Keith Rich Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 He never promised a fuel stabiliser, only that he would look into the feasibility of one. I for one think it would be unworkable anyway, and would probably come back to bite us if the price of oil ever plummeted again like it did a couple of years ago. When Cameron says he will 'look into' something it always means he's not going to do it. The term 'look into it' simply means the issue is being brushed under the carpet until the story disapears from the headlines. Cameron thinks that the plebs (The general public) are too stupid to notice this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Greybeard Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 When Cameron says he will 'look into' something it always means he's not going to do it. The term 'look into it' simply means the issue is being brushed under the carpet until the story disapears from the headlines. Cameron thinks that the plebs (The general public) are too stupid to notice this. The one thing he's usually right about Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 If you don't want to pay tax on fuel, how should the government charge you to make up the shortfall in revenue? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wednesday1 Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 If you don't want to pay tax on fuel, how should the government charge you to make up the shortfall in revenue? Tax the Bankers more.After all Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England says: 'The price of this financial crisis is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it'. "Now is the period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of public anger has not been greater than it has." l Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andygardener Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 If you don't want to pay tax on fuel, how should the government charge you to make up the shortfall in revenue? It's not a question of not wanting to pay tax on fuel, it's a 50% increase in the pump price of fuel within a decade which bears no relation to the barrel price, with endless increases in the duty above inflation rates by obscene ammounts. It hurts business and damages the economy, but for the Gov it's easy to collect so they keep increasing it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Sooner or later he'll do one u-turn too many and disappear up his own fundament. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RonJeremy Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 Tax the Bankers more.After all Mervyn King, Governor of the Bank of England says: 'The price of this financial crisis is being borne by people who absolutely did not cause it'. "Now is the period when the cost is being paid, I'm surprised that the degree of public anger has not been greater than it has." l And drive them and the taxes they do pay offshore? Silly suggestion - populist, but still very silly Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stan Tamudo Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 And drive them and the taxes they do pay offshore? It's called Jeremy's BLUFF. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 And drive them and the taxes they do pay offshore? Silly suggestion - populist, but still very silly Oh no, the bankers have run off abroad...who now will they get to bail them out...? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rupert_Baehr Posted March 2, 2011 Share Posted March 2, 2011 It's not a question of not wanting to pay tax on fuel, it's a 50% increase in the pump price of fuel within a decade which bears no relation to the barrel price, with endless increases in the duty above inflation rates by obscene ammounts. It hurts business and damages the economy, but for the Gov it's easy to collect so they keep increasing it. In March 2007, a barrel of Brent Crude cost $65 .. The exchange rate was £1.00 = $2.00, so a barrel of oil cost £32.50. Petrol was (about) 90 pence per litre. Today a Barrel of Brent Crude costs $116.35. The exchange rate is £1.00 = $1.63, so a barrel of oil costs £71.38. Petrol costs £1.30 per litre. Crude oil prices (in pounds - which is what you buy petrol with) have risen by 119%. Pump prices have risen by 44%. I agree. There is little apparent correlation between the price of a barrel of oil and the price you pay for petrol at the pumps. (The reason for that being that a large part of the pump price is tax.) In the UK, people are paying £1.30 for a litre of petrol. In Southern Germany, it costs £1.35. (And we don't blame that on the British government ) Apart from the tax element, pump prices seem to be driven by supply and demand. (And panic.) Libya produces about the same amount of oil as does the UK. If - for some reason - UK production was to be threatened, do you think that would have as much effect on the spot price as the Libyan threat has done? - I doubt it. I agree that any price increase on road fuel will have a dramatic effect on small businesses, but - as you say - it's an easy tax for the government to collect, they're short of money and if they don't raise the tax there, they would have to do so elsewhere ... or make bigger expenditure cuts. Fuel is taxed at a far lower rate in the US than it is in the UK and when crude oil prices rose in 2007/8 in the US, the effect on pump prices was much greater and the additional percentage cost (attributed to petrol costs) borne by small businesses was far higher in the US than in the UK. Many small businesses went to the wall. (So the tax take from those businesses fell to zero.) (Where I lived, petrol prices doubled between Jan 2007 and Dec 2007.) It's easy to say 'Tax the Bankers more' (Wednesday 1, Post #14) but in the real world, you can only go so far in taxing those Bankers. How many Bankers get those bonuses? Are we talking hundreds? That's not a lot of people. Would 100% of the Bankers' bonuses replace fuel tax? I don't know. It might for one year, but - according to those who employ those highly-paid people - that would drive them elsewhere, so next year there would be no Bankers' bonuses to tax and a far lower amount of revenue from tax on the banks themselves. Perhaps Cameron should do something to reduce the tax on fuel in the interests of protecting small businesses? - But if he does, I suspect it would mean a significant tax increase for every taxpayer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.