Is it time to raise motor fuel duty?

[py_megapixel]

What are forum members' thoughts on the continuation of the fuel duty freeze?
Surely, with significant fare rises mooted for rail passengers, the similar changes should apply to drivers?

Increasing fuel duty in line with inflation since it was frozen - which seems logical to me - would see it at about 77 pence per litre, which I don't think is unreasonable relative to the cost of other modes of transport (though, just to clarify as an edit, not all in one mammoth jump!)

 

[yorkie]

Ideally yes, but it may not be deemed politically acceptable.

 

[ATW Alex 101]

What are forum members' thoughts on the continuation of the fuel duty freeze?
Surely, with significant fare rises mooted for rail passengers, the similar changes should apply to drivers?

Increasing fuel duty in line with inflation since it was frozen - which seems logical to me - would see it at about 77 pence per litre, which I don't think is unreasonable relative to the cost of other modes of transport.

No.

 

[py_megapixel]

No.

Please elaborate - which part of the quoted post are you saying "no" to?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

For context, how much currently is the duty element (is it 58p per litre?), how much the selling cost of the actual fuel (maybe 62p per litre, possibly a little more), and how much is the VAT when added on top of both (maybe 24p per litre), which I calculate would then give you an overall total of around 144p per litre?

Is that about right?

 

[WestRiding]

No. Not everyone can use public transport to get to work. Especially shift workers.

 

[py_megapixel]

How much currently is the duty element (is it 58p per litre?), how much the selling cost of the actual fuel (maybe 62p per litre, possibly a little more), and how much is the VAT when added on top to both (maybe 24p per litre), which I calculate would then give you an overall total of around 144p per litre? Is that right?

There's a chart the BBC had on this a few days ago.

45p cost of the fuel
58p duty
24p VAT
leaving 21p for the retailer at the average price at the moment of about 147-148p/litre

No. Not everyone can use public transport to get to work. Especially shift workers.

Not everyone can use a car, either.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

So increasing the duty element from 58p per litre to 77p per litre, would probably increase prices at the pump by 23p per litre, once you'd factored in VAT, or an overall increase from 149p per litre (using your BBC example) to 172p per litre. Wow!

 

[WestRiding]

There's a chart the BBC had on this a few days ago.

45p cost of the fuel
58p duty
24p VAT
leaving 21p for the retailer at the average price at the moment of about 147-148p/litre


Not everyone can use a car, either.

More people have the choice to run/own a car, than use public transport. If I don't have a car, the trains don't run through Sheffield, because I have to be at work, before the first trains even start to run. As for buses, none existent. And as if I would swap my car for a bus anyway.

 

[py_megapixel]

More people have the choice to run/own a car, than use public transport. If I don't have a car, the trains don't run through Sheffield, because I have to be at work, before the first trains run.

Which is all fine and dandy, but doesn't explain why the cost of motoring should be less than the cost of public transport.

 

[WestRiding]

Which is all fine and dandy, but doesn't explain why the cost of motoring should be less than the cost of public transport.

There have been many threads on here proving that owning and running a car is more expensive than public transport. Public transport is no good though, where there is no public transport.

 

[py_megapixel]

So increasing the duty element from 58p per litre to 77p per litre, would probably increase prices at the pump by 23p per litre, once you'd factored in VAT, or an overall increase from 149p per litre (using your BBC example) to 172p per litre. Wow!

To be fair, the 77p was an example based upon replicating all of the raising that "should have" been happening over the past 10 years or so. In reality you'd probably want that to happen gradually in phases, and at the same time the wholesale cost would be falling from its record high at the moment, so I don't think you would actually see anything like a sudden 23p jump anywhere.

 

[richw]

Have you seen the price of fuel at the moment? It really isn’t the time to be raising duty.

 

[edwin_m]

There have been many threads on here proving that owning and running a car is more expensive than public transport. Public transport is no good though, where there is no public transport.

That's probably why the government should be moving to road pricing, where the charges can be targeted more at those who have a public transport alternative, for example by making it cheaper to drive at times when buses aren't running.

 

[ChrisC]

That's probably why the government should be moving to road pricing, where the charges can be targeted more at those who have a public transport alternative, for example by making it cheaper to drive at times when buses aren't running.

