Conference terri::cars_uk

    I think (in my case) that its still worth it.  I do over 2500 company
    miles a year (not much over), about 20,000 - 25,000 private miles a
    year, and have chosen to lease a car from a manufacturer prepared to
    discount heavily to Hertz/PHH.
    
    I did the sums when I first got my Pug, it was marginally cheaper over
    the 30 months than buying a 1 year old car, adding over 50,000 miles,
    paying insurance etc.
    
    I went through the same excersise to see if it was worth leasing or
    buying a 16V Astra, and came to the conclusion that its still slightly
    cheaper to lease - though its much more marginal than before.  Next
    years budget will be a vote catcher, I dont expect anything too nasty
    to happen to car taxes.
    
    Its also worth remembering that if you take the cash you only get about
    �2850, whereas you can get about �3400 of car on "the scheme".
    
    
    John

    It is marginal, but still worth it - but do your own personal
    sums. I take care to do the 2500, and also to get a 1.4 capacity
    car - one just on the 3400 boundary so that I don't pay extra.
    
    In my case that equated to a Peugeot 1.4 CJ (convertible).
    52 mpg on a long run - North Norfolk and back without a refill -
    at a steady 70+ on the motorway.
    
    You could do worse.
    
    Mike Day
    

    
    .1 Define 3400 worth of car!
    
    I have just spoken with Coopers & Lybrand about the tax position
    as my overseas contract is coming to an end. They reckon that the
    40% tax is not really a factor for a married man (wife not working)
    with mortgage until your total package hits 30K pounds. This is
    because the 40% rate applies on Taxable income after personal
    allowances come into play. So if you are on say 22K + level 8/9
    car allowance your total package in taking the money would be
    about 26K. With all the allowances youwont pay any of that at
    40%.
    
    As far as I can see the whole system is corrupt, UK is the only
    country in Europe that has this stigma/status symbol of company
    cars. I reckon our huge trade deficit would be much reduced if
    people had to think about the REAL costs of running
    a particular car. We should just be paid the right salary for the
    job then the individual can decide to spend it on what he wants. 
    you'd be surprised at the number of people here who drive to work
    in old Renault 4,5's/2CV's minis etc!...and they earn salaries that
    would make their UK equivalents turn green!!
                                    
    Dave in Annecy

    
    
    I've just "opted out" of the car scheme. There were four reasons
    for my decision. 
    
    - The high prices of vehicles on the scheme, no doubt in part due
      to the excessively high interest rates
    
    - The continually increasing CCT.
    
    - If I "opted in" this time I was stuck.
    
    - I didn't need a brand new tinbox.
    
    The big plus of the scheme for me was that it cost the same
    irrespective of mileage. Doing a high mileage, mostly personal
    meant that I was being "subsidised" by the scheme. 
    

    For the last two budgets I was quite frightened that the Government
    would, as it had claimed, "double the CCT". Having a car of over
    2 litres, that would have been a lot of money. I think now though,
    that my fear probably wasn't justified. Although, I'm sure the
    politicians would like the extra tax, the net effect of increasing
    the CCT over and above a value where the car ceased to be a perk
    would probably induce companies to stop offering cars as perks.
    
    The knock on effects of this might have much greater political 
    consequences. I suspect that it would significantly reduce
    new car sales and in doing so reduce overall tax revenues. On 
    every new car sold, the government do get a hefty slice of car tax 
    and VAT. The politicians might also have reflected that a drop in
    demand in the car industry might have lead to job losses in the
    car manufacturing and associated industries.
    
    On a related issue, but only marginally connected with the topic,
    I would be very much in favour of changing the CCT structure to
    encourage the leasing of British built cars. I don't believe there
    should be any net tax relief available on "foreign" cars. If people
    were encouraged to "lease British" this would IMO, be a good thing.
    Subsiding people to buy Mercs, BMWs, Japanese cars and others seems
    to me to be crazy. It causes problems with the balance of payments,
    doesn't help maintain the British car industry or its workforce
    and provides little or no benefit.
    
    I would like to make it clear, that I am not in favour of import
    controls or extra taxes, for people who wish to buy privately, but 
    I would like to remove any element of the "tax" subsidy that does
    exist today for leasing.
    

