Budget in april

stek

car tax- up at least 10%
fuel- at least 5%
tolls - up another 50c
perhaps a car ownership tax
tax tax tax..
Might consider renting a car after April 7

Darragh29

I'd say a carbon tax will be coming in at around 10 cent a litre for vehicle fuel.

And SUV tax I think is a runner also, and wouldn't be a bad idea either. Hit all those yummie mummies driving the kids to school in the 3 litre X5 or the Range Rover Vogue.

There's LOADS of folks driving around out there with no valid NCT and have been doing it for years. Hitting them with a 200 Euro on the spot fine or the car being impounded should sort that out and also bring in a good couple of million.

TGi666

there going to have to do something to get people to buy cars again not send then to the crusher i think fines sholud be increased ie parking,speeding etc.

Hal1

stek wrote: »

car tax- up at least 10%
fuel- at least 5%
tolls - up another 50c
perhaps a car ownership tax
tax tax tax..
Might consider renting a car after April 7

Tell me these are made up statistics by yourself. :mad:

Darragh29

Here's what I'd be doing also. Putting a ceiling on Dublin City parking charges, say 3 Euro an hour AND introducing a new rate of 50% tax on that service. All these huge carparks in town I imagine have been long paid off and everytime I go into town, the price of hourly parking has gone up!

If you introduced a new tax rate without the ceiling, the robbers would just add it onto their hourly rate, so cap the retail hourly rate and hit them hard with a new tax rate, these lads have been creaming it for years and can well afford to pay. Same could be done with niteclub charges, 12/15/20/30 Euro at the door!?!?! Cap the amount that can be charged and bring in a new rate of 50% tax on admission charges. If you are caught out, you lose your licence, next!

Senna

I'd say 10c a litre of petrol is to be expected.

Not terrible at the moment, but do you think they'll take it off again when oil hit over $100 a barrel again, not a chance. Anything that comes in now is for the long haul.

Guy:Incognito

Darragh29 wrote: »

And SUV tax I think is a runner also, and wouldn't be a bad idea either. Hit all those yummie mummies driving the kids to school in the 3 litre X5 or the Range Rover Vogue.

.

Why should they be hit any harder than someone drivign a 3 litre BMW or Merc saloon? Other than being physically higher, whats the difference?

Darragh29 wrote: »

Here's what I'd be doing also. Putting a ceiling on Dublin City parking charges, say 3 Euro an hour AND introducing a new rate of 50% tax on that service. All these huge carparks in town I imagine have been long paid off and everytime I go into town, the price of hourly parking has gone up!

Did you get that parts business off the ground?

Would you appreciate the government deciding you'd earned enough now so they are capping the prices on your parts? Private business can charge what they like for the products and services they supply. They own them and it's their right.

Darragh29

Stekelly wrote: »

Why should they be hit any harder than someone drivign a 3 litre BMW or Merc saloon? Other than being physically higher, whats the difference?

If they have 80K for a tank, then they are game for more tax I think!

Stekelly wrote: »

Did you get that parts business off the ground?

Would you appreciate the government deciding you'd earned enough now so they are capping the prices on your parts? Private business can charge what they like for the products and services they supply. They own them and it's their right.

I'm still in site test mode with the payment processing company... I hear your point on the free trade argument. But apparently we are being told that, "those best positioned to pay will be paying"... If you have a car park in Dublin with 2,000 parking spaces, charging 3.50 Euro an hour, with full occupancy (and they are always full, 6 days a week!), that's taking in 56,000 Euro a day or 336,000 Euro a week, or over 1.3 million Euro a month...

Now I'd be hitting them for more tax, considering that the car park was probably built on tax breaks and the building has been paid for ten times over. And I'd be doing it in a way that they couldn't just slap it back onto the consumer...

Guy:Incognito

Darragh29 wrote: »

If they have 80K for a tank, then they are game for more tax I think!


.

