Old cars are not necessarily hazardous to environment

Editor, RE: “Why govt raised taxes on used cars” (The New Times, February 12). I think a terrible mistake is being made here. Taxing used cars based on the car’s age, for the sake of reducing environmental pollution, makes absolutely no sense whatsoever. How? It is not the age of the vehicle that determines its impact on the environment. The vehicles technical specifications regarding emissions, fuel consumption, fuel efficiency etc., are what determine the level of environmental pollution a given vehicle can cause. By the “logic” of the RRA, if I get a two-year-old diesel-powered SUV and you get a 15-year-old VW Polo, you will be paying more taxes than me, despite the fact that my SUV is pumping far more poison into our air than several of those Polos could do together. Does that seem fair to you? With all the taxes the RRA is getting from us, you would think they could pay someone to come up with a sensible tax scheme to deter/reduce environmental pollution. You should be incentivizing the importation of low-emission, fuel-efficient vehicles, and as long as they pass the control technique, why does their age matter? The right thing to do is: the more fuel-efficient and low-emission your vehicle is, the lower the tax. In some countries, certain highly efficient ultra-low-emission vehicles are even tax exempt. That is why in industrialized societies, people buy lower emission vehicles to pay lower taxes and have more money available for other things in life. This is very disappointing. I expect much better than this from a government agency in charge of our tax monies. Dayo Ntwari

Opinions

Old cars are not necessarily hazardous to environment