Has everyone seen the petition relating to luxury car tax and the Teslas?
Petition: Abolish the Luxury Car Tax for EVs (Electric Vehicles)
Petition: Abolish the Luxury Car Tax for EVs (Electric Vehicles)
-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Luxury Tax
- Thread starter Martinb999
- Start date
interbear
Active Member
Yes I saw it but am in two minds as to whether to sign it or not.
One side of my brain - the govt should be incentivising zero emission EVs via zero tax. Sign it!
The other side of my brain - Tesla’s are expensive vehicles so applying the “luxury tax’ is likely affordable to most buyers. Don’t sign it!
I think the other side of my brain is winning. Eventually all cars will be EVs so the tax system will still have to collect funds from EV users to maintain the road system etc (and Trident or whatever else they use it for
). So EV owners - especially those with more expensive EVs such as Tesla’s, will need to keep paying.
One side of my brain - the govt should be incentivising zero emission EVs via zero tax. Sign it!
The other side of my brain - Tesla’s are expensive vehicles so applying the “luxury tax’ is likely affordable to most buyers. Don’t sign it!
I think the other side of my brain is winning. Eventually all cars will be EVs so the tax system will still have to collect funds from EV users to maintain the road system etc (and Trident or whatever else they use it for
). So EV owners - especially those with more expensive EVs such as Tesla’s, will need to keep paying.
Jason71
Well-Known Member
Yes I saw it but am in two minds as to whether to sign it or not.
One side of my brain - the govt should be incentivising zero emission EVs via zero tax. Sign it!
The other side of my brain - Tesla’s are expensive vehicles so applying the “luxury tax’ is likely affordable to most buyers. Don’t sign it!
I think the other side of my brain is winning. Eventually all cars will be EVs so the tax system will still have to collect funds from EV users to maintain the road system etc (and Trident or whatever else they use it for
I think the main argument is that a 40K EV is not as "luxury" as a 40K ICE since the batteries are expensive. That of course is an argument for raising the threshold for EV's rather than abolishing it. I believe it is already waived for Electric Taxis
Yes I saw it but am in two minds as to whether to sign it or not.
One side of my brain - the govt should be incentivising zero emission EVs via zero tax. Sign it!
The other side of my brain - Tesla’s are expensive vehicles so applying the “luxury tax’ is likely affordable to most buyers. Don’t sign it!
I think the other side of my brain is winning. Eventually all cars will be EVs so the tax system will still have to collect funds from EV users to maintain the road system etc (and Trident or whatever else they use it for
But...we already pay a 'luxury vehicle tax'...it's called VAT!
And VAT has the major benefit of being "means tested", ie a £40k car pays proportionally more than a £13k car, as opposed to a £40,001 car paying £1,600 more than a £39,999 car...and the same as a £200,000 car...
WannabeOwner
Well-Known Member
Not signing it. There are better solutions than throwing money at rich bastards (including me) buying expensive cars, even EVs.
MrBadger
Badger out
Personally, part of me thinks that it should be based on the gov grant inclusive price, but the other part thinks that the grant more than covers the tax and quite a few people will have got that grant benefit but will not be paying the full 5 years of tax.
The incentivising EV take up is covered by the £0 on the emissions side of the tax. two different things.
The option for anyone not wanting to pay the tax is to buy a cheaper car. There are more options range wise than there once was. But I glean from many comments that for many, the incentive to get a Tesla is for the performance and going zero emissions at tailpipe is a by product, or not.
The incentivising EV take up is covered by the £0 on the emissions side of the tax. two different things.
The option for anyone not wanting to pay the tax is to buy a cheaper car. There are more options range wise than there once was. But I glean from many comments that for many, the incentive to get a Tesla is for the performance and going zero emissions at tailpipe is a by product, or not.
The problem with the TAX is that its pretty stupid (like a lot of government decisions)
Exactly this. 35k car is less taxed than a 40k car etc.
what this "luxury car" extra tax is trying to do I don't know. A 40k car is not exactly a Bentley Continental.
If it was similar to income tax it would be more fair. For every £1000 above £40k you pay £10 a year tax for example. That way a £100k car would be taxed at 600/year and a model 3 SR+ Would be £20 a year.
This is aimed solely at middle class who can just about afford 40-60k range car. If you are spending 60+ on a car you are not going to care about another 1600 on top.
Just to put it into perspective, having the 40% income tax bracket £1000 lower than planned next years budget is not going to be noticed by anyone.
