Should Cyclists Pay Road Tax

Mark Tapley · 20-05-2013 10:35PM

The Op is a begrudger. If you have a complaint about Motorcycle tax make that complaint. Don't advocate for taking away one of the free things we have left. I pay tax for both a car and motorbike and don't cycle very much but I love the fact that I can just jump on my bicycle and go without any forms or red tape.

JerCotter7 · 20-05-2013 10:35PM

Seaneh wrote: »

But it is a tax for the privilege of using a motor vehicle on the road.

Motorists pay more towards road upkeep than peds and cyclists (and public transport users), but they do more damage than peds and cyclists (and public transport users).

The point of this thread was "cyclists dont pay to use the road".
They do, we all do.

I pointed out that road users don't pay as much for the privilege of using motor vehicles on the road as they cost in road damage (which is a direct consequence of their road use).

Are you going to now try and argue that motor tax isn't a direct tax on the privilege of using the road?

But you have to buy fuel to use a vehicle on the road. I already told you I think cyclists shouldn't pay "road" tax. What I am taking issue with is you claiming that motorists do more damage than they give to the government in taxes. It's wrong.

Also rethink your last line. You're the one arguing that it isn't. Unless you left out the part about using a vehicle on said road.

irish bloke · 20-05-2013 10:38PM

Seaneh wrote: »

Do you have any proof that motorists are paying more than than they cost?

What??? I never said that. Again your not answering the question.

You stated fuel tax does not go on road maintenance but rather towards teachers, banks, schools etc.

Do you think it's fair for motorists to pay more for teachers, banks, schools etc then non motorists

endacl · 20-05-2013 10:40PM

irish bloke wrote: »

Do you think it's fair for motorists to pay more for teachers, banks, schools etc then non motorists

As a motorist, I don't care. As a cyclist, meh.

Seaneh · 20-05-2013 10:43PM

irish bloke wrote: »

What??? I never said that. Again your not answering the question.

You stated fuel tax does not go on road maintenance but rather towards teachers, banks, schools etc.

Do you think it's fair for motorists to pay more for teachers, banks, schools etc then non motorists

They don't.

They pay tax into a central fund, like everyone else, to pay for the cost of everything.

The direct tax they pay for the privilege of using the road, doesn't even add enough to that central fund to cover the cost of their road use, so no, they aren't paying more towards doctors and nurses and teachers and politicians holidays, they are in fact costing the central fund more per capita than they contribute to the central fund in direct taxation.

Your argument is beyond flawed.

murraykil · 20-05-2013 10:44PM

stephen97 wrote: »

i say yes, motorcyclists have to pay and receive no benefits in terms of parking, bus lanes. but cyclists get cycle lanes and parking places without contributing

:rolleyes:

Let's hope the voting age isn't ever reduced to 16!

Jimoslimos · 20-05-2013 10:45PM

Seaneh wrote: »

Do you have any proof that motorists are paying more than than they cost?

I think the argument that is made is along the lines of secondary benefit to the economy. People are able to get to work, earn money, pay income tax, etc. Also certain businesses are reliant on vehicles and the road network, e.g. couriers. These also contribute towards the total tax intake in more ways than simply motor tax.

Which is fair enough. However that same argument rarely gets mentioned when factoring in the cost of public transport - which also provides the same benefits or as in this case, cycling which is a negligible cost to the system whilst providing many of the same transport needs.

Freddy Smelly · 20-05-2013 10:48PM

stephen97 wrote: »

i say yes, motorcyclists have to pay and receive no benefits in terms of parking, bus lanes. but cyclists get cycle lanes and parking places without contributing

its called motor tax not road tax

07Lapierre · 20-05-2013 10:50PM

scudzilla wrote: »

I do think that cyclists should have to have some kind of Insurance

Quite a few cyclists do! It's a condition of cycling club membership

http://www.cyclingireland.ie/Home/FAQ.aspx

irish bloke · 20-05-2013 10:52PM

Seaneh wrote: »

They don't.

They pay tax into a central fund, like everyone else, to pay for the cost of everything.

The direct tax they pay for the privilege of using the road, doesn't even add enough to that central fund to cover the cost of their road use, so no, they aren't paying more towards doctors and nurses and teachers and politicians holidays, they are in fact costing the central fund more per capita than they contribute to the central fund in direct taxation.

Your argument is beyond flawed.

That's just crap to be honest. Motor tax and fuel tax together would pay for road maintenance many times over, so therefore motorists are paying more to the central fund then non motorists.

