Appendix: Government response
Government response to Environmental Audit Committee
report on Vehicle Excise Duty as an environmental tax
1. We agree with the Exchequer Secretary: the
rebanding of cars bought since 2001 is not retrospective taxation.
The only retrospective element in these changes is that the new
rates will apply to cars that have already been bought. In itself
there is nothing intrinsically unfair or unusual about this. Variable
VED was first introduced in 1999 and the creation of new bands,
with the single exception of Band G, has always been applied to
cars already purchased. (Paragraph 12)
The Government welcomes the Committee's report on
Vehicle Excise Duty as an Environmental Tax. The Committee continues
to provide a constructive focus on environmental issues.
The Government welcomes the acknowledgement from
the Committee that the 2008 Budget changes to Vehicles Excise
Duty (VED) are not retrospective. As confirmed in the Pre-Budget
Report, the changes will only come into effect from April 2009
and the duty will not apply to previous tax years.
The aim of these reforms is to ensure that when people
choose a lower-carbon car they will be rewarded financially. As
the Committee notes, it is important that the environmental signal
within VED applies in the second-hand market—where around
three quarters of purchases are made each year—as well as
in the new car market.
The CO2-based VED system has been designed
in order to respond to changes in fuel efficiency in vehicle manufacture.
With forthcoming EU targets on cutting average new car emissions,
it is important that the UK maintains the flexibility to respond
to these changes through the VED system. However, if every time
that new VED bands were introduced they could only be applied
to new cars, the Government could potentially end up introducing
multiple systems which would greatly undermine the clarity and
consistency of the overall regime, as well as creating administrative
burdens for business and the Driver and Vehicle Licensing Agency
(DVLA).
For these reasons, and others identified by the Committee,
the principle that VED changes should apply to existing cars remains
sound.
However, in order to reduce pressures on motorists
during the current economic downturn, the Government recognises
that it is no longer appropriate to take forward the major changes
to taxes announced at Budget in April 2009. Therefore, in the
Pre-Budget Report 2008, the Government announced that there will
be no significant rate changes in CO2-based VED until
2010. As a result of this announcement:
- in 2009, no driver will pay
more than £5 extra in 2009;
- in 2010, no driver will pay more than £30
extra, and many in the lower bands will see a £30 tax cut.
A majority of drivers will pay the same or less than in 2009.
The Pre-Budget Report also confirmed the introduction
of differential first-year rates of VED in 2010, to strengthen
the signal to consumers at the point of purchase that they can
save money by buying a lower emitting new car.
2. We are not aware of any hard evidence about
the numbers of those affected by a doubling of VED rates who are
on lower incomes. We recommend the Treasury publish a detailed
analysis of the financial effects of VED on different income distributions
so that the impact of any future changes to VED can be more easily
understood. (Paragraphs 20, 22)
In 1997, there was only one VED band, meaning that
all car owners were taxed the same amount, regardless of the type
of car that they drove. By introducing and then reforming graduated
VED since 2001, the Government has made the system less regressive,
as well as ensuring that the most polluting cars pay more than
the least polluting.
The Government does not possess comprehensive evidence
linking specific levels of household income to the VED rate, in
the way that is available for other taxes. However, National Travel
Survey (NTS) data strongly suggests that low-income households
are likely to be either unaffected by, or benefit from VED changes,
whereas high-income households are more likely to face tax increases.
The Pre-Budget Report announced that these tax increases will
be a maximum of £30 in any one year.
The data in this table confirms that low-income households
are less likely to own a car. Indeed over half of the households
in the bottom income quintile do not own a car at all.
Furthermore, low-income households—if they
do own cars—are more likely to own cars registered before
2001 than high-income households. Around one third of the total
UK car fleet is made up of pre-2001 cars, and these are not subject
to the CO2-based VED regime, as there is no consistent
information available in relation to their CO2 emissions.
NTS data shows that over 30 per cent of cars owned by households
in the lowest income quintile are over 10 years old, compared
with only 15 per cent of cars owned by households in the highest
income quintile.
The Pre-Budget Report announced a £5 increase
in both the lower and higher rates for pre-2001 cars, in line
with the changes announced to main VED rates. It also announced
that in 2010, the higher rate will increase by £15 and the
lower rate will be frozen. As a result of these changes, none
of these cars will pay more in real terms in 2010, than in 1997.
