Business / Some Commentators Have Suggested That So-Called â€˜Chelsea Tractorsâ€™ Should Be Taxed Much Higher Than Other Vehicles.
Some Commentators Have Suggested That So-Called â€˜Chelsea Tractorsâ€™ Should Be Taxed Much Higher Than Other Vehicles.This essay Some Commentators Have Suggested That So-Called â€˜Chelsea Tractorsâ€™ Should Be Taxed Much Higher Than Other Vehicles. is available for you on Essays24.com! Search Term Papers, College Essay Examples and Free Essays on Essays24.com - full papers database.
Autor: anton 01 June 2011
Words: 1175 | Pages: 5
The term Chelsea tractor refers to the large 4x4â€™s which are used around the cities and towns, these vehicles are now more popular than ever. As stated by the BBC
â€œLast year some 187,000 were sold â€“ compared with 80,000 a decade before â€“ accounting for almost 8%, or one in every fifteen, of all cars sold.â€ This shows a growing trend in the popularity of these types of vehicles, many people use them for the school run due to the safety aspect of the cars, many just like to show off their wealth and have the â€œbig carâ€.
The problem occurs when many people drive these vehicles around town and in the inner cities, as they cause congestion and produce more carbon dioxide than other cars. Many people believe that in these circumstances the â€œChelsea tractorâ€ should be taxed more than other vehicles due to their size and emissions factor. Many people agree but some do not see why they should pay more, the minority of so called â€œChelsea tractorsâ€ are used in the country by people who use them for the purpose of their design and these people feel they would be being penalised for owning a working vehicle.
Many environmentalists believe that taxing these â€˜Chelsea tractorsâ€™ higher will stop people from buying them, but the question comes where to tax these vehicles more, the suppliers or consumers. If suppliers are taxed this will increase the price of the cars at the same time driving some consumers away, inversely the substitutes â€˜smaller carsâ€™ would become more desirable. As Fig. 1 shows if a higher tax was put directly on the production of 4x4â€™s the cost of production would increase, thus the supply line would shift to the right making a market equilibrium shift from what it previously was. The problem with this is that if the car manufacturers are taxed higher the consumer may just budget more as once purchased there are no other costs associated with the bigger vehicle. Obviously the extra cost will put a minority of consumers off of the prospect of buying the 4x4 even if the usage was for the designed purpose.
If tax was raised on the consumer of these large 4x4s (through road tax) then consumers may be put off due to more money flowing out each 6 months or year. Fig. 2 shows how demand would be affected by the higher tax introduced demand would fall, the substitute smaller cars demand would increase due to opportunity cost, the 4x4 would be sacrificed to enable the consumer to save money. Therefore the opposite would happen on the demand and supply curve for the substitute demand would increase and shift to the right. The consumer has more choice to decide which product to buy and the government have given serious thought to this dilemma and believe that a higher road tax is the best way to try a deter people driving these big 4x4s around towns as an â€˜everydayâ€™ vehicle. Some people buy the more expensive 4x4â€™s to show off their wealth, and buy raising the tax this will up the running cost or price of the vehicle adding to the show of wealth. This could turn the vehicle into a giffen good.
Due to the decrease in demand if the tax is introduced the firm that mainly specialises in 4x4 manufacture, namely Landrover, will be hit hard by the decreased demand for the specialised vehicles. Firms like Suzuki, Porsche, BMW, and Ford who do not specialise in just the 4x4 production and produce other smaller more economic cars will lose the revenue from the sale of 4x4â€™s but at the same time will pick up revenue by selling the substitute vehicles. Landrover is a British company and if they were declared â€˜bustâ€™ the economy would suffer, due to closure of the company jobs will be lost and more people will be out of work.
Other than the obvious arguments (being for or against the tax) there are many other arguments that surround the issue. There are many environmental issues surrounding 4x4â€™s in general they produce more carbon dioxide than smaller cars, which contributes to the effects of global warming. If the market is looked at as a whole there are many cars which emit the same if not more than â€˜Chelsea tractorsâ€™ as the BBC states:
â€œthere are plenty of high-polluting cars that are not four-wheel drive.â€
But later targets the Landrover Range Rover with specific interest and states:
â€œThe biggest Range Rover churns out 370g of CO2 per kilometre, more than double the average for British-owned cars in general, and far in excess of the 120g/km Greenpeace wants to see by 2008.â€
Another argument is about space in the inner cities but when the facts about size are raised it is better to look directly at the cars. Last yearâ€™s top seller (in the 4x4 market) the Landrover Freelander is smaller than the Ford Mondeo and the Vauxhall Vectra, therefore making the argument about space an unsubstantial one. People against the ban and who own these vehicles do so because they feel safer taking their child to school in a bigger safer car. Though this again is no reason to not put the tax up because the safest car of 2005 is not a big 4x4 but the Renault megane with 5 stars to the Landrover Freelanders 4 stars.
One of the main arguments in the issues is that people who do not use there 4x4s around cities will have to pay more to use the car for its designed purpose. A farmer who is making money to cover his living expenses and needs the 4x4 capability to enable him to work, will be being taxed for no reason other than some people choose to use their vehicles in the city. His income will be decreased due to a higher tax to run the vehicle therefore rendering him with a lower income each month this means he may suffer in the long run.
There are many arguments surrounding the issue with higher tax for 4x4s they are bigger and do produce generally more than smaller cars in the way of emissions, but it is un-economic to penalise the people in the countryside using their vehicles all day every day for living purposes by introducing the higher road tax. There are other ways of getting around the issue for example in London with the congestion charge bigger vehicles could be charged more than smaller ones, making people think twice about travelling into London and other cities in their bigger vehicles. Also in the long run businesses that are British will suffer therefore making the economy suffer by creating un-employment meaning less money is circulating through these sources, opportunity costing would come into effect and some people will have a lower disposable income rendering them unable to purchase goods they would have before.
Range rover information: http://www.landrover.com/gb/en/Vehicles/New_Range_Rover/Specifications/Range_rover_engines_and_performance.htm
Essentials of Economics â€“ John Sloman, (2004), Prentice Hall, Harlow.
BBC news article - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4829628.stm
BBC news video - http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/ukfs_news/hi/bb_wm_fs.stm?news=1&bbram=1&bbwm=1&nol_storyid=4831394
BBC news article - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/5171850.stm
Guardian article - http://environment.guardian.co.uk/travel/story/0,,1844974,00.html
Telegraph news article - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2004/07/18/nfour18.xml
Get Better Grades Today
Join Essays24.com and get instant access to over 60,000+ Papers and Essays