Budget

Latest Articles

Budget
Page 1, 2 Next

Downsizer Forum Index -> Finance and Property

Author

Message

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 06 10:07 pm Post subject: Budget

Not too much of interest in todays budget, a slight tinker with the car duty. Also something called an "energy and environmental research institute" is going to be set up but I have no idea what that will do.

Something that may have slipped through the headlines, the deadlines for self assessment tax returns is going to be reduced from 2008 so paper returns will have to be filed by the end of September rather than January, online returns by the end of November.

More details here: https://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4832036.stm

dougal

Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Posts: 7184
Location: South Kent

Posted: Wed Mar 22, 06 10:52 pm Post subject:

Not really a Budget measure, but there was a Budget announcement of support for a pilot study of "smart metering".
Wassat?
Fair question. I found this

Such meters are needed for domestic microgeneration, but that's a long way off for widespread adoption.
More immediately, clearly showing people the cash benefit of turning off extra lights, and suchlike, has to be a good idea.
But a 'pilot study' hardly sounds like a major expenditure for the government... or immediate sweeping action.

And personally, I kinda doubt that �35 extra a year for Road Tax is even going to be noticed by the drivers of gas guzzlers.
Maybe its just a sign of mild official disapproval, which the public are supposed to see as a badge of shame, rather than membership of an elite club...??

Andy B

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 3920
Location: Brum

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 8:30 am Post subject:

dougal wrote:

What exactly is happening with this road tax thingy, because as i have read it so far ,their will be cars with worse petrol consumption than 4x4's that wont be included ! Like top end BMW's and my mates Subaru thats 4x4 and has worse MPG.

Treacodactyl
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 25795
Location: Jumping on the bandwagon of opportunism

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 10:30 am Post subject:

Again from those lovely people at the BBC provide the following good example of the cars in the new 225 g/km �210 band. It seems a bit harsh to me that a 2 litre 7 seater people carrier, especially where people often drive with several people in them, will be paying the same as cars producing a huge amount more. Just looking at the numbers why not pay �1 pr g/km, and there certainly looks room for another band for cars over 300g/km. Either way I can't see the �210 band making any difference.

Jaguar X type 2.0 petrol saloon auto (239 g/km)
Porsche 911 Carrera Coupe 3.6 litre petrol (269 g/km)
Renault Espace 2 litre petrol (229 g/km)
BMW X5 4.8 litre petrol (324 g/km)
Range Rover 4.4 V8 petrol auto (389 g/km)

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 10:39 am Post subject:
Five Live last night was saying that there are two cars which qualify for zero tax. Neither of which are sold new in the UK anymore. (Insight & Smart diesel)

cab

Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 10:49 am Post subject:
Interesting... So perhaps something that incorporates a function of number of seats in the car against fuel efficiency would be a better way of taxing?

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 10:55 am Post subject:

cab wrote:

Interesting... So perhaps something that incorporates a function of number of seats in the car against fuel efficiency would be a better way of taxing?

Nice idea, but as per the other thread, most cars only have one actual occupant for most of the time.

cab

Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 10:57 am Post subject:

Jonnyboy wrote:

Nice idea, but as per the other thread, most cars only have one actual occupant for most of the time.

Of course. Shame.

Seems to me like the best way of taxing fuel guzzlers off the road (which is what Brown is half heartedly attempting) is to tax fuel more heavily. But he isn't going to do that.

The idea of linking road tax directly to the weight of the vehicle makes a certain amount of sense.

Jonnyboy

Joined: 29 Oct 2004
Posts: 23956
Location: under some rain.

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 11:03 am Post subject:
I think that any financial penalty just gives those with cash an opportunity to evade their environmental responsibilities whilst putting the burden on those less able to pay. I think in this, and other areas such as electricity consumption, the government should be bold and ban the worst performers. No excuses, no loopholes, just get them off the road (or out of the kitchen!)

cab

Joined: 01 Nov 2004
Posts: 32429

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 11:06 am Post subject:

Jonnyboy wrote:

I think that any financial penalty just gives those with cash an opportunity to evade their environmental responsibilities whilst putting the burden on those less able to pay.

I think in this, and other areas such as electricity consumption, the government should be bold and ban the worst performers. No excuses, no loopholes, just get them off the road (or out of the kitchen!)

See, that would be ideal. But I don't recally ever having a government that bold, or even that imaginative

Andy B

Joined: 12 Jan 2005
Posts: 3920
Location: Brum

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 12:19 pm Post subject:

Andy B wrote:

dougal wrote:

Actually having read the budget stuff properly i have no problem with it ( Ish ) Because it isnt just aimed at 4x4's like all the news reports said but at all gas guzzlers. I still think he should have aimed it at petrol consumption though. I use public transport most of the time, so my use/ pollution would be low compared to many.

dougal

Joined: 15 Jan 2005
Posts: 7184
Location: South Kent

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 12:42 pm Post subject:

Andy B wrote:

It *is* aimed at *fuel* consumption!!!

Errr, thats where the carbon comes from...

But it is calculated differently (I believe) from the standard mpg figures.
And its going to reflect the *weight* of fuel (lb or kg) and so the amount of carbon, consumed rather than the fuel's *volume* (in litres or gallons - as the fuel is sold and taxed), hence accounting for the difference in *density* between diesel and petrol - and even gas.

sean
Downsizer Moderator

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 42219
Location: North Devon

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 12:46 pm Post subject:
Can't see it making much odds though. People drive X5s, whatever the new Audi's going to be called (A8?), as a way of saying: "look at my money." an extra few quid on the road fund license isn't going to put them off. Off topic, but did you see that Audi had described the A8 as 'being for people who like the countryside but don't care about the environment'?

Northern_Lad

Joined: 13 Dec 2004
Posts: 14210
Location: Somewhere

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 12:46 pm Post subject:

dougal wrote:

It *is* aimed at *fuel* consumption!!!

Errr, thats where the carbon comes from...

...but diesel gives off less carbon by volume as petrol.

It's the only standard way of implementing such an aproach though.

tahir

Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 45674
Location: Essex

Posted: Thu Mar 23, 06 12:47 pm Post subject:

sean wrote:

Can't see it making much odds though. People drive X5s, whatever the new Audi's going to be called (A8?), as a way of saying: "look at my money." an extra few quid on the road fund license isn't going to put them off.

Very true

	Downsizer Forum Index -> Finance and Property	All times are GMT Page 1, 2 Next
Page 1 of 2

View Latest Posts