"Fuel Tax" to become a fuel tax?

[omerojs]

hahahaha... so after you finish deciding who has more money than who and who should pay for what... can anyone find out if the tax to the fuel was moved away from the cars and charged at the pump?

Yes.

No.

Dunno why you are using the past tense above. As I thought I made clear, the govt are said to be "considering it".

As I said, my bet is it will not happen (future tense), partly because it makes sense.

I thought it was a "done deal" since the fuel went up to 35 ~ 38 NTDs... and at about the same time the story about the tax came out..

[headhonchoII]

There is already a fuel tax and a tax on engine capacity. It's not one or the other. The government has eliminated the subsidy on fuel so that it now more closely reflects market rates.

[sulavaca]

There is already a fuel tax and a tax on engine capacity. It's not one or the other. The government has eliminated the subsidy on fuel so that it now more closely reflects market rates.

Actually, I think I called "Fuel Charge" "Fuel Tax" to more accurately describe what the government are doing in this case, when demanding a yearly payment based on engine capacity.
The government prefers to use the terms "Licence plate tax" and "Fuel charge". The latter terminology in this case makes no sense at all as a charge is a price demanded for a product or service rendered, and the government produces nothing and no service rendered in this case. I'm not even sure the government are within the boundaries of law in this case.

Fuel Charge

"Fuel charge" is not to be confused with "fuel tax" which is presently being considered to be added to fuel at the pump. Fuel charge then is an additional government tax in the guise of a charge, administered by the motor vehicles office and not the tax department, which has little or no accurate relevance to fuel consumption or CO2 emissions. The charge is calculated over a twelve month period and is payable before March 30th of every year.

[Ducked]

I propose we adopt the terms "Engine Capacity Tax" and "Fuel Tax" to avoid any further semantic confusion/bickering. I apologise for not explicitly defining my terms at the outset.

The quotes in my title ["Fuel Tax" to become a fuel tax?] are often known as "apologetic quotes", taken to imply "I'm calling it a fuel tax, but it isn't really a fuel tax"

In the US, this might be rendered "NOT Fuel Tax to become a fuel tax?"

I are a English teecha. Hope this helps.

[sulavaca]

Or, instead of "engine capacity tax", as the engine's air capacity on my old Prius would depend upon which stroke of the four cylinder cycle it was, due it being an Atkinson cycle engine, we could call it a "semi dependent bore tax" or a "hole tax", a "void tax", or most accurately I feel, a "unscientific, bollocks tax". .

I propose, that, in-keeping with the government's preferred method of taxation, that we lobby for a tax based on the size of a vehicle's fuel tank and/ or battery in the case of electric vehicles.

Anyone in favour?
Come on! Round up! Round up! Have a go!
Who can think of the daftest tax, based on loose logic that they can think of?

[Ducked]

Or, instead of "engine capacity tax", as the engine's air capacity on my old Prius would depend upon which stroke of the four cylinder cycle it was, due it being an Atkinson cycle engine,

Dodgy sophistry Mr S.

As I understand it, the capacity (bore times stroke) is constant, but VVT is used to render the effective compression ratio different from the expansion ratio. So "engine capacity tax" still works.

Come on! Round up! Round up! Have a go!

Uh? NOBODY says that!

Its "Roll up Roll up!"

Where in the UK are you from exactly?

Who can think of the daftest tax, based on loose logic that they can think of?

Dafter than the gubmint? TOUGH one.

ExampleS

They've proposed a special tax on cars older than 10 years: It would make sense to give tax relief on cars older than 10 years.

The UK gubmint were giving a largish bribesubsidy, matched by car sellers (I think 1500 quid, but I cant be bothered to look it up) to be spent on a new car, if you scrapped one 10 or more years old. It would make sense to tax new car purchases instead.

Lemme see...

Tyre tread depth tax? - No, not daft enough. Would encourage people to indulge in bald tyre brinkpersonship, but it would have environmental benefits, and it'd hit those Jeepnicks hard, which'd be a populist move

Tyre capacity tax - Air is for breathing. This'd be a fixed-rate tax, irrespective of whether you atually put any air in your tyres. A pay at the pump variant would be possible but stupider, in the case of air. You could do similar things with the cooling system

Tyre pressure relief tax - You pay according to tyre pressure you run. If based on inspection, this'd have to be called a "fine" rather than a tax, but you could just go by the handbook number.

Shaking off my current tyre obsession: Ride height? Swept area of windscreen wipers? Window tax? (hasn't been tried with vehicles AFAIK. My old bubble car would have been pretty hard hit, and arbitarily, so a bonus). Rattle tax?

Dirty car tax? ....oh, hang on.......I think that's actually been proposed

Speed tax? ........Ah.......Like I said, they're tough to beat.

[headhonchoII]

Boy racer mod tax.
Rear fins , check, 50 pounds
Go faster stripes, check, 50 pounds
LED underlighting , check, 50 pounds
Black Honda Civic with tinted windows and racing seats in red and a noisy muffler, check, 100 pounds for being a complete twat

[Ducked]

Boy racer mod tax.
Rear fins , check, 50 pounds
Go faster stripes, check, 50 pounds
LED underlighting , check, 50 pounds
Black Honda Civic with tinted windows and racing seats in red and a noisy muffler, check, 100 pounds for being a complete twat

Nope. Those are soundly based and would be supported by all right-thinking people. Not stupid at all.

And they're fines, though the distinction has admittedly become a bit threadbare

[sulavaca]

Or, instead of "engine capacity tax", as the engine's air capacity on my old Prius would depend upon which stroke of the four cylinder cycle it was, due it being an Atkinson cycle engine,

Dodgy sophistry Mr S.

As I understand it, the capacity (bore times stroke) is constant, but VVT is used to render the effective compression ratio different from the expansion ratio. So "engine capacity tax" still works.

Come on! Round up! Round up! Have a go!

Uh? NOBODY says that!

Its "Roll up Roll up!"

Where in the UK are you from exactly?

Erm... From the area with all the sheep in it. We're rather used to rounding, but we do like rolling from time to time.

Ducked, I'm astounded by your tax "incentives". You should be a polytishun!

headhonchoII, I like the way you're thinking. We could have a bucket seat tax based on that too!

Ooo! How about downforce tax?
I've got it! Braking tax. Every time you push the brake pedal in a car, it triggers a counter, which logs how much money you owe the government from wasting fuel.

[Ducked]

headhonchoII, I like the way you're thinking. We could have a bucket seat tax based on that too!

Ooo! How about downforce tax?
I've got it! Braking tax. Every time you push the brake pedal in a car, it triggers a counter, which logs how much money you owe the government from wasting fuel.

I'm afraid I must again draw attention to the terms of reference for these proposals. They have to be daft.. I'd suggest that, to conform to the spirit of the law, they should also be arbitary, and if possible, counter-productive.

A braking tax (and, to a lesser extent, a downforce tax) has an underpinning rationale, and although difficult to implement, is quite likely to lead to environmental benefits, including, but not limited to, the elimination of some real dickheads.

I submitt, therefore, that these proposals do not meet the standards of HM's, or indeed anybodies, G.