CONVERTED VANS AND PURCHASE TAX SIR,—I wonder if it really
is fair that 'a do-it-yourself conversion of a motor-van into a shooting brake should attract purchase tax' (Mr. Hunt). I wonder if it is even expedient: I know it is silly. Take my case.
I am poor, but I am skilful. I want another car.
I can buy a used van 'and, using my own tools, facilities and skill—my own, mark you—'convert' it into just what I want, at a price I can pay. But they want to tax me on it.
Fair. Why should I be charged for my own work, done for my own enjoyment? When, after my hard work, I extract the vegetables I want from my patch of clay, am 1 taxed? If 1 make my nieces a piggy-bank, do the Excise claim 30 per cent: (or 15 per cent. if it's used for razor blades)? Are they afraid that what the amateur does for himself some professional may turn into a racket? That's up to them to see to; why should I pay for their incompetence?
Expedient. If they tax me for it, will the job be worth my while? Probably my present car will rattle on, and someone else buy the van, as a van. Nobody, not the Treasury, will have gained anything, and one subject, at least, will have lost. Now look at it this way. If the Treasury discourages me from using up old stuff economically, it's encouraging waste. Silly. The intention is to put a 'conversion' on the same tax-footing as a car of the same year. But do you know what happens if I convert a pre-Aar van to a pre-war (and so untaxed) 'car'? Why, I PO tax at a higher rate than I should on a brand-new 1958 one.—Yours faithfully,
4 Stable Cottages, Buchan Hill, Crawley, Sussex
A s. HOBS
Previous page
