[hinesle]

Don’t know if you guys caught the budget yesterday but the reforms to VED duty starting next year now apply to ALL cars registered after 2001. In short the concessions made for cars registered before March 2006 have now been removed!!!!! So what does this mean to you next year :..

2.3t HOT 5-speed automatic saloon: 0-60 CO2 emissions 232g/km VED will rise to = £415
2.3t HOT 5-speed automatic estate: CO2 emissions 240g/km. VED will rise to £415
3.0V6 TiD 5-speed manual saloon: CO2 emissions 197g/km. VED will rise to £260 (I know its not a Aero )

I have the Diesel and even my VED jumps by £50 per year!!!

 

[macp]

AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAArgh

I wouldnt mind so much but you should see the roads in Cheshire

 

[wrighar]

2.3t HOT 5-speed manual saloon: 0-60 CO2 emissions 223g/km VED will rise to = £300

A little better.....

 

[macp]

I know its not just about maintaining the roads but dont you think they hide behind the whole carbon footprint issue.Dont even get me started on the taxation on fuel.

 

[Sandman959]

Its all just a front to swindle more money out of us but that another issue!

 

[pgoody33]

Just had a look at this: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/B...t2008/DG_073093.

I dont see anything on there about post 2001 cars going up to £400.

 

[Tweaker]

Just had a look at this: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/B...t2008/DG_073093.

I dont see anything on there about post 2001 cars going up to £400.[/b]

Have a look here http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/media/2/5/bud08_chaptera.pdf - page 122, Table A.8a - as always, the devil is in the detail. From next year ALL cars registered after 1/3/2001 will be re-banded.
Oh well, at least I've still got the motorbike :thumbsup:

 

[mark e]

Just had a look at this: http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/B...t2008/DG_073093.

I dont see anything on there about post 2001 cars going up to £400.[/b]

From that link

More tax bands
New, smaller bands will be introduced from 1 April 2009 (for cars registered after 1 March 2001), so that a small change in carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions has a bigger effect on the cost of vehicle tax. These changes include:

• reduced rates for cars that emit up to 150g of CO2 per km
• increased rates for the most polluting cars
• a new top band for cars that emit more than 255g of CO2 per km[/b]

 

[drmick]

its not just aeros, any automatic will get stung, 2.0l automatic apparently produces 251g CO2/km which is more than the Aero.

 

[drmick]

reading the direct.gov page, it looks to me that cars registered after march 2006 will have horrific tax rates, but those registered between 2001 and 2006 won't, at least for a year then they all the tax groups change. I looked on the parkers website and used their tax calculator and this year tax will be £210, then next year my MY05 Vector Estate Auto is regrouped as a tax group L, and the tax rise to £415, seems like a bargain!



I can't afford to change to a tree-hugging car so whatever it is I will have to pay it? Does getting a performance upgrade reduce your CO2 emmisions - would be a great excuse to get one

 

[BertieBentnose]

It seems to me that a way round this tax thing is to get a MY2000 Aero and upgrade that then you have the power of... well whatever you need... but falling in the pre 2001 tax bracket.

 

[john]

It seems to me that a way round this tax thing is to get a MY2000 Aero[/b]

I have been extremely fortunate in this respect - end of last year I sold my M04 9-5 Aero and just last month I bought a M00 9-5 Aero Auto. My other Saabs are 1999 and 1980. I think I will stick with those for a while, now.

 

[mitchell]

/John

How does the MY00 cmpare with MY04 areo?
Cheers
Mitch

 

[Rockhopper]

It seems to me that a way round this tax thing is to get a MY2000 Aero and upgrade that then you have the power of... well whatever you need... but falling in the pre 2001 tax bracket.[/b]

 

[Richard_C]

(its not just aeros by the way - the 2.0lpt autos have higher CO2 than Aeros for some reason)

I suppose you could buy a pre 01 Aero in poor mechanical condition for next to nothing. Swap as much of the body as you need to get a bit of body with the old chassis number onto a good newer one, SORN the new chassis number and throw away all the leftovers - then you have a pre 01 '0when you want' car - a repeatable upgrade process that could last you for years Or have I missed something? I suppose I've missed the fact that the labout cost/time would pay for aeons of roadtax anyway so its not worth it.

I am a bit miffed that they have not followed the principle they used when band G came in - effectively holding anything pre 06 in Band F, they could have left anything pre 08 in the appropriate new band. I do approve of more bands though, having everything above 225 lumped in together didn't seem right when you think of Hummers and the like.

If our bicycle-riding summer-sweaty winter-wet enviro-evangelist Cambridge City Council brings in parking charges based on tax band (as they might when the colour coded tax discs hit us) then I might try to find a 1974 Lincoln Town Car just to be sure I get maximum value for my parking money.

 

[phil_saab]

It seems to me that a way round this tax thing is to get a MY2000 Aero and upgrade that then you have the power of... well whatever you need... but falling in the pre 2001 tax bracket.[/b]

Exactly what i've done thank God. :thumbsup:

 

[john]

/John

How does the MY00 cmpare with MY04 areo?
Cheers
Mitch[/b]

THey are both disappointing, but the model year 2000 less so. The 2004 car was really poor quality plastics inside, xenons were like candles, had clonks in steering at just 60,000 miles and a few other issues. The 2000 Aero has done almost 100,000 miles and seems to be better assembled, does not have the squeaks of the newer car, plastics are marginally better.

 

[NedLudd]

THey are both disappointing, but the model year 2000 less so. The 2004 car was really poor quality plastics inside, xenons were like candles, had clonks in steering at just 60,000 miles and a few other issues. The 2000 Aero has done almost 100,000 miles and seems to be better assembled, does not have the squeaks of the newer car, plastics are marginally better.[/b]

I've heard it said that the plastics in all more recent cars look / feel inferior due to EU directives on recycling. Does anyone know if there's anything in this? I'm sure that GM cost-cutting played a part...

 

[sgould]

The plastic in my 06/07 car is different from that of the 2002 car. Harder and less pleasant to the feel, but, I believe the soft feel plastics are made from a mixture of materials and can't be recycled. So, I suspect that all manufacturers are in the same boat

But there's no excuse for deleting some carpet and covers, so that you can see painted body under the seats on the newer car. And the leather upholstery in the newer car is seat facings only. No leather on the rest of the seat or the door cards

 

[adrian]

Luckily I bought a manual Aero My02 this year so it will end-up in the £300 bracket.
Retrospective legislation like this I think is plain wrong.

Having just come back from India - even if the whole of the UK stopped existing tomorrow it would make no impact on the overall level of CO2 produced as places like India are insutrialising so quickly - its just a smokescreen for Govt to take more of our money as they obviously know better how it should be spent.

Think I'll keep my 4.0L V8 Disco, I purposly bought a pre March 01 Disco, that will cost £100 less than the Aero to tax in 2010 - that makes lots of sense..................