On 31/05/16 12:56, dennis@home wrote:
On 31/05/2016 12:39, Tim Watts wrote:


Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place, I
do question what can be done to reduce this.

You can insist on smaller trucks and pay the increased costs.
If you want cheap produce you have to make savings somewhere.

What will probably happen is unmanned trucks, possibly electric, that
will simply scamper around doing 'last 5 mile' deliveries from, ;local
depots, with the big stuff linking them.

The key to getting costs down is to get rid of the drivers.

And the regulations of course.

And the EU.


--
The biggest threat to humanity comes from socialism, which has utterly
diverted our attention away from what really matters to our existential
survival, to indulging in navel gazing and faux moral investigations
into what the world ought to be, whilst we fail utterly to deal with
what it actually is.

On Tue, 31 May 2016 12:46:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 31/05/16 12:39, Tim Watts wrote:
On 31/05/16 12:02, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 31/05/16 08:16, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 07:44:12 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:

I'm more interested in whether we can finally ban these European
mega sized trucks

So what size would you set the maximum to for the UK?

and drivers who watch dvds when driving them.

ITYM find that's already illegal...


I'd certainly like to see anything over 7.5 tons banned (and ideally
anything over 3.5 tons discouraged) from town centres - it's
ridiculous having some absolute monster of a lorry squeezing its way
through small streets with cyclists and pedestrians everywhere.

Are you saying only the EU could ban such trucks from our city centres?

Nothing to do with the EU Dave - just an independent opinion on trucks



Most of the big supermarkets these days have positioned themselves
near a road junction with excellent access to the A road.

That might be the case in a small town. But not in the likes of London.


Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place, I
do question what can be done to reduce this.

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20% VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

Or it might lead to even worse congestion. We will never have the chance
to find out though as long as we are in the EU will we?

:-/

--
The New European Soviet - Mikhail Gorbachev
http://www.crossroad.to/Quotes/globa.../soviet-eu.htm

On 31/05/16 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 12:46:59 +0100, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

On 31/05/16 12:39, Tim Watts wrote:
On 31/05/16 12:02, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
On 31/05/16 08:16, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 07:44:12 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:

I'm more interested in whether we can finally ban these European
mega sized trucks

So what size would you set the maximum to for the UK?

and drivers who watch dvds when driving them.

ITYM find that's already illegal...


I'd certainly like to see anything over 7.5 tons banned (and ideally
anything over 3.5 tons discouraged) from town centres - it's
ridiculous having some absolute monster of a lorry squeezing its way
through small streets with cyclists and pedestrians everywhere.

Are you saying only the EU could ban such trucks from our city centres?

Nothing to do with the EU Dave - just an independent opinion on trucks



Most of the big supermarkets these days have positioned themselves
near a road junction with excellent access to the A road.

That might be the case in a small town. But not in the likes of London.


Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place, I
do question what can be done to reduce this.

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20% VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.


Oh, there are so many things we cant do as long as we stay in the EU.
That's not saying they are the right thing to do, simply that we don't
even get the chance to make a mistake.

You can vote tory all you like, but what you get is Eurosocialism. High
tax, ideologically based Big Government.

Cameron has been shown to be totally powerless to make any significant
deviations from 'Plan 9 from Brussels'.

And he is their puppet lock stock and barrel. Lord knows they must have
as much on him as Tony Bliar.



Or it might lead to even worse congestion. We will never have the chance
to find out though as long as we are in the EU will we?

:-/



--
"It is an established fact to 97% confidence limits that left wing
conspirators see right wing conspiracies everywhere"

In article ,
Rod Speed wrote:
Those laws still have to be passed by MEPs.

But the MEPs don’t get to initiate any legislation what so ever.

Perhaps you'd care to speculate how many private memember's bills get
passed in the UK?
There's a ballot to even get one as far as being debated.

So yet another red herring from you. Note this product does not contain
fish.

--
*There are two sides to every divorce: Yours and **** head's*

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Tim Watts wrote:
Most of the big supermarkets these days have positioned themselves near
a road junction with excellent access to the A road.

That might be the case in a small town. But not in the likes of London.


Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place, I
do question what can be done to reduce this.

There was one such in the carpark at a local Lidl the other day. The one
at Clapham Junction, so not exactly one with easy access to an arterial
road. And after having unloaded, decided his easy way out was round the
carpark, rather than the reverse of his way in. And got well and truly
stuck, after getting halfway round.