Who are we talking about ? The SUV drivers? The S Class starts a good chunk north of 100k.

Darragh29 wrote: »

If they have 80K for a tank, then they are game for more tax I think!




I'm still in site test mode with the payment processing company... I hear your point on the free trade argument. But apparently we are being told that, "those best positioned to pay will be paying"... If you have a car park in Dublin with 2,000 parking spaces, charging 3.50 Euro an hour, with full occupancy (and they are always full, 6 days a week!), that's taking in 56,000 Euro a day or 336,000 Euro a week, or over 1.3 million Euro a month...

Now I'd be hitting them for more tax, considering that the car park was probably built on tax breaks and the building has been paid for ten times over. And I'd be doing it in a way that they couldn't just slap it back onto the consumer...

So if yours parts business takes off and you hit what someone might consider a high figure, it'd be ok for them to cap your prices and tax you more than another guy?

Im all for taxing the wealthy but thats far too much specific interfereance for my likeing.

Darragh29

Stekelly wrote: »

Who are we talking about? The SUV drivers?

+1. Anyone who uses a 3 litre truck to bring their kids 1 mile to school should be shot, never mind taxed. :eek:

Guy:Incognito

Darragh29 wrote: »

+1. Anyone who uses a 3 litre truck to bring their kids 1 mile to school should be shot, never mind taxed. :eek:

But my point is why tax a taller version of a 5 series more just for being taller? It doesnt take up any more road and has the same size engine.

I get annoyed as much as anyone about stupid pointless little trips like that clogging roads but at the end of the day they are paying their taxes so it's their right. I dont see why it's ok for them to drive and S500 but not an X5.

My missus drives a Scenic. Thats basically a taller Megane, should she be hit with this new tall tax?

NiSmO

This post has been deleted.

Saab Ed

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'd say a carbon tax will be coming in at around 10 cent a litre for vehicle fuel.

And SUV tax I think is a runner also, and wouldn't be a bad idea either. Hit all those yummie mummies driving the kids to school in the 3 litre X5 or the Range Rover Vogue.

There's LOADS of folks driving around out there with no valid NCT and have been doing it for years. Hitting them with a 200 Euro on the spot fine or the car being impounded should sort that out and also bring in a good couple of million.

I'm not going to disagree with you that driving without an NCT is wrong but just cool the jets there with the aul fines. This is a time when the government are very hard up and if they got away with that ,well you might just have wished too hard. Where do you stop? €20 for a brake light out, €50 for a dirty reg plate etc etc. I want safe roads as much as anyone but I dont want us to end up like England. On the spot fines usually end up hitting ordinary folk rather than the tramp who doesnt care and the goverment know that hence fines rather than jail tems for real crims. Oh and on SUV tax you have my 100% support. Why buy an X5 over a 5 Series estate and so on and so on. I've always hated jeeps and SUV's. They belong working in the country.

Drummerboy08

Saab Ed wrote: »

€20 for a brake light out

Yes. Nothing worse. People should learn to check their lights once a week at least. But thats a different arguement.

I reckon -

Motor Tax will go up
Petrol will go up (again)
The parking levy will be introduced
Tolls up,
Tougher enforcement of traffic offences (speeding, running lights etc)
BIK may go up

Its gonna be a tough year for the motorist.

Saab Ed

Drummerboy I know its annoying but we cant let them get silly on us over the next 12 months. Problem is without a fine the guards wont bother their bo**ox stopping people. Common sence says people should be stopped and warned about the problem but if on the spot fines start coming in for everything things will just go to pot.

Guy:Incognito

Saab Ed wrote: »

Why buy an X5 over a 5 Series estate and so on and so on. I've always hated jeeps and SUV's. They belong working in the country.

Why not buy one? Is anyone going to attempt to comne up with an actual valid reason other than them having the label "SUV"? What about large MPV's like the Espace or Galaxy, I'd imagine they would be close to the height of an X5?

