Should we tax vehicles by size instead of (or in addition to) emissions?

[brad465]

This BBC article today about the rise in SUVs got me wondering the above title: larger vehicles cause more problems on the road than smaller counterparts, including parking problems, issues passing on narrow roads (or even just getting down them) and wear and tear on the road surface itself, to name a few. Therefore, would a tax on size be an effective means of encouraging smaller vehicles to be both made and purchased?

I can see problems around potential loopholes and/or complexity in such a tax, but these can probably be mitigated if thought through. I do think though the increasing trend on vehicle size and our roads not being able to cope with them is an unsustainable trajectory.

With the world heating up, why are more SUVs being sold?

Despite dire predictions of climate breakdown, more Sports Utility Vehicles are being spotted on, and off, the roads.

www.bbc.co.uk

Across the globe more and more Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) are being spotted on – and off – the roads.

This is despite predictions from the United Nations of an inevitable pivot towards smaller and more environmentally friendly vehicles because of the urgency of the climate crisis and the rising cost of living.

That pivot has not materialised: globally, 54% of the cars sold in 2024 were SUVs, including petrol, diesel, hybrids and electric makes. This is an increase of three percentage points from 2023 and five percentage points from the year before, according to GlobalData, external.

Of the SUVs which are now on the road – both new and older models – 95% are burning fossil fuels, according to the International Energy Agency (IEA).

Manufacturers, however, say their new fleets of such cars are increasingly becoming electric, and that not all SUVs now being sold cause an increase in emissions.

SUVs are hard to miss. They are heavy and larger with spacious interiors, higher ground clearance and a high driving position with a better view of the road, although smaller versions are also on the market.

Environmental campaigners such as Greenpeace see SUVs as one of the villains of the climate crisis and argue that their manufacturing consumes significant resources given their size.

Experts also say they require larger batteries to power their electric versions, which then further increases the demand for critical minerals, putting even more pressure on the planet.

Momentum was thought to be with smaller, energy-efficient electric vehicles. But the sales of standard-sized electric vehicles (EVs) has actually decreased in major markets such as Japan and Germany, and their sales growth has slowed in India.

And in Europe, sales of SUVs have outpaced those of EVs despite indications more than half a decade ago of an opposite trend. In Europe in 2018, 3.27 million small hatchbacks – both those powered by fossil fuels and those by electricity – were sold while 2.13 million were sold in 2024, according to GlobalData, external.

Its sales forecast manager Sammy Chan said: "This is partly because of the SUV alternatives being offered in smaller [sizes] whose sales in Europe have now grown to nearly to 2.5 million in 2024 from 1.5 million in 2018."

China saw the largest sales of nearly 11.6 million SUVs in 2024 followed by the US, India and Germany, according to GlobalData.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's a reasonable argument for including weight, because it is a factor in road wear. The downside of that is that EVs are typically heavy, but are beneficial for other reasons.

I don't however like the vendetta against an entire class of vehicles. A small SUV is a great vehicle for someone of limited mobility, for instance - they have basically replaced MPVs in this context - and something like a Ford Ecosport is hardly fuel-heavy or particularly polluting, while a Ford Puma is basically just a Focus* on stilts. Whereas we definitely want to discourage unnecessary full size Range Rovers and pickups for example.

* I'm aware it's on the Fiesta platform but it's Focus sized.

 

[jfollows]

Electric cars probably change things, but no there should be a single tax for all cars and then collect the extra tax on fuel consumption. The ‘green’ agenda is just a front for collecting more tax. I imported and taxed a Ford Mustang in 1994 and it cost the same as a mini, but of course I paid tax when I used it because of its fuel consumption.
I don’t think we can uninvent the current system but it’s illogical, complicated and wrong.
My actual emissions were always lower than a little old lady driving every day (because I drove infrequently), the tax used to be on actual emissions (via actual petrol/diesel consumption) rather than hypothetical emissions.

 

[Meerkat]

You could base it on weight with different scales for pure electric and proper hybrids (defined to exclude cars with big engines and token batteries).
Still think we need a city car class equivalent to the Japanese Kei class which limits size and engine capacity. Make them cheap to tax and cheaper to park (with all the most convenient parking spaces Kei only), and cheaper congestion charges.
Things like X5s and Q7s need taxing into irrelevance in urban areas - its scary watching them barge through the school run.

 

[edwin_m]

The ‘green’ agenda is just a front for collecting more tax.

Hard to agree with that when the government is facing a big problem replacing the revenue from fuel tax as EVs replace ICEs. The greater average weight of EVs makes this worse, as road repairs will be more frequent. Greater weight also increases tyre particulates, even for EVs.

Thus I'm broadly in agreement with taxing vehicles by weight, possibly with a similar rate for EVs and ICEs considering the latter also pay fuel tax. The argument is less strong for size, as that mostly relates to parking - perhaps there is scope for cheaper spaces for smaller vehicles.

