ABS light is on

Umm, no they don't.

The car costs a lot more to buy / lease and run (as a private consumer) than a co. user pays in tax on a company car. But, my complaint is not the driver tax situation, rather the company tax relief that the tax payer subsidises.

The other month, whilst at the Jaguar Learning Centre in the Birmingham area, I was wandering around the car park during a break and more than a dozen new-ish Jag coupes (not being a Jag fan, I don't know what the models were) arrived with two execs on board. They had been out for a jolly. Those cars were perks. My point here is; I do not know how much those cars were, nor their CO2 output, but the depreciation of those cars written off against tax is subsidised by the taxpayer in general.

David gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Are you forgetting the tax-free IR mileage rate?

What "company tax relief" would that be, then?

The only Jag Coupe is the XK.

You know this for a fact, do you?

You know this for a fact, do you?

XK list starts at £60k

High enough that they're 35% tax rate.

You know this for a fact, do you?

Apart from the fact that virtually no company (at least outside the motor industry) actually _owns_ their company cars - they're all leased - I'll tell you for a fact that there will be virtually no depreciation put against Jaguar's books for those cars, since they'll be sold as approved- used cars at a few months old. As for whether they're co.cars or not - I've got various friends that work for UK importers/manufacturers. They have a choice of running them as company cars or effectively buying/ reselling. Where you're looking at cars with an annual tax bill approaching ten grand (like those XKs for a 40% taxpayer) then it's most certainly going to be preferable to do the latter.

Thanks to all for the follow-ups.

But having just seen this estimated valuation of my car

'm rapidly coming to the view that a replacement is due sooner ratherthan later. Spending even a few hundred seems increasingly indefensible,much as I love the car. A relative in the trade raised eyebrows when I told him of my intention to continue driving with the ABS (probably) inoperative. He's in his 30s. Overcautious or sensible advice? I'm in my 60s and my first reaction was that, while ABS is obviously desirable (it's saved my bacon a couple of times over the last decade or two), its absence surely can't be regarded as *dangerous*.

Terry Pinnell gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Umm, your comment on the valuation - "Guess it would count as below average _despite it's recent MOT_"...?

Are you implying that being in MOT-passing condition is anything more than a bare minimum suggestion of roadworthiness?

When it comes down to it, you've got a thirsty 15yo example of BMW's absolute low-point of recent years, the E36. If it was a coupe, it might be desirable to some up-and-coming low-rent pimp, but not a saloon. If it was a manual, it might be a vaguely entertaining basis for a track-day toy, but not an auto. It's too complicated and thirsty for bangernomics, and utterly devoid of any retro-cool.

Ok, convince me how they subsidise me.

Ok

Yes, I asked.

They could have been given much cheaper alternatives

Obviously

So when I read that, in some circumstances, companies can write off 100% of the cost of the car in the first year against tax, none of them do then?

Someone owns them, had to buy them, unless the leasing companies lease them from the manufacturer

So they did not cost Jaguar much to make, and run, them ? Accountants are paid to find ways of avoiding the payment of tax.

The dealership I worked at (a while ago) did not own the cars in the showroom, but had to pay the manufacturer a daily fee. We never got the importer released company cars. The last time I asked at a dealership, the demonstrators could not be sold until they were six months old.

Probably, but when a company buys that Jag new, (and they do) they are able to write off some depreciation against tax. ie, tax relief.

Also, for some, that ten grand annual tax bill is peanuts.

Then there are the car rental companies. I'm not sure if it is true, but I read buying a fleet of the same model of car can net a reduction of

35% off the list price. If that is true, then that demonstrates an inflated price of new cars to private punters. No subsidy for me there then, if I were to buy new.

David gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Because of the substantial amounts of tax which would be paid. I've already demonstrated that.

They work for Jaguar, ffs. That is what they _do_ for a living. It's not as if they're photocopier salesmen who are being paid to play in a Jag.

You really don't understand the most basic concepts here, do you?

