• Car Tax: The perils of dogmatism!


    Above, the portrait of Jean-Baptiste Colbert by Philippe de Champaigne (1655).

    A handy guide as to the contribution an individual has made to the public good or a nation state is for them to have a warship named after them. This is an almost universally recognised practice amongst the committees who decide on warships names throughout the navies of the world. Which is why since the end of WW2, US politicians have begun to name USN aircraft carriers after themselves! And not the famous battles as previously!

    As a rough guide, the more larger and more capable the warship, the more esteemed the individual was to the nation concerned.

    For the French Navy, six ships have borne the name “Colbert” in honour of Jean Baptiste Colbert:
    A corvette, 1848
    An ironclad, 1877
    An auxiliary patrol boat (1915–1917) and an auxiliary sail ship (1917)
    A heavy cruiser Colbert (1928), destroyed in the Scuttling of the French fleet in Toulon in 1942.
    An anti-aircraft (later guided missile) cruiser, 1956, broken up 2016.

    Basically, if you’re not the nations monarch, to have a substantial ship like a cruiser named after you, you must have been a good chap (Or chapess! – Ed.)

    Jean Baptiste Colbert was. He worked hard. He saved France from being made bankrupt. The French Treasury had plenty of gold. Unfortunately Colbert’s monarch was the “Sun King”, Louis XIV who believed – a belief shared by the vast majority of Frenchmen (the opinions of France’s women being regarded as unimportant!) – that he was placed on the throne by Almighty God and as a result could rule as an absolute autocrat!

    As a result, this devout and pious Roman Catholic warmonger depleted the French Treasury as quickly as Colbert filled it!

    You see, as a devout and pious Roman Catholic who believed that God had appointed him to rule, he set about trying to conquer as much as Europe as possible to carry out what he believed was the wish of the Almighty! As a result the death, destruction and misery caused was “All in a Good Cause!” And, yes, he really did believe that!

    Now the Sun King’s finance minister was recorded as making many excellent quotes and one in particular is remembered (or should be) by finance ministers the world over – “The art of taxation consists in so plucking the goose as to obtain the largest [number] of feathers with the least possible amount of hissing.”
    It is a quote that the Unfortunate Hammond should remember as he decides on who to tax and who not to tax!

    However, the Unfortunate Hammond is dogged by dogma. This dogma being the belief – which is as illogical and stupid as “the Divine Right of Kings” – that CO2 is a danger to the planet as that as a result the annual tax the owners of motor cars should pay should be based on the emissions the said vehicles produce of the said gas and that this should bear no proportion to the vehicle’s original value – that in and of itself is a reasonable indication of the wealth of it’s owner and therefore the ability of the said owner to pay!

    Thus setting the tax in progressive proportion to this figure [vehicle cost] would be fair and reasonable.

    However, being fair and reasonable when it comes to CO2 emissions does not apply to the CO2 obsessed Caroline Lucas (below)!Thus the Unfortunate Hammond will not introduce what this organ suggests and will continue to persist in imposing a cruel and regressive tax on something that many poor people regard as an essential to enable them to go about their lives.

    Especially in rural areas where there is much poverty and public transport is most notable by it’s absence!

    Of course, an EQUITABLE system of car tax would be to tax the car on an assessment of its value.
    We suggest this:

    VED upon purchase: 2.5% of invoice (subject to a minimum of £50 pa).
    For a £30,000 car = £750
    VED end year 1: three quarters of initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £562.50
    VED end year 2: two thirds of initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £500
    VED end year 3: half initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £375
    VED end year 4: one third initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £250
    VED end year 5: one quarter initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £187.50
    VED end year 6: one fifth initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £150
    VED end year 7: one tenth initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £75
    VED end year 8: one twelfth initial VED. For a £30,000 car = £62.50
    VED end year 9: Minimum/Flat Rate £50

    Thus for all cars over 10 years old, a flat rate of £50 would be applied.

    On 21st July 2015, we did.
    GOTO: http://www.british-gazette.co.uk/2015/07/21/death-and-carbon-taxes/
    Allow us to give two current examples to demonstrate the iniquity of Ms Lucas’s obsession with CO2!

    A vehicle purchased by many on modest incomes is the Dacia Sandero that starts from £6,995.
    For those such as the Unfortunate Hammond’s constituents living in St. George’s Hill, a new Rolls-Royce Phantom VIII starts from £405,000.
    For the Unfortunate Hammond’s constituents their new EW P8 (assuming they have not “up-spec’d) having gone for the “basic” version, their 1st year car tax will be £2,070 (0.5% of cost) and their 2nd year will be £450 (0.11% of cost). For the people who live near me who purchase a new Dacia Sandero at £6,995, their 1st year car tax will be £165 (2.36% of cost) and their 2nd year will be £140 (2.0% of cost). The Tories! Don’t ya just love ‘em! Answer, “Yes!” If you live in St. George’s Hill!
    Source: https://www.gov.uk/vehicle-tax-rate-tables
    Under the British Gazette’s proposal, for the Unfortunate Hammond’s constituents, their new EW P8 (assuming they have not “up-spec’d) having gone for the “basic” version, their 1st year car tax would be £10,125! Whilst the people who live near me who purchase a new Dacia Sandero their 1st year car tax would be £174.87!
    Of course, that amounts to £9.87 more than at present.
    However, their 2nd year VED will be £131.15! A saving of £8.85 than at present.
    Of course, one could set the VED rate lower. However VED goes into the Consolidated Fund and tax receipts are needed to pay for the NHS and so many other things.
    Now, British Gazette readers will know that the Editor has views on how the UK achieves Brexit that are radically different from his fellow UKIP members. However, we attended a public meeting on Brexit at the end of May organised by the Lib-Dems – where Andrew George the former MP labelled UKIP as being “far right”. Well we would suggest to Mr George that progressive VED is not a “far right” policy!

    Write a comment