UK switching to electric vehicles discussion

[jon0844]

There will be no black boxes. Mileage will be recorded at MOT stations and submitted to the government for invoicing. What happens in the first 3 years I don't know. I'm irked by this, I drive a plug in hybrid, and do about 6000 miles a year in France. Apparently I'll still owe UK Gov for this, even though I'm not using UK roads, but paying French tolls.

Never mind the fact that I rarely plug it in, so the battery charge is from petrol I've already paid duty on. It's double taxation.

Should we start the betting on this scheme being delayed or shelved ahead of the next election, when it not only proves unpopular and potentially unworkable but might even be used as some sort of deal sweetener by freezing a scheme that never actually started?

There had to be a load of better ways to increase revenue from car users, and this scheme seems dumb because while it isn't that much - it still impacts those who may do low mileages but need to drive for whatever reason. Richer people won't care one bit about the cost, and it certainly won't make them attempt to drive less (assuming there was any desire to use such a scheme to not only raise revenue but potentially reduce congestion).

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Nov 2025 ==

Only if your cars are young enough to be riddled with computers!

As every year goes by, there will be more and more cars with such computers and data logging - some able to send data over a mobile connection or Wi-Fi, or downloadable via an OBP port. I don't know what the average age of a car is on the road, but I am sure the technology to track usage has been around for well over ten years at this stage.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 26 Nov 2025 ==

The EV mileage charge is the worst thing from this announcement. I know someone who was on the fence about buying an EV (i.e. resistant, but running out of excuses, since they have a driveway and never do >200mi r/t). They're now determined not to buy one. Yes, they would still save money relative to a petrol car, but you're dealing with stubbornness and the tax being separately visible, not pure logic. It should have been deferred until we were further along the transition.

It will do (arguably has done) loads of damage to those advocating for EVs. For weeks since the Telegraph broke the story, that's nearly all you read on forums and social media. It doesn't matter that it still doesn't make an EV worse than an ICE car (even for those who can't charge at home, because in the last month or so there are plenty of ways to charge much cheaper at public chargers - for between 25-50p per kWh). It's all about perception.

And for what? A scheme not coming anytime soon, and may well be shelved or modified before the next election when common sense is realised. It may well be another embarrassing U-turn for the Government, who will try and spin it by saying they're delaying it but have nevertheless made it clear they intend to introduce such a flawed idea.

Just increase the annual charge for EVs based on the necessary criteria to help those buying a small car versus those buying a massive 2.5-3 tonne behemoth with a 120+kWh battery pack needed to offer any sort of decent range.

 

[Topological]

No, we don't, you might and some others may but I don't want an EV. I have nowhere to charge it at home or work.

I am slightly confused, because I never said you did.

I believe "we" as society do want everyone to stop driving ICE cars. The current argument appears to be that EVs are better for the environment, and by extension society, than their ICE equivalents. Hence, governments of all persuasions take steps to promote EVs.

That does not mean that every individual in society wants to drive an EV.

 

[43096]

I do have a problem with taxing EVs while we want people to switch to using them. But I can understand that the government needs to appease the internal combustion lobby and EV users do get an easier ride on tax.

More importantly, the Treasury needs to replace the revenue lost from tax on petrol and diesel because the vehicles are now battery.

 

[adc82140]

That's driving desirable behavioural change. It would be better if you did plug it in, as that would reduce emissions in urban areas for short journeys, so hopefully this situation will change your behaviour so you do.

Turned out to be such a faff to plug it in: finding a type 2 charging point, then fiddling around with the right app to try and get it to work. Life's too short.

But by 2028 I'll be due to change the car again, and next time it'll be pure petrol, and probably dirt cheap as I'll be looking for a 6-8 year old car, rather than the 2-3 year old vehicles I normally buy.

 

[jon0844]

More importantly, the Treasury needs to replace the revenue lost from tax on petrol and diesel because the vehicles are now battery.

Of course. Nobody could expect the Government to just willingly lose all that fuel duty income, but a per-mile charge seems somewhat unfair as it penalises those who have to drive and does little for those who have the money to drive all the time, while businesses will just put the extra cost onto the customers.

Why not tax the vehicles more every year? While I expect someone might argue that a family needs a big SUV to ferry the kids to school, in reality they probably don't need a massive, heavy, car.

I really do think they'll tweak, delay or axe this scheme when they realise it will be hindering the transition to EVs and used by nefarious actors to attack EVs. If they'd applied the charge for ALL cars, at least that wouldn't have been a thing.. but this Government doesn't seem to have worked out how to sell changes to the general public.