The X5 has the same footprint as a similar size saloon. This pointless suv bashing is getting ridiculous at this stage.

So again, why does a 3litre X5 deserve some special new tax more than an S500, What about some huge american towncar with a 6.5 litre engine, 14 foot bonnet and a bigger footprint than an X5?

Drummerboy08

That is a fair point - but a lot of people out there will just drive it on regardless of being stopped by the Gardai.

Is it a case of carrying the receipt for the bulb in the car with you? I dont know.

Things will get silly, but its up to the individual motorist to make sure that they cannot be touched for anything, not the governement.

A simple light check once a week takes care of the blown bulb fine. Stick to the speed limits and you wont get the speeding fine. Dont run the long-turned-amber-into-red-light and you wont get hit with that one. By not doing any of the above, you only give the government another excuse to fleece you.

A little common sense goes a long way.

agent_smith

I think it is a very VERY dangerous thing to be taxing everyday things such as fuel etc... IMHO the best option for the govt is to increase taxes at source and lower VAT in line with sterling. As for increasing road/car/fuel/carbon tax etc... this would not be a very forward thinking decision. Our problem / predicament now is that people are not spending money... there is a credit flow problem. Increasing fuel costs etc... has the side effect of increasing inflation. Mr Brennans Bread will have to increase the price of his sliced pan to cover the extra expense. The more expensive everyday things become, the more inflation increases. The less people spend.... viscious circle....

Guy:Incognito

agent_smith wrote: »

I think it is a very VERY dangerous thing to be taxing everyday things such as fuel etc...

I think that ship sailed a few decades back.:)

Saab Ed

agent_smith wrote: »

I think it is a very VERY dangerous thing to be taxing everyday things such as fuel etc... IMHO the best option for the govt is to increase taxes at source and lower VAT in line with sterling. As for increasing road/car/fuel/carbon tax etc... this would not be a very forward thinking decision. Our problem / predicament now is that people are not spending money... there is a credit flow problem. Increasing fuel costs etc... has the side effect of increasing inflation. Mr Brennans Bread will have to increase the price of his sliced pan to cover the extra expense. The more expensive everyday things become, the more inflation increases. The less people spend.... viscious circle....

Plus half the country lives 25 - 50 miles away from where they work due to bad planning. There are no trains in Blessington, Ashbourne, Virgina, Navan etc so should these people be taxed even more just for going to work?

techdiver

Stekelly wrote: »

Why not buy one? Is anyone going to attempt to comne up with an actual valid reason other than them having the label "SUV"? What about large MPV's like the Espace or Galaxy, I'd imagine they would be close to the height of an X5?

The X5 has the same footprint as a similar size saloon. This pointless suv bashing is getting ridiculous at this stage.

So again, why does a 3litre X5 deserve some special new tax more than an S500, What about some huge american towncar with a 6.5 litre engine, 14 foot bonnet and a bigger footprint than an X5?

I think that all fuel inefficient vehicles should have the arse taxed out of them. Regardless of whether it is an SUV or town car.

It does sicken my arse looking at yummy mummy's driving their fat kids to school because both them and their kids are too lazy to walk, or that the yummy mummy has spent too much time painting her face instead of taking the time to walk her kids to school.

voxpop

agent_smith wrote: »

I think it is a very VERY dangerous thing to be taxing everyday things such as fuel etc... IMHO the best option for the govt is to increase taxes at source and lower VAT in line with sterling. As for increasing road/car/fuel/carbon tax etc... this would not be a very forward thinking decision. Our problem / predicament now is that people are not spending money... there is a credit flow problem. Increasing fuel costs etc... has the side effect of increasing inflation. Mr Brennans Bread will have to increase the price of his sliced pan to cover the extra expense. The more expensive everyday things become, the more inflation increases. The less people spend.... viscious circle....

