Argh! You are correct in calling me out on that. I thought about that
phrasing when I posted those words, and went ahead and posted them anyway.
You are right that the fees are not associated with a priviledge. If your
VED though is principled as our road use taxes are, then the intended
purpose of the fee is highway maintenance and buildout. Not necessarily to
fully fund those, but to contribute to those costs. My point was that each
car is subject to those based on the presumption that it will use those
roads and be eligible for the honor of contributing to the upkpeep of them.
When bike owners say they already pay those fees, so they should be free to
use the roads as registered vehicles do, I disagree. It's not the
individual who is enabled by the fee, it is the vehicle.
I would agree based on the underlying principle but I really believe that
they came into practice to satisfy the insatiable appetite within
politicians for more money.
I stripped all of the cross posting out of this reply - which I had not even
noticed on my first reply. Maybe this won't even pass within Doki's field
of view now...
Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.