Thank you Mr Blair/Brown

[fay66]

If you thought that this present load of bandits would be sympathetic to the petition to extend the historic vehicle catergory .
Think Again. 
At least they have come clean and admit that they want your money for other things, then promptly hide behind "were doing it for the good of the environment".

Historiccartax - epetition reply21 June 2007

We received a petition asking:

"We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to change the tax exemption laws for historic motor cars."

Details of Petition:

"Currently cars have to have been constructed before a set date - the 1st January 1973 to be eligible for historic car tax exemption. We the undersigned would like the date to be move as it has been fixed for a number of years. A number of cars which were built in British factories are becoming few and far between and would like the Government to help preserve these cars by offering and extension on the current exemption date."

Read the Government's response.
The Government is committed to using Vehicle Excise Duty as a means of bringing environmental factors into consideration when people choose to take ownership of a car. Vehicle Excise Duty also helps to support the Government's wider policy objectives by providing a valuable source of revenue from which important public services may be funded.

The Government recognises that many historic car owners would have been disappointed when the 1998 Budget decision was made to freeze the rolling 25 year exemption at 1973. However, the Government continues to judge that in the light of its environmental focus for Vehicle Excise Duty it would be inappropriate to extend the exemption at this point in time.

It should be noted that the current exemption remains in force, currently benefiting some 307,407 vehicles, many of which will be maintained in careful preservation by their owners. The exemption applies equally to all historic cars built before January 1973 irrespective of their country of manufacture.

Some other types of historic vehicle are also exempt from payment of Vehicle Excise Duty. This Government decided to make all steam powered vehicles exempt from April 2001, benefiting vehicles like preserved steam powered road rollers and traction engines. Historic lorries built before 1973 are also exempt, provided that they are not used commercially.

The Government believes that it has got the balance right in the current exemptions it offers. In considering the case for further exemptions or changes to existing ones the Government has to consider the stability of its tax measures, the consistency of its environmental signal, and the costs of delivery - these would include initial implementation costs and ongoing administrative costs.

Brian Hilton
8227

[lee69]

Received my email from No10 today aswell.  I simply don't understand what costs would be involved in NOT issuing tax reminders for more exempt vehicles.  Surely the environmental argument against exemption for post 73 vehicles doesn't really hold water - how many cars (bulit between 1973 and 1982) are in use every day, clocking up the average 13k miles per annum?  Not enough to contribute huge amounts of CO2 to global warming I'm sure (but await to be corrected!).  Don't get me wrong, I'm as concerned as the next person about the impact of road use on the environment, in fact I think I'm probably more environmentally aware than the average Joe, but this response just smacks of the government seeing an easy income stream.  Sure the tax structure does need revising, and I do agree with higher levels of taxation for more polluting vehicles, but there's also a cultural heritage issue as well. Rant over.

Lee

[fensaddler]

I can't say that I can get too excited about this.  I guess there might be some sense in exempting more recent classics with smaller engines, to encourage the preservation of fuel efficient cars (says he running an 88 1.3 Delta...).  But in the end its a tax on a hobby - a non-essential luxury - and one that does have an environmental impact.  At least in running an old car with a small engine I get charged a lower rate.

[stuwilson128]

I too received the unpleasant email from this democratic dictatorship!  I totally disagree with their comments.  I have owned my Fulvia 1.3 for nearly seven years and have only covered around 3000 miles in that time.  I am sure '2 Jags' Prescott has caused more environmental damage from all the hot air that comes out of his mouth than my Fulvia produces each year! 

[timuth]

Problem is most of you probably voted him in! So you can't complain.

[fensaddler]

I did, and I'm not.

[lee69]

Even if I did vote him in (I really voted for my very capable and effective local MP, who does his job well), surely as a British subject that made an effort to exercise his right to vote, am I not more in a position to grumble than those that didn't? 

Lee

[stuwilson128]

I certainly did not vote him in.  I have never voted Labour and never will, especially as it is decisions they have made that have made me decide to leave the RAF!

[l3hou]

I also got the note - I just hope more people excercise their mandate next time around.