--
*I didn't say it was your fault, I said I was blaming you.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In article ,
Martin Barclay wrote:
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20% VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

And we could instantly drop the UK duty on fuel without any need to go to
the EU. At present, it is roughly 60p a litre on most road fuels. With VAT
added on top. So fuel duty is the major part of the tax raised from fuel -
not VAT.

But don't let a good rant about how it's EU taxes that causes high fuel
prices get in the way of reality.

VAT goes to our government's coffers. Remove that and they'll just have to
invent a new way of raising the money.

--
*Of course I'm against sin; I'm against anything that I'm too old to enjoy.

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20% VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to them.

On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20% VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)

On 31/05/16 14:42, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard
rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)


Lie: Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...axation_en.htm

"The taxation of energy products and electricity in the European Union
is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 2003/96/EC
restructuring the EU framework for taxation of energy products and
electricity.

"For fuels, the structure of excise duties is harmonised across the EU .
The rates themselves still differ from one Member State to the other.
*The Directive contains some derogations to the general rule of minimum
rates in its Annexes II and III.*

"The Commission is currently examining a possible review of the
Directive in view of aligning it to the energy and climate change goals
of the Europe 2020 Strategy .


So although excise rates are not yet harmonised the EU has the power to
do so and is actively seeking to do so...
--
The theory of Communism may be summed up in one sentence: Abolish all
private property.

Karl Marx

On 31/05/16 15:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:42, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard
rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could
reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)


Lie: Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...axation_en.htm

"The taxation of energy products and electricity in the European Union
is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 2003/96/EC
restructuring the EU framework for taxation of energy products and
electricity.

"For fuels, the structure of excise duties is harmonised across the EU .
The rates themselves still differ from one Member State to the other.
*The Directive contains some derogations to the general rule of minimum
rates in its Annexes II and III.*

"The Commission is currently examining a possible review of the
Directive in view of aligning it to the energy and climate change goals
of the Europe 2020 Strategy .


So although excise rates are not yet harmonised the EU has the power to
do so and is actively seeking to do so...

================================================== =========================
Oh, and whilst the link to the actual directive is broken, the wonder of
google again reveals this:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...ISERV%3Al27019

SUMMARY

Energy products and electricity are only taxed when they are used as
motor or heating fuel, and not when they are used as raw materials or
for the purposes of chemical reduction or in electrolytic and
metallurgical processes.

On the basis of this principle, the directive sets minimum rates of
taxation for motor fuel, motor fuel for industrial or commercial use,
heating fuel and electricity. The "levels of taxation" * applied by the
European Union (EU) countries *may not be lower* than the minimum rates
set in the directive.

The minimum levels of taxation applicable to motor fuels are the following:

-
Current minimum excise rates

Petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 421

Unleaded petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 359

Diesel (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

Kerosene (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

LPG (‚¬/1000 l.) 125

Natural gas (‚¬/gigajoule) 2.6

(The volumes are measured at a temperature of 15 °C).

No later than 1 January 2012, the Council acting unanimously after
consulting the European Parliament must, on the basis of a report and a
proposal from the Commission, decide upon the minimum levels of taxation
applicable to gas-oil for a further period beginning on 1 January 2013.
================================================== ====================

You remainers never bother to do the research do you? Trusting that the
EU isn't selling you down the river.

The truth is the vehicle fuel duty *AND* VAT are both set to a minimum
by the EU.



--
Truth welcomes investigation because truth knows investigation will lead
to converts. It is deception that uses all the other techniques.

On 31/05/2016 15:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 15:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:42, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard
rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is 20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have 20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could
reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)


Lie: Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...axation_en.htm


"The taxation of energy products and electricity in the European Union
is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 2003/96/EC
restructuring the EU framework for taxation of energy products and
electricity.

"For fuels, the structure of excise duties is harmonised across the EU .
The rates themselves still differ from one Member State to the other.
*The Directive contains some derogations to the general rule of minimum
rates in its Annexes II and III.*

"The Commission is currently examining a possible review of the
Directive in view of aligning it to the energy and climate change goals
of the Europe 2020 Strategy .


So although excise rates are not yet harmonised the EU has the power to
do so and is actively seeking to do so...

================================================== =========================
Oh, and whilst the link to the actual directive is broken, the wonder of
google again reveals this:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...ISERV%3Al27019

SUMMARY

Energy products and electricity are only taxed when they are used as
motor or heating fuel, and not when they are used as raw materials or
for the purposes of chemical reduction or in electrolytic and
metallurgical processes.