Higher rate last year was between £46,351 and £150,0001
This year its between £50,001 and £150,0001
if it started around 49000 instead of 50000, that 1k difference would have paid an extra £400 into the treasury for every person in the country earning over 50k driver or not and no-one would have noticed.
Exactly this. 35k car is less taxed than a 40k car etc.
what this "luxury car" extra tax is trying to do I don't know. A 40k car is not exactly a Bentley Continental.
If it was similar to income tax it would be more fair. For every £1000 above £40k you pay £10 a year tax for example. That way a £100k car would be taxed at 600/year and a model 3 SR+ Would be £20 a year.
This is aimed solely at middle class who can just about afford 40-60k range car. If you are spending 60+ on a car you are not going to care about another 1600 on top.
Just to put it into perspective, having the 40% income tax bracket £1000 lower than planned next years budget is not going to be noticed by anyone.
Higher rate last year was between £46,351 and £150,0001
This year its between £50,001 and £150,0001
if it started around 49000 instead of 50000, that 1k difference would have paid an extra £400 into the treasury for every person in the country earning over 50k driver or not and no-one would have noticed.
This exactly, but don’t exactly agree on the £60k+ Some of us might be lucky to afford such “luxuries” but where does it stop? Just because someone can afford it doesn’t mean they should be essentially double taxed. Yes, it’s only 1-2% of the cars worth but I’m sure if you ask any “rich” person if they like throwing money away and I’m sure they’ll say no. Those who’ve earned their wealth will typically be savvy with their money and underhand taxes like this make you despise governmental decisions even more.
I could make comparisons with childcare whereby an income of £99k will be entitled to 15 additional hours of free childcare. As soon as it hits £100k you lose it which in London is worth about £5k a year. Now if both parents are working and earn £99k each you still keep the 15 hours even though the household income would be £198k. Obviously you can “fiddle” your adjusted net income with pension contributions etc.. if you are on limit. But again it goes to show that there are multiple instances of governmental tax policies that use stupid hard cut-offs.
PrGrPa
Member
No. VAT is not ‘means tested’. It is quite the opposite. It is an iniquitous and evil regressive tax that affects the poor more than the rich.
For example, a person buys a pair of shoes for £50 + £10 VAT. If you are a poor person on £1000/month then the tax is 1% of your income. If you’re a a rich person on £10,000/month it is a piddling 0.1% of your income.
Consumption taxes are a sneaky way of increasing tax revenue at greatest expense to those who have the least. Irrespective of the apparent luxury of the goods.
Removing VAT from zero-emission vehicles sounds like a neat idea to promote them. But given the UK low emission vehicle incentive dropped from £4,500 from £3,500 the other year I’m not convinced the UK government really wants them adopted.
PrGrPa
Member
‘Luxury car tax’. I wondered what this was about. Now I see. It’s the expensive car vehicle excise duty. £310/year from years 2-5 if I remember correctly.
It did annoy me when it was introduced. But, like VED itself it’s a small cost compared to the cost of any kind of motoring.
It would be nice to see a £0 VED charge for zero emission vehicles. I’d rather see much higher VED for ICEs. That, combined with volatile fuel prices, might be the kind of ‘stick’ UK voters respond to?
goRt
Active Member
Got to love the suggestions on how everyone else should pay more tax so you can keep your £3.5k grant.
People are always happy for everyone else to pay but not to pay themselves.
This was announced in 2014 without any complaints on this forum, now musk has priced his cars over the limit that gets moaned about. Moan at the person who sets the pricing.
People are always happy for everyone else to pay but not to pay themselves.
This was announced in 2014 without any complaints on this forum, now musk has priced his cars over the limit that gets moaned about. Moan at the person who sets the pricing.
Tax has never been fair to all. I mean you all work to get slammed with 20-45% tax on your salary followed by tax on the goods you buy with that hard earned cash.
@PrGrPa I don't think the shoe example above is correct as you only spend what you can afford and the person earning £100 would buy a cheaper pair. I mean I could not afford a £250k Ferrari and yes the tax is a massive chunk of my wage if I did.
A great example of fair taxing...........:
The government have put in a target of reducing carbon emissions to nett zero by 2050.
So to achieve this they increase the tax from 5% to 20% on solar and battery storage and leave coal with a tax reduction!
Although this solar tax is from an EU decision. Brexit anyone lol! Sorry about the last bit!!