    
    .4 makes a good point about giving incentives to British made cars
    but there are some problems with that.
    
    	- How do you define a Britsh made car?
    	  Rover uses honda engines, Peugeot gearboxes etc although
    	  all made in UK (except the 2.7V6 in the Rover 827 and Sterling).
    	  Ford market share of 24% includes 10.5% imported
    	  Vauxhall market share contains 6% imported
    	  most 405 Pugs sold in UK are now made in UK except estates.
    
    	- Protectionism can breed weakness in the local manufacturer
          
    We don't need legislation, just a policy to pay people properly
    with higher rate of tax. Then people would spend their money on the cars
    they want to buy......and a lot less will be choosing foreign cars
    when its personal funds that foot servicing etc bills.
    
    In Digital France company cars are rare, Field people have them
    but they are nearly always French built models (and rightly so),
    DEC Germany is the same I believe. The attitude seems to be "If
    you want to buy foreign cars you pay for them yourself".
    
    It is often overlooked that the reason UK is
    so unique in having such a high % of company cars was that it was
    seen as a Tax break, a way to reward people without actually paying
    them more. This has led over the years to people taking a frivolous
    attitude to the real cost of running cars and the people who now
    drive BM's Mercs etc are often not really in the income bracket of BM/Merc
    drivers in other countries.
    Now the government is taxing company cars people 'hooked'
    on having a company car are starting to squeal.
    
    Now we are screwing ourselves as private buyers because the whole
    UK market is geared towards 'customers' like PHH/Hertz and the big
    fleets who buy in lots of 10/100/1000 cars and get big discounts.
    The laws of retailing/wholesaling show that when you run your business
    in this way you penalise the 'one off' price....which is what the
    private buyer has to pay.
    I showed some UK car prices (VW as a matter of interest) to my local
    VW dealer here in France. He was shocked at the prices we are paying
    for VW's in UK. The differnce is that here the dealer has to fight
    for each individual sale, there is no such thing as a 'fleet sales'
    department of a French dealer.
    
    Dave (willing to waffle on this subject as much as you like!)
                                  

    
    Re .5
    
    I was suggesting the "UK only" subsidy as a half way house that
    might prove to be politically acceptable. I say this because I
    believe there would be serious repercussions in the UK car 
    industry if we stopped the company car perk overnight.
     
    I don't think that providing this continued perk for UK cars 
    would be protectionism, although I accept that it might appear 
    as such. I would prefer to see it as an "inducement" to lease UK 
    vehicles as opposed to buying or leasing the "foreign" cars/vans.
    
    
    
     

    Dave,
    
    You mention a few back that many people drive to work in old Renault
    4,5's and 2CV's.
    
    This is fine, but do those same people ever have to 'nip' out to a
    customers 2 hours drive away??
    
    If so I would think they would then appreciate a new company car!
    
    Greg

    Just had an incident that highlights the value of the intangible
    benefits: Last night my speedo stopped working. 
    
    If it was my own car I'd have probably been under the bonnet and dash
    trying to solve it last night.  
    
    If I was concientious about keeping to a policy of putting it in the
    garage for repairs, they can't fit it in until saturday. So I probably
    would have driven without a speedo, thus no-doubt commiting two
    offences, speeding, and driving with a defective speedo.
    
    As it is, I rang Hertz: "It's a legal requirement, we'll give you a
    relief car straight away"! I think I'll be leasing again!.
    
    Richard
    

    
    Humph !  I rang PHH when it happened to me....
    
    "Take it to a garage and get it fixed."
    
    "I did, they can't do it for a week"
    
    "Well it doesn't stop the car from working, does it......."
    
    
    Hmmm.
    
    
    Ian

Well that settles it for me! I've never leased and I've never had a broken 
speedo. I'll carry on buying.

Dave.

    I'm pretty sure that this question has already been asked/debated but I
    can't remember where...
    
    With the driver being liable for extra tax for any car with a purchase
    price ov �19,500 is this the list price OR the actual price paid for
    the car. I'm thinking here of the 15%'ish discount that PHH get from
    a number of dealers.
    