Of course the material of the article is very weak.  It is about the need to raise taxation revenue to pay for all the hidden public spending. Stamp duty... I'm old enough to remember it being really a near irrelevant tax unless you had a veritable mansion.  Now it's gunning for average house prices.

If the Government can justify taxes based on consumption, insurance companies reduce premiums for less use on the road, I don't see the argument that says road tax is not applicable to this.

They could have said very simply: "Because we don't want to, ner" rather than the ecological mantra.  With this country only just tackling waste management inititatives, biofuel at one of the lowest levels in the EC, etc etc - it makes me despair.

If you want to change the system, vote in someone who will.  (Now where have I heard this before....?)

[Justin McArdle]

I had my Fulvia on a SORN and forgot to renew it - mainly because I didn't receive a reminder from DVLA. Got fined and charged road duty.
Same thing happened again for the road tax for my motorbike - didn't get a reminder and the bike bought new only came with  6 months road tax (DVLA's tactic to make sure people don't drive around a 12 months with Road Tax based on an insurance  cover note which they promptly cancel).
One day I received a plain white envelope which looked like the usual junk mail. The return to address on the back was an address in Dorset. I was about to bin it but decided to open it to find it was my £40 fine for failing to renew the road tax.
No trace of DVLA anywhere on the envelope. After receiving a number of fatuous explanations from DVLA why they did not identify their mail I resorted to the Freedom of Information Act which confirmed my suspicions that the correspondence is deliberately made to look like junk mail.
I renewed my road tax on the internet which identified that DVLA were aware that I had valid insurance on a bike that doesn't require an MOT. So why would I avoid paying £65.00 for the road tax - this amount being dwarfed by the amount I pay for insurance??
It just proves that the people who run this government (aided and abetted by countless expensive consultants) are out to maximise income from whatever devious scams they can orchestrate.  What is worse is that they are happy to criminalise honest motorists whilst doing little to address the problems of uninsured drivers who simply purchase a set of number plates.
Anyone else had similar experiences??

[fensaddler]

Can't say I've had your experience Justin.  My SORN reminder arrived from the DVLA with nearly a month's notice (and in a brown DVLA branded envelope at that) - and I renewed online in two minutes flat.  If you didn't get a reminder there are many other explanations than conspiracy - post office incompetence perhaps?  Can't speak for the fines - because of the above I've never been unfortunate enought to get one, though making fine notices easy to ignore or throw away does seem barking mad.  I have a very right wing former colleague who would probably tell you not to expect the nanny state to remind you of everything... but then I don't share his political or philosophical stance...

[Mark Webb]

The Blair government has just added a new type of tax disc that I have to display on my company vehicle, its a 'no smoking' sign.
I am told by the company I have to display it in a prominent position in the windscreen preferably close to the tax disc (which I took to be  in the corner behind the wiper blade). It will be a part of my regular checks to the vehicle!
I don't mind displaying a first aid kit sign but this really gets me and I don't smoke.

So just wait for the 'I'm a filthy polluter sign' for all classic cars, its the next step by this nanny state tax raising dictatorship!

And No I didn't vote for them but I will vote for the next party who vows to quash any legislation that 60% of the population thinks is stupid (thats 90% of health and safety for a start).
 
Anyway how can they fine you unless they can prove that you received the notification?
If they did not send it by recorded delivery (or signed for as Consignia or whatever they want to call themselves this week call it), then what grounds do they have to prove notification?

[timuth]

Anyway how can they fine you unless they can prove that you received the notification?
If they did not send it by recorded delivery (or signed for as Consignia or whatever they want to call themselves this week call it), then what grounds do they have to prove notification?

Mark not aimed at you or anyone in particular..

Negligence is not an excuse... If you have a vehicle that you have to tax each year or declare scorn then you can't blame the DVLA just as you forgot. Buy an LMC calender and write it down....

[Mark Webb]

Oh yes sorry its only politicans that can forget and walk away with no charge!

Another blow to the honest man.

Mark

[timuth]

Honest man? where?

We will always be stiffed by the goverment nothing new....