VED and tax evasion
Page 15
If you've noticed an error in this article please click here to report it so we can fix it.
IT MAY not be often that I agree with one of your editorials (having been attacked in them before) but we are clearly of like minds over the need to reduce tax evasion, as expressed by you in today's issue. Clearly, replacing VED by fuel tax would rule out any possibility of evasion and make each lorry pay for the amount of damage it does to the roads.
There is one problem, however, that you may not have appreciated. That is, that the current imbalance, whereby the smaller, lighter and less damaging vehicles subsidise the heavier and more damaging vehicles would be exacerbated.
Currently fuel tax accounts for 65 per cent of the road track costs for heavy goods vehicles generally, but only 52 per cent for 32 tonne vehicles. On the other hand lorries over 11/2 tonnes gross pay twice their road track costs in fuel tax. In order to comply with Government policy, that all classes of lorry should cover their costs, fuel tax would have to be increased by 90 per cent.
Naturally in some ways I find this increase quite acceptable, but I wonder how many operators would. And at the same time the trend to replace lorries and more nvironmentally acceptable with larger and less .environmentally acceptable lorries — a trend which I find totally unacceptable — would accelerate. Perhaps we should find some better way to secure full payment of existing lorry taxes?
NICK LESTER Transport 2000 Limited 258 Penton villa Road London Ni 9JY