 

[Topological]

Of course. Nobody could expect the Government to just willingly lose all that fuel duty income, but a per-mile charge seems somewhat unfair as it penalises those who have to drive and does little for those who have the money to drive all the time, while businesses will just put the extra cost onto the customers.

Why not tax the vehicles more every year? While I expect someone might argue that a family needs a big SUV to ferry the kids to school, in reality they probably don't need a massive, heavy, car.

I really do think they'll tweak, delay or axe this scheme when they realise it will be hindering the transition to EVs and used by nefarious actors to attack EVs. If they'd applied the charge for ALL cars, at least that wouldn't have been a thing.. but this Government doesn't seem to have worked out how to sell changes to the general public.

The government has many sources of revenue.

I think this idea of ringfencing money from one revenue source for one expenditure task is dangerous. In this case, there is no reason road spending needs to come from fuel duty. Road tax is a perfectly good source of road related taxation revenue that could be used.

As you note, road tax based on vehicle weight has sense.

However, it is wrong to make an argument for the proposed EV mileage tax based on losses of fuel duty on petrol.

 

[jon0844]

None of the money from VED is ringfenced for road maintenance anyway is it? It's all into one big pot, and in recent years there's probably less and less money going on maintenance (with the odd boost in cash to fix potholes when people get sufficiently outraged at the state of the roads).

I accept that when (almost) everyone switches to EVs - and I suspect it will be most, as unless you're keeping a particular classic on the road, the higher cost of fuel by 2030+ will make it even less logical to keep using one - there has to be some substitute for the income fuel sales provide, but it seems a particularly lazy and unpopular move that may well not happen, or will be easily abused and circumvented anyway.

It also seems that after all the fuss, it won't really be generating much income anyway, so they either have to quickly increase it and keep doing so until it becomes even more unpopular (and people are incentivised even more to get around it by hacking their vehicles to reduce the mileage). As I said before, those with loads of money won't care one bit and might even see it as a nice way to get the plebs off the road.

 

[Peter Sarf]

Although I have an EV, I cannot be too upset with it being 3p per mile the vehicle does. It probably balances with the vehicles paying tax in other countries using the UK roads.

I do have a problem with taxing EVs while we want people to switch to using them. But I can understand that the government needs to appease the internal combustion lobby and EV users do get an easier ride on tax.

The EV mileage charge is the worst thing from this announcement. I know someone who was on the fence about buying an EV (i.e. resistant, but running out of excuses, since they have a driveway and never do >200mi r/t). They're now determined not to buy one. Yes, they would still save money relative to a petrol car, but you're dealing with stubbornness and the tax being separately visible, not pure logic. It should have been deferred until we were further along the transition.

I think we really should have been addressing the issue of a tax on use of EVs a lot earlier. Instead of being a fact of life it is a sudden surprise - granted any person thinking about it could see it was inevitable.

Perhaps a black box OTMR style that also legally monitors driving standards compliance. Two birds, one stone.

I reckon the hardware is there in a growing number of cars. Ideally counting mileage, weight of vehicle AND how often it is driven inefficiently (dangerously)

More importantly, the Treasury needs to replace the revenue lost from tax on petrol and diesel because the vehicles are now battery.

This is the elephant in the room and both governments have sidestepped dealing with what is a large and growing loss of tax revenue.

Turned out to be such a faff to plug it in: finding a type 2 charging point, then fiddling around with the right app to try and get it to work. Life's too short.

But by 2028 I'll be due to change the car again, and next time it'll be pure petrol, and probably dirt cheap as I'll be looking for a 6-8 year old car, rather than the 2-3 year old vehicles I normally buy.

That does seem to be what most Hybrid owners are doing.

.................................

I accept that when (almost) everyone switches to EVs - and I suspect it will be most, as unless you're keeping a particular classic on the road, the higher cost of fuel by 2030+ will make it even less logical to keep using one - there has to be some substitute for the income fuel sales provide, but it seems a particularly lazy and unpopular move that may well not happen, or will be easily abused and circumvented anyway.

The government cannot possibly wait any longer to replace the income lost from fuel duty. It is long overdue.

It also seems that after all the fuss, it won't really be generating much income anyway, so they either have to quickly increase it and keep doing so until it becomes even more unpopular (and people are incentivised even more to get around it by hacking their vehicles to reduce the mileage). As I said before, those with loads of money won't care one bit and might even see it as a nice way to get the plebs off the road.

