This will kill EV adoption, just to put it into perspective this is the equivalent of an average ICE car (38.6MPG) having 25.5p added per litre of fuel, in a single budget.

The even more ridiculous thing is plug in hybrids are 1.5p per mile, so people with 80+ miles of range in their Golfs etc. will pay half price, even though they are needlessly dragging around an internal combustion engine for 99% of their journeys.

  • FelixCress@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    2 days ago

    needed to apply it to both ICE and EVs equally,

    You mean to drop the fuel duty by 50%, and introduce EV charge in the same time, yes? That would be an equal treatment.

    • manualoverride@lemmy.worldOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 days ago

      Sadly no, I don’t think the pay per mile model is the right way to fund our roads if we are still going to charge a large amount of road tax to everyone on top.

      But if they want to encourage EV adoption and had no better ideas, they should have introduced a blanket 1p per mile for everyone.

      People who bought an electric car on a tight budget and drive 12k a year have been hit with an extra £560 in costs per year in the last 8 months.

      • FelixCress@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 days ago

        if we are still going to charge a large amount of road tax to everyone on top.

        This is how it works at the moment. Huge amount of tax is included in the fuel price. This is now being extended to EV which according to your estimate will be paying roughly half of what other road users are paying. This is more than fair - especially if you take into account EV are much heavier and are putting disproportionate pressure on the roads.

        • manualoverride@lemmy.worldOP
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          Depends on what you are trying to achieve, we should be moving away from burning fuel, and this takes us a step back.

          Also the heavier EV argument is a bit weak, they are not much heavier, and wear and tear when the roads that have to cope with 30ton lorries?

          The road infrastructure needs to be maintained or we don’t get any deliveries, and the shops have no stock, it’s not just drivers that need the roads.

          • FelixCress@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            23 hours ago

            Depends on what you are trying to achieve

            It was you talking about fairness.

            Also the heavier EV argument is a bit weak, they are not much heavier, and wear and tear when the roads that have to cope with 30ton lorries?

            These 30t lorries are paying significantly more tax than normal vehicles, nevermind EVs. Would you perhaps prefer vehicles to be taxed according to their weight?

            The road infrastructure needs to be maintained or we don’t get any deliveries, and the shops have no stock, it’s not just drivers that need the roads.

            It is vehicles using the roads and vehicle owners/keepers (not “drivers”) paying the taxes - and rightly so.

            • manualoverride@lemmy.worldOP
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              22 hours ago

              It was you talking about fairness.

              No, it wasn’t, I didn’t mention fairness because that is not my point at all, my focus is moving away from ICE vehicles.

              prefer vehicles to be taxed according to their weight?

              As long as all safety system weight is removed from the calculation then maybe! We don’t want companies sacrificing safety for weight reduction.

              Also significant changes should only apply to new vehicles, so the rules don’t change retrospectively after people have already made significant financial decisions based on government policy.

              • FelixCress@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                22 hours ago

                No, it wasn’t, I didn’t mention fairness because that is not my point at all

                That you?:

                In order to introduce this they needed to apply it to both ICE and EVs equally

                Normal cars are taxed per your own calculations twice as much as EVs. That is far away from “equal” treatment but at least EVs owners now will START contributing.

                • manualoverride@lemmy.worldOP
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  21 hours ago

                  Fairness and equality are different words and mean different things, you also cut off the second half of that quote in an attempt to prove your point.

        • gnutrino@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 day ago

          EV are much heavier and are putting disproportionate pressure on the roads.

          My MG4 weighs ~1.6 tonnes, taking a VW Golf as a roughly comparable ICE hatchback at ~1.4 tonnes it’s really not that big an increase. Compare that to a Land Rover Sport at 2.5 tonnes for example, the EV weight thing is really overblown IMO.