They will put up petrol but leave diesel

Saab Ed

Stekelly wrote: »

Why not buy one? Is anyone going to attempt to comne up with an actual valid reason other than them having the label "SUV"? What about large MPV's like the Espace or Galaxy, I'd imagine they would be close to the height of an X5?

The X5 has the same footprint as a similar size saloon. This pointless suv bashing is getting ridiculous at this stage.

So again, why does a 3litre X5 deserve some special new tax more than an S500, What about some huge american towncar with a 6.5 litre engine, 14 foot bonnet and a bigger footprint than an X5?

I'll use the X5 disel versus 530d as an example. X5 is less fuel effiecent, has less usable space ,is more dangerous to other road users because of its size due to the fact that it hinders everybody elses vision of the road and its higher bonnet line is far more dangerous in an impact with a person especially a child. Plus a 530 estate is just a much nicer car to drive. Espace and a Galaxy use 2 litre engines and provide far more useable space and better fuel consumption in a similar sized package. And why not tax an S500 higher. A big car always has equalled big bills. I just cant see an S500 owner complaining too much about his road tax going up €100 a year

smash

Darragh29 wrote: »

+1. Anyone who uses a 3 litre truck to bring their kids 1 mile to school should be shot, never mind taxed. :eek:

And why is that? if it's used for school runs then it's doing low mileage... and less damage to the environment than a 1.9ltr van that's doing 100k plus a year!

techdiver wrote: »

I think that all fuel inefficient vehicles should have the arse taxed out of them. Regardless of whether it is an SUV or town car.

And why is that exactly? I have a 3ltr, I do about 5k a year in it so why should I pay more than someone that does over 10 times my mileage?

techdiver wrote: »

It does sicken my arse looking at yummy mummy's driving their fat kids to school because both them and their kids are too lazy to walk, or that the yummy mummy has spent too much time painting her face instead of taking the time to walk her kids to school.

Not everyone lives within walking distance from a school, and out of what... 3000/4000 students in a school at any time, how many "yummy mummy's" are there driving big SUV's? ffs man get a grip of yourself!

Increase Tolls for cars with only one occupant.

Arguments For - Promotes Car sharing, which will benefit everyone!
Arguments Against - Will only work on "Cashiered" Booths

Cyrus

Saab Ed wrote: »

And why not tax an S500 higher. A big car always has equalled big bills. I just cant see an S500 owner complaining too much about his road tax going up €100 a year

because everyone driving an s500 is loaded right......

Cyrus

this thread is full of begrudgery, jesus people need to get over it

dodgyme

Cyrus wrote: »

this thread is full of begrudgery, jesus people need to get over it

Thats manure.! - incidentally what most of the SUV's seem to never come near. Tax the hell outta them out of these big awkward lookin yokes. (and I am not just talking about the driver and passengers here)

techdiver

Cyrus wrote: »

this thread is full of begrudgery, jesus people need to get over it

Begrudgery is nothing to do with it.

Lets get some facts here:

SUV's are more dangerous to everybody except the occupants. They also are way more inefficient than other cars that are meant for urban use.

If you can afford to drive and fuel one, you should have to pay extra tax for that privilege and the extra pollution that they do and the danger they put other road users and pedestrians in.

Guy:Incognito

Saab Ed wrote: »

I'll use the X5 disel versus 530d as an example. X5 is less fuel effiecent, has less usable space ,is more dangerous to other road users because of its size due to the fact that it hinders everybody elses vision of the road and its higher bonnet line is far more dangerous in an impact with a person especially a child. Plus a 530 estate is just a much nicer car to drive. Espace and a Galaxy use 2 litre engines and provide far more useable space and better fuel consumption in a similar sized package. And why not tax an S500 higher. A big car always has equalled big bills. I just cant see an S500 owner complaining too much about his road tax going up €100 a year

The debate here was specifically about taxing cars that come in to the "suv" bracket.Whether a 530D estate is a nicer place to be is irrelevant. There are hundreds of other vehicles on the road that fit the safety concerns you raise with the X5, vans and trucks for a start.