Of cars that have been registered after 2001 and
are therefore subject to the CO2-based VED regime,
NTS data also suggests that low-income households are generally
more likely to own cars in the lower VED bands, and high-income
households are more likely to own cars in the higher VED bands.
Over 60 per cent of cars owned by households in the lowest income
quintile are in the current bands B to D. The data in Table 2
confirms that the overall correlation between car cost and VED
band is extremely strong: in general, cars in higher VED bands
are likely to cost more.
Table 2: Average cost of new cars within VED bands, from data provided by JATO Dynamics, 2007
| 2008-9 band | Sales-weighted average car price[1] in 2007
|
| Band B | £11,000
|
| Band C | £12,000
|
| Band D | £16,000
|
| Band E | £18,000
|
| Band F | £24,000
|
| Band G | £42,000
|
3. We welcome the fact that those on higher rate disability
benefit are exempt from paying VED, and can have their cars paid
for them through the Motability scheme. However, we are concerned
that this will leave many people, who do not qualify for the higher
rate disability benefit, still having to pay VED; many of this
group may need a larger vehicle to accommodate wheelchairs or
medical equipment. We recommend that the Treasury urgently reviews
the impacts of VED changes on disabled people and their carers,
and takes steps to ensure they are not financially disadvantaged.
In particular, we recommend the Treasury considers extending the
exemption on paying VED to all recipients of disability benefit.
(Paragraph 23)
The Government provides a package of measures that help support
disabled people, including benefits, tax credits and other disability-related
financial support. Disability Living Allowance (DLA), a main source
of direct financial support provided to disabled people, is designed
to take into consideration additional living costs and is available
to adults and children who need help getting around and/or have
care needs because of severe illness or disability. The care component
of DLA is available at three rates and the mobility component
at two rates—both are awarded according to the level of
need. The higher rate mobility component of DLA is targeted on
those who are unable or virtually unable to walk.
Those on the higher rate mobility component of DLA
and those receiving the War Pensioners Mobility Supplement can
claim an exemption from paying VED. As of June 2008, over 1.1
million disabled people were claiming the exemption. An exemption
from VED is also available for vehicles in the Disabled Passenger
Vehicle taxation class, used by organisations concerned with the
care of mentally or physically disabled people. The exemptions
are deliberately targeted at those with disabilities that severely
impair mobility. To extend the VED exemptions to further groups
would include those
who are not mobility impaired.
Receipt of the higher rate mobility component of
DLA and the War Pensioners Mobility Supplement also confers eligibility
to the Motability scheme, which provides help in buying or leasing
a car, and associated assistance such as the helping to meet the
costs of vehicle adaptations.
The Government also provides other support to disabled
people, such as VAT relief. The leasing or hiring of certain equipment
and vehicles may qualify for VAT relief, and other goods may also
qualify if the item has been designed or adapted solely for a
disabled person's use. This includes some medical appliances,
certain adjustable beds and hoists and some adapted vehicles.
The local authorities-administered Blue Badge scheme
also provides a range of parking benefits for disabled people
with severe walking difficulties who travel either as drivers
or as passengers. Disabled people are also entitled to a discount
of up to a third on rail travel, and concessionary bus fares.
The Government believes its current approach to the
provision of assistance to disabled people—including the
exemption from VED for the mobility impaired—is the fairest
way to go about offering targeted support to those that are in
greatest need of it.
4. We recommend that VED bands and carbon emissions
should be made clearly visible to prospective buyers of second-hand
cars. (Paragraph 27)
The labelling scheme for new cars was launched by
the Government in 2005, in conjunction with the Society of Motor
Manufacturers and Traders (SMMT) and the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership
(LowCVP). Participation in the scheme by car showrooms has steadily
increased, to the extent that 91 per cent of showrooms now use
the labels on their vehicles. The labels are designed to provide
information—including on overall fuel consumption, VED rates
and CO2 emissions—to consumers in as clear, consistent
and useful a way as possible, and their introduction was welcomed
by the King Review.
The scheme supports the UK's implementation of the
EU directive on car labelling, under which manufacturers are required
to provide clear information on fuel consumption and CO2
emission figures for new vehicles at the point of sale.
