T.R | Title | User | Personal Name | Date | Lines |
---|
953.1 | | CURRNT::SAXBY | Digital? Yeah I worked there ONCE! | Tue Feb 06 1990 20:57 | 12 |
|
Taken in order
1. Sounds very likely, and ok by me.
2. Less likely, but a good idea.
3. Certain!
4. Not in a million years! Imagine the inflationary effect!
Mark
|
953.2 | Taxing question | CURRNT::JENKINS_R | Undone, Underdone or Overdone? | Tue Feb 06 1990 21:05 | 31 |
953.3 | | SAC::PHILPOTT_I | Col I F 'Tsingtao Dhum' Philpott | Wed Feb 07 1990 12:15 | 9 |
|
I'm told that switching money from road fund licence to petrol excise duty
is not inflationary (since the road fund licence is included in the index, and
apparantely petrol isn't directly).
Further by putting the bulk (or all) of the increase on petrol (not diesel) it
might even reduce inflation (since most delivery trucks and vans are diesels).
/. Ian .\
|
953.4 | Not everyone works for Digital! | ANNECY::PARKER | | Wed Feb 07 1990 13:48 | 11 |
|
Problem with both 1. and 4. is that they hit the low income groups,
pensioners etc.
Its OK for us with Company cars and reasonable salaries in hi-tech
jobs but if you implement 1. you hit people who dont have the very
latest car which runs unleaded and if you implement 4. you hit them
again (200 quid road fund license would force these people off the
roads). I'm all in favour of a 'green' budget but we should be
careful of how it is applied.
Dave
|
953.5 | what low income group? | WOTVAX::ANDERSONE | its going to happen in kololi | Wed Feb 07 1990 15:44 | 14 |
| re .4
Come come.... I drive over 3000mls a year and pay 100 quid for road
licence. The wife drives less than 10k mls and pays the same. I think
my 'damage' to road is more than hers, so I should pay more thro' the
gas i use. maybe the govt might even have more money to invest in
roads. I can here you all shouting 'how about a decent public
transport?' thats a different topic.
Anyway who exactly is a 'low income group'? If they fall into this
group should they be able to afford cars in the first place? I think
this is just a 'statistical group' which unions use to get bash govt
and get inflationary pay with, but then thats another story.
eddie
|
953.6 | gloom | THATIS::LINDLEY | Strewth mate..... | Wed Feb 07 1990 15:45 | 14 |
| Raising the price of petrol is inflationary. The chancellor is scared
of inflation. Any rise will be small.
Raising the tax on company cars is inflationary. It encourages
employers to give higher wages to employees to compensate, or to give
much higher wages to replace company cars. I bet this wont stop him
from raising the tax by 20-50% however...
The chancellor already raises more money by taxation than he knows what
to do with - he cant spend any of it, cos its inflationary.
John
|
953.7 | The rumour mill is grinding... | JANUS::BARKER | Jeremy Barker - Reading, England | Wed Feb 07 1990 15:49 | 29 |
953.8 | | CURRNT::SAXBY | Digital? Yeah I worked there ONCE! | Wed Feb 07 1990 15:57 | 10 |
|
Yeah, punish all the people with big engined cars!
I'll be quite happy with a reduction in the tax on my 1397cc car
, thank you!
Mark
PS I suspect that a 3-5p increase in tax on leaded petrol is more
likely than 10p too.
|
953.9 | 18 wheels on my wagon and I'm still strolling along | COMICS::HWILLIAMS | | Wed Feb 07 1990 16:10 | 9 |
| How's about extracting more money from the haulage firms?
I remember reading somewhere that one 38 ton truck does about the same
amount of damage to the roads as about 300-400 cars.
Anyway, what percenatge of the road fund tax actually gets spent on
road repairs/improvements????
Huw.
|
953.10 | Not a lot ! | IJSAPL::CAMERON | Studying fluid dynamics, from a stein | Wed Feb 07 1990 16:30 | 8 |
| > Anyway, what percenatge of the road fund tax actually gets spent on
> road repairs/improvements????
Oh no !, please not again, after double de-clutching this one
gets resurected as well :-}
Gordon
|
953.11 | Differentials where they achieve something! | NEARLY::GOODENOUGH | | Wed Feb 07 1990 17:07 | 13 |
| I use unleaded petrol only because it's cheaper than leaded. But it's
laughable how some people are so badly informed that they think
unleaded is somehow "greener". (In fact burning unleaded without a cat
releases more benzine, which is more carcinogenic, and hence more
dangerous). I also heard that unleaded uses more CFC's in its
manufacture, and definitely more energy, since more processes are
involved.