Well I will not be surprised if the EV mileage charge increases to match what the government would be getting from fuel duty as time goes by. Probably adding a sliding scale to charge more per mile for the more power hungry cars.

I will be annoyed if ICE cars have to pay both !. But that will be the way the government appease the EV users.

For me it is the road tax that I have a problem with. I choose to walk or use public transport as much as I can. Why should I pay a fixed charge for a car I use as little as possible ?.

 

[jon0844]

I guess you could have a certain mileage allowance that is not charged, or work things on a sliding scale, but the whole idea is going to be full of issues and clocking will absolutely become a thing again.

While I'm sure the software in an EV is encrypted, there are 100% going to be companies working to hack systems to lower mileage. I wouldn't be surprised if we don't also see hacks to fake data on battery health and so on too.

We'd have to be naive to not think there's a good incentive to do so.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I caught a snippet yesterday - the exact source, I can't remember - which, if I understood it right suggested this mechanism was what was (to be) proposed:
At the time you apply for your annual VED you would estimate your mileage for the coming year and pay for it alongside your VED. I suppose you would also supply your ODO reading.

Example: ODO 35000. VED £195 plus 10k estimate *3p = total VED £495.

Next year - ditto, but the amount you pay will be adjusted by any difference between your estimate and your actual mileage.

Example: ODO 44000. VED £195 plus 10k estimate *3p. Subtotal £495. . Actual mileage (35000-44000 = 9000) Adjustment = estimate 10000 - actual 9000 = 1000 *3p = £30. Net £465.

There appears to be no concession for mileage conducted outside the UK or on private land. I'm not sure I see the necessity anyway. It's a tax, pure and simple. And you still, for example, pay income tax when you are overseas.

Compare to VED rates for petrol and diesel which range from £20 to £760 with an average probably around £200. Plus the duty on fuel used.

 

[jon0844]

I was a little surprised when I read about the proposal for people to estimate usage in advance and declare it. I cannot see how that can possibly work.

If you drive fewer miles you can claim back the next year, but many will see this as akin to energy suppliers taking money to build a credit for the winter months and will start to moan that the Government is profiting from their money - and then people are going to refuse to pay up front and will lie about the mileage.

There surely had to be a better way to get an income without this flawed scheme. It seems like someone knew they wanted a pay per mile method but had zero idea how to do it with tech (realising every car maker has non standard systems, so you'd likely need additional hardware fitted to all cars - including cars already on the road) and so opted for some sort of trust-based system.

And to top it off, the idea sounds worse than it actually is (so is now giving loads of negative publicity and may slow EV sales) but ironically doesn't seem like it will raise that much because it isn't as bad as it sounds!!

Simply increasing the annual tax would have likely been more sensible, with specific cars charged more or less based on things like weight or efficiency, or even their original on-the-road price.

 

[Harpo]

There appears to be no concession for mileage conducted outside the UK or on private land. I'm not sure I see the necessity anyway.

Refuelling abroad involves paying any local taxes so it is a double taxation.

 

[Harpers Tate]

I agree with both
- the totally unnecessary business of estimating and then reclaiming any required correction. Why isn't this simply retrospective and actual?
- the negative publicity. In reality this is to a degree "fake news" because in reality, ICE users already pay ~5-10p/mile in fuel taxes so an EV user is still ahead on this basis. That's just a matter of how this has been "sold" (presented). The same outcome (in revenue terms) might have been achieved by, for example, putting the same 3p/mile on everything offset by a corrresponding reduction of an average 3p/mile on fuel duty.

Refuelling abroad involves paying any local taxes so it is a double taxation.

If you mean tolls then that's certainly the case. As it is on the few toll roads we have here. If it's something else - as this is about EVs then it can only be about tax on electricity. I don't know what, if any, such taxes there are elsewhere.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Refuelling abroad involves paying any local taxes so it is a double taxation.

It's likely other countries will move to a similar system because taxing electric cars when you "refuel" them is not practicable here or anywhere else because there is no realistic way to differentiate between whether those electrons are going into a car or a 3 bar electric heater. Thus most likely it wouldn't be double taxation, much similar to the way if you go on a two week business trip to France you don't switch to paying French income tax.

 

[styles]

Well the OBR estimates that there will be 440,000 fewer EV sales between 2030-31 as a result of this policy.

I think bringing in per-mile pricing for EVs but not ICEs is silly, an administrative burden, and likely to put people off EVs (which the OBR appears to believe also).

