Quite

Teachers and police officers will not have a national exemption from a controversial workplace parking tax agreed by the SNP and Greens, under plans lodged in the Scottish Parliament.

The Scottish Greens tabled amendments to a Transport Bill, agreed with the Scottish Government, that will allow councils to introduce the new levy.

They included a “national exemption” for hospitals and NHS properties and, following complaints from doctors and charities, specified this should include GP practices and hospices.

Blue badge holders will also not have to pay the charge but pleas by teachers and other groups that they should be extended the same privilege fell on deaf ears.

How wide should the exemption be? Politicians? Bureaucrats? Employees of vital exporting firms? Members of political parties?

36 thoughts on “Quite”

  1. Good to see the SNP death-wish made manifest to all. This latest piece of lunacy should finish them off nicely.

  2. Bloke in Germany in(vading) Austria

    Kevin, are you sure enough of their voters are in gainful employment to make much difference to the vote?

  3. Don’t you just love the way that there are so many groups who are rather keen to inflict this on other people but want a get out just for themselves. Similar to the various eco hypocrites who think that other people should stop flying.

  4. That ‘Celtic Tiger’ economy, eh?

    1. Make it harder/more expensive for people who pay taxes to get to work
    2. ???
    3. Profit!

    By coincidence, many Scottish Parliamentarians have never knowingly done an honest day’s work in their puffs. It’s the same Yooni -> Political bag-carrier -> Elected representative pipeline that’s yielded such unimpressive results at Westminster.

    Mibbe they need some sort of pest control measure like they do for deer and grouse? Charge a pretty penny for blokes called Jonty to bag a few would-be MSP’s.

  5. How wide should the exemption be?

    All State employees should be exempt. Why should they pay for a policy they introduced? It goes against all the principles of Progressivism!

    BTW politicians will be exempt – they will simply pass it off on expenses.

  6. If a blue badge holder has a job and a privileged parking space why should he not pay? Don’t they wanna be treated equally?

  7. Rhoda: Exactly. The blue badge system is to make parking spaces available in more convenient places for the disabled, not to give them free parking. That some local authorities do make it free for them seems to have made people think it should be for all.

  8. Surreptitious Evil

    Would it apply to military personnel who live on base?

    They certainly aren’t included in the “National Exemptions” section – but a local authority could exempt them.

    I would suspect that people living on the married patch should be exempt but singlies (or married unaccompanied) would be caught.

  9. Ah Scotland, a toxic mix of Calvinism, socialism, envy, stupidity, incompetence and bad weather. I support Scottish independence.

  10. They’re taxing people to park at work?

    What. The. Fuck?

    Is Scotland in a position where they can do all sorts of stupid shit and just get bailed out by England? It seems like they’ve been given all sorts of powers but fuck all responsibility.

    It feels like everyday I read about someway the West is becoming more and more tinpot, little by little, like a frog in a pan on the stove.

  11. Climate change is an imminent disaster, but NHS staff and people with blue badges are exempt from any action we take to avert this imminent world catastrophe, for some reason I am not currently aware of.

    Some crisis, eh?

  12. If putting this tax on car parking actually did what they claim it should do, and everyone stopped driving to work, they wouldn’t introduce the tax in the first place.

    Governments tax things to raise revenue, and they tax things they know will still be around in ten years time. Governments have taxed alcohol for centuries for precisely this reason.

  13. Sadly this cancer will only spread. Nottingham has a WPL see https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-47177240
    All the usual virtue signalling councils looking to fund their diversity advisers are fully on board. It has the advantage for councils that a lot of people who pay the tax will not be their voters. But a nationwide scheme, as in Scotland, is another thing altogether.

  14. Scots seemingly love and consistently vote for socialism be it ZaNu or ZaNu escapees the SNP.

    What have they got to complain about. They vote for thieves and parasites.

  15. I remember this being proposed by Blair’s Government in the 2000’s.

    The idea was that employees with access to free parking were benefiting from a benefit-in-kind (as not all employees everywhere had free parking).

    Rule 1 should be that MP’s are treated the same as everyone else. No expenses workaround, no exections.

  16. Dennis the Peasant

    One of the side benefits of reading Tim’s blog is the constant reminder of just how lucky I am to be on this side of the Atlantic.

  17. It is another chunk of the globo-elite’s plan to impoverish ordinary folk.

    Petrol tax boosts like that shite Macron, congestion/emission charges like those two other chunks of shite BoJo and Sad Dick Khan.

    Now parking taxes. All designed to price you out of a car and force folk down the employment/poverty scale.

