Jump to content

Stop EU banning red diesel use for Narrowboats. sign UGov petition here


Capt.Golightly

Featured Posts

When I signed this morning, there were less than 800 signatures.

That level of interest will only make the government take the easy way out.....agree with the EU.

 

 

And there we have lesson number one.

 

Anybody can start a petition without thinking carefully about what they want to say, and put out a dogs breakfast that isn't something that other people will associate with.

 

It has often been said that lawyers never ask a question that they don't already know the answer to, because they want to control what the Judge and Jury hears. It is a maxim that petition creators should bear in mind. Never create a petition unless you are SURE that people will sign it, because a crap petition will always work against your aims.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can I set my self up as Canal Carrying Company and claim commercial use for my clone craft?

Carrying small loads, occasionally. When and if I find them.

 

You could put your proposal to CRT when you apply for your trader's licence.

 

Though you ought to have a look and see if the saving in fuel duty compensates for the increase in your licence fee (and, I suspect, insurance premium).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Change for the better, is what I should have put!

 

 

If my partial reading of this thread is right.

Commercial boats will still be able to use red diesel. Are hire boats leisure or commercial?

 

Can I set my self up as Canal Carrying Company and claim commercial use for my clone craft?

Carrying small loads, occasionally. When and if I find them.

 

Bod

i'm not certain, but I think the commercial licence is quite expensive.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You could put your proposal to CRT when you apply for your trader's licence.

 

Though you ought to have a look and see if the saving in fuel duty compensates for the increase in your licence fee (and, I suspect, insurance premium).

Thought there would be a catch!

 

Bod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

. Are hire boats leisure or commercial?

 

 

 

Hire boats are classed the same as leisure boats when it comes to diesel and the tax (split) payable, although they do pay a higher licence fee and are tested on the BSS more frequently (yearly instead of 4 years), and there's additional items to test. There's a few other operational differences too which make them more expensive to run.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hire boats are classed the same as leisure boats when it comes to diesel and the tax (split) payable, although they do pay a higher licence fee and are tested on the BSS more frequently (yearly instead of 4 years), and there's additionoal items to test. There's a few other operational differences too which make them more expensive to run.

Are not hire boats, the new working boats?

 

They exist solely to take profit from the use of the waterways.

 

Bod

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Are not hire boats, the new working boats?

 

They exist solely to take profit from the use of the waterways.

 

Bod

 

There's elements of running a hire boat which are 'business' and elements which are 'leisure'. It so happens that the HMRC have addressed the issue surrounding fuel tax, thus I can answer with reasonable confidence on it. There's a link to the HMRC document a few posts back, I can re-find it if you are unable to.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Hire boats are classed the same as leisure boats when it comes to diesel and the tax (split) payable, although they do pay a higher licence fee and are tested on the BSS more frequently (yearly instead of 4 years), and there's additional items to test. There's a few other operational differences too which make them more expensive to run.

 

Whilst the rest is true, can you provide evidence that Hire boats need a yearly BSC?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

They exist solely to take profit from the use of the waterways.

 

 

Whilst I am sure there are hire companies that are totally profit orientated I know of several that put far more back into the waterways than most leisure boaters,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Bringing fuel duty for boats in line with other vehicles is change.

It's a great pity that consecutive governments aren't as enthusiastic in being fair to their respective electorates as you are Carl in wishing to create parity on fuel duty for boats and other vehicles.

 

Historically, governments have ripped their voters off in allowing energy companies a virtual free rein in what they charge and how they charge their customers. It is no coincidence that in doing so, they also earn a few bob on the vat levied on fuel and energy. High energy costs equate to higher vat income from the providers.

 

They must love the likes of you in being so keen to add to their coffers!

Edited by Doorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Possibly, but I wouldn't hold your breath.

It has gone rather quiet though hasn't it!

Right. I have paid, over the course of my working life, quite a lot more income tax and national insurance contributions than most people. Whilst I agree partially with Carlt and Chris Pink and others about the 'unfair' difference in fuel prices for propulsion, red and white diesel etc., I can't seem to get my head around their point of view.

In their opinion they think we should pay the same as road users for our diesel unless we have separate tanks for propulsion and generation. I'm not trawling through all the posts but I think it was Carlt who posted that Europe seems to have got their head around it so why shouldn't we. Well as far as I know, they pay less, not a lot I know but less, than we do. I may be wrong though.

