logo
The punitive diesel pickup truck tax coming for Britain's farmers

The punitive diesel pickup truck tax coming for Britain's farmers

Telegraph4 hours ago
While sales of demonised diesel cars continue to plummet in the face of large tax rises, there is a strange blip in the market which has seen a surge in popularity for some of the largest and most polluting vehicles – pickup trucks.
However, this blip is set to slip in the face of new taxes, sending pickup sales crashing. But is it fair, and how can those who genuinely need these versatile vehicles drive one without picking up a whopping bill?
The reason for their popularity was a simple tax loophole. Pickups with a payload of more than 1000kg were classified as commercial vehicles. That meant the Inland Revenue would only charge a flat rate for the perk of having the vehicle for personal use, the same as applied to any van.
As that flat rate would include any accessories, many drivers would choose a pickup as their company car, ticking the box for the most expensive model, laden with the largest capacity V6 (or larger) engine and every optional extra. These four-door, five-seater 'double cab' variants have all the practicality of a large SUV and can cost £65,000, although their owners will have been paying the same tax as a florist with an ageing Fiesta van.
400 per cent tax increase
But now the loophole has been closed. Since April 2025, double cab pickups are classed as cars for company drivers, which means they are taxed based on the official exhaust emissions. This inevitably puts these heavy, bluff-fronted vehicles in the highest taxation category and means the keeper could experience a tax increase of more than 400 per cent.
On the big-selling Ford Ranger Wildtrak, for example, a higher rate 40 per cent taxpayer will now be faced with a bill of £8,322 per year rather than the £1,608 they would have paid previously.
It's about time, say some campaigners, who have long thought the loophole was being used by drivers who had no need for a pickup and yet were paying less company car benefit tax per year for driving a 3.0-litre diesel truck than they would for a 1.0-litre Fiat 500.
The Green Party's Jenny Jones says: 'It's clear that some drivers were using the tax benefits intended for genuine businesses to subsidise their choice of the most polluting and inefficient diesel pickups. It is reasonable for the tax system to recognise that and encourage people to switch to more efficient vehicles.
'Genuine business users who need a pickup will still have access to tax concessions, while the new increasing number of electric and hybrid commercial vehicles offer more sustainable alternatives for everyone.'
Genuine business users
But inevitably it has gone down badly with those who feel they need a double-cab pickup for their business – particularly the farming community, who are already feeling victimised by other punitive new taxes.
The National Farmers' Union deputy president David Exwood says: 'Farmers and growers rely on double cab pickups every single day to go about their farming duties and there are few vehicles that can be used as an alternative. This means that, if plans to reclassify them as cars are not changed, many will face an unaffordable tax. This will add to the financial burden farmers are already straining under and hinder our ability to produce the nation's food.'
To try and placate the business users and soften the blow, the Government has given an unusually generous transition period. Any business which bought, leased or ordered a double cab pickup before 6 April 2025 will be allowed to keep the old tax rate until 5 April 2029, even if the truck is allocated to a new driver. However, if it is sold or the lease expires, the new owner won't get the same tax benefit.
Are they really cars?
The rules also only apply to double cab pickups, which have seats behind the driver. The official HMRC guidance categorises a vehicle as a car if it 'has side windows behind the driver and passenger doors […] particularly if it is fitted, or is capable of being fitted, with additional seating behind […] the driver'.
This means the more utilitarian vehicles used by the largest businesses will not be affected. Filip Czajkowski, spokesman for one of the biggest pickup makers, Isuzu, says: 'We've not seen a major difference in sales following the April benefit-in-kind tax changes. A major part of our customer base is fleets, where the vehicles are only used as work vehicles, with no personal use, so the tax doesn't apply. These will be the major energy providers, rail maintenance et cetera.'
Other makers are taking a different route, reflecting what's happening in the car market by introducing hybrid or even pure electric double cab pickups. Ford's new plug-in hybrid (PHEV) Ranger is seen as particularly competitive because it maintains the 3,500kg towing ability of the diesel version. This is essential for many users, who love a pickup's ability to effortlessly haul everything from horseboxes to racing cars.
Hybrid and full electric
The new Ranger PHEV has official emissions of 68g/km – less than the 1.0-litre Fiat 500 mentioned earlier – based on the fact it can be plugged in and cover some miles on electric power rather than using its 2.3-litre petrol engine. That means it is taxed at 19 per cent compared with the diesel's 37 per cent, slashing the tax bill from £8,322 to £4,191 for a higher rate payer.
If that's still too much, there is the full electric route. Isuzu has revealed an EV version of its popular D-Max, with the first customer deliveries due in early 2026. The tax bill for the 2026/27 year will be only £1,123 for those 40 per cent payers, although the trade-off is a range of only 163 miles – and much less if you are using its 3,500kg towing capability.
We will be spared the 'ultimate' electric pickup in the UK, however, Tesla's massive Cybertruck is not legal to drive on British roads due to its size, weight and sharp-edged bodywork. There are also no plans to bring Ford's six-metre long, three-tonne F-150 Lightning electric.
Which is just as well – it would be ironic if the tax aimed at ridding British roads of big, bling pickups resulted in an influx of even larger and more ostentatious models.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Starmer and Zelensky say Alaska talks present a ‘viable chance' for Ukraine
Starmer and Zelensky say Alaska talks present a ‘viable chance' for Ukraine