    Time to tell then to fuck off. Tartan Jackets prepare!.

  18. Would it apply to military personnel who live on base?

    Only if gate guards allows SNP prodnoses on site*; even off-base personnel would benefit. Bases are MOD Crown property. Also, Soldiers etc based in Scotland have had a pay increase to cover SNP’s higher income tax rates – Northern Ireland Yeomanry are currently based in Edinburgh.

    * They’re reluctant to allow TV Licensing on base and the delay between arrival and request eventually reaching base CO maybe approving allows all to prepare.

  19. As a sometime blue badge holder I rather like not paying in some car parks.
    Often the disabled parking (if can find a space) is not close to the payment machine. More walking is painful.

    Disabled appear to not want equality, they want to be treated special.
    And do not forget, most disabled do not get a blue badge.

  20. @Ian
    Ah Scotland, a toxic mix of Calvinism, socialism, envy, stupidity, incompetence and bad weather. I support Scottish independence.

    You forgot the midgies 🙂

  21. Dennis the Peasant

    Andrew C –

    It is best to check before gloating.

    The two taxes are completely different… starting with the fact that the US tax is on businesses providing parking spaces for employees and the Porridge Wog tax being levied on individuals for parking to go to work. There are other differences as well.

    So, other than the fact that really aren’t close to being the same thing, you’ve nailed it. Nice try, though.

  22. DtP

    How come the free office space, desk, and heating and lighting aren’t taxed?? I’d a thought that it’s all “infrastructure needed in the corporations view to support their business”. True, these all benefit employees (esp the heating and cooling for single folk) but they’re ‘necessary to do the job’ not ‘benefits in kind’. surely?

  23. “The two taxes are completely different… starting with the fact that the US tax is on businesses providing parking spaces for employees and the Porridge Wog tax being levied on individuals for parking to go to work.”

    Silly Dennis. It really is best to check before gloating.

    Both taxes are on businesses providing parking for employees. Even if you couldn’t be bothered to look, did you honestly think councils and municipal authorities are going to bother tracking floating individuals?

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-47089134

  24. @DtP

    It’s best to check before trying to wriggle your way out of not checking before gloating.

    “The budget deal agreed between the Scottish government and Scottish Greens will allow councils to introduce a workplace parking levy (WPL).

    This would see employers pay an annual tax to the council for every parking space they provide for employees.”

    So the US tax is on business and the UK tax is on business. I am sure if you look hard enough you can find differences (look, one is in $ and the other in £!!!) but we were talking about the existence tax on employees parking.

  25. Dennis the Peasant

    So the US tax is on business and the UK tax is on business. I am sure if you look hard enough you can find differences (look, one is in $ and the other in £!!!) but we were talking about the existence tax on employees parking.

    Ok, you got me on the Porridge Wog tax. I mistook the wording I’d read to mean it was paid by the individual and not the business. But it doesn’t change anything… Read and learn, son.

    I’ve read the proposed IRS regs – and you haven’t – and if you knew enough about US tax law to interpret them – which you don’t – you’d understand that what the new tax law is taxing an previously untaxed employee benefit,,, and not tax employee parking per se. There is a difference and it is important. The key is that the company must come up with a valuation for the benefit and that will generate the tax… and for the vast majority of companies that will be valuation will approach zero.

    For example, JP Morgan Chase has a service center less than five miles from where I am. On any work day there will be between 10,000 and 12,000 working in the building. Chase has a three level parking area that is connected to the building itself: 8,000 parking spaces. Value? Close to zero. Why? First, the land is owned by Chase. Second, the parking facility is an integral part of the building proper. Third, there are no parking lots anywhere around the facility. It is in a mixed use area teeming with apartments, stores and a very large mall. Those apartments and businesses provide parking for their tenants and customers. There is no economic justification to building a commercial parking lot. The land the Chase parking lot is on could not be developed in any manner other than Chase expanding its facility… which it wouldn’t do without an appropriate level of parking.

    If the IRS attempted to value the Chase parking, it would be entirely arbitrary. They have no large scale parking lots within ten miles in any direction to use for valuation purposes. The tax courts don’t like arbitrary valuations and the IRS is well aware of that fact. Also, the parking Chase is providing – and this is a key element – is not discriminatory. All employees have access to the parking lot… not just some.