What I'm getting at is, I don't mind paying tax but I only want to pay the minimum amount I legally can. I've never been in the super league of tax payers but 25 years at 40% plus the massive hike in Ni contributions means I have paid my dues. If our tax money was used as frugally as the government are expecting us to live at the moment then I wouldn't moan about it but we all know there's a lot of money wasted left right and centre by not only this government but Brussels and previous governments of this wonderful country of ours.

Doghouse has posted a link that has said our government don't want to implement what Brussels wants them to do. That should be good enough for anyone to accept that it isn't right for us to have to conform with Europe just because they say so. It may even cost more to collect the tax than it brings in in revenue. How mad is that, and yet some people welcome it. Why on earth should we pay more than we have to when a lot of it will just get wasted or eaten up with red tape.

HMRC stated years ago that we can run our boats on red at a discounted rate. What's wrong with that? It's the law. We should abide by it.

Just because they want to change the law it doesn't make them right.

Just because some people, and it should be everyone, want to abide by the law and do what is best for them, it doesn't make them wrong.

Rant over. I hope it makes sense although you don't have to agree.

Steve P

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is true, but I was once told that one of the reasons for some retailers enforcing a 60/40 split was that the extra tax that they collect goes into their account until HMRC come for it, in some cases over a year. A good way of collecting interest?

If we are forced to put more tax paid fuel in our boats that's more money for them.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I don't know if it is true, but I was once told that one of the reasons for some retailers enforcing a 60/40 split was that the extra tax that they collect goes into their account until HMRC come for it, in some cases over a year. A good way of collecting interest?

If we are forced to put more tax paid fuel in our boats that's more money for them.

Bob

 

Rubbish way of collecting interest, since its likely to dissuade a large proportion of boaters from buying fuel from them!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well as far as I know, they pay less, not a lot I know but less, than we do. I may be wrong though.

What I'm getting at is, I don't mind paying tax but I only want to pay the minimum amount I legally can. I've never been in the super league of tax payers but 25 years at 40% plus the massive hike in Ni contributions means I have paid my dues. If our tax money was used as frugally as the government are expecting us to live at the moment then I wouldn't moan about it but we all know there's a lot of money wasted left right and centre by not only this government but Brussels and previous governments of this wonderful country of ours.

 

Steve P

 

Couldn't agree more but that is an entirely separate argument. In the UK we pay far too much tax for too little and I see no evidence of government (bureaucracy) austerity, it seems very much to be spend (waste) as usual,

 

Any campaign that reduces the bureaucratic burden of taxation has me as a supporter.

 

But doing it by picking at one tax amongst many, a tax which in the main is paid by wealthier people indulging in a leisure activity is hypocritical and wrong.

 

I see access to transport as a basic enabling freedom that is slowly but inexorably being denied to all but the wealthier. How about massively reducing tax on basic transport costs? Making mobility affordable again.

 

But for the comfortably off to whinge about a few pence extra leaves a foul taste. And to suggest that their range rovers will be transporting tesco diesel to save a few pence per litre and causing pollution as a fundamental argument is simply risable.

 

Why not gladly pay that tax and campaign for further reduction in fuel duty for living costs? That might be seen as progressive.

  • Greenie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Whilst the rest is true, can you provide evidence that Hire boats need a yearly BSC?

That doesn't sound correct to me either, Dave.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there were other checks or certificates that are required annually, but I have never heard that the BSS itself is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't sound correct to me either, Dave.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there were other checks or certificates that are required annually, but I have never heard that the BSS itself is.

 

Pretty sure it's not correct, but some of the requirements are more stringent than for private boats.

They might need an annual gas test, as I believe do holiday static caravans?

 

Tim

Edited by Timleech
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Couldn't agree more but that is an entirely separate argument. In the UK we pay far too much tax for too little and I see no evidence of government (bureaucracy) austerity, it seems very much to be spend (waste) as usual,

 

Any campaign that reduces the bureaucratic burden of taxation has me as a supporter.

 

But doing it by picking at one tax amongst many, a tax which in the main is paid by wealthier people indulging in a leisure activity is hypocritical and wrong.

 

I see access to transport as a basic enabling freedom that is slowly but inexorably being denied to all but the wealthier. How about massively reducing tax on basic transport costs? Making mobility affordable again.

