Railcards, Rovers & Rangers: Should they be means tested?

[RichmondCommu]

Mod Note: Posts #1 - #31 originally in this thread.

Personally I think the extension should be means tested. If you're earning less than 21k you qualify, if not you can go whistle. The problem is means testing costs money.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Personally I think the extension should be means tested. If you're earning less than 20k you qualify, if not you can go whistle. The problem is means testing costs money.

There is no means testing if you are 25 so why should there be when you are 26? And as you say it costs money - probably more money than what it would "save". So what is the point?

 

[pemma]

Personally I think the extension should be means tested. If you're earning less than 20k you qualify, if not you can go whistle. The problem is means testing costs money.

And you'll get the same problem that existed with Working Tax Credits. You don't know exactly what your income for the financial year will be until the end of it, so the previous year's figures will have to be used.

 

[RichmondCommu]

There is no means testing if you are 25 so why should there be when you are 26? And as you say it costs money - probably more money than what it would "save". So what is the point?

The point is I know of many 26 to 30 year olds who are earning well in excess of 50k per annum and can afford to pay full price for rail travel.

 

[RichmondCommu]

And you'll get the same problem that existed with Working Tax Credits. You don't know exactly what your income for the financial year will be until the end of it, so the previous year's figures will have to be used.

Well it seems to work for student tuition fees.

 

[tspaul26]

The point is I know of many 26 to 30 year olds who are earning well in excess of 50k per annum and can afford to pay full price for rail travel.

The same can be said of many people over 60. That does not mean that we should abolish the Senior Railcard.

 

[RichmondCommu]

The same can be said of many people over 60. That does not mean that we should abolish the Senior Railcard.

I'm not suggesting that anything should be "abolished'.

 

[tspaul26]

I'm not suggesting that anything should be "abolished'.

Quite so, but I do not see why a person's income should have any bearing on the introduction of a new railway discount product. The key issue is whether it is revenue positive for the farebox.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Quite so, but I do not see why a person's income should have any bearing on the introduction of a new railway discount product. The key issue is whether it is revenue positive for the farebox.

The key issue is the cost to the treasury and could the money be better spent else where, for those who can get by without discounted rail travel.

 

[gsnedders]

The key issue is the cost to the treasury and could the money be better spent else where, for those who can get by without discounted rail travel.

The assumption seems to be the cost to the treasury will be zero.

 

[pemma]

Well it seems to work for student tuition fees.

I don't know how that works but the problem with Working Tax Credits was you could earn £12,000 one year and not get any working tax credits, then move to a better job and earn £20,000 the next and get working tax credits based on your £12,000 income.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The point is I know of many 26 to 30 year olds who are earning well in excess of 50k per annum and can afford to pay full price for rail travel.

So I assume your position regarding means testing also applies to things like the Network railcard then? Hell why not also apply it to rovers that allow cheaper travel than "full price" tickets, or advance tickets too?

 

[RichmondCommu]

It depends on the university. The ones that "forbid" outside work are generally the likes of Oxbridge etc which are also the ones that generally require more hours spent on study and assignments.



So I assume your position regarding means testing also applies to things like the Network railcard then? Hell why not also apply it to rovers that allow cheaper travel than "full price" tickets, or advance tickets too?

Yes I would certainly apply it to Rovers but not to Network cards given the chronic congestion in the SE.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Yes I would certainly apply it to Rovers but not to Network cards given the chronic congestion in the SE.

You'd means test Rovers?

How ridiculous. They are leisure tickets intended to increase discretionary leisure travel.

 

[AlterEgo]

Yes I would certainly apply it to Rovers but not to Network cards given the chronic congestion in the SE.

How on earth do you plan on means testing a Rover? And why? It’s a leisure product, they’re priced to attract discretionary travel.

Edit: @Bletchleyite beat me to it!

 

[Bletchleyite]

Quite. Rovers are totally discretionary and offered because it is profitable to do so, essentially because they generate primarily enthusiast travel that would not otherwise occur. Were it not profitable, they would just be dropped.

 

[ainsworth74]

I'm not suggesting that anything should be "abolished'.

Should all Railcards be means tested? Senior? Friends & Family? Network? Gold Cards? If some should be and others shouldn't why not? They're all products intended to promote usage of the railway and increase fare box revenue?

Who will pay for the means testing? Who will administer it?

I don't know how that works but the problem with Working Tax Credits was you could earn £12,000 one year and not get any working tax credits, then move to a better job and earn £20,000 the next and get working tax credits based on your £12,000 income.

Student Loans are taken at source from your pay packet as calculated by your employer (you tell them you have a student loan) who hands it to HMRC along with your tax and NI.

 

[BigCj34]

Should all Railcards be means tested? Senior? Friends & Family? Network? Gold Cards? If some should be and others shouldn't why not? They're all products intended to promote usage of the railway and increase fare box revenue?