The Department for Transport and the Treasury are
actively looking at the current label design in the context of
reforms to VED, along with SMMT and LowCVP. This work is being
taken forward via the LowCVP Passenger Car Working Group. The
Department for Transport is currently working with industry to
ensure that any future rollout of the label into the second-hand
market is effective and useful for consumers.
5. We support the widening of differentials between
VED bands for existing cars. It makes perfect sense to do this
for existing cars, not just new cars, given that this is a way
of influencing buyers of second-hand cars towards choosing models
with lower emissions. This is enormously important, given that
three-quarters of all cars bought each year are second-hand. (Paragraph
29)
6. We were disappointed that the Treasury had
not modelled what impact the rebanding of existing cars will have
on carbon emissions. Presumably this means the Treasury does not
have any idea of what levels of VED will either persuade people
to trade in their existing cars sooner than they would otherwise,
or choose a more efficient model when they next come to buy a
second-hand car. This is particularly surprising given the Exchequer
Secretary told us the changes to VED in the Budget were primarily
made for environmental purposes. We recommend the Treasury urgently
carry out and publish research on the impacts that these and other
potential changes to VED would make to the second-hand car market,
and resultant carbon emissions. (Paragraph 30)
The Government welcomes the Committee's support for
increasing the number of VED bands. The number of bands was increased
in order to improve the financial incentive on motorists to purchase
the cleanest vehicles within their preferred class of car. Under
the current bands, around 30 per cent of cars in graduated VED
fall into just one band, current Band C, which under these reforms
will be split into three separate bands, allowing customers to
make a financial gain of £30 in 2010 by shifting to a more
fuel-efficient version of their preferred car, where previously
they might have paid the same VED rate.
The Government has modelled as much of the carbon
impact of the Budget 2008 changes as is possible given the data
available at this point in time. This modelling by HM Revenue
and Customs was based upon the results of an econometric study
undertaken during 2007 and published in January 2008 by Economics
for the Environment Consultancy (EFTEC). Using a large and uniquely
detailed data set recording new car purchase decisions of households
in the UK, the study analysed how different attributes of a car
(including physical appearance, motoring capabilities and purchase
and running costs) determine households' new car purchasing decisions.
As the Committee heard in its evidence session, this
study only covered impacts in the new car market, and purchases
by individuals, rather than companies. It is therefore likely
that the actual carbon savings could be different. It is also
likely that the level of publicity that these reforms have received
will have contributed to far greater consumer awareness about
the benefits of choosing a lower-emitting car, with concomitant
impact on carbon savings.
However, the Government takes the view that, given
the immediate need to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in order
to meet environmental objectives, it would have been wrong to
wait until further studies are complete before taking forward
the restructuring of VED.
7. We recommend that the Treasury urgently reviews
and consults on how lower income households could be economically
supported to trade in their cars for low emission replacements.
In particular, we recommend that the Treasury urgently examines
the proposal for a "car scrappage scheme", which would
provide payments in return for taking high emission cars off the
road. In any scheme that were implemented, it would be important
to ensure that high emission vehicles were genuinely scrapped—with
as much of their materials recycled as possible—rather than
allowed to stay on the road under different ownership, for instance
in another country. (Paragraph 38)
The Treasury is aware of the French bonus-malus scheme
that rewards motorists for trading in their older, more polluting
cars for less polluting models. However, it is too soon to be
able to tell whether it has been effective in incentivising the
purchase of more fuel-efficient cars. The Government has made
no commitment to legislate for a similar scheme to be introduced
in the UK. Nevertheless, the Government will monitor the results
of the French scheme, and other similar schemes, closely.
The Government agrees with the Committee that, with
any scheme, it would be imperative to get the structure right,
to ensure it was successful in helping to reduce overall emissions.
For example, it would be necessary to avoid paying incentives
to motorists who were already planning on scrapping their vehicles,
creating a deadweight loss.
8. We recommend the Treasury looks again at what
more it could do to ensure that the first-year VED rates are prominently
displayed before and at point of sale, and not simply incorporated
into an "on the road" price. (Paragraph 43)
9. The Treasury must address concerns that the
new system of VED will make the efficiency labelling of cars too
complicated to impact on the public in practice. We recommend
it undertakes research and develops guidance and publicity to
inform traders and consumers. (Paragraph 45)
Although some showrooms may present customers with
an on the road price that does not include the cost of VED, it
should still be clear to buyers what the first-year rate of a
vehicle is. In advance of purchase, vehicle buyers are able to
look at the VED band and corresponding rate for a particular vehicle
on its colour-coded fuel efficiency label, which, as mentioned
above, 91 per cent of showrooms are currently displaying. In many
showrooms, the exact amount of VED payable will also be included
in the paperwork accompanying the car as part of the on the road
price.