    When you read the proposed regs what you see is the IRS taking aim at companies located in very dense urban areas where companies do not own or operate parking facilities, but rather purchase parking space from third parties for their employees. Think a law firm in Manhattan, or downtown Boston, or the north side of Chicago, etc. Those firms don’t buy parking spaces for all their employees… the paralegals and secretaries aren’t driving in the first place. No those firms are shelling out $50K or more a year to buy parking spaces for the partners. That’s an untaxed employee benefit. If the spaces paid for are for the use by only certain employees, it is an employee benefit provided to the individual and is now going to be taxed. The decision to tax the business rather than the individual has more to do with the drive to do away with itemized individual tax returns than anything else.

    The IRS isn’t going to swoop in and demand GM pay tax on the parking they provide at an assembly plant. Nor are they going to demand the Apple value and pay tax on the parking they provide at the company campus. That’s why there is absolutely no thunder coming from any of the large companies that have parking integrated into their facilities.

    What you did was pull an NiV. You did the Google Fu thing to find an article in order to shoot down a snide comment I’d made. Then you presented that article as accurate and correct without understanding it or the subject matter.

    The Councils now have the power to enact a flat tax on any and all employer provided parking, right? That’s not what the US tax does, and the proof is in how the IRS is writing the regs for the tax that was enacted. So, other than the fact that you’ve got it completely wrong, you’ve really nailed my ass to the floorboards on this one.

  26. Dennis the Peasant

    How come the free office space, desk, and heating and lighting aren’t taxed?? I’d a thought that it’s all “infrastructure needed in the corporations view to support their business”. True, these all benefit employees (esp the heating and cooling for single folk) but they’re ‘necessary to do the job’ not ‘benefits in kind’. surely?

    See my post above. Andrew C and PJF haven’t a clue about the what the US tax actually does.

  27. Dennis the Peasant

    On more thing: Did you bother to look at who Streetsblog USA (the source you linked to) is?

    Streetsblog is a daily news site that connects people to information about how to reduce dependence on cars and improve conditions for walking, biking, and transit. Since 2006, our reporters have broken important stories about efforts to prevent pedestrian injuries and deaths, build out bicycle networks, and make transit more useful. Our writing raises the profile of these issues with policy makers and makes arcane topics like parking requirements and induced traffic accessible to a broad audience.

    Today, hundreds of thousands of readers rely on Streetsblog and our video production partners at Streetfilms to link into a national movement for transportation reform. Streetsblog USA, New York City, Los Angeles, San Francisco, California, Chicago, and Denver produce original reporting and commentary that aims to change the cars-first status quo on their cities’ streets. We also work with regional partners in St. Louis, Ohio, Texas, and the southeast to provide updates and insights into local transportation policy issues.

    Streetsblog USA covers federal transportation and land use policy, as well as stories around the country about how to reform our highway-centric model of transportation and development. Our daily readers include Beltway decision makers, transportation policy experts, transit advocates, urban planners, and people who just want better walking, biking, and transit for their neighborhoods.

    Streetsblog USA is produced by OpenPlans, a 501c3 non-profit organization. We are funded by foundation grants, sponsorships and advertising, and generous donations from readers like you.

    Kinda sounds like TRUK for driving and parking, doesn’t it?

    Any mention of expertise in tax law in the above?

  28. @DtP

    The proposed SNP tax would also apply to a firm that rented parking spaces as you describe.

    Everyone else is seeing

    employer: parking space: tax

    If you want to spend ages forensically examining the taxes to point out diffences to make yourself feel better about having misunderstood the SNP proposal, help yourself. I couldn’t even be bothered to read what you wrote.

  29. I couldn’t even be bothered to read what you wrote.

    The NiV style essay response was pretty amusing. Even more amusing in a sad sort of way was when checking the background of the US approach, it really does show how utterly fucked up they are by Byzantine tax laws. At least the shit UK system is simple.

    Dennis needs his quota of anti-Brit drivebys to distract him from the US having a good chance of being more ruined than we are.

  30. @Dennis the Peasant May 11, 2019 at 9:29 pm

    “The Councils now have the power to enact a flat tax on any and all employer provided parking, right?”

    Correct. Thanks for explaining USA IRS implementation, sounds much fairer, but still vindictive.

  31. Bloke in Aberdeen

    I think our dear leaders have also legislated that any new building can’t have more than a certain number of parking spaces (a % of the occupancy). This means the proposed new stadium up here (to be just out of town) will have space for far fewer cars than is needed, despite the land being plentiful and the public transport non existent.

  32. @Bloke in Aberdeen May 13, 2019 at 4:09 pm

    Correct. When Napier Uni (Edinburgh) expanded Craiglockhart campus, planning approval stipulated Napier had to Reduce number of parking spaces.

    Loons running Asylum.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *