenly as late 2020 thebev market choice was a lot smaller & potential range limited, as well as naff all known by the staff manning the places selling "one" ev within their massive range.

Exactly how we ended up getting the lowest model with a single motor, smaller battery & less range

(as discussed here before)

The least SUV type bev that had better aerodynamics & technically eked out more range, often for not much more than the bev they were ignoring & were ignorant of.

Necessity not fan boi -ism's

Thats how we chose ours / driven into the arms of tesla by feckless "competitors"

Not sure of your point? I never mentioned Teslas in my post. I was just saying that if you can afford £40k for a car (and by that I mean any car EV or ICE) then you can afford the extra VED. It only applies to new purchases from 2025 and is not retrospective. So at that point I would assume there will be plenty of sub £40k choices - inflation allowing

Ah yes, theres the rub. Given the inflation in the component supply chain, a couple of years of inflation and many smaller EV's are going to get closer to that limit. An "Expensive Car VED Premium" feels very different when all cars (well the ones that are available) are expensive.

Reckon that £40K threshold will get increased with inflation? "Fiscal Drag" - its the in thing I hear!