A chance to bring back tax exemption!

[1960Zody]

stop whinging and stop rocking the boat........

That's all very well if you're already in the boat

It's a question of which 'Boat' you want to be in though...

The fixed date we have now, With a 'Historic' vehicle for taxation purposes simply defined by the date of manufacture and no other restrictions on what you can and cannot do to it or subject to the relevant laws and testing, and where and when you can use it, or a 'Rolling' date with a Historic' vehicle for legislation purpoeses based on something like the FIVA definition which states...

"FIVA defines a historic vehicle as a mechanically propelled road vehicle:
Which is at least 30 years old;
Which is preserved and maintained in a historically correct condition;
Which is not used as a means of daily transport;
And which is therefore a part of our technical and cultural heritage"

This is what FIVA are recommending should be the 'Europe Wide' definition of a Historic Vehicle for legislation purposes.

As The FBHVC have said:

"For example, the EU Commission have given indications that while they are happy to consider legislative exemptions for a reasonably small number of vehicles, used for relatively low mileages, they would become concerned if the number of vehicles or the mileage they covered grew too large. It is hoped that by lifting the defined age to 30 and excluding vehicles used for daily transport, this will be avoided."

So, this would mean that anyone who uses a vehicle over 30 years old as a daily, or has modified it in a way that is not 'Historically Correct' would not, in the eyes of FIVA or FBHVC be driving a ‘Historic Vehicle’ and would, potentially, be liable to meet any legislation applied to ‘Non-Historic’ vehicles.

I know which scenario I prefer.

[suffolkpete]

It's perfectly understandable that any group that currently enjoys the privileges would want to keep it that way, but organisations like FBHVC represent the movement as a whole and the test of any change is whether or not there would be a net benefit. All the discussion so far is based on pure speculation.

[Luxobarge]

organisations like FBHVC represent the movement as a whole.

Not quite - they represent clubs, not the whole classic/vintage/veteran car movement. IMHO the difference is more than subtle.....

[1960Zody]

organisations like FBHVC represent the movement as a whole.

Not quite - they represent clubs, not the whole classic/vintage/veteran car movement. IMHO the difference is more than subtle.....

This is particularly relevant in the light of FBHVC's often stated stance that they cannot be seen to support high-mileage drivers.

They stated this in an article in PC back in 2009, and so far as i can see, that stance has not changed.
They have thrown their support behind the FIVA definition and, as such, could be doing a dis-service to many owners of Classic and Retro vehicles.

[Dave3066]

I have 2 "Historic" vehicles, one of which is my daily driver. I regard myself lucky to have both and that both are tax free. When I bought my first one I didn't even consider looking for a tax free car I just wanted a Rover P6. If the govt scrapped the whole thing and decided to include cars such as mine in the general taxation bracket then I'd be quite happy to pay road tax to drive my car every day over as many miles as I want.

If we choose, for whatever reason, to drive these cars then we should accept the rules governing how they should be used, taxed etc. That said, I am fully supportive of the lobbying being done to change these rules as long as they are changed for the benefit of all and not just a small part of the classic car community.

That's my tuppence worth

Dave

[tractorman]

Oh how I agree with Dave - if you do lots of miles in a vehicle, why shouldn't you pay duty for it?

I'm currently doing 3,500 miles a year with the Golf, it's nine years old, so, even if they restored the 25-year rule, I won't get free tax for some time to come. Yet if I had a "Historic vehicle", I could do 12,000 miles a year and not contribute to what used to be the "Road Fund". Is THAT fair? I need the car as I live in the sticks and Tesco's online is limited on occasion (and can't get Ma to the doctors' surgery).

OK, many of us have "moderns" as well as HVs and pay the appropriate tax on them, but we wouldn't be using the "Historic" vehicle so much if that was the case, so perhaps a limit on mileage for HV is fair - say a 1,000 miles a year total for all the HVs you own

Somehow, I suspect that, if the classic people pushed for the 25 year rule to be introduced, the majority of non-classic owners would feel entitled to push for a mileage restriction in the hope that their duty wouldn't increase to fund the shortfall caused by ten year's worth of vehicles no longer contributing to the public purse (going on the theory that the HV owner would have to have a modern to commute etc)

I fear I may be banned from the forum now, but I am only showing another side to the argument!

[kevanf1]

I fear I may be banned from the forum now, but I am only showing another side to the argument!

I sincerely hope you are not banned. I may or may not agree with you but I hope that this forum is democratic enough to accept alternative sides to any debate; otherwise it is not a debate

I am a newcomer to this forum but not to the classic ownership 'club'. I will admit that I actually have very mixed feelings about the whole 'bring back the 25 year rolling exemption' thing. I see the advantages and also the disadvantages. All I can say at the moment is that perhaps we shouldn't allow so much fear to creep into the issue. If the government want to bring in punitive taxation for those of us who currently have free road tax then I am pretty sure they will do so regardless. It seems that we may be like the mouse that knows the cat is there but we keep on creeping past to get the cheese hoping that by being quiet the cat will not notice us... yeah, right

[mach1rob]

Would those that are saying no to the return of a rolling cut off date be creating about it if the rolling exemption had remained in place from when it was first introduced?

So what if someone who has a historic vehicle uses it every day? He/she may not pay VED, but they're still paying duty and VAT on the fuel they use, and that's enough these days!

[SEE YA]

Another bonus you do not have to pay at the Dartford tunnel its free if your is car tax exempt.

[JPB]

Another bonus you do not have to pay at the Dartford tunnel its free if your is car tax exempt.

Not if it's in the Historic Vehicle class. HV used to attract toll-free travel at every crossing in the UK, now those in England and Wales are only free to DLA404 and PLG cars which are free under either the disabled or PLG (post 2001 on emissions) class. This is why my Dolomite, although previously "Historic", is now taxed in class DLA404 as I got sick of producing the form at TT2 and holding up the traffic at an otherwise unmanned toll bucket where a person in a uniform has to be sent down from the office to do the job manually.

I came back up with the Dolomite via the Dartford crossing 3 years ago and that was the case then too. I had my badge with me but not the form, the car was then taxed HV, I had to pay and quite right too.
Toll routes on the Scottish side are still free for HV vehicles, there's much to be said for the Scottish legal system.