By all means slash the cost of motoring to those with catalytic
converters, but any further differential in leaded/unleaded would be
misplaced.
Jeff.
|
953.12 | Seems like my costs will stabilise! | BRIANH::NAYLOR | Purring on all 12 cylinders | Wed Feb 07 1990 18:25 | 4 |
| Let's see, unleaded is cheaper, tax on 5.3 litres goes up, net effect nil.
One happy motorist ..... except we run 5 cars in the family, and guess who gets
to pay all those road fund licences? Put it on the petrol!!
|
953.13 | Number of cars = too many! | IOSG::MITCHELL | Elaine | Wed Feb 07 1990 18:36 | 7 |
|
hear hear! (we're currently running too many cars too!)
How about a transferable tax disc? You would only need one per
'car-on-the-road' :-)
Elaine
|
953.14 | Try this rathole for size | TASTY::JEFFERY | Ring Carlsberg Customer Complaints Dept. | Wed Feb 07 1990 19:09 | 8 |
| re: .10
Yeah, let's tax double de-clutching as well!! ;-)
I'm reasonably happy with the company car tax, as long as they don't
tax on BHP!
Mark.
|
953.15 | | BRIANH::NAYLOR | Purring on all 12 cylinders | Wed Feb 07 1990 19:12 | 1 |
| That's OK, mine are measured in Kilowatts!
|
953.16 | Forgot to sell it at 3 years? | CURRNT::SAXBY | Digital? Yeah I worked there ONCE! | Wed Feb 07 1990 19:16 | 8 |
|
Is the E-Type a company car then Brian?
What's it cost on the lease scheme and more importantly...
What make are the mats!
Mark
|
953.17 | Another turn of the scrooge... | CURRNT::PREECE | Atonal apples and amplified heat... | Wed Feb 07 1990 20:01 | 14 |
|
Anybody see that suggestion in the paper the other day, that the
latest taxable goodie for the Co. Car driver will be parking spaces?
"If your company gives you a place to park your company car, it's
a perk, so let's tax it. Now, let's see, at London rates (and isn't
everything ?), a parking space is worth about the same as a small
house, so your taxable salary has just gone up by 150,000 pounds.
Cough up."
BTW, this was a relatively serious suggestion, from a tax specialist.
Then, of course, you're breathing the air over the motorway, so
that'll cost extra, too.
|
953.18 | If you take a walk ... | TASTY::JEFFERY | Ring Carlsberg Customer Complaints Dept. | Wed Feb 07 1990 20:35 | 5 |
| Yeah, I'd heard that one as well. Unbelievable! Especially with
Snamprogetti being so petty about the parking spaces. Hopefully they'll
tax spaces closer to the front door!
Mark.
|
953.19 | Won't be done | VOGON::KAPPLER | John Kappler | Wed Feb 07 1990 21:22 | 5 |
| Rathole warning......
The reason they won't do away with Road Fund licensing (whatever the
annual fee) is because it's a fundamental part of the registration
system, and the watchdog for the MOT. Money has little to do with it.
|
953.20 | 1 truck damage = 10000 car damage | SWEEP::GALVIN | Steven GALVIN @BST, DTN: 768-5291 :-) | Wed Feb 07 1990 21:41 | 9 |
| RE: .9
I can remember from my under-graduate days that we were told a truck does
approximately 10000 times the damage to our roads compared to a single car.
Regards
Steven
|
953.21 | | SWEEP::ALFORD | Fantasy is the reality of life... | Wed Feb 07 1990 21:52 | 3 |
|
there's probably an algorithm in there somewhere that explains why
trucks pay 4 times the private car tax...
|
953.22 | Business Mileage Changes | CURRNT::JENKINS_R | Undone, Underdone or Overdone? | Wed Feb 07 1990 22:27 | 29 |
|
Truck damage - arrgghh - I'd ban 'em. If it weren't for the lorries,
the roads would just about never wear out. At the moment they last
less than 15 yrs (1 yr if its the M25) not so :-).
Still , with the strength of the Road Transport lobby in the House of
Commons (for all political persuasions), I don't expect the
chancellor to do anything.
I've read suggestions that they might introduce another "mileage band"
in the company car scheme with an extra break at 10,000m, the new bands
being:
0 - 2,499; 2,499 - 9,999; 10,000 - 17,999; and 18,000 +.
