MOTOR TAXATION.

Evening Star, Issue 19713, 14 November 1927, Page 12

MOTOR TAXATION.

TO THE EDITOR. Sir, —There lias been a deal of controversy regarding motor taxation, and the trend of it all points to a general desire for a method of taxation whereby each' car will be taxed according to the amount of use made of the roads. Motor organisations, public bodies, individuals, and also the newspapers in their leading articles, have supported this principle. The latest outburst is for the abolition of the other “ three” taxes, viz.—tyre, registration, and number plates. But there is another tax (a most iniquitous one) which all writers have hitherto conveniently left numentioned. I refer to the henxy traffic tax. This tax is a very heavy one, and only hits one class of motorist, namely—the passenger and goods service proprietors. I may havo_ ten seven-seater touring cars with which I may run a. regular passenger service, but mv competitor may have ten sevenscatcr“ elosed-in cars, and on account of the extra weight his cars would carry a tax of £IOO per annum. Is this fair taxation? Then again, the same principle may be applied as against those firms' (some employing from 50 to 100 travellers), whose cars are continually on the roads, and on which there is no heavy traffic tax to pay. Why the preference? Cars used for luxury are exempt from heavy traffic tax, although • they may Ire heavier on road use and cover greater mileages and at faster speed than cars used as a public necessity for the conveyance of passengers and goods to remote parts. Service cars have also to pay a further substantial tax for a license to hire. If motorists arc to be taxed according to the amount of use made of the roads, let it be by_ a general petrol tax for nil, irrespective of whether the vehicle is used for carrying passengers as a commercial venture or for private use. The heavier the vehicle the more petrol it uses; the faster a car travels the more petrol it uses, and so the tax adjusts itself. If the heavy traffic tax is a Government move to lilt competition with the railways, then why make it applicable to those services which do not compete with the railways? Does the public realise that the existing tax on some of our service cars now amounts to £SO per car per annum, and the new petrol tax will cost an additional £SO per car per annum, making a total tax of £IOO per annum per car? Now what about some genuine public support on this question on behalf of the service proprietors? The Motor Club is always a fighter for the private users, and although the club chases the service proprietors for their annual subscriptions, its officials appear to bo lacking in any desire to take up the cudgels on their behalf.—l am, etc.,

Fairplay

November ]*J.