realgolferuk
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 19/08/2007
Posts: 2921
|
|
So, I thought (given the news last week) that I'd check out the new car tax bands. Don't know what to make of it really.....can't decide whether this system is fair or it should just all be chucked on fuel???
What I did find out though is that my car (registered late 2000) costs £185 this year for tax (I knew that already) but somewhat remarkably exactly the same car registered in 2001 has been costing £120 this year. Hmmmm......what kind of logic is this????
Most of us grow up being told the world isn't fair....sure....but is it really beyond the wit of man to come up with some equitable plans for taxation???? It gets on my wick.
Also, while I'm on my soap box.....did you know that it would cost under £3 per year / per person to keep all the post offices open (profitable or not). Can we not manage this.......if this is the way "public" services are controlled by essentially private companies....what hope is there....."Oh well, we can bail out a building society, but post offices and fair fuel prices for those less fortunate.....hey **** em".
--------------------
Dave
Returned from 5 years of not playing - played off 8-11, now 12 .
Member of the Tommy Armour 845 appreciation society (current membership 2!)
|
backwoodsman
enthusiast
Reged: 03/03/2008
Posts: 335
Loc: sarf Lunnon
|
|
Quote:
So, I thought (given the news last week) that I'd check out the new car tax bands. Don't know what to make of it really.....can't decide whether this system is fair or it should just all be chucked on fuel???
What I did find out though is that my car (registered late 2000) costs £185 this year for tax (I knew that already) but somewhat remarkably exactly the same car registered in 2001 has been costing £120 this year. Hmmmm......what kind of logic is this????
Aw c'mon Real...
If they are going to say "these new reg's will only apply to cars registered after xxx" (which would be reasonable) then there's a cut-off line to be drawn, and someone will always fall just the wrong side of it - in this case you, amongst others.
To use a golf analogy, it'd be like the rules saying if your ball is out of bounds then you have to play another ball from where you last played... (except if your ball is only a little bit out of bounds, in which case you can just cary on).
If you had a different car, you could easily have found that the car tax was a lot more for being the other side of the line
--------------------
In the bag......
Driver: Taylormade R5XL
3&5W: Wilson Matrix
3-pw: Titleist AP1
Vokey 56.11 Tour Chrome
Putter: Yes Golf C-groove Valery
The uglier a man’s legs are, the better he plays golf. HG Wells
|
viscount17
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 13/08/2007
Posts: 2613
Loc: Middle Earth,
|
|
backwoodsman, you've got the wrong idea. This is the Gov'mint we're talking about - we don't have to be reasonable.
We don't have a job where we can vote for our own payrise, vote to keep all the sinecures, allowances etc and never have to account for cock-ups or the fact that we don't turn up half the time.
--------------------
In any other sport the purchase of new equipment after the age of 50 would be classed a vainglorious gesture; in golf it represents a sensible investment in the future. Michael Parkinson
H'cap 24.5 - gone the wrong way! 
The bag is changing:
Driver: TaylorMade r7 460 reg/Ping G5 10.5 stiff
5-wood: TaylorMade r7 steel
Hybrids: Bayhill Plasma 4i 25*/Ben Sayers M1 2i 17*
Irons: MacGregor M565 forged 3-PW 4.5 Rifles
Wedges: Ben Hogan Apex forged 49* & 54*
Putter: Ping Karsten B60
|
realgolferuk
Carpal \'Tunnel
Reged: 19/08/2007
Posts: 2921
|
|
Quote:
Aw c'mon Real...
If they are going to say "these new reg's will only apply to cars registered after xxx" (which would be reasonable) then there's a cut-off line to be drawn, and someone will always fall just the wrong side of it - in this case you, amongst others.
Well, I do have a car which fits this scenario exactly. My point wasn't that I'm that bothered, it was that it's all a stupid system i.m.o.
I've seen "normal" cars bracketed in the £400 per year catagory (there was even a 2.0 Peugeot!!) which seems daft.....I don't see why they just didn't expand the old system, say £100 for under 1.2 £150 for 1.2 to 1.5 £200 1.5-2.0 etc.etc. My feeling is that the "emissions" chestnut is just a silly way of hiding the real motive which is to increase revenue from car tax. Fine, increase the revenue but find a way that doesn't go silly on those well off enough to drive a posh car or has financial implications on those struggling to make a go with everything. If I did have a 2001 model, I'd be equally indignant that it would be unfair for the hard up family next door to pay more than me with their 1999?
--------------------
Dave
Returned from 5 years of not playing - played off 8-11, now 12 .
Member of the Tommy Armour 845 appreciation society (current membership 2!)
|
Nico
addict
Reged: 28/02/2008
Posts: 697
|
|
The true genius of this tax is that it affects the vast majority of drivers in the uk. Drivers who already pay tax on almost every aspect of car ownership. Road Fund Licensing is a ridiculous way of collecting tax anyway,it would be so much easier and eliminate avoidance if they increased fuel tax. Ah but you couldnt dress that up as a "Green" tax could you.
This could be their "Poll Tax" because stupidly they have brought it in before the next election,OOPS!!
There is also so much more in the tax system that is ridiculously inequitable,take banding for instance,40% of £100k is a damn sight more than 40% of £25k so why should you pay proportionally more the higher your earnings?
--------------------
------------------------------
Driver - Titleist 905R 9.5 Accra pured shaft
3 Wood - Cleveland Launcher 15 Accra pured shaft
Rescue - Makser 21 Accra pured shaft
Irons - 3-pw Vega v-muscle blades Precision tour stepped shafts pured
Wedges - Vokey spin milled 54 bent to 53 cut sole,58 cut sole both with pured shafts
Putter - Ping Redwood Zing cut to32" and weighted
Yes, I do know how lucky I am !!!
|
Previous
Index
Next
Threaded
Edit
Reply
Quote