As was set out above, the Treasury is working with
the Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership and other government departments
in looking at the current fuel efficiency label design in the
context of reforms to VED, to ensure that the labels continue
to provide clear and consistent information. This work will of
course take into account the introduction of first year rates.
Vehicle buyers are also able to find out about the
emissions level and VED rate for particular vehicles using the
Vehicle Certification Agency's car fuel data website, which identifies
the VED on individual vehicles based on their emissions.
Of course, it may also be in car dealers' interests
to make sure that the customer is aware of the amount of first-year
rate that applies to a new car. If the first-year rate is low,
this will of course be an additional selling point to make to
customers. Indeed, results from a survey undertaken by LowCVP
indicate that dealers are increasingly likely to refer to the
fuel economy label when discussing vehicle options with car buyers.
LowCVP found that over 75 per cent of dealers surveyed made use
of the label in conversations with customers, while 61 per cent
of dealerships made reference to the financial savings illustrated
by the label.
10. We recommend the Treasury commission research
on the impacts, on purchasing decisions and carbon emissions,
of implementing a range of different first-year rates of VED.
(Paragraph 47)
11. Unlike other forms of transport, such as aviation,
very significant cuts in emissions from cars could be made extremely
rapidly, if prospective buyers could be persuaded consistently
to choose the most efficient models in each class that are already
on the market. That the Government could achieve this without
stopping people driving, merely directing their choice of vehicle
to the most efficient available, provides a strong argument for
market intervention—larger differentials and bigger incentives—that
could be robustly conveyed to the public. (Paragraph 48)
12. At the same time, to develop the market for
very low emissions cars, we further recommend that the Treasury
examine the merits of some kind of "feebate" system,
similar to the "bonus/malus" scheme in France, in which
levies on high emission cars are accompanied by subsidies on low
emission cars. (Paragraph 49)
The Government welcomes the Committee's support for
the introduction of differential first-year rates of VED, and
the support for the direction of travel taken in VED reform as
a whole.
In shaping VED policy, the Treasury models a variety
of different possible structures, to assess their impact on business,
as well as on income groups, carbon emissions and Government revenues.
When considering proposals for further increases
to the differentials between VED bands, it is important to take
into account all relevant economic, social and environmental factors,
including proportionality and fairness to motorists, and transparency
and consistency of signals to motorists and manufacturers. Setting
VED rates at levels significantly beyond those announced in Budget
2008, as desired by the Committee, could have disproportionate
effects on certain groups of motorists and manufacturers.
The Government believes the differential first-year
rates announced at Budget and confirmed in the Pre Budget Report
will act as a strong signal to encourage consumers to pick the
most environmentally friendly new car in their preferred class.
Motorists do not necessarily need to buy a car in a different
class of vehicle altogether—for example by switching from
a large Multi Person Vehicle to a smaller supermini—in order
to take advantage of the lower rates on cleaner cars. Large savings
can be made by choosing the vehicle that is environmentally best
in the motorist's preferred class, such as the lowest CO2-emitting
Multi Person Vehicle within that class, or by choosing the lowest
CO2-emitting version of a particular model of car.
For example, the lowest emitting version of the Ford
Focus currently on the market will fall into the new band C in
2009, while the highest emitting version will fall into new band
K. From 2010, motorists buying a brand new car who choose the
former version would pay no VED in the first year in 2010, while
those choosing the latter would pay £550 of VED in the first
year. Similar differentials in the emission levels between different
versions of car models exist among other vehicles.
As the Exchequer Secretary pointed out in evidence
to the Committee, the Government believes that the right approach
is to make gradual changes to the structure of VED rates and thresholds.
This will allow motorists to get used to the recent changes, and
for the Government to be able to assess the change in purchasing
behaviour that takes place as a result of the reforms. The Government
keeps all taxes under review, and maintains the option to alter
the VED structure further in the future in order to meet its environmental
objectives.