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

Starmer and Zelensky say Alaska talks present a ‘viable chance' for Ukraine

UK Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer and Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky met in Downing Street on Thursday, affirming their 'strong resolve' to achieve a just and lasting peace in Ukraine. It comes ahead of a scheduled meeting between US President Donald Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin in Alaska on Friday to discuss a potential ceasefire in Ukraine. Downing Street said both Sir Keir and Mr Zelensky agreed that the Alaska talks 'present a viable chance to make progress as long as [Mr] Putin takes action to prove he is serious about peace'. However, there are concerns that the US and Russia might attempt to decide the war's conclusion without Ukraine's direct participation. Mr Trump has warned of "severe consequences" if the Russian leader does not agree to peace, while Mr Putin has hinted at discussions on nuclear arms control.

What a cheek! The US is in no position to lecture us about free speech
What a cheek! The US is in no position to lecture us about free speech

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

What a cheek! The US is in no position to lecture us about free speech

In the spirit of free speech, I suppose we have to allow other countries to express their concerns about life in Britain, even though it's none of their business and is diplomatic bad manners. However, it is impudent of the Trump administration, currently engaged in dismantling the constitution of the United States, to issue a patronising school report on the state of human rights in the United Kingdom. Every so often, the Americans, whose system of laws owes much to the British, like to tell us we're no longer a free people. 'Sod off' is the instinctive and succinct British reaction to such treatment, but I shall endeavour to elaborate. In the document, produced by the US State Department, Britain is chastised for a human rights scene that has apparently 'worsened' over the past year. From the lofty moral heights occupied by Donald Trump, 'specific areas of concern" are raised, including restrictions on political speech deemed "hateful" or "offensive". The Americans are especially censorious about the way the government responded to the horrendous murder of three children in Southport last year, and the subsequent violence. This constituted, or so we are lectured, an "especially grievous example of government censorship". The UK is thus ticked off: 'Censorship of ordinary Britons was increasingly routine, often targeted at political speech". Bloomin' cheek! What the Americans don't like is that we have laws against inciting racial, religious and certain other types of hatred. Well, first, tough. That's how we prefer to run things to promote a civilised multicultural society. Second, they might do well to consider our way, which is not to pretend that there is ever any such thing as 'absolute' free speech. Encouraging people to burn down a hotel of refugees is not, in Britain, a price worth paying for 'liberty'. Although never stated explicitly, it seems that the State Department is upset about the now totemic case of Lucy Connolly, colloquially regarded in both the UK and the US as 'locking someone up for a tweet'. Connolly was sentenced to 31 months' incarceration under laws consistent with international human rights obligations, which obviously include the protection of free speech. It was more than one message on social media that landed Connolly in the dock, the most famous of which went as follows: 'Mass deportation now. Set fire to all the f***ing hotels full of the bastards for all I care. While you're at it, take the treacherous government and politicians with them. I feel physically sick knowing what these families will now have to endure. If that makes me racist, so be it.' It was up for three hours and read 310,000 times so not trivial. But there's more. According to the recent court of appeal review of her case, and before the Southport attacks, Connolly posted a response to a video which had been shared online by the far-right activist Tommy Robinson, real name Stephen Laxley-Lennon, showing a black male being tackled to the ground for allegedly masturbating in public. She wrote: 'Somalian, I guess. Loads of them', with a vomiting emoji. On 3 August 2024, five days after the attacks, Connolly posted a further message in response to an anti-racism protest in Manchester: 'Oh good. I take it they will all be in line to sign up to house an illegal boat invader then. Oh sorry, refugee. Maybe sign a waiver to say they don't mind if it's one of their family that gets attacked, butchered, raped etc, by unvetted criminals. Not all heroes wear capes.' Two days later, Connolly sent a WhatsApp message to a friend saying: 'The raging tweet about burning down hotels has bit me on the arse lol.' She went on to say later that, if she got arrested, she would 'play the mental health card'. So that is some extra background on the case of Lucy Connolly, and nor should we forget that she was sending inflammatory messages during the worst civil disorder in years. Of course, the great irony about the 2024 riots is that they were caused by what you might call 'too much free speech'. The entirely false rumour promoted on social media was that the killer, Axel Rudakubana, was a Muslim asylum seeker who had virtually just got off a boat before setting off to commit a terrorist offence. None of that was true, but it was stated near enough as fact by people 'just asking questions' with no official interference or 'censorship' whatsoever in free speech Britain. There was no 'cover-up' of the perpetrator's status because Rudakubana was born in Britain. At his trial, it was established that his massacre was not motivated by any political, religious or racial motive but by an obsession with sadistic violence. Had this propaganda about Rudakubana been banned, a great deal of needless anger, distress, and damage would have been avoided. And what of America? Where you can be refused entry or deported for your political views, and without due process, violations of the ancient rule of habeas corpus. Where the president rules by decree and can attempt to strike out the birthright clause in the Constitution by executive order? Where the Supreme Court is packed with sympathetic judges who give him immunity from prosecution, and the president ignores court orders in any case. A land where there is no human rights legislation, no international commitments to the rights of man, where the media is cowed and the universities intimidated? Where the president dictates what is shown in museums, how history is taught and where the historic struggles of people of colour are disparaged as woke nonsense. A country where gerrymandering is a national sport. Where science is being abolished and statisticians sacked for reporting bad news. America is in a state of incipient authoritarian rule and is in no position to criticise anyone about freedom and liberty. The British should tell them all that, but we're too polite.

