GARETH BUTTERFIELD New car tax system could be miles better

IF you believe the speculation, the government is considering charging us a fee per mile to drive our cars. And I’m not really surprised. In a bid to encourage us to drive eco-friendly cars, most of us have been paying historically low Vehicle Excise Duty (the bill formerly known as road tax) for years, or even no Vehicle Excise Duty in many cases.

During the lockdowns, I bought a rattly old Citroen as a runabout. It was over 10 years old, a little bit broken, and it struggled to do more than 40mpg. But because, on paper, its emissions were low, I paid just £20 per year to “tax” it. And you’d be amazed how many smokey old rot boxes attract this lower level of duty.

It wasn’t all that long ago that road tax cost at least a few hundred quid for normal, everyday cars, so it’s obvious that the government is going to be losing a fortune from this valuable source of income. Especially as everyone seems to be buying zero or low-emission cars these days.

Now, there are some obvious problems with charging people per mile, rather than asking for a flat, annual fee. People who have bought a plug-in hybrid car to munch the miles in, for example, will now supposedly have a huge amount of money added to their motoring bills. For a large company that’s just invested in a fleet of low-emission vehicles, this could be catastrophic. And then there’s all the fun the conspiracy theorists will have once they realise that, for this to work effectively, tamper-proof monitors of some kind will have to be fitted in all our cars, so the government can check how far we’re driving and how often.

But I’m a big fan of the idea. And I’ve been saying for years it’s the way forward.

Think about it. Why should Nigel, the sales rep, in his hybrid BMW, covering 30,000 miles per year, pay less money to take to the roads than Mrs Steggol, who uses her old diesel

Volkswagen Polo once a week to get to her WI meetings?

My wife, for another example, drives a three-litre straight-six turbocharged BMW convertible but covers less than 2,000 miles per year. Yet she has to pay an absurd amount of “tax” – far more to use her car on the odd occasion than our neighbour, who uses his Vauxhall Astra every day.

If the speculation is correct, motorists would be given 3,000 miles per year to play with before charges kick in, so my wife’s Bimmer would attract no tax whatsoever, while her brother, who takes his hybrid Honda Jazz on an 80-mile commute every day, pays a bigger slice. It seems perfectly fair to me. You use the roads, you pay for them. You don’t use the roads, you pay nothing. Otherwise, it’s like paying annually for a year’s supply of McDonald’s Big Macs, regardless of whether you eat them or not.

Of course, the current excise duty system is geared towards pushing us all in the direction of low-emission cars. It’s not an excise duty, or a road tax any more, it’s a pollution tax. Something I have no problem with, incidentally.

But we’ve conquered that now. Most people are buying cleaner vehicles. And supposedly, in just over eight years, we won’t be able to buy cars relying solely on fossil fuel any more in the UK. So pollution tax has effectively run its course – or it will very soon.

If it’s sensibly thought out, with the necessary caps in place, and perhaps concessions for the companies that rely on piling on miles to put food on our tables and to bring essentials to our doors, I think charging motorists per mile is the right way forward.

If it ever happens, I might even buy myself a big V8 sports car to celebrate, and keep it within the 3,000 miles per year allowance. I’m about due a mid-life crisis.

It seems perfectly fair to me. You use the roads, you pay for them. You don’t use the roads, you pay nothing.