Treasury figures prove that "green" taxes are guff

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by royalmile, Apr 24, 2008.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

  1. From today's Telegraph:
    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2008/04/24/nlevy124.xml

    Just goes to show that when a Chancellor stands up in the House of Commons and says a tax is to encourage people to go "green" he speaks with fork tongue. Why can't they just be honest and say "I have just found a way of screwing most of you out of more money to pay for spin doctors etc".
     
  2. How does the Treasury know what will influence the Chelsea Tractor drivers around the country? When it starts to bite into their disposable income then they will start to change - just like it did with cigarettes.

    And don't start wittering on about farmers, their vehicles are company owned (by the farm) and so the running costs are offset.
     
  3. Ord_Sgt

    Ord_Sgt RIP

    You didn't read the article did you. :roll:
     
  4. And of course it is just 4x4's that are taxed heavily isn't it :roll:

    So farms pay more, profits reduced. That equals either less pay to the farmer and his staff or he will just pass the cost onto us.

    Sven you really do scare me.
     
  5. in_the_cheapseats

    in_the_cheapseats LE Moderator

    Nope - a quick look at the picture and on to a meaningless rant unconnected with the article. Then again, do you expect Sven to stick to the subject at hand? I certainly don't :roll:
     
  6. Sorry Sven I forgot you are one of the ZANU-Labour apologists and one of their auxiliary spin doctors. I never mentioned "Chelsea tractors" so you are the one who started "wittering on" about them. The bottom line is that this tax is not really aimed at the most polluting cars, but rather raising revenue. The Treasury aren’t remotely interested in the environment, just parting us from our hard earned cash. :x
     
  7. The whole global warming issue is an excuse for all governments to raise taxes.
     
  8. Sven, how do you manage to talk such bollox so often?
     
  9. I'm surprised that the Telegraph took so long to work that out, they must be slipping. It has been obvious for a while that Brown and his glove puppet were getting desperate to find more revenue streams to pay his army of civil servants and plug the massive gaps left by his wasteful spending binges.

    The government have already admitted that the revenue raised from the doubling of Airport environment tax last year would not go on environmental projects, but would go into Gordons' big bucket marked 'please waste me'.
     
  10. You forgot to read the bit that says "the running costs are offset" :roll:

    On the off chance that You don't know, businesses have their running costs taken away from the amount of tax they pay - so farms DON'T pay the extra costs.

    Vandyke - You scare me too.
     
  11. blue-sophist

    blue-sophist LE Good Egg (charities)

    Two terms that should be banned from the English lexicon ... "Chelsea Tractor" and "4x4". In a Stalinist/LibDem vision of Britain, you should all be issued with a Trabant and told to get on with it. In a free country, you should be permitted to choose the vehicle you buy.

    I have chosen, for many years and for a variety of reasons, to drive one of these "offending vehicles". Although it has a "4x4" capability, it actually operates as a "4x2" unless the sensors determine that all wheels need to be powered. And I do not live in Chelsea either. :wink:

    I am, however, sorry to discover that, according to the manufacturer's website, the CO2 emissions are 258 g/km. Accordingly, I now shall give consideration to selling the vehicle immediately [so that someone else can use it as a Planet Polluter] and buy a new, greener, vehicle instead. ........... No, I won't.

    The idea that those tax bands are going to change the spending habits of those who can afford larger vehicles is fatuous. And I still smoke 20 a day as well. An increase in cost of few hundred quid per annum is irrelevant. It is, as has been said here and elsewhere, simply a dishonest and fraudulent tax imposed under the guise of an ecological measure.
     
  12. Yep

    I was using 4x4s as an example, the same can be said for all those large engines that by and large just aren't needed. Why does a person need 2.0l plus to drive around town. Large cars are status symbols by and large and not needed.
     
  13. blue-sophist

    blue-sophist LE Good Egg (charities)

    Is that the politics of envy, or the politics of ecology?
     
  14. It is the urbanised politics of envy, intended to appeal to the prejudices of left-wing urbanites.
     
  15. Is that 100% tax deductable?

    What about the poor family that drives a VW sharan people carrier now forced to pay £400 per year road tax in addition to tax added to fuel.

    If you drive a gas guzzler you already pay more tax by using more fuel.

    I will believe global warming when someone can explain why last ice age melted. Like said previously an excuse to tax us again, Not that they need an excuse.