 

But for the comfortably off to whinge about a few pence extra leaves a foul taste. And to suggest that their range rovers will be transporting tesco diesel to save a few pence per litre and causing pollution as a fundamental argument is simply risable.

 

Why not gladly pay that tax and campaign for further reduction in fuel duty for living costs? That might be seen as progressive.

That would be ok Chris , but not everyone is as comfortable off as we seem to be. So why should they carry the burden.

How many narrowboat ears do you know with a range rover or the equivelant?

Campaigning doesn't seem to work unless the government have sent out a red herring and then give in at the request of the people.

I'm not rich by any standards. I have 'assets' an income from them and I can still work if I want to. I like what I do so its ok for me. Not many people can say that. Be different when me knees give up though.

Steve P.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That doesn't sound correct to me either, Dave.

 

I wouldn't be surprised if there were other checks or certificates that are required annually, but I have never heard that the BSS itself is.

 

I was chatting with the guys at the hire base today, I totally forgot to ask about this! (There's nothing online about it). It might be me muddled about something, in that the BSC is valid for 4 years but there's additional checks either on each individual boat or another aspect of the hire base which is a yearly check. I'll be there tomorrow too, so I'll try to remember to ask. Apologies if I've misled, I'll try to clarify all the various admin required for hiring boats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Couldn't agree more but that is an entirely separate argument. In the UK we pay far too much tax for too little and I see no evidence of government (bureaucracy) austerity, it seems very much to be spend (waste) as usual,

 

Any campaign that reduces the bureaucratic burden of taxation has me as a supporter.

 

But doing it by picking at one tax amongst many, a tax which in the main is paid by wealthier people indulging in a leisure activity is hypocritical and wrong.

 

I see access to transport as a basic enabling freedom that is slowly but inexorably being denied to all but the wealthier. How about massively reducing tax on basic transport costs? Making mobility affordable again.

 

But for the comfortably off to whinge about a few pence extra leaves a foul taste. And to suggest that their range rovers will be transporting tesco diesel to save a few pence per litre and causing pollution as a fundamental argument is simply risable.

 

Why not gladly pay that tax and campaign for further reduction in fuel duty for living costs? That might be seen as progressive.

 

Agree with every word Chris, and really can not understand the "jerry can logic" at all. I do wonder if people promoting this have factored in the cost of transporting the fuel.

 

To illustrate your point, if the cost of fuel for Juno was doubled (I use petrol, so no rebate anyway), and bus fares halved, I'd be a heck of a lot better off.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not gladly pay that tax and campaign for further reduction in fuel duty for living costs? That might be seen as progressive.

Why not use the (all of the) funds from road tax on maintaining and improving the road infrastructure, instead of siphoning off the larger proportion to the treasury to be spent elsewhere. That might be seen as sensible, if not truthful.

 

Surely, by redirecting large parts of this duty to pay for general use and not as suggested as 'road fund licence', it is simply another form of stealth tax levied on a captive market better known as motorists.

 

 

 

How many narrowboat ears do you know with a range rover or the equivalent?

 

Steve P.

Not many, I imagine!

Edited by Doorman
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why not use the (all of the) funds from road tax on maintaining and improving the road infrastructure, instead of siphoning off the larger proportion to the treasury to be spent elsewhere. That might be seen as sensible, if not truthful.

 

Surely, by redirecting large parts of this duty to pay for general use and not as suggested as 'road fund licence', it is simply another form of stealth tax levied on a captive market better known as motorists.

 

Not many, I imagine!

Oops. I meant owners, not ears. Edited by fudd
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

But for the comfortably off to whinge about a few pence extra leaves a foul taste. And to suggest that their range rovers will be transporting tesco diesel to save a few pence per litre and causing pollution as a fundamental argument is simply risable.

 

Why not gladly pay that tax and campaign for further reduction in fuel duty for living costs? That might be seen as progressive.

The thing is, it's not just a few pence.

A few years ago we spent a winter in a marina where the diesel was £.95 ltr. I could buy it elsewhere at £.75 ltr.

I used to drive over with 8X 25 ltr cans and fill up.

Now, 200 ltrs @ .95 = £190.00. 200 ltrs @ .75 = £150.00. A saving of £40.00.

That may be peanuts to you, but its too much for me to throw away.

BTW the cost of fuel to get there and back was under £6.00.

The car was taxed and insured anyway, the wear and tear I would consider negligible.

Bob

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.