As a side point, there are many many rural dwellers who need there own motor transportation to commute to and from work, so to your earlier point, it is not always a choice to own a motor vehicle.

Gorilla Rising · 20-05-2013 11:11PM

Seaneh wrote: »

In 2008, 2009 the take for motor tax was about €850million and €835million respectively, the cost of building and maintaining roads in those two years was €1.4billion and €1.2billion respectively.

'Building' is the key word here.

Should you, as a road user and cyclist (assuming for arguments sake you don't drive) not contribute then? If roads are being built for your use as well as for drivers.

For the record, I couldn't care less about who pays what, just asking.

Seaneh wrote: »

As I said earlier, if the cycle lanes are properly designed and properly built and properly maintained, then you'd have an argument I(a shíte one mind, but an argument nonetheless). But as it is, the cycle path network in Ireland is almost completely useless.

The ones that are there still had to built and marked etc, whether they're up to scratch is somewhat irrelvant.

Plenty of roads aren't up to scratch in this country. I still think I should pay motor tax.

Seaneh · 21-05-2013 05:40AM

Gorilla Rising wrote: »

'Building' is the key word here.

Should you, as a road user and cyclist (assuming for arguments sake you don't drive) not contribute then? If roads are being built for your use as well as for drivers.

For the record, I couldn't care less about who pays what, just asking.

The ones that are there still had to built and marked etc, whether they're up to scratch is somewhat irrelvant.

Plenty of roads aren't up to scratch in this country. I still think I should pay motor tax.

Cyclists do pay for roads, as already stated.

We pay VAT on our bikes, and every time we buy new tyres or wheels or smaller parts or upgrade our groupsets or buy a second bike (most cyclists will have more than 1 bike) or buy accessories like helmets, cycling glasses, mitts, jerseys or jackets or the food we take on longer cycles or the coffee we buy when we stop in a cafe half war through a 100km cycle and so on. That's 23% of everything we buy for use while cycling goes straight to toe government to pay our share of building and maintaining the transport network, paying for schools, doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, bank debt and of course, ploiticians holidays.

I'd imagine if the math could be done, the cost of maintaining the current cycle path system and painting a few more white lines is far less than we contribute through what we spend on out bikes/associated gear.

And then you have the however much is taken from out income tax to help pay for all of the afore mentioned costs on top of that.

Motorists pay more than other road users because they cost more to clean up after and more to accommodate.

Simples.

fasttalkerchat · 21-05-2013 05:47AM

I think that serious cyclists (the ones with helmets, lycra and expensive bikes) should pay a few euro a year to contribute to cycling infrastructure and parking. They should also get a basic insurance policy covering injury where they are at fault. These cyclists can cycle on all public roads (not motorways) but can be fined for cycling on paths etc.

Kids and anyone who takes a bike to the shop when the car is off the road or just in the summer can continue as normal however cannot cycle on 100km/h roads.

endacl · 21-05-2013 01:24PM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I think that serious cyclists (the ones with helmets, lycra and expensive bikes) should pay a few euro a year to contribute to cycling infrastructure and parking. They should also get a basic insurance policy covering injury where they are at fault. These cyclists can cycle on all public roads (not motorways) but can be fined for cycling on paths etc.

Kids and anyone who takes a bike to the shop when the car is off the road or just in the summer can continue as normal however cannot cycle on 100km/h roads.

So the experienced, serious ones, who are less likely to cause or be involved in accidents, and who will most likely do less damage, should be insured? As it happens, to qualify for a ci license, those serious cyclists you mention are insured.

Anybody clueless/reckless on the other hand, would pay nothing?

Your logic rocks! You should definitely be running things.

Triangla · 21-05-2013 01:27PM

Where does my 3 year old daughter go to pay her road tax for her bike?

jam_mac_jam · 21-05-2013 01:42PM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I think that serious cyclists (the ones with helmets, lycra and expensive bikes) should pay a few euro a year to contribute to cycling infrastructure and parking. They should also get a basic insurance policy covering injury where they are at fault. These cyclists can cycle on all public roads (not motorways) but can be fined for cycling on paths etc.

Kids and anyone who takes a bike to the shop when the car is off the road or just in the summer can continue as normal however cannot cycle on 100km/h roads.

So, how do you judge that? Tax on lycra or good bikes? Its not really feasible is it?

Ush1 · 21-05-2013 01:42PM

Seaneh wrote: »

Cyclists do pay for roads, as already stated.