A ferry link between Scotland and France could be one step closer
A ferry link between Scotland and France could be one step closer

The Independent

time16 minutes ago

  • The Independent

A ferry link between Scotland and France could be one step closer

A ferry linking Scotland to Europe could be one step closer to reality after a key border obstacle may be resolved. Ferry operator DFDS is planning on launching a service between the town of Rosyth in Fife, Scotland, and Dunkirk in France, as early as spring 2026, allowing for both passengers and freight to be transported between the countries. The route is nicknamed 'Project Brave', and was first proposed in 2022. If instated, the journey could take up to 20 hours, making it among the longest in Europe. One of the main barriers to the project was the need for certain goods to be processed at a border control post. Building a new facility at Rosyth was deemed expensive and unnecessary. DFDS proposed using the existing border control post at Grangemouth, in Scotland, instead, however local politicians say a new UK-EU deal could mean that checks at the posts would no longer be needed. In May, prime minister Keir Starmer confirmed a new agreement with the European Union, which means food and drink can be more easily imported and exported 'by reducing the red tape'. Goods are expected to flow more freely as some routine checks on animal and plant products will be removed. Negotiations are ongoing with the EU to determine specific requirements. Scottish MP Graeme Downie said this week that the new deal could bypass the need for border control posts, according to the Dunfermline Press, but temporary use of Grangemouth will be required for the ferry to launch by spring 2026. 'A regular passenger and freight ferry service from Rosyth to Dunkirk would be an incredible boon for the Dunfermline and Scottish economy, making trade easier as well as making it simpler for people from Europe to visit the kingdom of Fife," he said. 'These matters can be complex but we have taken a huge stride towards making this ferry service a reality.' Secretary of state for Scotland, Ian Murray, has written to Steve Reed, secretary of state for environment, food and rural affairs, detailing how the ferry service could launch without the new border control point, the local paper reported. He asked that for an 'urgent' amendment to the current model, and thanked Mr Murray for his support in finding a temporary workaround. '[The] efforts make it more likely a passenger and freight ferry to Dunkirk could begin as soon as next year,' he said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store