 

[Meerkat]

Thus I'm broadly in agreement with taxing vehicles by weight, possibly with a similar rate for EVs and ICEs considering the latter also pay fuel tax. The argument is less strong for size, as that mostly relates to parking - perhaps there is scope for cheaper spaces for smaller vehicles.

Longer cars use more road space , creating more congestion. They are also worse for pedestrian in terms of visibility and impact heights.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Longer cars use more road space , creating more congestion. They are also worse for pedestrian in terms of visibility and impact heights.

So that argues in favour of SUVs and against estates? A super mini won't do for everyone.

 

[lachlan]

Electric cars probably change things, but no there should be a single tax for all cars and then collect the extra tax on fuel consumption. The ‘green’ agenda is just a front for collecting more tax. I imported and taxed a Ford Mustang in 1994 and it cost the same as a mini, but of course I paid tax when I used it because of its fuel consumption.
I don’t think we can uninvent the current system but it’s illogical, complicated and wrong.
My actual emissions were always lower than a little old lady driving every day (because I drove infrequently), the tax used to be on actual emissions (via actual petrol/diesel consumption) rather than hypothetical emissions.

The trouble is the system doesn't work for electric cars unless we increase taxes on electricity which impacts everyone, not just drivers.

As others have mentioned there doesn't need to be a one size fits all solution - perhaps there can be surcharge on parking for larger vehicles and an increase in taxes for heavier ones.

 

[Meerkat]

So that argues in favour of SUVs and against estates? A super mini won't do for everyone.

Do they even build estates any more - everything seems to be SUV or pseudo SUV?
You have to use cost to push people to the smallest they can use. Parking could actually be a sensible target, as that would enable variation across cities and countryside. It could apply to parking permits for on street parking but not sure how you deal with driveway parking (otherwise its a bit regressive).

which reminds me of a real bugbear of mine - using front yards of terraced housing for parking cars that are too big and overhang the pavement. They should really be getting ticketed again and again.

 

[mpthomson]

Do they even build estates any more - everything seems to be SUV or pseudo SUV?
You have to use cost to push people to the smallest they can use. Parking could actually be a sensible target, as that would enable variation across cities and countryside. It could apply to parking permits for on street parking but not sure how you deal with driveway parking (otherwise its a bit regressive).

which reminds me of a real bugbear of mine - using front yards of terraced housing for parking cars that are too big and overhang the pavement. They should really be getting ticketed again and again.

Yes. Skoda, Volkswagen, Vauxhall, Seat, BMW, Mercedes, Ford, Audi (at least, there will be others as well) all offer estates as a core part of their ranges in multiple different sizes.

 

[Meerkat]

Yes. Skoda, Volkswagen, Vauxhall, Seat, BMW, Mercedes, Ford, Audi (at least, there will be others as well) all offer estates as a core part of their ranges in multiple different sizes.

Ford are binning the Focus so what estate do they offer?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ford are binning the Focus so what estate do they offer?

Ford do appear to be going SUV-only, but that isn't true of other manufacturers and is widely regarded to be a serious mistake. In particular one cannot image BMW or Audi ceasing estates, and VW already have at least one in their new "id" range.

 

[Meerkat]

Ford do appear to be going SUV-only, but that isn't true of other manufacturers and is widely regarded to be a serious mistake. In particular one cannot image BMW or Audi ceasing estates, and VW already have at least one in their new "id" range.

Ok. Why is it relevant? They are still longer so take up more space in urban areas.

 

[NIT100]

What would people think about a vehicle excise duty component based on the NCAP star rating for Vulnerable Road User Protection (previously just Pedestrian Protection)?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Ok. Why is it relevant? They are still longer so take up more space in urban areas.

If one needs a larger car, one can go larger by going up (SUV/MPV) or going longer (estate).

I get the impression you're advocating everyone to have a supermini, but that's not always an option. Indeed, most people for whom a supermini is an option in an urban area should probably be using a bicycle/e-bike or public transport because by definition they don't need to carry much stuff if they have a small car.

Of the above two, which is your preference? Most anti-SUV people say the estate because the lower height makes children etc more visible and it is safer in a collision with a pedestrian as they go over the top.

 

[Meerkat]

If one needs a larger car, one can go larger by going up (SUV/MPV) or going longer (estate).

I get the impression you're advocating everyone to have a supermini, but that's not always an option. Indeed, most people for whom a supermini is an option in an urban area should probably be using a bicycle/e-bike or public transport because by definition they don't need to carry much stuff if they have a small car.

Of the above two, which is your preference? Most anti-SUV people say the estate because the lower height makes children etc more visible and it is safer in a collision with a pedestrian as they go over the top.