The basic fact is that people should buy what the want and can afford, but addign extra tax to something because its a bit higher than a simalr car is ridiculous.

dodgyme wrote: »

Thats manure.! - incidentally what most of the SUV's seem to never come near. Tax the hell outta them out of these big awkward lookin yokes. (and I am not just talking about the driver and passengers here)

So now we're taxing them becaus eof their looks.

Why not just tax all ugly cars so?

Other than height they are the same dimensions as a large saloon.

smash

Deleted User wrote: »

Increase Tolls for cars with only one occupant.

Arguments For - Promotes Car sharing, which will benefit everyone!
Arguments Against - Will only work on "Cashiered" Booths

And how will this help a recession or encourage people to start spending again?

smash

techdiver wrote: »

If you can afford to drive and fuel one, you should have to pay extra tax for that privilege and the extra pollution that they do and the danger they put other road users and pedestrians in.

They don't all cost 100k+ - Jesus you'll get an X5 for peanuts now... so they're easily affordable! So really you want to tax the hell out of someone just because you don't like what they drive!

fricatus

Stekelly wrote: »

The debate here was specifically about taxing cars that come in to the "suv" bracket.Whether a 530D estate is a nicer place to be is irrelevant. There are hundreds of other vehicles on the road that fit the safety concerns you raise with the X5, vans and trucks for a start.

Yes, but you have to pass a specific test to drive a truck.

Stekelly wrote: »

Other than height they are the same dimensions as a large saloon.

It's the height that's the problem. There's no problem pulling off at a roundabout if there's a 520D or S500 next to you, because you can see over the bonnet or through the windows. If it's an X5, Hyundai Santa Fe or (shudder) a Kia Sportage, you have to wait until the bloody thing's gone out of your line of vision before you can move.

Saab Ed

steve06 wrote: »

They don't all cost 100k+ - Jesus you'll get an X5 for peanuts now... so they're easily affordable! So really you want to tax the hell out of someone just because you don't like what they drive!

Just because they are cheap now and that suggests that the everyday man can afford one to you that meens that they shouldnt be taxed heavier. Do you think its a good idea for everybody to drive second hand cheap [EMAIL="SUV@s"]SUV's[/EMAIL] . All the more reason to tax them more I say..

techdiver

steve06 wrote: »

They don't all cost 100k+ - Jesus you'll get an X5 for peanuts now... so they're easily affordable! So really you want to tax the hell out of someone just because you don't like what they drive!

The point is we need to make them more expensive through taxation. I'm not just talking about X5's, I'm talking about all gas guzzlers. This includes all vehicles that contribute more than their fair share to climate change and particle emissions.

I make no apology though for having a special hatred of SUV's being used in urban areas. Especially by people who cannot handle them and have no consideration for other people on the road, such as the yummy mummy who clipped my car at traffic lights and kept on driving.

Drummerboy08

I think the government would be delighted if everyone bought SUV's. Think about it. The majority will be registered before 08, so it will be the old CC based taxed system. How much is it to tax a 3.0 engine now??!

They will also make more money on petrol - an X5 will use more juice than say a Focus or Golf.

Guy:Incognito

Saab Ed wrote: »

Just because they are cheap now and that suggests that the everyday man can afford one to you that meens that they shouldnt be taxed heavier. Do you think its a good idea for everybody to drive second hand cheap [EMAIL="SUV@s"]SUV's[/EMAIL] . All the more reason to tax them more I say..

Its as good an idea as everyone drivign similarly engined and sized Saloons.

fricatus wrote: »

It's the height that's the problem. There's no problem pulling off at a roundabout if there's a 520D or S500 next to you, because you can see over the bonnet or through the windows. If it's an X5, Hyundai Santa Fe or (shudder) a Kia Sportage, you have to wait until the bloody thing's gone out of your line of vision before you can move.