On the basis of this principle, the directive sets minimum rates of
taxation for motor fuel, motor fuel for industrial or commercial use,
heating fuel and electricity. The "levels of taxation" * applied by the
European Union (EU) countries *may not be lower* than the minimum rates
set in the directive.

The minimum levels of taxation applicable to motor fuels are the following:

-
Current minimum excise rates

Petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 421

Unleaded petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 359

Diesel (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

Kerosene (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

LPG (‚¬/1000 l.) 125

Natural gas (‚¬/gigajoule) 2.6

(The volumes are measured at a temperature of 15 °C).

No later than 1 January 2012, the Council acting unanimously after
consulting the European Parliament must, on the basis of a report and a
proposal from the Commission, decide upon the minimum levels of taxation
applicable to gas-oil for a further period beginning on 1 January 2013.
================================================== ====================

You remainers never bother to do the research do you? Trusting that the
EU isn't selling you down the river.

The truth is the vehicle fuel duty *AND* VAT are both set to a minimum
by the EU.

And how do those minima compare to what they are now? Way lower. The UK
has had the option of lowering diesel duty (remember, we're talking
about commercial vehicles here) from the current 57.95 ppl to about
27ppl. They've never taken that opportunity. The EU isn't setting the
duty, the UK is. It's a local decision, not an EU one.

On 31/05/16 15:14, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 15:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:42, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it
being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard
rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is
20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have
20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could
reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)


Lie: Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...axation_en.htm



"The taxation of energy products and electricity in the European Union
is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 2003/96/EC
restructuring the EU framework for taxation of energy products and
electricity.

"For fuels, the structure of excise duties is harmonised across the EU .
The rates themselves still differ from one Member State to the other.
*The Directive contains some derogations to the general rule of minimum
rates in its Annexes II and III.*

"The Commission is currently examining a possible review of the
Directive in view of aligning it to the energy and climate change goals
of the Europe 2020 Strategy .


So although excise rates are not yet harmonised the EU has the power to
do so and is actively seeking to do so...

================================================== =========================

Oh, and whilst the link to the actual directive is broken, the wonder of
google again reveals this:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...ISERV%3Al27019

SUMMARY

Energy products and electricity are only taxed when they are used as
motor or heating fuel, and not when they are used as raw materials or
for the purposes of chemical reduction or in electrolytic and
metallurgical processes.

On the basis of this principle, the directive sets minimum rates of
taxation for motor fuel, motor fuel for industrial or commercial use,
heating fuel and electricity. The "levels of taxation" * applied by the
European Union (EU) countries *may not be lower* than the minimum rates
set in the directive.

The minimum levels of taxation applicable to motor fuels are the
following:

-
Current minimum excise rates

Petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 421

Unleaded petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 359

Diesel (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

Kerosene (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

LPG (‚¬/1000 l.) 125

Natural gas (‚¬/gigajoule) 2.6

(The volumes are measured at a temperature of 15 °C).

No later than 1 January 2012, the Council acting unanimously after
consulting the European Parliament must, on the basis of a report and a
proposal from the Commission, decide upon the minimum levels of taxation
applicable to gas-oil for a further period beginning on 1 January 2013.
================================================== ====================

You remainers never bother to do the research do you? Trusting that the
EU isn't selling you down the river.

The truth is the vehicle fuel duty *AND* VAT are both set to a minimum
by the EU.

And how do those minima compare to what they are now? Way lower. The UK
has had the option of lowering diesel duty (remember, we're talking
about commercial vehicles here) from the current 57.95 ppl to about
27ppl. They've never taken that opportunity. The EU isn't setting the
duty, the UK is. It's a local decision, not an EU one.


You are moving the goalposts again.

The point is that excise duty on road fuel IS controlled by the EU.

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.


--
€œSome people like to travel by train because it combines the slowness of
a car with the cramped public exposure of €¨an airplane.€�

Dennis Miller

On 31/05/2016 15:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

Only to about 32p for petrol and about 27p for diesel.
Quite a lot really.

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

On 31/05/2016 15:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 15:14, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:07, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 15:00, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:42, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 14:35, The Natural Philosopher wrote:
On 31/05/16 14:27, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 13:17, Martin Barclay wrote:

Well removing the tax on commercial diesel and on commercial
transport and
removing the minimum wage on drivers might actually lead to it
being
cost
effective to have 10 3 tonners instead of one 30 tonner..

