'Secret' tax for family cars - surely not fair?

[Maiakins]

I couldn't believe it when I read in the Times this morning about the new road tax rules to include cars up to seven years old. This means we'll be paying £300 next year for our used 2003 Ford Galaxy and £455 the following year onwards.

See 'Secret tax adds £200 to cost of running family cars' - driving.timesonline.co.uk/tol/life_and_style/driving/article3842848.ece?Submitted=true

It makes me mad as if you have 3 or more young children and need 3 infant car seats, these cars are the only models that suit. This is especially true if you have twins/triplets and need to fit in a double buggy. It isn't ethically right to backdate a tax to a decision we now have no influence over. Fair enough to tax cars from 2006 onwards when the law was introduced and people were aware, but what are we supposed to do if we already have the car? Urgh!!!!!!!

I've been a Labour voter all my life and this is the last straw!

They backdate a lot of legal changes and tax changes and it is bad law and very very unfair when you have based your life on one set of rules - e.g. living here with tax on foreign earnings on one basis then changed or one man bands who set up their own company because Labour introduced lower taxes for those and then abolished them. It's the chopping and changing which is so unfair.

Also people with older can't cannot afford to buy new ones. We had our second hand volvo for 16 years until last year when it died.

(I have certainly never had a tax credit because i earn too much)

We qualify for ctc but because of a mix-up they said they had overpaid us so now we receive nothing until it's paid back.

Like for like - USA vs UK - we get $3400 per child as a tax exemption ($17000 for all of our children), and in the UK it's about £3000 a year in CB. There is also additional CTC, which we have received in the last few years despite not having any earned income in the US, and this year and economic stimulus worth $3800 to us.

Both systems are equally valid way giving tax breaks to families.

Because the US doesn't have a separate Child Benefit, you can't say they don't recognise families - they just do it on the tax return instead. The other good thing about the US system is that they recognise marriage, and also let you deduct your mortgage interest.

Most families in the UK may earn less than £40k, but that doesn't mean that higher earners should be ignored - most families don't have disabled children either - many families have unique or uncommon situations - does that mean we should ignore those families too?

I cannot believe that all of you are schoked by this?

I bought a car about 6 years ago (It was one year old) and one of teh KEY criteria was fuel economy and low emissions even then. We knew car tax waa going to change and that it woudl be based on thsi. Therefore the people who boought cars in the past 7 years should have been aware that things were going to change and factored this into their choice of cars.

I have a picasso which BTW does fit 3 car seats nto and has low emisssoions.

Of course it's unfair, it's the Labour government. What did you expect?

would a Tory government be fair then, KaSo?

Reallytired - are you really suggesting that people should abort their child if they have an unplanned pregnancy...or just swallow any unfair hit the middle income tax that comes along (in this case retrospectively) without complaint. Or did I misunderstand you...? I hope so, as you seem to say 'have an abortion' like I would say 'take a paracetamol' to someone with a headache.