Fees for driving high polluting cars in London. Is a GT considered high polluting?


BlackICE

BlackICE

GT Owner
Nov 2, 2005
1,416
SF Bay Area in California
From October 27th, drivers of high-polluting cars will have to pay £25 to enter London's congestion zone. The charge applies to vehicles which emit over 225 grams of carbon dioxide per kilometre, which includes most 4x4s and some people-carriers. Drivers of these vehicles who live inside the congestion zone will also lose their right to a 90% discount on the congestion charge. The lowest-emitting cars will be exempted altogether. For all other cars the charge will remain £8. The plan was announced on February 12th by Mr Livingstone, who said the increased revenue—which he put at £30m to £50m—would be spent on improving the capital’s cycle network.
 
Yup, Red Ken and his Kengestion zone :bs

It's just a tax. Another one of his proposals is to tax people who own more than one car in Greater London, which basically is everything inside the M25 ring road. Now that road is 125 miles long, and roughly circular to give you some idea of scale!

SO, yes the GT pays £25 a day. Interesting the Noble being just under 3000cc and having no published emission figures falls through a loop hole and is still £8.
 
LONDON (Reuters) - Luxury carmaker Porsche said on Tuesday it planned to legally challenge London mayor Ken Livingstone's decision to help fight global warming by taxing gas guzzling cars driving in the city centre. Porsche said on Tuesday the 25 pound ($48.74) daily charge was unfair, would not cut emissions of carbon dioxide and would deter businesses from moving to the city.

"A massive congestion charge increase is quite simply unjust," said Andy Goss, Managing Director of Porsche Cars GB.

"Thousands of car owners driving a huge range of cars will be hit by a disproportionate tax which is clear will have a very limited effect on CO2 emissions," he added.

Livingstone rejected the move as a public relations stunt and called it an attack on Londoners.

"No one is allowed to throw their rubbish in the street and Porsche should not be allowed to impose gas guzzling polluting cars on Londoners who do not want them," he told reporters.

Announcing the plan last week Livingstone admitted that it would have little immediate effect on carbon emissions but said it would discourage people from driving polluting cars in the city centre and encourage manufacturers to make cleaner engines.

He said the new scheme would raise 30 million to 50 million pounds a year and cover most of the cost of a major cycling initiative that will include a Paris-style roadside bicycle hire scheme in the city centre.

Livingstone, who has made the environment a central plank of his tenure, is facing a tough re-election battle in May. If he loses, his emissions policy is likely to go with him.