Road pricing which could be flexible in the fact that it would be cheaper to drive at times when buses aren’t running could be very complicated. How would it be decided when buses aren’t running unless it is extremely localised. For most locations in urban areas that would be just during the night. Where I live there are no buses after 7pm and none on Sundays and Bank Holidays. There are also the more isolated rural areas where there are no buses at any time. How far would someone have to live from a bus route before it was decided that public transport was not a viable option. If I need to use public transport in the evening or on a Sunday I have a walk of well over a mile along narrow country roads and some without pavements. Also what about the frequency of the bus service. Would a bus every 2 hours be considered sufficient? These may to someone living in an urban area with a 7 day a week service of frequent buses running until late into the evenings seem unimportant and perhaps even frivolous questions. They are important issues for people living in more rural areas.

 

[edwin_m]

Road pricing which could be flexible in the fact that it would be cheaper to drive at times when buses aren’t running could be very complicated. How would it be decided when buses aren’t running unless it is extremely localised. For most locations in urban areas that would be just during the night. Where I live there are no buses after 7pm and none on Sundays and Bank Holidays. There are also the more isolated rural areas where there are no buses at any time. How far would someone have to live from a bus route before it was decided that public transport was not a viable option. If I need to use public transport in the evening or on a Sunday I have a walk of well over a mile along narrow country roads and some without pavements. Also what about the frequency of the bus service. Would a bus every 2 hours be considered sufficient? These may to someone living in an urban area with a 7 day a week service of frequent buses running until late into the evenings seem unimportant and perhaps even frivolous questions. They are important issues for people living in more rural areas.

It's a complex issue. I'd guess a fairly low flat rate would apply in rural areas with an extra charge to enter larger towns and cities. These could have park and ride sites just outside the charging "cordon", and the extra fee might apply only during the operating hours of the P&R buses. Fuel duty would continue alongside this, to incentivise people to switch to electric vehicles or at least to get a more efficient IC vehicle and drive it in an economical way.

 

[Shrop]

In a fair world the cost of car travel should be raised by at least as much as the cost of rail travel, year on year. After all, haven’t we just hosted Cop26 which was all about limiting environmental damage, and isn’t there also general agreement that rail travel is more environmentally friendly than car travel?

However, if one thing is for sure in this discussion, it’s that politics play a major part, and politicians are almost invariably biased towards car travel. The attitude of Government to road vs rail was epitomised by our local MP back in 1992, which was a poignant year for us in Shrewsbury, as we became England’s first county to be deprived of a through rail service to London. But much to the disgust of many locals and rail users, our MP was noteworthy by his lack of any support to oppose British Rail’s proposals to withdraw the service.

That same year, our A5 bypass was opened, but a few weeks after its opening one lane was closed for essential work on overhead power cables. But this time, the same MP wasn’t just more prominent, he was widely reported as being “incandescent with rage”, because he couldn’t bear road traffic to be disrupted. And that was despite having just had a massive improvement to Shropshire's highway infrastructure, with rail services going in the opposite direction.

This is just one example, and throughout my career during which I’ve discussed road and rail travel with politicians at many levels, I have no reason to believe that, as a generalisation, politicians think much differently now, to how our MP did in 1992. I could give several other reasons why this should be, like mentioning petrol headed journalists who scare politicians into not daring to raise fuel costs, but this post is long enough already.

So back to the main point, yes, by increasing fuel duty or by another way, the costs of driving should be increased by at least as much as the cost of rail travel, but will it happen? Only if oil prices rise. It won’t happen while our politicians have a choice about it.

 

[DarloRich]

No government is going to massively raise fuel duty. It would be electoral suicide. To suggest they should or would is naïve in the extreme.

 

[jon0844]

I really don't think we need to price cars off the road. That will just cause issues for essential workers who need a car because they work odd shifts, with little to no public transport options.

Road pricing or other tech-based solutions are almost certainly going to have introduction issues, be prone to all sorts of frauds/hacks, and end up hitting the wrong people.

The solution is to make alternatives more enticing. Make it so someone can drive at 4am for their warehouse shift or care job, but during the day they can feel comfortable enough to take a bus. Make cycling more enticing by improving the road network and so on.

Fuel is currently way too expensive to talk about further price rises. That includes energy bills in the home, which will disproportionately hit the lower paid people who can't necessarily just turn things off. When the caps lift next year, there's a potential for some people to be unable to heat their home - while more affluent people may moan and groan at the price hike, but can still pay it.