A lot of the budget announcements appear to not have the unintended consequences considered. This was so easy to get right, but the government has messed it up.

 

[jmh59]

My thoughts are rather less rational - I do around 3.5k miles per year and charge at home at 25p/kWh or whatever. It's still cheaper than running a diesel car for example. But from next month I get free bus travel (in England at least) and my wife will hopefully from late 2027 unless they scrap it by then. I do one long trip to the railway each week (far too early for busses) - 50 miles - otherwise it's shopping and the odd day out. In my case I can see us not even having a car by 2028, saving the cost of the car plus servicing, MoT, VED, and insurance. That bundle would see us a decent flight every year plus the occasional car hire if needed. Pity there isn't one of those car clubs in walking distance.

Right now I am at the point of looking for a new car as the warranty on our current EV expires in June. I am minded not to bother and just run the current car to 2028.

 

[sannox]

I've got an EV on lease. I can see it just being added to the X miles per year by them and paid.

I'm not too bothered by the tax as I can see that EV driving is cheap as chips compared to older cars.

 

[E27007]

I've got an EV on lease. I can see it just being added to the X miles per year by them and paid.

As described in the Govt consultation paper, when configuring a lease or PCP contract, the lessor has almost always required a declaration of estimated mileage for the vehicle over the term, the 3p/mile charge may be amortised over the term and incorporated into the monthly payment

 

[Welly]

I needed to change from my 18 year car and did consider a Dacia Spring but I was unable to get a test drive and was unsure I could have a home charger fitted in good time. So I went for a new petrol Kia Picanto instead - it cost a lot less than the Spring and felt a much nicer car! I do expect my next car to be electric and I hope they will be cheaper to buy in the future.

 

[Sun Chariot]

I know this strays well off topic - but...

Whilst north of the Arctic Circle this week, I was surprised to see a fully-electric Polar explorer ship (attached).
A lot of EV cars in use here. Interestingly, nearly all are Tesla or Toyota; not a single Scandinavian brand EV seen.

Range and reliability in 2025? Clearly well beyond "anxiety". The future looks bright.

 

[greyman42]

And for what? A scheme not coming anytime soon, and may well be shelved or modified before the next election when common sense is realised.

Why announce it then?

 

[jon0844]

Why announce it then?

I have no idea. It's like they came up with the idea (which has its merits) but didn't look into how they could implement it effectively, and possibly realised that installing hardware in every car would be expensive and problematic (unless other countries did the same, it would mean having to get car makers to adapt vehicles for a relatively limited market) so thought 'we'll get people to estimate their usage and pay upfront'.

In other words, they announced the idea without having properly worked out how to effectively enforce it.

 

[Noddy]

I have no idea. It's like they came up with the idea (which has its merits) but didn't look into how they could implement it effectively, and possibly realised that installing hardware in every car would be expensive and problematic (unless other countries did the same, it would mean having to get car makers to adapt vehicles for a relatively limited market) so thought 'we'll get people to estimate their usage and pay upfront'.

In other words, they announced the idea without having properly worked out how to effectively enforce it.

Indeed as an EV driver I have no issues with the policy itself, but the implementation looks like lunacy at the moment.

 

[Bald Rick]

I have seen absolutely loads of VW ID7s on the roads recently*, many of which appear to be minicabs. Three in a row at the station tonight! Have done a bit of investiagation, and they have a c400 mile range, 0-60 6.5 sec, loads of space, and you can pick up a year old example with around 5-10k miles for £31k. That is bargain territory.

*Including, today, one that drove past me with the reg plate VW 10 SVN. Clever.

 

[Mawkie]

Obviously nobody wants to pay for something that they didn't pay for previously - but the reality is EV drivers will be paying relatively low amounts per year, £200/300.

My hot take, for what it's worth, is the government should have bitten the bullet and removed VED completely for all vehicles and replaced it with a financially comparable pay per mile system that penalises the half mile trip to the school, or quick drop off to the train station because it's raining.

Pay per mile is surely the fairest system of all, no?

 

[greyman42]

In other words, they announced the idea without having properly worked out how to effectively enforce it.

Are these people idiots?

 

[Topological]

Are these people idiots?

Wouldnt be the first time a policy that looks nice in practice was an absolute disaster in implementation when an obvious alternative existed.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I have no idea. It's like they came up with the idea (which has its merits) but didn't look into how they could implement it effectively, and possibly realised that installing hardware in every car would be expensive and problematic (unless other countries did the same, it would mean having to get car makers to adapt vehicles for a relatively limited market) so thought 'we'll get people to estimate their usage and pay upfront'.