@PrGrPa I don't think the shoe example above is correct as you only spend what you can afford and the person earning £100 would buy a cheaper pair. I mean I could not afford a £250k Ferrari and yes the tax is a massive chunk of my wage if I did.
A great example of fair taxing...........:
The government have put in a target of reducing carbon emissions to nett zero by 2050.
So to achieve this they increase the tax from 5% to 20% on solar and battery storage and leave coal with a tax reduction!
Although this solar tax is from an EU decision. Brexit anyone lol! Sorry about the last bit!!
This is exactly the mind set which means social inequality gap continues to get bigger in the UK. Your having a hissy about household incomes of £99-198K, for 95% of the UK population they couldn't careless.
Go on to this and see how many people in the UK would love to worry about the situation you highlighted above!!
Where do you fit in -
The 'average' UK household income for 2+2 famly is £38k per year, the mode appears to be far less than this at £27K per YEAR.
Anyone who thinks a petition about trying to reduce the tax burden for those who are lucky enough to afford a brand new £40K car will get mass support is living in a fantasy land.
It's not quite as bad as the out of touch nutters who protesting about Tesla price changes using the same banner as those protesting about increasing costs of basic living standards and social disparity, oh the irony.
Tesla owners block factory entrance in protest over Model 3 price drop - Electrek
Last edited:
Terry_B58
Member
Regardless of how people feel about the Luxury Tax - we all knew about it before we bought our cars. If we didn't then unfortunately you didn't research enough.
It is not a retrospective tax so YOU had the choice to buy & expect to pay for tax or do not buy and complain about the tax until it is forced away.
I definitely do not like the tax, but I knew about it and as such have to 'suck it up'.
It is not a retrospective tax so YOU had the choice to buy & expect to pay for tax or do not buy and complain about the tax until it is forced away.
I definitely do not like the tax, but I knew about it and as such have to 'suck it up'.
I’m not having a hissy fit but stating that the derivation of such taxes has not been properly thought through. I know plenty of people who both earn mid-£50k. Why should someone who earns a single salary of £100k then be docked of £5k when the joint income household won’t?
I knew full well what taxes would be involved and I’m “happy” to pay them but think they should be calculated more fairly.
Watts_Up
Well-Known Member
With an EV you buy your energy up front.
To separate "regular" cars from "luxury" cars, it would be better to compare cars by comparing
the cost of the car plus the cost spent on gas or electricity over five years for example.
Here an example where a Tesla Model 3 cost less than a Toyota Corolla:
MrBadger
Badger out
Spot on.
The $35k never really came, and for us, the draw was the long range battery, a $9k option at the time. I cannot remember the figures at the time, but using Model S $/£ pricing, meeting £40k threshold was likely going to be down to paint, interior, delivery costs and what the regressive gov grant was going to be at the time.
In the end, and it changed several times during the waiting game, Tesla took the pricing into their own hands. LR only came as AWD (iirc $4k) or Performance, Premium ($5k), or the variation Part Premium, came the only options.
A sub £40k car should have been easily doable with original spec and reasonable options, but Tesla took the choice away from us. TBH, I wonder what the point of partial premium is? It would not surprise me if they tried to get a sub £40k UK version, but didn't manage it.
We would have preferred a decent fabric interior, but love the glass roof, so standard/premium interior would have been a tough choice. Likewise range vs slightly better chance at getting up our hill on odd day when it snows. Choices taken out of our hands. fyi, we did not reserve until we knew what options and $ pricing was likely to be, unlike early reservation holders who took it on blind faith.
Last edited:
Jason71
Well-Known Member
I noticed this year that they raised the rate from £310 to £320. they will probably continue to do this year on year
But they haven't raised the threshold that stayed at £40K. In theory that ought to go up with inflation as well
DVLA has previous for this. A few years ago they introduced zero ved for "historic" vehicles with a threshold set at 1965. Logically this should have gone forward by one year every year. Nope the left it at 1965 for at least 10 years. They have now changed it to a rolling 40 years. So we can probably expect the ART threshold to stay at £40K for quite a while.
But they haven't raised the threshold that stayed at £40K. In theory that ought to go up with inflation as well
DVLA has previous for this. A few years ago they introduced zero ved for "historic" vehicles with a threshold set at 1965. Logically this should have gone forward by one year every year. Nope the left it at 1965 for at least 10 years. They have now changed it to a rolling 40 years. So we can probably expect the ART threshold to stay at £40K for quite a while.
Similar threads
