Congestion Charge - Tax or Service?

[Shaun]

As always the clue is in the question! :P:

Congestion Charge

Originally Posted by andygrif

So what about the Dartford Crossing or the Clifton Suspension Bridge?

I just knew something like that was going to come up

If these were built with public money, then having to pay for them is a tax too. I wonder if the Americans would refuse to pay for the use of them?
__________________

Originally Posted by Shaun

As always the clue is in the question! :P:

Check out http://www.google.co.uk/search?hl=en...ax+charge&meta= and see just how often the Council Tax is referred to as a 'charge'.

So the name is NOT the answer - arguably the name tries to justify the charge without calling it a tax.

[Nugget]

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

I just knew something like that was going to come up

If these were built with public money, then having to pay for them is a tax too. I wonder if the Americans would refuse to pay for the use of them?

But it's still not a tax or, as I said earlier, they are voluntary at their worst level.

I can't speak for the Dartford Bridge because I don't use it very often, but the Humber Bridge is a toll bridge because they have to pay off the debt acquired through building it. Now, it was built for the convenience of, for example, people who lived in Grimsby but worked in Hull who, instead of having a 75 mile journey, now have a 30 mile journey.

People are paying for the convenience of saving themselves an extra 45 miles. However, if they don't want to pay the toll, they have the choice of going the long way round. As such, I still don't see why anyone would think any of these are taxes.

As I said earlier, the congestion charge is purely voluntary - if you don't want to pay it, don't drive through the congestion zone. Sometimes, and there are examples given onhere, this isn't practical but this is the exception rather than the rule.

[BBKing]

Well, it does give 'em a break from annexing Poland

Other way round, these days, Germany's full of Poles. And they're still wrong about it.

Anyway, London isn't the only city with CC - most cities in Norway do. Presumably diplomats fork out there?

There is, of course, an excellent way round the charge (which, incidentally, proves it isn't a tax). Get a green vehicle. You still have security, you're making an effort towards climate change (and we all know how important that is to the US government), it's excellent PR, you're supporting innovation in the car industry and you don't have to pay Ken a penny to drive it (apart from £10 to register).

http://www.est.org.uk/fleet/funding/lcc/

[andygrif]

Originally Posted by ScaredWebWarrior

I just knew something like that was going to come up

If these were built with public money, then having to pay for them is a tax too. I wonder if the Americans would refuse to pay for the use of them?

I'm struggling with your definition of tax I'm afraid. Does that mean that the charge for making a phone call via BT is a tax too, as much of the BT network was built by public money.

Also, my local council offer office units in council owned properties (bought with my Council Tax money one assumes). They charge start-up businesses £4,000 a year to rent them. Is this a tax too? Or is rent?

Originally Posted by BBKing

There is, of course, an excellent way round the charge (which, incidentally, proves it isn't a tax). Get a green vehicle. You still have security, you're making an effort towards climate change (and we all know how important that is to the US government), it's excellent PR, you're supporting innovation in the car industry and you don't have to pay Ken a penny to drive it

Originally Posted by BBKing

(apart from £10 to register).

Isn't that a tax too? If so that Septics will refuse to pay it!!

[BBKing]

FFS, I'll have a whipround in the pub to pay it if necessary.

Presumably they have to register their cars with the DVLA, even if they don't pay car tax? Or is that free? What about car insurance, which is compulsory on British roads and contains a tax element on the premiums?

I say they have to pay it like everyone else.

They use the roads (and clog them up), they pay. End of.

I mean, it's not like they a skint hey?

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Tuftus

They use the roads (and clog them up), they pay. End of.

I mean, it's not like they a skint hey?

Ah, but this is Yanks, they do whatever they want and *everyone else* pays...!

(Oops, don't want to start things off again! )

[BBKing]

Further to this, the Germans are refusing to pay because their embassy is in the extension zone (basically a chunk from Knightsbridge to Notting Hill) - that's not the case with the US. Bangladesh manage to pay. The US owe £150,00 0, having refused to pay since the price went up (which suggests that they were happy with it at £5/day).

Also, the Vienna Convention doesn't quite say 'no taxes on embassies', it's 'no obligation to pay the host nation unless a specific benefit is rendered'. In this case, the argument would be that, since the embassy benefits directly from cleaner air and 30% less traffic on the roads in central London, they're getting a direct benefit from CC and thus should pay.

[Angua]

Amazing that the "richest nation" in the world is arguing over paying the "congestion charge" whilst Libera, one of the "poorer" nations pays without a murmer.

No one should have to pay it.

Originally Posted by Nugget

But it's still not a tax or, as I said earlier, they are voluntary at their worst level.

I can't speak for the Dartford Bridge because I don't use it very often, but the Humber Bridge is a toll bridge because they have to pay off the debt acquired through building it. Now, it was built for the convenience of, for example, people who lived in Grimsby but worked in Hull who, instead of having a 75 mile journey, now have a 30 mile journey.

People are paying for the convenience of saving themselves an extra 45 miles. However, if they don't want to pay the toll, they have the choice of going the long way round. As such, I still don't see why anyone would think any of these are taxes.

As I said earlier, the congestion charge is purely voluntary - if you don't want to pay it, don't drive through the congestion zone. Sometimes, and there are examples given onhere, this isn't practical but this is the exception rather than the rule.

So the customs and excise duty on a bottle of whisky or a pack of fags is not a tax it's a service?Because using your analogy we don't have to buy or use those products thereby avoiding paying the duty.

I have no view about this tax/charge/service/toll one way or the other.I'd never happily drive through London by choice(anyone who does is a nutter)and I'm quite happy to drive into my daughter's road in Archway by going the long way round(but only if forced to because my darling wants me to do house removals).

I think London is a driver's worst nightmare.Gives me the sweats just thinking about doing so.