13. The Treasury should have taken greater care
to explain that the new VED bands would apply to all vehicles
registered on or after March 1 2001. If the point of green taxes
is to change behaviour, they need to be properly publicised, so
that people are fully aware of what they are being encouraged
to do. A failure to advertise green tax details to the public,
or explain them in a timely manner to Parliament, breeds suspicion
about their objectives, increasing the perception of them as revenue
raising measures with no environmental purpose. (Paragraph 52)
14. We recommend that the Treasury pays far more
attention to communicating the details and objectives of VED—and
other environmental taxes—in the future. (Paragraph 55)
The Government's announcement of Budget 2008 was
made in line with past practice: the reforms were set out in the
environment chapter of the Red Book with accompanying rates tables
in Annex A of the report. Rates were also set out in the Budget
2008 press notice. There has been no shortage of publicity surrounding
the VED reforms announced at Budget 2008 and it is likely that
the level of public awareness around car purchasing choices has
increased as a result.
In light of the high level of public interest in
these reforms, however, at the Pre-Budget Report the Government
has taken steps to ensure that the public are able to access easily
information about VED rates for the next two years. This includes
through:
- information in the Budget document
and press notices, available on the Treasury website;[2]
- information on the specific details of reform
to VED, also available on the Treasury website;[3]
- a Frequently Asked Questions page specific to
the VED reforms on the motoring section of Directgov,[4]
which will help the public to understand which VED rate their
car will be subject to. A link to this is also provided on DVLA's
homepage; or
- contacting DVLA or the Treasury directly.
15. We would further observe that if changes to
VED were introduced on a revenue-neutral basis, with reductions
for low emissions cars matching in value the revenue raised from
increased rates for high emissions vehicles, the policy would
be both more acceptable to the public and could unequivocally
be communicated as green taxation. (Paragraph 56)
Road tax was first introduced in 1910 and has been
used principally as a revenue raising tax since that time. In
March 2001, the Government made the decision to charge it on a
CO2 basis for the first time—making the UK the
first member state in the EU to do so. This change was made so
that, in addition to raising revenue for the Exchequer, VED would
also play a role in incentivising the purchase and manufacture
of lower-carbon vehicles.
The Government does therefore not see VED principally
as an environmental tax, in the same sense as, for example, the
Climate Change Levy, which was set up purely with environmental
purposes; however, it is a tax that is charged on an environmental
basis.
That said, the impetus for the Budget 2008 reforms
was an environmental one: as the Exchequer Secretary said in her
evidence, had the Government simply aimed to raise revenue from
VED, there are considerably more straightforward ways of doing
so. The decision at Pre-Budget Report to maintain the creation
of new bands, underlines this commitment.
The case for increasing the number of VED bands is,
as set out above, one that has been widely supported, including
by SMMT. However, in order for VED to be effective, it is necessary
not only for the number of rates to increase, but for differentials
between the rates to be clear. To achieve this, it remains necessary
to raise some rates, and decrease others.
16. We are surprised that the Treasury has risked
provoking such political opposition for an environmental measure
which, according its own projections, is of limited benefit. We
recommend the Treasury consults on and examines the case for a
much more ambitious reform of VED. While this might provoke more
opposition from those wanting to buy or already owning higher
emissions vehicles, it might also provide the opportunity for
a more positive presentation, based on higher carbon savings and
bigger tax discounts for low emissions vehicles. (Paragraph 63)
As set out above, the Government believes the right
approach is to introduce gradual changes to VED rates and thresholds.
In shaping VED policy, the Government scrutinises a range of options
for reforms to rates and thresholds, taking into account the effects
of each on a variety of factors. As with all tax policy, tax rates
policy will continue to be made in the Pre-Budget Report and Budget.
17. Complementing the use of VED to shift the
market towards more efficient cars, the Government should do much
more to accelerate the development of new vehicle technology (such
as hybrids and fully electric cars); improve public transport
nationally; and encourage the growth of car-sharing clubs and
schemes, especially for groups that are particularly car-dependent,
such as the elderly, disabled, large families, and those in rural
areas. (Paragraph 65)
The Government is working hard to improve the sustainability
of transport in the UK. As the Exchequer Secretary mentioned in
her evidence to the Committee, the reforms to VED are part of
a package aimed at reducing greenhouse gas emissions in the UK.
