Should we severely penalise and tax the use of large polluting 4x4 vehicles?

Question

Some 4x4 are not much worse than most cars at pollution - the Fiat Panda 4x4 for example. But most 4x4 cars are huge therefore weigh more therefor need more energy to pull their weight therefore use more fuel therefore put more carbon monoxide and carbon dioxiide into the atmosphere therefore are more polluting QED

In answer to Bricklayer: Just ;ook at the mpg and carbon ratings for 4x4 vehicles. For most of them you will find they are far higher than most other family sized cars. Thus they are more polluting. Though I do agree with you older cars and badly maintaibed cars can also be higher polluting than the average.

Answer 1

Yes, there was a prior tax in place and Bush removed it.

Answer 2

In areas where they are unnecessary - yes. If you are in the middle of the country and a 4x4 is essential then fair enough, but people taking 1/2 children to school 2 miles down the road should be hit hard. They should walk or get an economical car.......

Answer 3

No they will go to the poor like all junk.
write to your representatives to have 35mpg min requirementson new cars. alternate fuel and alternate energy.
our government has lower standards than Europe for car makers who don't build for best economy except by mandate.
note Brazil has had no reliance on oil for years! Brazil is way ahead of the USA, grows soy for oil. remember republicans are oil. and they've controlled lots for a long time. democrats are finally starting to get a backbone and stand up as are even some republicans. some have not made a pact with the devil/and big business. or at least are breaking it seeing our country is going down the tubes.

Answer 4

4x4 vehicles were built for rural terrain and not for taxiing the kids to school in the morning. in the inner cities and towns they just take up too much space and pollute the air more, they are very uneconomical on fuel and there are too many of them on the roads around schools. the drivers are higher up so they cannot necessarily see young children lower down or buggies, this does not make taking the children to school any safer.

Answer 5

Absolutely! hopefully gas prices keep going up, so the number of them on the roads will thin out. I can't stand SUVs; not only because of how destructive they are on the planet, but also because they are so dangerous if one hits you! I drive a '90 mercury capri convertible(the size of a miata), and an SUV could prolly run right over the top of me! (I get like 35-40 mpg on the highway)

Answer 6

Perhaps some type of MPG tax might do the trick, at least for a while. I would prefer that larger muscle-trucks would run on a less-polluting fuel, but I am not in charge of designing them...

Answer 7

depends uipon the reason for the 4x4 if you need it to get cross country to your property then why should you be taxed. Also as one of 4 children a small car would have been no good for my parents. personally i think you shouldnt be but you should have a tax rebate if you use public transport a lot

Answer 8

Yes, especially if you are A) not using it to drive on rough surfaces in which case you are a low class peasant, or B) you are one of the aristocracy and can obviously afford to pay the extra tax.

Answer 9

Please supply proof, that 4x4 vehicles pollute the world.

I would think that idiots driving worn out old cars that pump out black smoke from the exhaust is more harm full than my new Toyota Hilux

Answer 10

better plan would be tax relief for low energy / low consumption vehicles that would get people to buy more economic vehicles instead if guzzlers if it's cheaper to buy and run ppl will buy it at the moment more economical technology is overpriced or worse de - bunked in the name of profit

Answer 11

Only for those who drive them in cities to pick the kids up from school etc, and for whom the term "off road" refers to parkin on the kerb.