You can install our site as a web app on your iOS device by utilizing the Add to Home Screen feature in Safari. Please see this thread for more details on this.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
No, petrol vehicles don't pay RUCs...Since we're talking about slow people, you seem to have missed that currently RUC is tied to emissions for petrol vehicles. They are rewarded with lower RUC costs if their vehicle has better fuel efficiency/lower emissions.
I think it's perfectly fine for EVs to pay the same rate as the other vehicles subject to RUCs.. Why should they get a further discount, they use the same road, weigh the same, take up the same amount of space.Please answer why you think it's ok for emission generating vehicles to be incentivised with lower RUC costs while zero emission vehicles have to pay the full rate?
Yeah, they do. It's the fuel excise tax component of fuel and it's the equivalent of RUC for petrol vehiclesNo, petrol vehicles don't pay RUCs...
Once again, as per the above, the RUC that is paid by petrol vehicles is tied to emissions. So I'll ask again, why do you think emission generating vehicles should pay less towards the roads than their EV equivalents?I think it's perfectly fine for EVs to pay the same rate as the other vehicles subject to RUCs.. Why should they get a further discount, they use the same road, weigh the same, take up the same amount of space.
Once again, RUCs pay for roads, they are nothing to do with emissions. There's a carbon tax paid by fuel companies, if you think that needs adjusting, knock yourself with letters to the editor or your MP.
You are trying to make it about emissions, but it has nothing to do with emissions, it is about paying for the cost of building and maintaining roads. No point discussing this any further.Once again, as per the above, the RUC that is paid by petrol vehicles is tied to emissions. So I'll ask again, why do you think emission generating vehicles should pay less towards the roads than their EV equivalents?
JFC it's not a hard concept to grasp lol. Because petrol vehicles pay RUC via the tax component of petrol, the amount they pay is determined by the fuel efficiency of their vehicle. The less fuel they use, the less tax they pay which means less RUC they pay per km. The amount of RUC a petrol vehicle pays is tied to the emissions of the vehicle.You are trying to make it about emissions, but it has nothing to do with emissions, it is about paying for the cost of building and maintaining roads. No point discussing this any further.
How do you not understand how it does though??Yes, it corellates, but it has zero to do with the pricing of RUCs or FED, and it is irrelevant.
It doesn't, despite your fervoured desires for to. If you search the RUC Cost Allocation Model paper, the word emissions appears twice, once defining what the E in ETS is, and the other in a footnote "The classification does not include externalities such as congestion, noise or emissions. These costs are not directly part of the roading system"How do you not understand how it does though??
Take a RAV4 Hybrid with a fuel efficiency of 5.3L/100km, or .053L/km. The RUC component of petrol is $0.70, so if you apply that to the efficiency, it's 3.7c/km
Take a Ford Ranger Raptor (petrol version) with a fuel efficiency of 11.5L/100km or .115L/km. The RUC component of it is 8.1c/km.
Did you notice how the vehicle with the lower emissions has the lower per km RUC cost?
So you're just going to ignore the math above? The math that shows you how a lower emission petrol vehicle contributes less to the cost of road maintenance? How that goes against that everyone should pay their fair share?It doesn't, despite your fervoured desires for to. If you search the RUC Cost Allocation Model paper, the word emissions appears twice, once defining what the E in ETS is, and the other in a footnote "The classification does not include externalities such as congestion, noise or emissions. These costs are not directly part of the roading system"
So once again, despite you needing it as an excuse to justify why you should not pay your fair share of the costs of providing the roads you drive on, it has ABSOLUTELY NOTHING TO DO WITH RUCS.
No, I agree that some of the more efficient petrol cars are not paying enough and all petrol cars should be brought into RUCs asap but thatSo you're just going to ignore the math above? The math that shows you how a lower emission petrol vehicle contributes less to the cost of road maintenance? How that goes against that everyone should pay their fair share?
Either you're playing dumb for some stupid agenda or you really just don't understand.
Matt. Stop trying to freeload and pay your fair share.Ok, so I guess it's the latter of the two options. Since I assume nearly everyone else understands how RUC in petrol vehicles is tied to emissions, I'm going to move on from your deficiencies...
Fuel Excise tax | 77.4 | c/l | Per 1000km | ||
Fuel Tax | RUC | Total Tax | |||
RAV4 | 5.3 | l/100km | $ 41.02 | Nil | $ 41.02 |
Ford Ranger Raptor | 11.3 | l/100km | $ 87.46 | Nil | $ 87.46 |
Corolla Hybrid | 4.0 | l/100km | $ 30.96 | Nil | $ 30.96 |
RAV4 Plug-in Hybrid | 1.0 | l/100km | $ 7.74 | $ 53.00 | $ 60.74 |
EV | Nil | l/100km | Nil | $ 76.00 | $ 76.00 |
Fabulous chart mate. Very compelling.
Fuel Excise tax 77.4 c/l Per 1000km Fuel Tax RUC Total Tax RAV4 5.3 l/100km $ 41.02 Nil $ 41.02 Ford Ranger Raptor 11.3 l/100km $ 87.46 Nil $ 87.46 Corolla Hybrid 4.0 l/100km $ 30.96 Nil $ 30.96 RAV4 Plug-in Hybrid 1.0 l/100km $ 7.74 $ 53.00 $ 60.74 EV Nil l/100km Nil $ 76.00 $ 76.00
We are getting screwed.
91 Octane Fuel | 262 | c/l | Per 1000km | ||
Fuel Excise tax | 77.4 | c/l | |||
Fuel Tax | RUC | Total Tax | |||
Corolla | 4.9 | l/100km | $ 37.93 | Nil | $ 37.93 |
RAV4 | 5.3 | l/100km | $ 41.02 | Nil | $ 41.02 |
Ford Ranger Raptor | 11.3 | l/100km | $ 87.46 | Nil | $ 87.46 |
Corolla Hybrid | 4.0 | l/100km | $ 30.96 | Nil | $ 30.96 |
RAV4 Plug-in Hybrid | 1.0 | l/100km | $ 7.74 | 38 | $ 45.74 |
BEV | 0.0 | l/100km | $ - | 76 | $ 76.00 |
In that it was never going to work. The price of used EV'S jumped by the amount of the subsidy.The key benefit was to grow the used EV market so folks could pickup decent EVs for $20k-40k with 300km