...
Porsche said it would write to Livingstone this week asking him to reconsider the plan.
If he failed to respond in 14 days or refused to reconsider the plan that will come into force in October, the carmaker would make a submission to the courts for a judicial review.
"The proposed increase will be bad for London as a whole and will send out the signal that it is not serious about establishing itself as the best place in the world to do business," Goss said.
The court could force a delay, alteration or even a rejection of the plan.
A judicial challenge by Greenpeace last year forced the government to mount a major public consultation on its proposals for a new fleet of nuclear power stations.

~~~~~~~~`

Good on Porshe! hopefully more of the auto industry, and etc. fight this as vehemently
 
Ken Livingstone must die. Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.Die. Die.

Right, got that off my chest. Slightly.

Ken is a left wing donkey felcher who doesn't even own a car. He's introduced punitive taxes originally based around 'congestion' - i.e. charge every car driver $80 a week($4,000 a year) for the privilege of bringing their car into London and, at the same time increase the cost of rail travel into the capital. That way, he reckons, people will, erm, maybe, come in by bicycle. Brilliant!

But no, the morons keep driving in. Me included - we do it because we HAVE TO! You pea brained communist.

So....

Plan two.

Charge $50 a day! That's right.. $12,000 a year to drive to London. But we won't call it Congestion Charging (because that didn't work) we'll call it emissions thingy. We're saving puppies and dolphins when we drive by.

The guy is a dick. I plan to remove his spleen with a battery powered axle-grinder and then stamp on his kidneys.

Londoners will hopefully vote him out of office and we can restore normality to what was once a civilised city.
 
"can't we just get along?"
rodney king
 
Here's what the nimrods here in Washington tried to pass while I was gone. LUCKILY, IT DIED ON THE VINE:



"There is a bill that the Washington State Legislature is trying to
pass
in Olympia that, if successful, will directly add huge costs to our
vehicle license fees. Everyone needs to know about so this
situation so
that you can contact your representatives and voice your objection.

The bill is SB 6900 and it adds an "engine displacement" fee to the
vehicle license tabs upon renewal.

The fee has a varied amount depending on the size of the vehicle's
engine:

Engine Size (liters) Rate Schedule
Up to 1.9 $0
2.0 - 2.9 $70
3.0 - 3.9 $225
4.0 - 4.9 $275
5.0 - 5.9 $325
6.0 - 7.9 $400
8.0 or over $600

For each car & truck that you own, calculate the rate by matching
the
engine size in liters to the dollar amount. Add the amounts for
each

vehicle and you'll see that the average two car family will be
paying
$500+ every year in "displacement fees" on top of the normal
license
fees. If you have three vehicles, you'll be paying even more..."


This makes as much sense as hitting us with the "gas guzzler" tax. 'Changes NOTHING - except where the money in OUR wallet ends up residing.

I just L-O-V-E government...
 
Gee whiz Neilds, tell us how you really feel. How long is his term for? Will business move out of London if this persists?
 
Gee, Pockets I thought WA was much more rational than CA. This sounds like the kind of :bs that CA is famous for. WA was one of my choices for to live at, but the weather is a turn off and now it seem the lunacy in CA has migrated there too!
 
BlackICE said:
Gee, Pockets I thought WA was much more rational than CA. This sounds like the kind of :bs that CA is famous for. WA was one of my choices for to live at, but the weather is a turn off and now it seem the lunacy in CA has migrated there too!
Click to expand...


Both states are run by libs. 'Nuff said...:bored
 
Empty Pockets said:
Both states are run by libs. 'Nuff said...:bored
Click to expand...

At least WA doesn't have any state income tax. The rate in CA can be as high as 10.3%!!!
:ack :thumbsup :ack
 
fjpikul said:
Gee whiz Neil, tell us how you really feel. How long is his term for? Will business move out of London if this persists?
Click to expand...

:biggrin

I'm moving out of London on March 28th. I'm told, semi-seriously too, that there will be general mourning in the finer restaurants in London...

My business spends and almost unbelievable amount entertaining in London, we also catch maybe 40 cab rides a day, and probably around 300+ lunches a week.

That's why Ken is a dick.

Without wanting to sound like a smart-arse here, wealthy business people are wealthy for a reason - they tend to be good at what they do. They also create micro-economies around them. I wouldn't want to say what my micro-economy is, but it's substantial. Employment, taxes, spending on goods and services and so on.

If you start punishing people who are successful, they leave and take their toys somewhere else - which is exactly what I'm doing.

As you can tell, I'm more than a little wound up by this issue, it really is hurting the wrong people.
 
Only one question, how can you eat so many lunches and remain so fit? :-)
You are my hero ....
--in more ways than one! :-)
 
I have been in those London hacks,... I have always been lucky, they seem efficient and reliable.