We pay VAT on our bikes, and every time we buy new tyres or wheels or smaller parts or upgrade our groupsets or buy a second bike (most cyclists will have more than 1 bike) or buy accessories like helmets, cycling glasses, mitts, jerseys or jackets or the food we take on longer cycles or the coffee we buy when we stop in a cafe half war through a 100km cycle and so on. That's 23% of everything we buy for use while cycling goes straight to toe government to pay our share of building and maintaining the transport network, paying for schools, doctors, nurses, teachers, social workers, bank debt and of course, ploiticians holidays.

I'd imagine if the math could be done, the cost of maintaining the current cycle path system and painting a few more white lines is far less than we contribute through what we spend on out bikes/associated gear.

And then you have the however much is taken from out income tax to help pay for all of the afore mentioned costs on top of that.

Motorists pay more than other road users because they cost more to clean up after and more to accommodate.

Simples.

You'd imagine.

People complain about "jaysus our roads are sh1te" all the time, doesn't matter though, they still have to pay.

May not mean you have to pay as much tax as a car but everything has a cost.

Ush1 · 21-05-2013 01:46PM

hardCopy wrote: »

If deaths and injuries caused by cyclists ever become an issue then we can revisit this. For now it's a no from me.

What about cyclists crashing into a car and damaging it?

Chips Lovell · 21-05-2013 01:47PM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

I think that serious cyclists (the ones with helmets, lycra and expensive bikes) should pay a few euro a year to contribute to cycling infrastructure and parking. They should also get a basic insurance policy covering injury where they are at fault. These cyclists can cycle on all public roads (not motorways) but can be fined for cycling on paths etc.

Kids and anyone who takes a bike to the shop when the car is off the road or just in the summer can continue as normal however cannot cycle on 100km/h roads.

Actually, most of the "serious cyclists", i.e. racers or members of clubs already have insurance, since they'd be members of Cycling Ireland, which has a policy that covers you for racing and training.

And they'd rarely if ever use cycling infrastructure or parking. You ride on the road.

radia · 21-05-2013 02:13PM

And then, of course, there's the convincing argument by some that if you don't pay "road tax" you deserve to be run off the road.
This woman apparently went round a bend at speed, bounced a cyclist off her bonnet, and kept going. Now under investigation by Norfolk police.

See her tweet:
Emma%20Way%20tweet.jpg

Also tweeted (while driving) that she was stuck behind too slow a driver, and a photo of her speedometer at 95 mph.

More details:
http://road.cc/content/news/84212-norwich-police-seek-driver-who-tweeted-about-collision-cyclist
http://ipayroadtax.com/no-such-thing-as-road-tax/i-knocked-a-cyclist-off-his-bike-i-have-right-of-way-he-doesnt-even-pay-road-tax/

How come I can't get an image to display here using tags?

PerrDub · 21-05-2013 02:37PM

As for those "Mountain cycler's" cycling off the Road... make them pay DIRT tax! :pac: :rolleyes:

Anyone · 21-05-2013 02:40PM

Triangla wrote: »

Where does my 3 year old daughter go to pay her road tax for her bike?

It could be deducted at source from her Child Benefit?

fasttalkerchat · 21-05-2013 02:42PM

jam_mac_jam wrote: »

So, how do you judge that? Tax on lycra or good bikes? Its not really feasible is it?

They would opt in to registering in order to use their bike as a vehicle eg. On all roads and not just in towns and housing estates.

endacl · 21-05-2013 02:44PM

fasttalkerchat wrote: »

They would opt in to registering in order to use their bike as a vehicle eg. On all roads and not just in towns and housing estates.

And..... We've actually transcended daft.

You might want to check out the new 'tax on kids' thread. Your posts would fit in perfectly on that one.

endacl · 21-05-2013 02:45PM

Anyone wrote: »

It could be deducted at source from her Child Benefit?

Gets complicated if she bought her bike on the 'cycle to play school' scheme.

BostonB · 21-05-2013 02:47PM

Theres a road tax?

lertsnim · 21-05-2013 02:49PM

Motor Tax. It is Motor Tax

hardCopy · 21-05-2013 02:50PM

Ush1 wrote: »

What about cyclists crashing into a car and damaging it?

Is that a problem? Since when?

BostonB · 21-05-2013 02:51PM

How can you charge a motor tax for something without a motor?

hardCopy · 21-05-2013 02:51PM

lertsnim wrote: »

Motor Tax. It is Motor Tax

Tax their emissions Joe! Make them pay by the fart!

Should Cyclists Pay Road Tax

Comments