On the subject of "Road Tax"
Jul. 11th, 2012 03:39 pm![[personal profile]](http://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
tajaselBecause I'm tired of getting into altercations with people who object to the presence of cyclists on the road on the basis that "they don't pay road tax", I thought I'd clear a few things up.
First: nobody pays road tax. Road tax doesn't even exist. The payment commonly known as road tax is actually called Vehicle Excise Duty, or VED, and it's a tax on the vehicle. It is paid as a license to drive or park a vehicle on public roads, and the amount paid usually depends on the emissions of the vehicle. So, as it happens, a bicycle rider pays the appropriate amount for their zero-emission vehicle!
Historically, the Road Fund (and its predecessor - the RF came into being in 1920, but taxes for vehicles were introduced in 1888) existed to pay for road construction and maintenance, but it was very heavily subsidised by local and general taxation, because RF wasn't enough to cover the costs, and eventually, in 1937, the government stopped ring-fencing the Road Fund and it all went into a big pot along with income tax and council tax, and it is this pot which pays for the upkeep of roads today.
It's also worth noting here that the original VED was introduced because the roads were intended for use by horses and cyclists, and the tax upon drivers was implemented to give them permission to use the roads. At risk of sounding like a small child: "we were here first!"
Amusingly, Winston Churchill once predicted the future in a speech opposing the Road Fund, saying: "It will be only a step from this for them to claim in a few years the moral ownership of the roads their contributions have created". Well, quite.
Cambridge Cycle Campaign also came out with a gem, suggesting that those who believe cyclists should be banned from the road for not paying this mythical "road tax" should also be in favour of smokers getting priority medical care, as non-smokers don't pay a "hospital tax".
This also led me to think about some of the vehicles that are exempt from Vehicle Excise Duty: fire engines, police cars, ambulances and other healthcare vehicles. Would those arguing that cyclists should be banned from the roads also ban the vehicles of the emergency services, I wonder?
(There are others too - vintage cars, army vehicles, vehicles imported by members of foreign armed forces, etc. and I wouldn't object to the argument that owners of these vehicles should pay VED.)
In short, this "cyclists don't pay road tax" argument is old, and boring, and so very very wrong.
First: nobody pays road tax. Road tax doesn't even exist. The payment commonly known as road tax is actually called Vehicle Excise Duty, or VED, and it's a tax on the vehicle. It is paid as a license to drive or park a vehicle on public roads, and the amount paid usually depends on the emissions of the vehicle. So, as it happens, a bicycle rider pays the appropriate amount for their zero-emission vehicle!
Historically, the Road Fund (and its predecessor - the RF came into being in 1920, but taxes for vehicles were introduced in 1888) existed to pay for road construction and maintenance, but it was very heavily subsidised by local and general taxation, because RF wasn't enough to cover the costs, and eventually, in 1937, the government stopped ring-fencing the Road Fund and it all went into a big pot along with income tax and council tax, and it is this pot which pays for the upkeep of roads today.
It's also worth noting here that the original VED was introduced because the roads were intended for use by horses and cyclists, and the tax upon drivers was implemented to give them permission to use the roads. At risk of sounding like a small child: "we were here first!"
Amusingly, Winston Churchill once predicted the future in a speech opposing the Road Fund, saying: "It will be only a step from this for them to claim in a few years the moral ownership of the roads their contributions have created". Well, quite.
Cambridge Cycle Campaign also came out with a gem, suggesting that those who believe cyclists should be banned from the road for not paying this mythical "road tax" should also be in favour of smokers getting priority medical care, as non-smokers don't pay a "hospital tax".
This also led me to think about some of the vehicles that are exempt from Vehicle Excise Duty: fire engines, police cars, ambulances and other healthcare vehicles. Would those arguing that cyclists should be banned from the roads also ban the vehicles of the emergency services, I wonder?
(There are others too - vintage cars, army vehicles, vehicles imported by members of foreign armed forces, etc. and I wouldn't object to the argument that owners of these vehicles should pay VED.)
In short, this "cyclists don't pay road tax" argument is old, and boring, and so very very wrong.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 03:04 pm (UTC)I always joked that instead of a "cycle to work day" Cambridge should have a "drive to work day" and we could see if it was actually more convenient for non-cyclists -- I predicted that it would be a lot MORE congested :)
no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 04:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 06:22 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 10:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 03:26 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 06:29 pm (UTC)In practice, regardless of wether we use the road by car, bike, or not at all, we ALL use the roads nearly equally - all the food we eat and (road based) public transport is used by everyone. It has to get about somehow!
no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 10:43 pm (UTC)What do I expect? I expect to be treated reasonably. Why should I face abuse for cycling on a small portion of road in a safe manner which doesn't inconvenience anyone?
"I pay more tax than you" is NOT an excuse for abusing cyclists. That's the whole point of this post - are you seriously excusing abusive motorists behaviour on the basis that they pay VED?!
no subject
Date: 2012-07-12 11:54 pm (UTC)It might be better to ask what might reasonably be expected when one group kills untold [1] thousands of people each year and maims tens of thousands, and the other does not. We don't seem to live in a reasonable world.
[1] Yes, I do mean that; direct road casualties are the tip of the air quality iceberg.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-11 09:27 pm (UTC)There's a formula somewhere which reckons damage to the road is proportional to the pressure on the road per square whatever to some large power. On that basis, lorries should pay a fortune and cyclists a very small fraction of a penny per year.
no subject
Date: 2012-07-12 07:37 am (UTC)