What about large MPV's?

I pull out beside anythign or I wait till it pulls out first. It's not difficult.

Cars with heavy tints on the windows block your vies just as much.

fricatus wrote: »

Yes, but you have to pass a specific test to drive a truck.

.

Vans? Vans up to 3.5 t are very bid and you could put an SUV inside a box van.


The fact is there is no reason why a car should be taxed more just because of it's bodytype (suv).
If it is then a 520D estate should cost more to tax than a saloon version aswell.

smash

Saab Ed wrote: »

Just because they are cheap now and that suggests that the everyday man can afford one to you that meens that they shouldnt be taxed heavier. Do you think its a good idea for everybody to drive second hand cheap [EMAIL="SUV@s"]SUV's[/EMAIL] . All the more reason to tax them more I say..

Do you think it's a good idea to tax people because they have something that you don't like.... obviously!

In my own opinion I think road tax should be wiped out and extra duty put on fuel - level playing field for everyone!

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

How much is it to tax a 3.0 engine now??!

I think my tax is about 1200 or something.

techdiver

Drummerboy08 wrote: »

I think the government would be delighted if everyone bought SUV's. Think about it. The majority will be registered before 08, so it will be the old CC based taxed system. How much is it to tax a 3.0 engine now??!

They will also make more money on petrol - an X5 will use more juice than say a Focus or Golf.

I think you may be missing the fact that we may take in more revenue in taxation, but we would also be paying more in fines for breach of our Kyoto commitments.

We need to reduce our energy usage and while taxation needs to be increased to boost the government coffers, it also needs to be used as a deterrent to excess carbon output.

Guy:Incognito

techdiver wrote: »

The point is we need to make them more expensive through taxation. I'm not just talking about X5's, I'm talking about all gas guzzlers. This includes all vehicles that contribute more than their fair share to climate change and particle emissions.

I make no apology though for having a special hatred of SUV's being used in urban areas. Especially by people who cannot handle them and have no consideration for other people on the road, such as the yummy mummy who clipped my car at traffic lights and kept on driving.

Gas guzzler is a retarded american term btw. But if you insist on using it, then an older petrol 5 litre engine is a gas guzzler, not a diesel BMW X5 returning 32mpg. (slightly better mpg with the newer version).

A 730i gets 26mpg, but hey, its not an SUV so it's not evil.

I think using rally and race cars in urban areas is ridiculous too, lets tax them more if they are registered to an adress inside the city boundry.

Generalisation?:rolleyes: I see we are bringing out the big guns now.

Gumbo

Darragh29 wrote: »

I'd say a carbon tax will be coming in at around 10 cent a litre for vehicle fuel.

And SUV tax I think is a runner also, and wouldn't be a bad idea either. Hit all those yummie mummies driving the kids to school in the 3 litre X5 or the Range Rover Vogue.
There's LOADS of folks driving around out there with no valid NCT and have been doing it for years. Hitting them with a 200 Euro on the spot fine or the car being impounded should sort that out and also bring in a good couple of million.

why should a 3.0D X5 be hit with a carbon tax when it has better MPG than my 2.0 petrol saloon?

assuming less MPG means more fill ups, and more of a drain on the worlds oil etc etc

smash

techdiver wrote: »

I think you may be missing the fact that we may take in more revenue in taxation, but we would also be paying more in fines for breach of our Kyoto commitments.

We need to reduce our energy usage and while taxation needs to be increased to boost the government coffers, it also needs to be used as a deterrent to excess carbon output.

You see, now you're totally mislead... motorists are getting hit for tax because they're an easy target. Pollution from cars is a very small fraction of the carbon output!

If you care so much about the environment then you wouldn't bother complaining about "big SUV's" and you'd go complaining about companies that wont upgrade factory equipment etc to more environment friendly alternatives!