All very well, /but/ the UK /cannot/ remove VAT on fuel. The EU
foisted it
on the then Tory government in 1993, & under EU law the standard
rate of
VAT in any EU state cannot be lower than 15% and at present is
20% on
petrol & diesel. It's even been slapped on biodiesel and
bioethanol.
Now I'm not saying that it's entirely the EU's fault that we have
20%
VAT
on fuel, ALL governments love tax, but /outside/ the EU we could
reduce
VAT lower than the 15% minimum demanded by them.

How many commercial hauliers don't reclaim the VAT on fuel? It's a
complete red herring - doubling it to 40% wouldn't change the
cost to
them.

check out fuel DUTY as well.

Is that controlled by the EU? (hint : no)


Lie: Yes

http://ec.europa.eu/transport/modes/...axation_en.htm




"The taxation of energy products and electricity in the European Union
is governed by the provisions of Council Directive 2003/96/EC
restructuring the EU framework for taxation of energy products and
electricity.

"For fuels, the structure of excise duties is harmonised across the
EU .
The rates themselves still differ from one Member State to the other.
*The Directive contains some derogations to the general rule of minimum
rates in its Annexes II and III.*

"The Commission is currently examining a possible review of the
Directive in view of aligning it to the energy and climate change goals
of the Europe 2020 Strategy .


So although excise rates are not yet harmonised the EU has the power to
do so and is actively seeking to do so...

================================================== =========================


Oh, and whilst the link to the actual directive is broken, the wonder of
google again reveals this:

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-conte...ISERV%3Al27019

SUMMARY

Energy products and electricity are only taxed when they are used as
motor or heating fuel, and not when they are used as raw materials or
for the purposes of chemical reduction or in electrolytic and
metallurgical processes.

On the basis of this principle, the directive sets minimum rates of
taxation for motor fuel, motor fuel for industrial or commercial use,
heating fuel and electricity. The "levels of taxation" * applied by the
European Union (EU) countries *may not be lower* than the minimum rates
set in the directive.

The minimum levels of taxation applicable to motor fuels are the
following:

-
Current minimum excise rates

Petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 421

Unleaded petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 359

Diesel (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

Kerosene (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

LPG (‚¬/1000 l.) 125

Natural gas (‚¬/gigajoule) 2.6

(The volumes are measured at a temperature of 15 °C).

No later than 1 January 2012, the Council acting unanimously after
consulting the European Parliament must, on the basis of a report and a
proposal from the Commission, decide upon the minimum levels of taxation
applicable to gas-oil for a further period beginning on 1 January 2013.
================================================== ====================

You remainers never bother to do the research do you? Trusting that the
EU isn't selling you down the river.

The truth is the vehicle fuel duty *AND* VAT are both set to a minimum
by the EU.

And how do those minima compare to what they are now? Way lower. The UK
has had the option of lowering diesel duty (remember, we're talking
about commercial vehicles here) from the current 57.95 ppl to about
27ppl. They've never taken that opportunity. The EU isn't setting the
duty, the UK is. It's a local decision, not an EU one.


You are moving the goalposts again.

No. I'm pointing out that the misguided attempts to blame the EU for the
cost of commercial diesel by you and Martin are wrong. Martin is wrong
re VAT, you are wrong re fuel duty.

The point is that excise duty on road fuel IS controlled by the EU.

No, it's not. It's controlled by the UK. There may be a minimum but in
the UK we're so far above it that minimum is irrelevant.

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

Earlier you said :

Petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 421

Unleaded petrol (‚¬/1000 l.) 359

Diesel (‚¬/1000 l.) 330

So that's 35.9c, 33c respectively, not what you wrote. Pretty much
nobody uses leaded any more. And that's currently 27.5p and 25.2p.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

There's scope to take it to less than half its current rate. I think
you'll find that's quite a lot of scope.

How long have UK duty rates been above the minimum? Decades? It's not
the EU setting them, it's the UK.

On 31/05/2016 15:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

Only to about 32p for petrol and about 27p for diesel.
Quite a lot really.

As per my other reply, actually 27p, 25p - TNP can't divide by 1000
accurately or identify fuel types.

On Tue, 31 May 2016 11:59:59 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

who the voters can't even give the bums rush at the ballot box if they
are ****ed off enough.