I do think that with the price of petrol and diesel rocketing, it will be encouraging a lot more people to switch to an EV.. especially now range anxiety is less of a thing with modern cars doing 200+ miles with relative ease - and being chargeable in as little as 20-30 minutes.

 

[GB]

Which is all fine and dandy, but doesn't explain why the cost of motoring should be less than the cost of public transport.

who says one HAS to be cheaper than the other? Surely the price of either is determined on specific circumstances? In any case I have just looked at a return ticket to my place of work (about 60 miles round trip) and the price of a ticket is about the same I’d budget for fuel (£9). The issue I and many others have is that there is no train to get me to the start of my shift or a train more than doubles my commute time.

 

[jon0844]

Saw a video this morning which introduces another problem for the motorist; cars are getting more expensive. With the way things are regulated, and new requirements coming, car makers are simply scrapping small cars (many of which are ideal for people who need a car for work, but don't need a huge SUV or with fantastic performance*).

(Video from Carwow with opinion piece about cheap cars are going to become a thing of the past, due to tighter regulations and the need to include more technology).

* Yes, EVs will one day mop up this market I'm sure, but until we get those cheap EVs from China, a lot of people are going to have to worry about more than just higher fuel prices.

 

[birchesgreen]

I am thinking of getting a new car next year, looking around at the various manufacturers i did notice myself the choice of small car seems to be less than it was a couple of years ago.

 

[richw]

I am thinking of getting a new car next year, looking around at the various manufacturers i did notice myself the choice of small car seems to be less than it was a couple of years ago.

I purchased a nearly new Hyundai i10 back in April. Was one of very few choices I found, but on research the i10 and Kia picanto seemed best rated. Very happy with my purchase and serves my short commute perfectly well and is of a decent specification.

 

[AM9]

I purchased a nearly new Hyundai i10 back in April. Was one of very few choices I found, but on research the i10 and Kia picanto seemed best rated. Very happy with my purchase and serves my short commute perfectly well and is of a decent specification.

Similar here. I didn't buy new as my mileage meant that a good S/H car would see me OK until I go EV. I managed to get a top of the range 2015 1250cc model with 30K miles from the local main dealer. It's quite comfortable, economical and with all the bells and whistles compares favourably with a more basic recent vehicle. If the market is still lively for small IC cars then it should end up being quite cheap to have owned.
As far as fuel costs are concerned, they are almost irrelevant. But individual expenses may become secondary to the need to reduce CO2 as things get worse meaning that transport hydrocarbon fuel needs to be costed according to it's climatic damage. Pausing the Fuel Price Escalator (now called the Fuel Duty Stabiliser) might have been a practical move during the credit crisis in 2012 but to not remind the country that it was intended to return in the interest of climte damage from vehiclular use was an error that a future Conservative government may regret.

 

[birchesgreen]

I was thinking of a Panda or a Sandero, according to the video both are in peril.

 

[SynthD]

Raise it, catch up with the politically motivated freeze. Let key workers, anyone on benefits, etc (to be determined) claim back the duty or vat in tax returns. How many people do we think don’t have tax returns but do buy fuel?

 

[ac6000cw]

How many people do we think don’t have tax returns but do buy fuel?

There's about 32 million Income Tax payers in the UK, of which about 11.5 million have to submit a Tax Return, so probably millions of road vehicle fuel buyers don't submit tax returns.

 

[PauloDavesi]

Raising fuel duty will have a massive effect on inflation, and increase the transport costs for all companies that are manufaturing or providing services, leading to a loss of jobs.
Do we really want to increase inflation and unemployment at the current time?

 

[AM9]

Raise it, catch up with the politically motivated freeze. Let key workers, anyone on benefits, etc (to be determined) claim back the duty or vat in tax returns. How many people do we think don’t have tax returns but do buy fuel?

I don't see why "key workers" necessarily should have fuel at a reduced cost. Perhaps you could explain why they should, (and maybe define what you mean by 'key workers').

 

[SynthD]

I want them to be unhindered by poor public transport provision in their area, while still firmly discouraging others (which should lead to the others demanding better public transport). There's more than just the pandemic's definition of key workers so I said to be determined.