THE MOTOR-CAR AND THE BUDGET

At the present time a Departmental Committee, under the chairmanship of Sir HENRY MAYBURY, is conducting a very thorough investigation into the question of the taxation and registration of motor vehicles. When its task will be completed we do not profess to prophesy; nor would we attempt to anticipate its findings on the expert and other evidence which has been submitted to it. There is a very general hope, however, that its report will be available to the Chancellor of the Exchequer sufficiently in advance of his introduction of this year’s Budget to enable him to discuss in full knowledge the grievances of motorists of all classes and to extend to them at any rate some consideration. For if we may judge from the statements made to the Committee on behalf of the Automobile Association and Motor Union, with a membership of 160,000, and the Auto-cycle Union, dissatisfaction among private users of the road with the present system of taxation is wellnigh universal. Nor should the views of those who manufacture motor-cars be ignored, since there is reason to believe that the present system of taxation, based on horse-power, is contributing to handicap them in developing the export trade. The natural tendency in design, with taxation graded according to the power of the engine, is to keep down the weight of cars, as may well be done in this country, where good roads are the rule rather than the exception; but the very success with which manufacturers achieve this object hinders them in trying to sell abroad – and particularly in the Dominions oversea – where there is no fiscal inducement to keep down the horsepower and the roads are, at any rate, not of the character of billiard tables. Of course, there are many other considerations to be borne in mind in approaching this matter of taxation from the standpoint of the motor manufacturer; but that he is not satisfied with the existing basis is apparent. Motor-cars are taxed with the specific object of providing money for the upkeep of the roads; the funds raised are devoted to that purpose. It follows, then, that those who do most damage to the roads should contribute most to their maintenance. Can it be said that they do so under a scheme which is based upon the horse-power of the car? Whether the owner covers 2,000 or 5,000 miles in the course of a year, provided that he spreads his mileage over the whole year and does not lay up his car for three or six months on end, he pays exactly the same amount of taxation. The car is taxed, but not the usage of the roads, and the result is to discourage wouldbe motorists of moderate means from becoming purchasers. It is true that the tax may be actually a comparatively small item in the sum total of the expenses – depreciation, tyres, and repairs – but it looms large in the mind of the prospective motorist when he asks himself the initial question, “Can I afford a motor-car?” The position of the motorcyclist is in some respects the same, though in other respects it varies. As Mr. T. W. LOUGHBOROUGH has pointed out, the motorcyclist is usually comparatively poor, and a matter of a few pounds in the price of a machine may make the difference between a purchaser and a non-purchaser. Moreover, it is often a hardship for the motor-cyclist to pay his annual tax in one lump sum. It has also to be borne in mind that the actual damage done to roads by these light machines must be almost negligible, yet, under the present system, they are contributing approximately £1,000,000 per annum.