Within these bands taxes would be increased
1.4 2.0 2.0+
0 - 2,499 + 100% of "norm" instead of +50% (2800/3700/5900)
2,499 - 9,999 + 30% of "norm" (1820/2450/3900)
10,000 - 17,999 no change (ie make this the norm (1400/1850/2950)
18,000 + no change (-50%)
Apparently some 70% of all company car owners fall into the 10,000+
business miles category and would not be affected by these changes.
R.
|
953.23 | No parking tax | VANDAL::BROWNM | | Thu Feb 08 1990 12:03 | 8 |
| In the last budget, the chancellor stated that he had abandoned taxation on
company provided parking.
The Inland Revenue were already taxing some people, in London I think.
I don't suppose John Major will hold to such promises however...
Mike.
|
953.24 | I meant THREE tier not two! | CURRNT::SAXBY | Digital? Yeah I worked there ONCE! | Thu Feb 08 1990 12:08 | 14 |
953.25 | Not that easy.... | IOSG::THOMPSONR | Great failures of our time No.10324 | Thu Feb 08 1990 14:11 | 8 |
| Re: .22
The only thing about truck's is that we depend on them for relatively cheap
transport of goods. If you start penalising them we end up paying more
for the goods in the shops. Looks like there's no escape - we all end
up paying for their damage whatever way you look at it..... :-{
-Ruth.
|
953.26 | And it's nicer driving with less trucks around ! | IJSAPL::CAMERON | Studying fluid dynamics, from a stein | Thu Feb 08 1990 14:32 | 24 |
|
Re. Trucks
Without wanting to open up a political rathole, well I can't really
help it on this issue ! One of major reasons there are so many trucks
on the roads today is because of the appalling rail system in the
UK. If some of the larger canals were also utilised for bulk transport
this would help as well.
I'm not bashing B.R, too much, on this point because they have'nt got
the kind of government funding that the French,Dutch and German railways
get from their respective governments.
In the above countries the number of HGV's is markedly less and roads
,in general, don't need repairing so often. I can't see the governments
stance on the railway system at all. The taxpayer is probably paying
as much , if not more, to support the amount of goods being transported
by road, rather than using government money to invest in the rail
network.
Well, nuff said !
Gordon
|
953.27 | I'll go back to EF90 in a minute :-) | RUTILE::GUEST | Drill... Drill... What Drill ? | Thu Feb 08 1990 16:02 | 10 |
| One of the reasons why there are less trucks on the Roads in France
in the Tolls imposed for EVERY journey. It then becomes cheaper
to send it by rail. (also the distances are larger).
But, Gordon, if i remember correctly, you are opposed to toll roads in
the UK.
Nigel
|
953.28 | Get back to EF90 at once ! | IJSAPL::CAMERON | Studying fluid dynamics, from a stein | Thu Feb 08 1990 16:21 | 9 |
|
You might remember correctly, I don't remember being opposed to
toll roads in the UK though, oh well. As long as they don't
introduce them in The Netherlands I'm not too bothered, as I only
visit the UK a couple of times a year with the car.
Gordon
|
953.29 | The E-type *IS* a company car | BRIANH::NAYLOR | Purring on all 12 cylinders | Thu Feb 08 1990 20:12 | 15 |
| And you should see the company I keep in the passenger seat! Plus, as far as
I'm concerned, it's still less than 3 years old (I bought it less than 3 years
ago that is!).
On the other hand, I am opposed to all and sundry getting "company" cars and
even when I was in field service support failed to see how I could really
justify receiving the payment for one as my annual mileage was so low. I took
the money of course as to try to not to would have messed up the system 8^).
As far as lease cars are concerned, they are a personal choice and a perk
which you are not forced to accept. I would never enter any lease scheme I've
ever seen as I have never been able to cost-justify doing so - except when
income tax rates were over 50%, in which case there was a definite cost break.
Brian
|
953.30 | Better infrastructure is needed | SWEEP::GALVIN | Steven GALVIN @BST, DTN: 768-5291 :-) | Fri Feb 09 1990 12:33 | 5 |
| We basically need a better infrastructure for our goods and our commuters.
A combination of rail and trucks for long and short journeys, and rail and
busses, etc for the commuters.
Steven
|
953.31 | but... | SHAPES::STREATFIELDC | Run a Beetle?..IOSG::AIR_COOLED | Fri Feb 09 1990 15:26 | 7 |
| I think you will find that the Police would not be too keen on
scrapping road-tax, as this is the only way ( be it not too effective)
that they can ensure that the car at least HAD an MOT when it applied
for the tax. This way, it is recognisable, and at least some of the
time the car is roadworthy.