Of course they can. All MEPs are elected. Even the UKIP MEPs who usually
can't be bothered voting.

Trouble is, the PR system that's in place for the EU elections doesn't
actually allow individuals to be voted in or out.

F'rinstance, my region has seven MEPs, three of whom are currently
kippers. If the person at the top of the party list is a complete waste
of oxygen (relatively speaking) their seat is safe no matter what, right
up until the happy day that none of our seven seats are wasted on a party
who won't actually even pretend to represent their constituents.

In article ,
Clive George wrote:
So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

There's scope to take it to less than half its current rate. I think
you'll find that's quite a lot of scope.

How long have UK duty rates been above the minimum? Decades? It's not
the EU setting them, it's the UK.

Turnip's brain must be hurting. He'll have run out of fingers long ago.

Just don't expect him to admit he's talking ****e once more.

--
*OK, so what's the speed of dark? *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

On Tue, 31 May 2016 12:56:07 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place,
I do question what can be done to reduce this.

You can insist on smaller trucks and pay the increased costs.
If you want cheap produce you have to make savings somewhere.

Quite.

Sure, that artic might be delivering a single 7.5t truckload to the place
in your village. But if it's come from a distribution depot 100 miles
away, and is then delivering five more 7.5t truck loads to other places
in other villages, that's A WHOLE THOUSAND MILES of 7.5t truck use saved.

On Tue, 31 May 2016 15:53:34 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

Yes. The same as the reason that applies for the "tampon tax".

The list of zero-rated products is short. If something wasn't zero-rated
when the UK joined the EU in the '70s, then it stayed taxed - the
exemption that applied to those pre-existing zero-rated products couldn't
be applied to new products.

So the list of products the UK charges zero-rate on was defined by the UK
government, and the list of products the UK charges VAT on was also
defined by the UK government - but things can't be moved from the taxed
list onto that zero-rate list.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-34649495

On 31/05/16 16:30, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 12:56:07 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place,
I do question what can be done to reduce this.

You can insist on smaller trucks and pay the increased costs.
If you want cheap produce you have to make savings somewhere.

Quite.

Sure, that artic might be delivering a single 7.5t truckload to the place
in your village. But if it's come from a distribution depot 100 miles
away, and is then delivering five more 7.5t truck loads to other places
in other villages, that's A WHOLE THOUSAND MILES of 7.5t truck use saved.


I was not suggesting 10 7.5 ton trucks drove the whole distance - but
rather have more mini distribution centres. Even a shared facility where
an artic can split its load amongst local runaround lorries would be a
good move which would not need much more than a large covered car park
and some fork lifts.

The current move seems to be to *less* and bigger distribution centres,
which is the wrong move IMO. It might be cost effective for the
distributors, but it's taking its toll on the environment (local).

In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 15:53:34 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

Yes. The same as the reason that applies for the "tampon tax".

The list of zero-rated products is short. If something wasn't zero-rated
when the UK joined the EU in the '70s, then it stayed taxed - the
exemption that applied to those pre-existing zero-rated products
couldn't be applied to new products.

So the list of products the UK charges zero-rate on was defined by the
UK government, and the list of products the UK charges VAT on was also
defined by the UK government - but things can't be moved from the taxed
list onto that zero-rate list.

Does it really make that much difference what VAT rate is applied to what?
Unless you never buy that product.

The government determines how much income it needs to pay for the things
it does. So if you reduce a tax on one thing, they'll just need to raise
it on another.

--
*Starfishes have no brains *

Dave Plowman London SW
To e-mail, change noise into sound.

In message , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 15:53:34 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

Yes. The same as the reason that applies for the "tampon tax".

The list of zero-rated products is short. If something wasn't zero-rated
when the UK joined the EU in the '70s, then it stayed taxed - the
exemption that applied to those pre-existing zero-rated products
couldn't be applied to new products.

So the list of products the UK charges zero-rate on was defined by the
UK government, and the list of products the UK charges VAT on was also
defined by the UK government - but things can't be moved from the taxed
list onto that zero-rate list.

Does it really make that much difference what VAT rate is applied to what?
Unless you never buy that product.

The government determines how much income it needs to pay for the things
it does. So if you reduce a tax on one thing, they'll just need to raise
it on another.

Can you kindly arrange the increased tax to be on luxury items rather
than necessities?

Mind, I thought fuel tax was also targeting CO2 reduction as well as
simply raising revenue.


--
Tim Lamb

In article , ARW
writes
So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?