In other words, they announced the idea without having properly worked out how to effectively enforce it.

Well I wonder.

Perhaps it is one of those unpopular things they can be seen to decide against closer to the general election.

Or later they will exchange the road pricing idea for something less unpopular and/or unworkable when it suits them

I still think the government (and opposition) must be seeng a significant drop in tax revenue from road users so something has got to happen.

Obviously nobody wants to pay for something that they didn't pay for previously - but the reality is EV drivers will be paying relatively low amounts per year, £200/300.

My hot take, for what it's worth, is the government should have bitten the bullet and removed VED completely for all vehicles and replaced it with a financially comparable pay per mile system that penalises the half mile trip to the school, or quick drop off to the train station because it's raining.

Pay per mile is surely the fairest system of all, no?

I prefer to walk for the short trips and really wish the state would discourage short car trips. Granted EVs are less polluting but getting rid of a lot of the school runs for instance would improve traffic smoothness greatly. Now for EVs this would mean a pricing regime that penalises very short trips (unless driver/owner is disabled). For ICE (petrol/Diesel) the higher fuel usage when cold infers higher costs - also short hops are not good fo the engine.

I think a mileage based charge has to come.

I think road tax unfairly penalises people like me who use their car sparingly.

Here is an idea for mileage based charging.
For every insurance quote I search out there a question asked is what is the annual mileage. Brain storming here but perhaps increasing insurance premium tax and relying on insurance companies to vary prices based on annual mileage (as they seem to) would be easy (it dumps all the work on others outside the government).
Policing it ? - Easy most insurers do not check how truthful a car owner is until they make a claim. Then the owner discovers they are not insured (thus not getting repair/replacement paid for or more seriously plod taking an interest as they are "uninsured". Messy I know.

 

[jon0844]

Well I wonder.

Perhaps it is one of those unpopular things they can be seen to decide against closer to the general election.

Or later they will exchange the road pricing idea for something less unpopular and/or unworkable when it suits them

I still think the government (and opposition) must be seeng a significant drop in tax revenue from road users so something has got to happen.

I prefer to walk for the short trips and really wish the state would discourage short car trips. Granted EVs are less polluting but getting rid of a lot of the school runs for instance would improve traffic smoothness greatly. Now for EVs this would mean a pricing regime that penalises very short trips (unless driver/owner is disabled). For ICE (petrol/Diesel) the higher fuel usage when cold infers higher costs - also short hops are not good fo the engine.

I think a mileage based charge has to come.

I think road tax unfairly penalises people like me who use their car sparingly.

Here is an idea for mileage based charging.
For every insurance quote I search out there a question asked is what is the annual mileage. Brain storming here but perhaps increasing insurance premium tax and relying on insurance companies to vary prices based on annual mileage (as they seem to) would be easy (it dumps all the work on others outside the government).
Policing it ? - Easy most insurers do not check how truthful a car owner is until they make a claim. Then the owner discovers they are not insured (thus not getting repair/replacement paid for or more seriously plod taking an interest as they are "uninsured". Messy I know.

Tying it in with insurance might be a good idea because, as you say, it does mean falsely declaring your mileage could have serious consequences (more so than simply being asked to pay a bit more next year).

I am sure for a proper system to work, it needs every car to record mileage and securely store that data for the DVLA to check and for a bill to be raised (or added to the yearly VED). Of course that costs money and, as I also said, if we are the only country doing it that way then we have to ask every car maker to add in the necessary tech - either from the factory, or installed separately (and that means type approvals, testing to make sure it doesn't interfere with safety critical systems etc). What a faff!

Or they go with the 'please tell us how much you drove' and maybe checks against the MOT database after three years, and assuming we don't see a massive black market that will reduce the mileage.

Oh, and when the per mile charge rises in the future, will we see people gaming the system by paying for miles they haven't done in the current (tax) year?

I am sure we can all brainstorm and find more and more flaws!

 

[Mawkie]

Tying it in with insurance might be a good idea because, as you say, it does mean falsely declaring your mileage could have serious consequences (more so than simply being asked to pay a bit more next year).

I would say tax evasion is more serious than fibbing to an insurance company. I don't fancy HMRC knocking on my door.

Most modern cars have the ability to see numerous parameters in an app. Certainly on my last 2 cars this has included total mileage. This indicates that the car is sending this information to 'the cloud' before it arrives on my phone. It wouldn't bother me to give permission for mileage info to be shared with HMRC and billed automatically.