Carl.
|
953.32 | Opt out ? Me ? Nah !! | WAR750::SMITHC | one careful owner, low mileage !! | Fri Feb 09 1990 15:32 | 19 |
| re:29
*Some* lease cars are not an option, they are mandatory. You have to
have a car, and cannot opt out of the scheme. Personally I don't mind,
but then my car only costs me tax plus what I choose to contribute
over-and-above the base supplement.
What will really dismay me is if the chancellor penalises me for having
a tool required for my job. It's certainly a personal benefit, and I
don't mind paying tax on it. But if the tax starts to cost more than
running my own car would, I'll be miffed. I support the idea of a
graduated scale based on mileages, but that should mean graduated and
NOT stepped, as suggested above.
Colin
Whoever you vote for, the government always gets in, and the chancellor
always gets your cash !!
|
953.33 | | ANNECY::MATTHEWS | M+M Enterprises. Thats the CATCH | Fri Feb 09 1990 16:06 | 8 |
|
re: .31
Why not just replace the road-tax disk with an MOT disk ... a bit
like the German system.
Mark
|
953.34 | | NSDC::SIMPSON | File Under Common Knowledge | Mon Feb 12 1990 15:05 | 4 |
| Or, have what the Swiss have - where the number plate belongs to YOU, not the
car. They know everything about you - state of insurance, whether you've paid
you're tax, whether car has been tested recently, whether its passed its annual
"breath test"..... - and the police are such a friendly bunch!
|
953.35 | The French have a way... | EVOAI1::HULLAH | Jacquie Hullah @EVO | Tue Feb 13 1990 13:19 | 25 |
953.36 | Yep, I vote for that! | CURRNT::SAXBY | Digital? Yeah I worked there ONCE! | Tue Feb 13 1990 13:22 | 4 |
|
Cars over 20 years old exempt? GREAT!
Mark
|
953.37 | | BRIANH::NAYLOR | Purring on all 12 cylinders | Tue Feb 13 1990 13:37 | 2 |
| Yeh, but not with big engines or foreign - so the "E" loses out on both counts!
But then who'd be daft enough to keep an "E" in Paris? Probably me!
|
953.38 | | UKCSSE::RDAVIES | Live long and prosper | Tue Mar 20 1990 19:42 | 27 |
| The story so far...........
BUDGET 90
1989 1990
MOTORING
/GAL 4* 1.89 +11.00
2* UNLEADED 1.79 +9.00
DIESEL 1.69 +9.00
ROAD FUND 100.00 100.00 no change
PERSONAL TAX +7.70%
SINGLE 2,785.00 3,005.00
MARRIED ADDIT'N 1,590.00 1,720.00
MORTGAGE 30,000.00 nothing yet
HIGHER TAX BAND 20,700.00 20,700.00
LOWER TAX RATE 25.00% 25.00%
HIGHER TAX RATE 40.00% 40.00%
COMPANY CAR TAX
THRESHOLDS INCREASE +20.00%
0-1400 1,400.00 1,680.00
1400-2000 1,850.00 2,220.00
2000- 2,950.00 3,540.00
3,850.00 4,620.00
Richard
|
953.39 | Ta Muchly | SHAPES::FIDDLERM | | Tue Mar 20 1990 19:50 | 7 |
| Thanks for that. Is there anyone who knows how to translate these into
hard cash terms? Like, the increase threshold for less than 1400cc,
what does that mean in pounds per month? Does it mean I shoiuld get
rid of my lease car?
Mikef
|
953.40 | The simple answer | UKCSSE::RDAVIES | Live long and prosper | Tue Mar 20 1990 20:00 | 4 |
| The figure given is taken AWAY from your tax allowance so for most
purposes you can say you'll pay 25% of that figure as tax.
Richard
|
953.41 | To get rid or not to get rid, that is the question | VOGON::BALL | ...a wafer thin mint? | Tue Mar 20 1990 20:06 | 12 |
953.42 | ta | SHAPES::FIDDLERM | | Tue Mar 20 1990 20:13 | 6 |
| So I used to pay 525 in tax per year, now I pay 630...which is 52.5 per
month as opposed to 43.75. Hmmm, 9 per month extra. ( sorry, can't
get my pound key to work). I dunno. I'll wait and see how much my new
quote is, sinc e my poor fiesta was destroyed in the Cres fire.
