--, Conducted by EDMUND DANGERFIELD, Vol. XXX. No. 778. I
Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
New Taxation Proposals. ,
DURING TPLE LAST week or so, a fair number of details as to the scheme of taxation under consideration by the committee at the Ministry of Transport have leaked into the ciaily Press. To our mind, this premature publication is somewhat unfortunate. Many of us have, of Course, been well aware, for some time past, of the outline of the proposals and have even, been in a position •to indicate their details with a fair degree of accuracy, but have refrained from .doing so out of deference to the fact. that the official committee is of a confidential character, and that those who May have been called into consultation with it should, therefore, regard themselves as being upon a similar footing: Now, however, that partial statements have been made— sometimes misleading, in character—we feel at liberty to deal with the subject fairly fully.
It has been freely stated that commercial; motor vehicles are o be taxed upon their. weight. The statement is both correct and incorrect. It is the truth, but not the whole truth. In point of fact, the proposition which appears to be about to be adopted is for the taxation of . commercial vehicles by weight, coupled with estimated annual mileage. Thus, were taxation to be by weight alone, a vehicle weighing 4 tons unladen would presumably be taxed four times as highly as a Vehicle weighing 1 ton unladen.
This would be evidently unfair because the legal speed and, therefore, the average annual mileage of 1-tonner, are much higher than the corresponding figures for a 4-tonner.
Suppose that a 1-ton van uses petrol at the rate of one gallon in 12 miles, then if we can estimate with fair accuracy the annual mileage which such a -vehicle ought to cover if intelligently used, we can arrive at a figure fairly correctly reflecting the total amount paid per annum: in petrol tax. Suppose this to work out at 211, then the correct amount of the new tax is suggested. We must, however, reckon .that, like everything else, the cost of road maintenance and improvement has gone up very materially. We must, therefore, be prepared to pay more than we have paid in the past, or else to have less work done upon the roads with the proceeds of our taxation.
If we admit that an increase of approximately 40 per cent, in taxation is necessary, in order to get the required amount of work done upon the road, we may accept a sum of, say, 216 as being a reasonable tax for the average van welshing not more than 1 ton. This tax might be paid either annually, or in quarterly instalments.
Now, take the case of a vehicle weighing not more than 2 tons unladen, but more than I ton, Probably the great majority of the cars already dealt with came close up to' the 1-ton mark. In this second class, however, there will be vehicles of all weights from 1 to 2 tons. We must not, therefore, consider that the average weight is double. Meanwhile, the mileage will, on the average, most certainly be less and the average useful load! carried will, probably, not be double. Consequently, the fair amount for the tax, compared with the £16 for the lighter cars, would be some figure not much exceeding 220.
By somewhat similar reasoning, we may arrive ,at £25 as being a reasonable 'annual tax for a vehicle between 2 and,3 tons in weight. Above this figure we get lower speed limits, so that even the heaviest types of vehicle ought not to be liable for more, than about £30 per annum.
It remains an open question whether any special additional tax should result from the use of metal instead of rubber tyres. Probably this would not be justified, because the use of metal tyres already involves a lower speed limit and, therefore, if the same figure be retained, a higher tax per mile run.
Taxation of Public Service Vehicles.
IT IS PROPOSED that public-service vehicles should be taxed on the basis mainly of their seating capacity. For this purpose it is assumed 'that the motor cab, or hired car, carrying from one to five passengers, should be put on the same level as a private ear of about 15 hp. to 18 h.p. Presumably, it is recognized that the public-service vehicle should pay a lower tax per mile, but that its probable annual mileage is higher. Next, we have what might be called the station Omnibus, carrying about 12 passengers and paying twice as much as the motoreala In this, as in other classes of lia,ckney carriage, it is suggested that the fee paid by 'vehicles licensed in the Metropolitan area and, perhaps, in other large towns should be somewhat higher than that enforced elsewhere. For chars-a-bancs, or motor coaches, carrying from 18 up to about 30 ,passengers, it is proposed that the tax should range from 250 up to about £70, according to the locality and the seating capacity.
The highest class is that into which the double decked omnibus will fall, and it is suggested that the annual tax payable, by a London bus should be somewhere' in the neighbourhood of £80; a somewhat lower figure applying to buse,s used in smaller centres. Unquestionably the annual mileage of the motorbus is exceptionally high, as compared with other vehicles, but,despite this fact, it seems-to us that the proposed taxation is more than adequate, though its incidence may 'perhaps help to dispose of the old argument that, if only the tram were given anything approaching the favourable consideration accorded to the bus, in respect of taxation, its general superioritywould be readily demonstrable.