Is England still allowed to carry on in the Euro 2016 finals?

FFS it's the European Finals not the ****ing EU finals.
No point in asking the Welsh or Irish (both sides) as they will not
make it to the last 16.


--
bert

On 31/05/16 16:28, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 11:59:59 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

who the voters can't even give the bums rush at the ballot box if they
are ****ed off enough.

Of course they can. All MEPs are elected. Even the UKIP MEPs who usually
can't be bothered voting.

Trouble is, the PR system that's in place for the EU elections doesn't
actually allow individuals to be voted in or out.

F'rinstance, my region has seven MEPs, three of whom are currently
kippers. If the person at the top of the party list is a complete waste
of oxygen (relatively speaking) their seat is safe no matter what, right
up until the happy day that none of our seven seats are wasted on a party
who won't actually even pretend to represent their constituents.

That's no way to talk about the Labour party.



--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

On 31/05/16 15:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

Only to about 32p for petrol and about 27p for diesel.
Quite a lot really.

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.


Yes, The EU wont allow it.


--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

In article , Nightjar
writes
On 30-May-16 4:45 PM, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Mon, 30 May 2016 16:18:54 +0100, ARW wrote:

So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?

Is England still allowed to carry on in the Euro 2016 finals?

Suggest things like that, you might get me voting out...

And if you include Eurovision, me too.


Australia is in Europe for the purposes of Eurovision - you can't
escape it that easily.

As is Israel for both Eurovision and football
--
bert

On 31/05/16 16:24, Clive George wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:53, dennis@home wrote:
On 31/05/2016 15:41, The Natural Philosopher wrote:

And we couldn't lower it even if we wanted to below their minimum levels

Petrol and diesel are currently subject to 57.95p a litre excise duty.

The EU minima are 42 and 35 cents a litre respectively.

So there is not that much scope for cutting it.

Only to about 32p for petrol and about 27p for diesel.
Quite a lot really.

As per my other reply, actually 27p, 25p - TNP can't divide by 1000
accurately or identify fuel types.

Looks like Clive George cant tell a British pence from a European cent.,

But that's what you expect from, thick innumerate ****s brought up on a
diet of socialism.


--
"When a true genius appears in the world, you may know him by this sign,
that the dunces are all in confederacy against him."

Jonathan Swift.

On 31/05/16 16:34, Tim Streater wrote:
In article , Adrian
wrote:

On Tue, 31 May 2016 11:59:59 +0100, Dave Plowman (News) wrote:

who the voters can't even give the bums rush at the ballot box if they
are ****ed off enough.

Of course they can. All MEPs are elected. Even the UKIP MEPs who usually
can't be bothered voting.

Trouble is, the PR system that's in place for the EU elections doesn't
actually allow individuals to be voted in or out.

F'rinstance, my region has seven MEPs, three of whom are currently
kippers. If the person at the top of the party list is a complete
waste of oxygen (relatively speaking) their seat is safe no matter
what, right up until the happy day that none of our seven seats are
wasted on a party who won't actually even pretend to represent their
constituents.

Which is why the List System is a PoS. It creates and perpetuates the
notion of a "political class", that you can't be dislodged from.

Which is why UKIP says that they want us out of the EU, that imposes
this system


--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

On 31/05/16 19:23, Tim Lamb wrote:
Mind, I thought fuel tax was also targeting CO2 reduction as well as
simply raising revenue.

Bless!

--
Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have
guns, why should we let them have ideas?

Josef Stalin

In article , The Natural Philosopher
writes
On 31/05/16 09:53, Capitol wrote:
Dave Plowman (News) wrote:
In ,
Rod wrote:
So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?
Nothing much, but Britain eventually gets to decide policy for itself.
Right. That would mean a referendum for every single law, then?


A simple return to the old standard of government by statute would
be nice.

Well it would be a start. No one pretends that they have a complete
answer to what political system is the right way to govern in the 21st
century - well except the EU of course - and that in essence is why we
must leave, so we can *have that debate*.

If we remain we are nailing our colours to the Brussels mast forever,
putting on the shackles and setting down to row under the slavemasters
of Strasbourg and Brussels. What they say, we are bound to do. And we
can neither remove them, nor change them nor affect their policies. Nor
any more leave.

Goodbye UK, welcome 12 irrelevant 'regions' in the new commissariat of
Europe.