    Thanks fro any advice and/or pointer to the existing discussion.
    
    Rich

    I have a feeling that the value shown on the P11D that's submitted to
    HMI shows what was the capital value paid and not "Book" or "list"
    price. I only know of one person reported to have been able to
    determine what that value was before ordering the car to make sure that
    he wasn't stuffed (more) with extra car tax ...... mail me if you want
    his name. The incident was a couple of years (ish) ago. Fleet may be
    able to give you that number (which is basically the capital amount on
    which PHH/Hertz will base the annual lease charge)  once the quote has
    been processed by tghem, but don't quote me on that ........

    � �19,500
    
    Rich,
    
    
    I understand that it is the "on the road" price _including_ any extras
    that are fitted. I would think this is before any discounting is
    considered.
    
    
    - Roy
               

    
    I have an old Inland Revenue statement in my desk "car benefits and car
    fuel benefits to 5 April 1990".
    
    It uses the term "Cars with original market value more than �19250" to
    define the amount of Car Benefit.
    
    This doesn't seem to relate to what a leasing company pays for a car.
    It's the list price.
    
    
                                                                        
    
    

�    It uses the term "Cars with original market value more than �19250" to
    
    I thought it was based on the 'listed price' for a new car.
    
    Otherwise, dealers would - in theory - be able to sell the car for
    some low price (say �5000) but say that all extras (ie dust caps
    on the tyre valves) would cost �20,000.  In that way, you could
    say you only pay tax on the �5000.  At least the 'fiddle' could
    work something like that, with figures being defined according
    to any tax break limits, etc.
    
    J.R.

    
    From a newspaper article I read recently, I believe its the list
    price of the car that is used, not the price paid, and that
    extras don't count towards this taxable total (Even though they are
    subject to car tax).

    R.
    

I was told by car fleet that the actual price paid for the car was sent to
the inland revenue. I was worried that one of my quotes was going to be over,
but the kind gent at car fleet (forget his name) dug out the quote and told
me the price over the phone. It was under, so I ordered.

Pete.

    Well after asking the same question to lots of dealers, to the INland
    Revenue and fleet MY, and I emphasise, MY interpretation of the �19,250
    rule is as follows;
    
    If the total cost of the car plus whatever extras comes to over the
    �19,250 BUT the lease company gets a discount from the garage which 
    brings the price dwon to under �19,250 then you DON'T incur any extra 
    car tax.
    
    Rich
    

    
    I seem to remember my accountant said that if the list price is over 
    �19,250 but you get a discount below that amount then the Inland
    Revenue (pedantic as ever) would want something in writing from the
    garage saying the exact price. Otherwise they tax you at the higher
    rate.

    �the answer is not to get a BMW!
    
    Why, several models come well under �19,250.
    
    Roy

    Re. 20 - Dereks just biased !! - so Elaine says 
    
    Rich
    

    
    Re .22
    
    How can you tell? :^)
    
    Mark

    Can anyone confirm the current figures for taxable benefit an a company
    car covering less than 2500 business miles for the classes of up to
    1400cc and 1400-2000cc.
    
    I think they are something like �2500 for <1400 
    and �3000 for 1.4-2.0
    
    Cheers,
    
    - Roy

    Not offhand, but you should be able to find that on Channel 4 Oracle
    (the section on personal taxation)
    
    Jeff.

    From Payroll VTX:
    
                             1991/92
            Cylinder                     Car Under 4 Years Old at
            Capacity                           End oF Tax Year
            --------                     ------------------------
            Upto 1400 cc                  2050 Taxable Benefit
            1401-2000 cc                  2650 Taxable Benefit
            over 2000 cc                  4250 Taxable Benefit
    
            Value over 19250(pounds)
            ----------------
            19251-29000                   5500 Taxable Benefit
            29001 or more                 8900 Taxable Benefit
    
    If you travel under 2500 business miles per year the charge is 1.5
    times the taxable benefit.
    If you travel between 2500 and 17999 business miles per year the charge is
    just the taxable benefit.
    If you travel 18000 or over business miles the charge is 1/2 the taxable 
    benefit.