Mikef
|
953.43 | | CURRNT::CROUCH | mumble mumble FNB mumble mun | Wed Mar 21 1990 13:14 | 7 |
953.44 | Not nice | DOOZER::JENKINS | Sitting in the hot seat... | Wed Mar 21 1990 13:49 | 11 |
|
I've already got one.....
TAX CODE = OT
Personal allowance = -135 (definitely negative)
Yearly payment direct to HMG.
Yuch.
|
953.45 | | BRABAM::PHILPOTT | Col I F 'Tsingtao Dhum' Philpott | Wed Mar 21 1990 13:54 | 19 |
953.46 | Personal TAX and cars | IJSAPL::CAMERON | Studying fluid dynamics, from a stein | Wed Mar 21 1990 14:12 | 14 |
|
I would imagine they probably refer to the 'Book Price'. Otherwise
all kinds of under-the-counter dealing could be done and the tax
people are'nt that daft.
That's what they do in Holland. I was offered an new 'old' style
300ZX at Fl 70,000 compared to it's 'Book Price' of over Fl 90,000.
Not that I was interested anyway, but for tax purposes, I would have
been taxed on the 'Book Price' and not what I actually paid for it.
It could be different in the UK, but, from the tax man's point of
view, it would seem the easiest way of doing it.
Gordon
|
953.47 | | SIEVAX::CORNE | Position Independent | Wed Mar 21 1990 14:52 | 5 |
953.48 | Value it is | BAHTAT::HILTON | Two in the box ready to go | Wed Mar 21 1990 15:09 | 3 |
953.49 | No VAT | WOTVAX::MEAKINS | Clive Meakins | Wed Mar 21 1990 17:52 | 1 |
| I believe the price threshold is for the "book" price minus VAT.
|
953.50 | It's the price purchaser pays | UKCSSE::YOUNG | GEOFF YOUNG | Wed Mar 21 1990 22:38 | 11 |
| I have just recently specifically asked a taxation advisor about this
issue. His reply was that it is the price PAID by the purchasing
company. It bears no relation to the value, book price or anything
else.
So if PHH/Hertz say they paid less than 19250 then you get charged on
the appropriate other scale.
Stupid if you ask me, but there you go.
Geoff
|
953.51 | "Pay the man! Smithers" | MALLET::STEPHENS | Never could get the hang of Thursdays | Thu Mar 22 1990 12:21 | 9 |
| The quote from the Garage is "the invoice price". The interesting thing
is that they take the full list price, add VAT and Car tax, then take
off the PHH negotiated discount from the base price. That ends up as
the invoice price and that is what we report to the Inland Revenue.
e.g. imagine a 10k base price car and car tax and vat come to 20%. Also
imagine that PHH get a 10% discount. The calculation is as follows :-
Base 10k Tax 2k Discount 1k(from base) Total 11k.
|
953.52 | Bigger diesels should be less penalised? | VOGON::KAPPLER | | Tue Nov 06 1990 19:18 | 17 |
| A new question.......
Now that we've all agreed (-: that diesels are cleaner (oops let say
"less polluting") and more economical and run on cheaper fuel....
It's seems also to be true that to get resonable performance, a diesel
has to have a larger CC than it's petrol equivalent.....
So why does the CC rating for tax breaks not differentiate between
diesels and petrol engines. For my money getting below the 2000cc limit
in a petrol engine is relatively easy. However you might just get me to
go to a diesel if the same break was available on diesels below 2500cc.
Seems reasonable to me, or is my "logic" all screwed up?
JK
|
953.53 | | CHEFS::CLEMENTSD | Public Sector and Telecomms | Tue Nov 06 1990 20:48 | 11 |
| Sounds logical to me, John. There was a rumour going round (started by
Ford, I think) that at a recently past Budget the Chancellor was going
to announce just what you suggest: an offset in the allowance cost for
diesel vs. petrol vehicles. Translates to >2000cc diesel = 1400-1999cc
petrol, 1400-1999 diesel = 1100-1399 petrol or whatever the current
breaks are. Can't see much of a problem in that as there isn't that
much difference between the cost of diesel and leadfree these days.
Perhaps it's the greater economy of the diesel engines that skews the
chancellors rake off from us that makes it a no-no. Anyway as we all
know, it never happened. But I agree with you that if it did happen it
would almost certainly make me a diesel driver.
|
953.54 | A great 0.57 of a litre? | DOOZER::JENKINS | Quote......unquotE | Wed Nov 21 1990 19:56 | 8 |
|
When the chancellor changed the tax-breaks on engine sizes a couple
of years ago, he did it to come in line with Europe.
I imagine that Europe would have to make any new amendments and
we would just follow?
|