And by the way, the pollution involved in building 1 Toyota Prius is more than what an X5 would put on in it's life time on the road!

techdiver

Stekelly wrote: »

Gas guzzler is a retarded american term btw.

Your opinion.

It's patently obvious that you have your opinion and I have mine and neither of us will change our minds about it. So we are chasing our tails arguing with each other.

I did however mention that I am talking about all "fuel inefficient" vehicles and was not picking on a particular model. And I also stated that tax should be based on the level of damage or potential damage to the environment, both in terms of air pollution and safety.

techdiver

steve06 wrote: »

You see, now you're totally mislead... motorists are getting hit for tax because they're an easy target. Pollution from cars is a very small fraction of the carbon output!

If you care so much about the environment then you wouldn't bother complaining about "big SUV's" and you'd go complaining about companies that wont upgrade factory equipment etc to more environment friendly alternatives!

And by the way, the pollution involved in building 1 Toyota Prius is more than what an X5 would put on in it's life time on the road!

I'm not an enviromental nut or anything. And I 100% agree about the Prius, I think it is a terrible car and causes more damage than it claims to save.

My complaint about SUV's is on a personal level, but my argument on taxation on inefficient vehicles is seperate.

As a point to the level of pollution caused by cars, I agree that all sectors of industry needs to be addressed.

Guy:Incognito

techdiver wrote: »

Your opinion.
.

Not really, even just take the first word alone. How many "gas stations" are there here?

techdiver

Stekelly wrote: »

Not really, even just take the first word alone. How many "gas stations" are there here?

Oh GOD, it's a turn of phrase. Get over it. You know the point I was trying to make, there is no need to change the topic to use of language or phrases.

BTW, gasoline and petrol are the same thing, just reffered to in a different way in the States.

Saab Ed

By in large SUV's are heavy drinkers and in my opinion heavy drinkers should be taxed more. Also I dont like lots of things but I dont for one minute suggest that things I dont like should be taxed more but there are lots of reasons to tax large SUV's more.

darc

I doubt if there will be any increase in the petrol price, but I do expect Duty of diesel to be raised by approx 8c a litre bringing it back to about the same price as petrol.

Currently duty on petrol is 50.79c / litre & duty on diesel is 36.8c / litre. - Diesel now accounts for over 50% of road fuel used in the country.

Also a 5c duty per litre of home heating oil / red diesel may be introduced.

As for the SUV arguments - they are already taxed far higher than other cars. Higher VRT due to bigger engines, Higher road tax due to higher emissions & higher taxes via higher use of petrol / diesel as many only do about 25 miles / gallon. - So SUV haters can smile knowing that on average an SUV driver contributes approx. €5500 to the tax coffers annually (based on €50k purchase value with 5 year change cycle & 25mpg) compared to average family car (€25k cost, 5year cycle, 45mpg) owner paying €1800 / year.

smash

Saab Ed wrote: »

By in large SUV's are heavy drinkers

My GTV 3.0 drinks less petrol than my 2.0 Almera GTI

Saab Ed wrote: »

in my opinion heavy drinkers should be taxed more.

They already are!

Anan1

Whatever about taxing fuel consumption (which, TBH wouldn't really suit me...) i'm all on for a tax on vehicles which inconvenience and endanger other road users. I'd sooner be driving behind an S600 than a Range Rover diesel any day of the week - at least I can see around the big saloon.

Guy:Incognito

Anan1 wrote: »

Whatever about taxing fuel consumption (which, TBH wouldn't really suit me...) i'm all on for a tax on vehicles which inconvenience and endanger other road users. I'd sooner be driving behind an S600 than a Range Rover diesel any day of the week - at least I can see around the big saloon.

Thats what safe distances are for. Theres plenty of far bigger vehicles that I regularly end up behind. Whats in front makes little difference as long as you are competant.

But seeing as we are choosing I'll take being stuck behind nothing thanks, only clear roads for me please.:)