Exactly. That is why this conservative government is promoting Mayors in
cities even though they know they will almost always be Labour
candidates. It is stepping stone to the City Regions or City States
which will replace national parliaments.
--
bert

In article , T i m
writes
On Tue, 31 May 2016 09:21:54 +0100, Tim Watts
wrote:

On 31/05/16 08:16, Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 07:44:12 +0100, Brian Gaff wrote:

I'm more interested in whether we can finally ban these European mega
sized trucks

So what size would you set the maximum to for the UK?

and drivers who watch dvds when driving them.

ITYM find that's already illegal...


I'd certainly like to see anything over 7.5 tons banned (and ideally
anything over 3.5 tons discouraged) from town centres - it's ridiculous
having some absolute monster of a lorry squeezing its way through small
streets with cyclists and pedestrians everywhere.

Agreed, but ... it was (probably) a foreign artic that was blindly
following his out_of_date GPS and ignoring the less than specific road
signs (that are only in English, stating there was no access to their
desired destination), that wrote off our car before driving off. ;-(

Ironically it was an artic transporter of about the same size that
came to collect the mangled remains and who asked me if there was a
more artic friendly way out and I said there wasn't.

Most of the big supermarkets these days have positioned themselves near
a road junction with excellent access to the A road.

Ironically, the desired destination for these foreign artics is on a
dual carriageway but that doesn't seem to help them blindly follow
their GPS's down a narrow (very in some places) urban dead-end.

I spoke to the Council suggesting that their signage was obviously
ineffective (as I've been out there in the rain in the middle of the
night, seeing these lorries turned round safely on many an occasion)
but they just stated that it conformed to the regulations. shrug

Funny, I was given a parking fine for not getting a free 20 min ticket
at a place where I had parked free and ticketless for about 30 years
(latterly up to 1 hour only). I mentioned to the Council that because
the existing signs had only changed slightly, anyone using the
facility regularly may not re-read the signs to see if they had been
changed, or notice the ticket machine (hidden beside a post box). I
also mentioned that someone had tied an A4 laminated sign on a nearby
post, warning people of the changes (because so many people were being
caught out) and the person at the Council said it was them (admitting
in my mind that the changes weren't made sufficiently clear).

Long short, my local councilor helped me get the charge overturned and
I later heard that the Council had refunded everyone they had charged
because, of the poor signage (which has subsequently been changed).

So I wonder if I could claim the cost of my written off car off the
Council because of their (obviously) ineffective signage? ;-) [1]

Cheers, T i m

[1] That I'm still paying for though raised insurance premiums because
the insurance company didn't have anyone to claim against so it went
down as a 'no blame *claim*'? ;-(

Our local council put up diversion signs in Polish during some major
road works but had to take them down for discriminating against other
drivers who couldn't read English.
--
bert

In article , Adrian
writes
On Tue, 31 May 2016 10:55:25 +0100, T i m wrote:

I'm more interested in whether we can finally ban these European mega
sized trucks

So what size would you set the maximum to for the UK?

I'd certainly like to see anything over 7.5 tons banned (and ideally
anything over 3.5 tons discouraged) from town centres - it's ridiculous
having some absolute monster of a lorry squeezing its way through small
streets with cyclists and pedestrians everywhere.

Agreed, but ...

That's going to make deliveries to urban retailers and building sites
rather difficult. It's also going to MASSIVELY increase the number of
trucks on the roads.

BTW, 44t is the current maximum for any HGV (with restrictions on routes)
without being considered oversize. That's an increase from the first
European harmonised regulations - which, in 1999, set 40t maximum. It's
since crept back up to 44t from 2009.

That 1999 limit of 40t was, for the UK, a reduction from the previous
national limit... of 44t.

Apart from that, the normal maximum of 38t was increased - BY THE UK
GOVERNMENT - in 1982 from 32.5t.
Under pressure from Europe, sorry EU.
--
bert

"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Nightjar wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Adrian wrote
ARW wrote

So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?

Is England still allowed to carry on in the Euro 2016 finals?

Suggest things like that, you might get me voting out...

And if you include Eurovision, me too.

That can't fly, even Australia got to be in the Eurovision contest.

God knows why, that is all I know about it, that it did...

It sells well in Australia,

Like hell it does.

Better than watching Neighbours or Home and Away.

On second thoughts I'll watch none of them and watch the football:-)


--
Adam

In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 15:53:34 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

Yes. The same as the reason that applies for the "tampon tax".