Not as much as they will then be sold for as 6 month old, low mileage approved-used cars.

If not more. Probably because they're buying several hundred at a time.

Everything's a conspiracy against you, isn't it?

Sorry to be picky, but if you're going to quote me... ;-) "...despite its recent MOT..." ^^^

Terry Pinnell gurgled happily, sounding much like they were saying:

Furthermore, taxpayers are not "subsidizing". It is somebody's money in the first place.

A tax deduction is not a subsidy.

DAS

I have driven all my life without ABS. So far I have put 480,000 miles on my 2002 and 294,000 miles on my E28, and I haven't been killed yet.

Mind you, if it's broke, you should fix it, because if you start leaving things unrepaired, you will get in the habit of leaving things unrepaired and they will eventually balloon until you get to the point where everything needs to be repaired. Constant and careful maintenance keeps cars running.

--scott

As I have stated, accountants are paid to find the loopholes in the tax laws to reduce the tax liability for their company. All businesses do this, and this effectively increases the payments by the individual.

I am not having an issue with co. car drivers. This is not an envy thing. (OT) I could go out and buy nearly any car I wanted, but IMO, it is obscene to spend enormous amounts on a car when, for example, £25 can restore the sight of a blind person in India.

Not at all. I do not believe that you speak for the hundreds of thousands of companies that supply co. cars to their employees.

ffs ??? steady on... In these times, firms are looking to reduce costs. Therefore, what I am saying is that the *true* cost of supplying and running those cars, for employees, (just as an example) is not going to be borne by Jaguar. Some of those costs will be offset against tax. This is what accountants do.

^ I do not believe this statement is accurate.

I don't think you are looking at the bigger picture...

True

Or more

correction: No subsidy for the private new car buyer. (Not that I buy new.)

I am one insignificant individual amongst 6,729,286,xxx (and rising) insignificant individuals, so I do not understand that comment.

And a several-month-old used car hasn't depreciated significantly?

A car depreciates significantly the moment it's driven off the lot and is then "used".

You got me. Most are optimized for the 50-60Hz range, since that's all most people ever measure.

They will still "work" outside of that range, with accuracy dropping-off.

In the case of the ABS sensor, the accuracy is not important, of course.

But don't measure, say, your HiFi output with a 1KHz test tone and expect anything approaching accuracy.

Like what? A good one will survive up to 600V on any input (including the wrong ones).

A good quality meter (any Fluke, don't need the spendy 77) should last the average jerk a lifetime.

I've just tried this, unsurprisingly my flukes are just as accurate at

1kHz as 50Hz, but the crap one someones' left here rolls of from 500HZ quite slowly.

Coffee kills them, damp randomly seems to trash them, and snapping the dial off the front of the fluke 100s seems easy (I don't know how, I only see the remains). Equally there's perfect working mk11 70 series here & my old 867s nearly black from ingrained oil & still passes calibration.

AVO model 8. can't beat it. ;-)

Well, not for working on older electronics, anyway, as it was the reference meter for most circuit diagram voltages until the 70s at least.

For a car, the cheapest you can get, 'cos IME, they last about three jobs before they get soaked, dropped, trodden on, borrowed, lost.....

Yup, and the front end electronics bandwidth isn't so hot.

My cheap B&K is about 20% off at 1KHz. It actually reads peak voltage and uses a fudge factor to get RMS, which is fine for sine waves but not so fine otherwise.

The Fluke 77 is right on the money, but then again the calibration specs certify it to be.

Surprisingly, my Simpson 260 seems to be accurate up to above 10 Khz, which I never would have believed if I hadn't tested it.

--scott

Look at the post I was replying to; we were discussing the relative merits of cheap vs expensive DMM's surviving *physical* events.

BTW, it's generally selecting a current range and connecting across a supply that kills them electrically; even Fluke die when you do that enough times.

You must have a whole different class of average jerks where you come from! Some of the guys I worked with would kill at least one a year...

Chris