As part of this package, Budget 2008 announced a £40 million
investment in Research and Development, to encourage the development
of low carbon vehicle concepts. This investment has subsequently
been increased to £100m, with contributions from One North
East and Advantage West Midlands.
The Government also announced in October that, as
part of this £100m programme, motor manufacturers will be
invited to bid for the opportunity to participate in a £10
million project to run electric car and ultra low carbon vehicle
demonstration projects. The Government has also launched new competitions
dedicated to UK research into improving technology that could
make electric and other green cars more practical and affordable.
Furthermore, the Government is calling on the European
Investment Bank to double its financial support for the next generation
of greener cars by making available €8 billion over the next
two years. This support should target significant carbon dioxide
reductions through research, development and innovation expenditure,
as well as improving the energy efficiency of related infrastructure
and production. The funds should be made available quickly on
a fair, equitable and commercial basis across all Member States.
In addition to VED, the tax framework also provides
other incentives for the development, purchase and use of low
carbon fuel-efficient vehicles. Company car tax was reformed in
2002 and is now based on CO2 emissions to encourage
employers and employees to choose less polluting vehicles. Fuel
duty rewards those driving fuel-efficient vehicles with reduced
running costs. The Government also provides tax incentives for
purely electric vehicles, including: an exemption from VED, a
reduction in the percentage used for the calculation of company
car tax and the provision of enhanced capital allowances for companies
purchasing electric and low carbon cars. Electric vehicles also
pay no fuel duty.
Over the last decade, there has been a significant
increase in investment in transport in the UK—by over 70%
in real terms. This investment has contributed to, for example,
the construction of the UK's first high-speed rail link—the
Channel Tunnel Rail Link—and the upgrading of the West Coast
Main Line. In addition, since April 2008, free off-peak bus travel
for older and eligible disabled people has been extended nationally.
Additionally, the Department for Transport encourages
local authorities to include car-based initiatives such as car
clubs and car sharing schemes as part of their local transport
strategies. Car sharing is being specifically promoted by the
DfT as part of its ACT on CO2 campaign. The Department
has also set up Cycling England in 2005, to develop cycling programmes.
The scheme's budget is being increased to £20 million in
the current financial year, and to £60 million in the two
following years. Increased investment such as this, coupled with
reforms to delivery, has ensured significant improvements in the
performance of the transport network.
18. We strongly support the Treasury's use of
VED as an environmental tax, and we welcome the changes announced
in the Budget. However we are seriously concerned that even the
projected differentials between VED bands remain too small to
be effective and, in consequence, the projected carbon savings
are far less than they could be. We also believe that both the
proposed changes in VED rates and the objectives of VED as an
environmental tax, have been poorly explained and communicated.
(Paragraph 66)
19. We recommend the Treasury looks again at hypothecating
VED revenues to areas such as public transport and subsidies for
car clubs or electric vehicles. Alternatively VED changes could
always be made on a revenue neutral basis with cuts in the rates
levied on low emission cars to match the increases on high emission
models. This might increase both the environmental benefits of
VED changes and the level of public support for them. (Paragraph
69)
The Government welcomes the Committee's support for
the use of VED in providing environmental signals.
However, the Government does not hypothecate taxes,
and it remains the case that the Government's spending priorities
are not, in general, determined by the way in which the money
is raised. As the Committee noted in its report on the Pre Budget
Report 2007 and Comprehensive Spending Review, hypothecation of
tax revenues for particular purposes can reduce flexibility in
managing public finances.
It is true that VED does have a double benefit in
that it provides finances for the public services, as well as
encouraging the take-up of low emission vehicles. However, it
makes sense that, when raising revenue to fund public services,
the Government should target those revenue sources that will help
shift the burden of taxation from goods to bads. The polluter-pays
philosophy inherent in the VED system is central to that principle.
HM Treasury
December 2008
1 The average price is the volumes-weighted average
of the retail price, excluding delivery but including all other
taxes and charges (VAT, First Registration Fee and VED). Back
2
www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/prebud_pbr08_index.htm Back
3
http://www.hm-treasury.gov.uk/vehicle_excise_duty.htm Back
4
http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Motoring/OwningAVehicle/HowToTaxYourVehicle/DG_172916 Back
| 