The list of zero-rated products is short. If something wasn't zero-rated
when the UK joined the EU in the '70s, then it stayed taxed - the
exemption that applied to those pre-existing zero-rated products
couldn't be applied to new products.

So the list of products the UK charges zero-rate on was defined by the
UK government, and the list of products the UK charges VAT on was also
defined by the UK government - but things can't be moved from the taxed
list onto that zero-rate list.

Does it really make that much difference what VAT rate is applied to what?
Unless you never buy that product.

The government determines how much income it needs to pay for the things
it does. So if you reduce a tax on one thing, they'll just need to raise
it on another.

But when Osborne raised it to 20% all the lefties went bananas claiming
it was hitting the poorest hardest. Was that just political posturing
using the poor as cannon fodder?
I would have thought you would welcome switching the burden to income
tax where the top 50% of tax payers pay 90% of the tax.
--
bert

In article , ARW
writes
"Rod Speed" wrote in message
...
Nightjar wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Adrian wrote
ARW wrote

So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?

Is England still allowed to carry on in the Euro 2016 finals?

Suggest things like that, you might get me voting out...

And if you include Eurovision, me too.

That can't fly, even Australia got to be in the Eurovision contest.

God knows why, that is all I know about it, that it did...

It sells well in Australia,

Like hell it does.

Better than watching Neighbours or Home and Away.

On second thoughts I'll watch none of them and watch the football:-)



Even Wales and Ireland (either side)?
--
bert

dennis@home wrote
Tim Watts wrote

Aye - it's never that simple. But when I see artics going through the
villages and towns here, to drop maybe 1/20th of it load at one place, I
do question what can be done to reduce this.

You can insist on smaller trucks and pay the increased costs.
If you want cheap produce you have to make savings somewhere.

The problem with that line is that doesn’t explain why the smaller
'ethnic' shops that almost never get their stuff delivered using artics
normally do have cheaper produce than the big supermarkets that do.

On 31/05/16 20:53, bert wrote:
In article , "Dave Plowman (News)"
writes
In article ,
Adrian wrote:
On Tue, 31 May 2016 15:53:34 +0100, dennis@home wrote:

Is there actually any reason why we can't zero rate it for VAT like we
do for kids clothing, etc.

Yes. The same as the reason that applies for the "tampon tax".

The list of zero-rated products is short. If something wasn't zero-rated
when the UK joined the EU in the '70s, then it stayed taxed - the
exemption that applied to those pre-existing zero-rated products
couldn't be applied to new products.

So the list of products the UK charges zero-rate on was defined by the
UK government, and the list of products the UK charges VAT on was also
defined by the UK government - but things can't be moved from the taxed
list onto that zero-rate list.

Does it really make that much difference what VAT rate is applied to
what?
Unless you never buy that product.

The government determines how much income it needs to pay for the things
it does. So if you reduce a tax on one thing, they'll just need to raise
it on another.

But when Osborne raised it to 20% all the lefties went bananas claiming
it was hitting the poorest hardest. Was that just political posturing
using the poor as cannon fodder?
I would have thought you would welcome switching the burden to income
tax where the top 50% of tax payers pay 90% of the tax.
Of course if the government wasn't handing out grants, free this that
and te other to lefty****s, and inserter left money in peoples pockets
so they could buy the same things or better themselves, we wouldn't need
to tax everyone so much.

Taxation is there to support public sector make-workers who otherwise
would be jobless, and on the dole, where they would in fact cost less.



--
"What do you think about Gay Marriage?"
"I don't."
"Don't what?"
"Think about Gay Marriage."

"The Natural Philosopher" wrote in message
...
On 30/05/16 17:16, ARW wrote:
"Capitol" wrote in message
...
ARW wrote:
So what happens if we vote out on the 23rd?

Is England still allowed to carry on in the Euro 2016 finals?

No point in asking the Welsh or Irish (both sides) as they will not
make it to the last 16.


Who cares?


The football fans.


Are there any?

There are thousands of them.



--
Adam

Dave Plowman (News) wrote
Rod Speed wrote
Dave Plowman (News) wrote

Those laws still have to be passed by MEPs.

But the MEPs don't get to initiate any legislation what so ever.

Perhaps you'd care to speculate how many
private memember's bills get passed in the UK?

ALL the legislation that gets voted on in parliament has
been initiated by MPs and ministers who have instructed
civil servants to draft that legislation and the legislation
is debated and amended by MPs in the parliament.