We would also suggest that the proposed tax as applied to the larger type of char-a-bancs or coach is unduly restrictive of -development. Many vehicles of this class are only in regular use for three or four months in the year. Even then, their mileage is not very greatOn the other hand, it must be admitted that they frequently use country roads not.intended for heavy traffic and that their proprietors are not subject to any control as to the fares that they may charge. Possibly the high taxation applied to them may encourage the use of chassis of this class with alternative passengerand goodscarrying bodies, so that, in the course of the year, they 'may cover a fair total mileage and, so to speak, get value for their money. It looks as if a difficulty might arise in respect of vehicles of the carrier cartgvariety, intended, parfiy for passengers and partly for goods, For instance, it is not clear what would be the tax on a vehicle weighing about 3 tons and with provision for .s.bout.five passengers and _a quantity of goods.
To some extent the new scheme, if 'adopted, must have-the effect of dividing vehicles up verysdefinitely into classes, each class unladen weighing-close on a certain number of tons. If, for instance, a vehicle weighing 23 cwt. is to pay the same as one weighing 39 cwt., the factemay act as the reverse of aaelling point, for the former.
We have yet to learn that these is any proposal for increasing the licence duties payable in respect of privately-owned horsed vehicles, or of imposing any tax at all on trade vehicles horse drawn. We can see no possible reason for this anomaly, except the old one that politicians are not willing to support any proposal which is likelyunnecessarily to alienate the sympathy of large numbers of voters, particularly in the country districts.
A question with which we will not deal at the moment, deferring it to future consideration, is whether the scale of taxation proposed for commercial and public-service, vehicles seems to have a fair relation to the taxation proposed for private cars. We gather that this matter has been fully discussed and that the-interests with which we are particularly concerned are not dissatisfied, but theopoint is one to
Three Threatened Increases in a Week !\
HE ATTACK upon road transport is becoming serious.. There is the threat of heavy taxation upon steam and electric vehicles, tractorsantl trailers, and upon those internal-combustion-engined vehicles which do not use petrol as fuel, whilst: the lump sum taxation on petrol-driven vehicles must, inevitably, work out to the disadvantage of the 'owner of every Vehicle which does not cover a suffiaient annual mileage for the old tax on petrol, to equal the new tax on weight, and public service vehicles must, in the majority of cases, be called upon to pay more than they now do. The threat of an increase in petrol price has already brought to the benzole distributors sufficient courage to raise their prices by fourpence per gallon, and, now, the National Transport Workers' Federation has formally issued an application to commercial road transport employers for an advance of Ms; a week on the wages of all the adult road transport workers, with the exception of tramway and omnibus drivers and conductors.
These three extra imposts must inevitably mean an increase in cost of working, serious enough to hamper commercial road transport in its already difficult task of competing with railway transport. An extra 28. per man per day (assuming five running days per week) tells most against the long haul, because, in that case, it would mean an extra 8d. per ton if only a single load be tackled in the day, and. the ability to deal economically with long hauls is the claim which, so far, has been the hardest to push ill connection with road haulage. And, again, the smaller the vehicle and the smaller the load the higher the increase per ton of goods.
The same arguments and figures apply to the projected new taxation of previously untaxed vehicles —steam and electric—thus helping to rob them of some of the advantage they have, in some circumstances, been able to show in their running costs.
But, theanost serious of projected increases is that on petrol, which, in the case of a three-ton vehicle, may run to six or eight shillings a day for each vehicle. And the evil of it is that there is no en-' couragement to turn to other hydro-carbon fuel's, the price of which has and will go up in sympathy (Iti " sympathy " be quite the right word to use l).
Unquestionably, motor users have not done enough for themselves in the past.. They have bought their cheap petrol, grumbled at increase after increase, but done nothing towards building up sound business on competing fuels. The circumstances are easy to understand, when looked at from the point of view of the individual. Unless the petrol organizations have the Government held by some portion of its anatomy, it is to Government that we must Took for assistance in development of home-produeed fuels. Gas under compression will yet come to be regarded as a useful competitor, but encouragement must be given to its development in the meanwhile. The subject of power alcohol, after one thorough investigation by an Inter-Departmental Committee, seems destined for yet another by the Fuel Research Board, thus involving a further one year's delay be-. fore any action can be considered. Benzoic, therefore, seems the only hope, so far as alternative fuels go, and, objectionable as the increase in price may be, if it will encourage the gas companies and owners of coke oven plants to strip the gas more vigorously thanhas recently been done (the output of beuzole has fallen to a meagre 20,000./000 gallons per annum), good may come out of evil, and a much bigger benzole output may result.
But State intervention in the control of prices, in the rectification of freight rates, _and in securing a cessation of competition between one country and another (admittedly a difficult business, but by no means so difficult as it would have been six years ago), could usefully be employed, and it is imperative that the forthcoming conference of motor organizations should urge such a course on ,the Government.