Superminis are the size of family cars of the past. We should use tax to make people have the smallest car they can. You need bigger, you pay for it.
This is why I like the idea of going after parking as you can reduce the tax in rural areas where larger vehicles are more necessary and less of a problem.
However i don’t know how you hit parking without further killing the High Street…..

 

[edwin_m]

Longer cars use more road space , creating more congestion. They are also worse for pedestrian in terms of visibility and impact heights.

The space issue is marginal unless traffic is literally bumper to bumper. Most of the space "occupied" by traffic is the gaps between vehicles necessary for safe braking.

Isn't it higher cars that are worse for pedestrian impact? Not sure how a longer car of the same height would be any greater or less risk to pedestrians, considering it's the front that presents the hazard.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Isn't it higher cars that are worse for pedestrian impact?

Yes. You're less likely to see a small child, and they're more likely to go under rather than over as they would on a lower car.

 

[edwin_m]

Yes. You're less likely to see a small child, and they're more likely to go under rather than over as they would on a lower car.

Although European SUVs are much less bad in this respect than American ones or their pickup trucks (I had to laugh when one of the Trump acolytes asked why they sell so few Dodge Rams in Europe...).

 

[mpthomson]

Ok. Why is it relevant? They are still longer so take up more space in urban areas.

Estates are rarely longer than their hatchback or saloon counterparts by anything over a centimetre or two and most are exactly the same length.

 

[JonasB]

Estates are rarely longer than their hatchback or saloon counterparts by anything over a centimetre or two and most are exactly the same length.

And in case of the Volvo S90/V90, the saloon version is actually 27 mm longer than the estate version. And the XC90 SUV is even longer.

 

[AndrewP]

In most cases I don't think the length matters it's the width that is the bigger factor. I justify a big car as I would otherwise need to rent vans honest! I do like a big car and just as the luxury car tax did nothing to stop me buying a hulking big Jag a size tax won't stop me trading it in for an even bigger Range Rover of some kind when I feel like it. What I can see happening is the American idea of parking spaces for 'compact' cars which makes sense as not all spaces should suit those of us who buy Canyoneros or similar silly but nice things!

 

[Harpo]

What I can see happening is the American idea of parking spaces for 'compact' cars which makes sense as not all spaces should suit those of us who buy Canyoneros or similar silly but nice things!

Parking space sizes definitely need addressing.

 

[mpthomson]

Parking space sizes definitely need addressing.
View attachment 176840

That's just lazy parking, they'll easily fit in a standard space.

 

[Yorkshire09876]

There is a big issue here with small cheaper cars increasingly not being made at all, leaving many with little option but an SUV even if they don't want one. e.g. Ford has stopped making both the Ka and the Fiesta. The Toyota Aygo / Citroen C1 / Peugeot 108 (all basically the same car with different styling) is no longer produced.

The result is that older cars are selling for increasing amounts. I was actually talking to a local garage owner yesterday and he told me that increasingly it's now worth repairing older small cars even if they need a load of welding, because of the way values have increased.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is a big issue here with small cheaper cars increasingly not being made at all, leaving many with little option but an SUV even if they don't want one. e.g. Ford has stopped making both the Ka and the Fiesta. The Toyota Aygo / Citroen C1 / Peugeot 108 (all basically the same car with different styling) is no longer produced.

The result is that older cars are selling for increasing amounts. I was actually talking to a local garage owner yesterday and he told me that increasingly it's now worth repairing older small cars even if they need a load of welding, because of the way values have increased.

While Ford are (in my view erroneously) concentrating on SUVs, there are still small, cheap new cars available. Dacia specialise in them, for example, and I think MG do one too. It's just that the high-cost traditional manufacturers don't make enough money out of them any more in the context of these others cutting prices.

 

[Harpo]

That's just lazy parking, they'll easily fit in a standard space.

If the driver is capable, a related topic with Seriously Ugly Vehicles. (SUV for short.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the driver is capable, a related topic with Seriously Ugly Vehicles. (SUV for short.)

The best fix for this is for parking companies to make money penalising people who park like that. Win win for those who can drive correctly.

I read of a car park doing this recently and had a giggle.

 

[norbitonflyer]

I have long thought that making the cost of parking permits dependent on emissions is not logical - any car is zero-emission when it is parked. It has led to some unintended consequences - I know a two-car family in which the big seven seater family car is used for the daily commute, so only the smaller city car needs a permit. Why not make the cost of parking permits dependent on length?

 

[E27007]

Yes. You're less likely to see a small child, and they're more likely to go under rather than over as they would on a lower car.

Plus the front of the SUV is at the correct height to cause head injuries to a child, also "back over" injuries, the length blindzone behind an SUV leads to young children being run over as the vehicle is reversed on driveways.

Backovers reversing SUVs