Did not realize they had such mechanical issues that you have to take 40 a day. :)
 
Neilda said:
:biggrin

I'm moving out of London on March 28th. I'm told, semi-seriously too, that there will be general mourning in the finer restaurants in London...

My business spends and almost unbelievable amount entertaining in London, we also catch maybe 40 cab rides a day, and probably around 300+ lunches a week.

That's why Ken is a dick.

Without wanting to sound like a smart-arse here, wealthy business people are wealthy for a reason - they tend to be good at what they do. They also create micro-economies around them. I wouldn't want to say what my micro-economy is, but it's substantial. Employment, taxes, spending on goods and services and so on.

If you start punishing people who are successful, they leave and take their toys somewhere else - which is exactly what I'm doing.

As you can tell, I'm more than a little wound up by this issue, it really is hurting the wrong people.
Click to expand...



Very well said, Neil.

'Reminds me of when the geniuses in D.C. slapped a "luxury tax" on yachts built here in the U.S. a couple decades back. What happened? Wealthy people had their yachts built overseas and U.S. boat builders took it in the shorts. That's what.

GOV'T NEVER LEARNS.
 
Neil

I always knew there was a need for Arthur Scargill and his henchman Mick McGahey. McGahey in his prime probably would have done it on his own. Maybe their followers can get rid of Ken the Red for you and the rest of sensible Londoners.

:cheers
Dave
 
BlackICE said:
At least WA doesn't have any state income tax.
:ack :thumbsup :ack
Click to expand...


YET. :bored

That was tried in Booth Gardner's Admin a couple decades ago. Pblm was he wanted THAT - AND he wanted to keep the sales taxes, blah, blah, blah, as well. In other words, the new income tax was just an ADDITIONAL money pit for the state to draw from. (Oh, he SAID he'd form a bi-partisian "commission" to LOOK INTO LOWERING the the sales taxes if the income tax was past!!!!!!! Oh, ya! YEEEEEEEEEW BETCHA! Of COARSE he would!!! And it'd been the shortest lived commission in the history of the world too! And GUESS what the RESULT would have been!!! Phuleeeeeeeze...)

I'd have no pblm with a state income tax if, BY LAW, everybody above the poverty level had to pay it - AND - gov't had to dump Pers. Prop txs, Real Estate txs, sales txs, & B&O txs, etc., at the same time the inc. tx. took effect NEVER TO RETURN with out a 75% majority vote of the people. Otherwise, the stinkin' scumbag politicians would restore every dang wunna 'em before the voting machine's even had time to cool. You could bet your soul on it.

Like I said. I L-O-V-E gov't. 'Trust 'em 100% to a fault. NOT.
 
Empty Pockets said:
Very well said, Neil.

'Reminds me of when the geniuses in D.C. slapped a "luxury tax" on yachts built here in the U.S. a couple decades back. What happened? Wealthy people had their yachts built overseas and U.S. boat builders took it in the shorts. That's what.

GOV'T NEVER LEARNS.
Click to expand...

That reminds of a story from Italy (I think) from a couple of years back, basically some little island was populated by major yachts - the REALLY big types. So the local government thinks up this great idea to give them an additional tax. The high rollers simply moved on, island economy went pop overnight.

Wealthy people already pay more tax than anyone else - sure they'll try to reduce the burden, but the total contribution is massive. Start targeting them and they'll react.

One of my luxuries in life is to take my Bentley into London (or Range Rover). I sit in my well earned luxury, smoke a cigar and listen to a bit of Steely Dan or John Mayer. This is done at 5.30am every morning. Yup, every morning. I then work - I reckon in a typical week, by Thursday morning, I'm working for myself, such are the taxes I have to pay.

Want to whack me with $50 tax a day for driving in to pay my taxes? PISS RIGHT OFF! I'll stop - I have enough to not need to work.

No more taxes being paid. Genius policy.

Dave, you're right, I should get Red Ken knobbled! :cheers
 
Income taxes in exchange for sales taxes are bad for the state and people. The state trades a fairly stable income stream for one that can be very erratic. Some people lose incentive to innovate, create, and work, others get incentive to be fu-kups. CA has one of the highest, if not the highest, taxes in the nation, sales (8.75% in some places) and income (10.3%), but is still projected to be billions short in the next 12 months! The rich are leaving CA for states with more reasonable policies. I believe this trend will continue to the demises of CA’s financial health in the future.
 
Last edited:
I feel for you Neil. That is total absurdity in the worst way. I would imagine at some point Londoners will revolt towards this very continental redistribution of wealth.

I can't even begin to imagine all the cars that traverse in and out of the M25 every day that will eventually choose not to. That's an absolutely massive area.
 
We have 17.5% sales tax on everything (VAT or Value Added Tax), income tax is 40% and health care is 11%.

Savings are taxed at 40%, 80% of the cost of fuel (gas) is tax...

I could go on.

Pass me my medication.... :thumbsdow
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Top Bottom