Who will pay for the means testing? Who will administer it?



Student Loans are taken at source from your pay packet as calculated by your employer (you tell them you have a student loan) who hands it to HMRC along with your tax and NI.

Could be administered in the same manner as the Jobcentre discount card, anyone receiving certain benefits can be eligible. In all seriousness though, though there are people under 30 who earn £50,000 and people over who earn far less, I think the new railcard is a reflection of the generally stagnant wages millennial face versus how their parents did, and how under 30's are not opting for the car as much.

 

[pemma]

Student Loans are taken at source from your pay packet as calculated by your employer (you tell them you have a student loan) who hands it to HMRC along with your tax and NI.

I know how plan 1 student loans work but the earlier post referred to tuition fees rather than loans. The problem with plan 1 loans is it's taken on your monthly income so if you work overtime or get a bonus then you loose a big chunk of that to the SLC and unlike Income Tax it doesn't balance itself out over the course of the year.

 

[ainsworth74]

I know how plan 1 student loans work but the earlier post referred to tuition fees rather than loans.

Yes apologies reading comprehension failure on my part there!

 

[RichmondCommu]

You'd means test Rovers?

How ridiculous. They are leisure tickets intended to increase discretionary leisure

Why should someone benefit from a highly discounted ticket when they can afford to buy an off peak ticket?

From memory I seem to remember you complaining that London Midland off peak tickets to London were too cheap. In which case what's the difference with my suggestion that Rovers are means tested?0

 

[RichmondCommu]

Should all Railcards be means tested? Senior? Friends & Family? Network? Gold Cards? If some should be and others shouldn't why not? They're all products intended to promote usage of the railway and increase fare box revenue?

Who will pay for the means testing? Who will administer it?

I've already stated that means testing would be expensive and as such I don't think it would happen which I think is a pity.

 

[yorksrob]

Personally I think the extension should be means tested. If you're earning less than 21k you qualify, if not you can go whistle. The problem is means testing costs money.

Why means test ? It's a commercial product that will encourage the purchase of rail travel.

Plus means testing introduces a whole new level of bureaucracy.

 

[RichmondCommu]

I know how plan 1 student loans work but the earlier post referred to tuition fees rather than loans. The problem with plan 1 loans is it's taken on your monthly income so if you work overtime or get a bonus then you loose a big chunk of that to the SLC and unlike Income Tax it doesn't balance itself out over the course of the year.

Sorry my mistake I meant to say student loans.

 

[RichmondCommu]

Why means test ? It's a commercial product that will encourage the purchase of rail travel.

Plus means testing introduces a whole new level of bureaucracy.

If you means test you can then help other rail users who are in more need of financial assistance. A lot of people including myself would still use the train whether or not I had my railcard. I don't deny that means testing would be complicated.

 

[yorksrob]

If you means test you can then help other rail users who are in more need of financial assistance. A lot of people including myself would still use the train whether or not I had my railcard. I don't deny that means testing would be complicated.

But the idea is to get paying travellers to buy more travel during the off peak. This is true for people of all income levels.

 

[RichmondCommu]

How on earth do you plan on means testing a Rover? And why? It’s a leisure product, they’re priced to attract discretionary travel.

Edit: @Bletchleyite beat me to it!

In answer to your question why means testing anything? I've already stated that means testing would be expensive but at the same time those people with plenty of disposable income will use the train for leisure journeys whether or not they can purchase a Rover ticket.

 

[AlterEgo]

In answer to your question why means testing anything? I've already stated that means testing would be expensive but at the same time those people with plenty of disposable income will use the train for leisure journeys whether or not they can purchase a Rover ticket.

The ticket is there to encourage discretionary travel, not essential travel. Rovers encourage a particularly whimsical form of travel, filling often empty trains, which would be expensive and impractical on separate tickets.

Tickets like Advances for example are not there principally to give discounts to poor unfortunates. They’re there to yield manage passenger loadings.

Should I not be able to avail of £10 Ryanair tickets because I can afford £50 ones? Madness.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

Why should someone benefit from a highly discounted ticket when they can afford to buy an off peak ticket?
From memory I seem to remember you complaining that London Midland off peak tickets to London were too cheap. In which case what's the difference with my suggestion that Rovers are means tested?0

Railcards, and Rovers, are commercial products which deliver more revenue to the railway.
They are aimed largely at off-peak passengers and fill otherwise empty seats.
Unlike free bus passes, TV licences or prescriptions which involve a public subsidy from government to the operator.
Of course, you wouldn't need them if all fares were reduced by 34%, but we all know that's not going to happen.

 

[RichmondCommu]

But the idea is to get paying travellers to buy more travel during the off peak. This is true for people of all income levels.

For those that are employed you can only make a certain number of journeys before you start running out of free time. In which case they shouldn't be a priority. Instead money should be spent on reducing season tickets.