Cycle To Work Scheme Being Reduced? - UK

Status
Not open for further replies.
The UK C2W scheme is widely abused and should be replaced by a measure which better serves its original purpose.
Click to expand...

I wouldn’t disagree. I think the scheme could be fairer – perhaps applied to lower rate and not the upper rate + NI. Though having said that with Reeves not raising tax allowances until 2031 (is it?) looks like a tax once only paid by senior managers etc, may be paid perhaps by the majority of workers by 2031! That is quite a thought.

A sensible cap, perhaps £5K, which if not raised will be eroded by inflation anyway.

Maybe make it exclusively for bicycle purchases, or only allow other items to be purchased with a bicycle. Which is worthwhile remembering, at the moment,even if you aren’t purchasing a bicycle, you can place an order for clothing, spares and accessories and get tax relief + dodge NI on them.:)

So yes, it is abused. Hey, but whilst it there and if you are an employee, get in there and take advantage – enjoy!:cool:

Wish I still had access! It is outrageous, bicycle shops just won’t give me the 50% off I’m used to! They all seem to expect me to pay the full retail price. Shocking:mad:
 
⚡ EMTB Pro Go Pro — Living Intelligence Reports, exclusive discounts & ad-free Up to 25% off Peaty's, PEMBREE, Magicshine & more · Ad-free browsing · Pro badge See the deals →
RustyMTB said:
Not that it's relevant here but Motability is not widely abused.
Click to expand...
Indeed, and of course, PIP is also an in work benefit too. Last year, even the Draconian DWP measured PIP fraud so small it was measured as zero.

“Fraud and error in the benefits system annual report”

Zero percent fraud rate for PIP, DWP figures show

Get the benefits you're entitled to: help with personal independence payment (PIP), universal credit (UC), employment and support allowance (ESA),disability living allowance (DLA). Claims, assessments, reviews, appeals.
www.benefitsandwork.co.uk www.benefitsandwork.co.uk

The cycle to work scheme is demonstrably taken advantage off by 'some' people who do NOT need a discount, but all eyes appear to be on alleged benefit fraud instead.
 
RustyMTB said:
Not that it's relevant here but Motability is not widely abused.
Click to expand...

Similar abuse to C2W

Google says "Motability's new car market share is approximately 20% to 22%, making it the largest fleet car operator in the UK."
 
Last edited:
Abuse and fraud are two entirely different things though aren't they...I would go further and say abuse is the wrong word in the context of C2W, as a tax break it has it's challenges around accessibility for self employed and those on a lower income, but the additional money it brings into the economy will -eventually- benefit everyone by contributing to UK PLCs overall economic health. IMO at least :)
 
HappyCamperIan said:
Abuse and fraud are two entirely different things though aren't they...I would go further and say abuse is the wrong word in the context of C2W, as a tax break it has it's challenges around accessibility for self employed and those on a lower income, but the additional money it brings into the economy will -eventually- benefit everyone by contributing to UK PLCs overall economic health. IMO at least :)
Click to expand...

C2W means "Cycling To Work" but is widely used for other purposes.
 
irie said:
C2W means "Cycling To Work" but is widely used for other purposes.
Click to expand...
True, the scheme says at least 50% of it's total usage should be commuting...but again, at the risk of becoming repetitive, the more people use the scheme the greater the benefits for all due to it's net gain for the economy. So is it really abuse if there is a net gain for all?
 
HappyCamperIan said:
the more people use the scheme the greater the benefits for all due to it's net gain for the economy
Click to expand...
This is obviously true. The abuse is around the quality of equipment avaiable and how higher earners have greater access to bigger savings while in sharp contrast, NMW people have no access at all.

irie said:
Google says "Motability's new car market share is approximately 20% to 22%, making it the largest fleet car operator in the UK."
Click to expand...
Google says lots of things. In this case, it's a context free observation on number of cars sold with no nuance whatsoever. Is the new car market shrinking? Are more people becoming disabled? I already know the answers to these questions & I'm very aware of the origins of the current debate around Motability, it's still not relevant here, save to say parroting the talking points is a valuable insight into the media consumption habits of those doing it.
 
It's a tax break...the more you earn, the more you save. I think that is about as fair as you can be in that context.

I do agree there should be some form of access for those that do not qualify for support within the current scheme, but that is a whole other kettle of fish. A companion scheme for those would be a great idea, I'm just not bright enough to know how you would approach a beast like that though...
 
HappyCamperIan said:
True, the scheme says at least 50% of it's total usage should be commuting...but again, at the risk of becoming repetitive, the more people use the scheme the greater the benefits for all due to it's net gain for the economy. So is it really abuse if there is a net gain for all?
Click to expand...
Agreed, if its a net gain to the economy (i.e everyone) then I don't see what the problem is. If it means more high-end bikes are sold then even better.
 
Some things genuinely create societal good. I would imagine taken as a whole, the financial benefits to the NHS of C2W dwarf the sale of bikes in the scheme.
 
RustyMTB said:
This is obviously true. The abuse is around the quality of equipment avaiable and how higher earners have greater access to bigger savings while in sharp contrast, NMW people have no access at all.


Google says lots of things. In this case, it's a context free observation on number of cars sold with no nuance whatsoever. Is the new car market shrinking? Are more people becoming disabled? I already know the answers to these questions & I'm very aware of the origins of the current debate around Motability, it's still not relevant here, save to say parroting the talking points is a valuable insight into the media consumption habits of those doing it.
Click to expand...
As much as avoiding the talking points provides "a valuable insight into the media consumption habits of those doing it.".
 
The talking points have nothing to do with a mountain bike forum & in any event are got up bullshit traceable back to shithouse Twitter accounts then propagated through GB news, Alison Pearson & alll the rest of the right wing media dog whistling tossers.

Can we stay on topic, keep it in our pants do you think?
 
RustyMTB said:
The talking points have nothing to do with a mountain bike forum & in any event are got up bullshit traceable back to shithouse Twitter accounts then propagated through GB news, Alison Pearson & alll the rest of the right wing media dog whistling tossers.

Can we stay on topic, keep it in our pants do you think?
Click to expand...
In which case perhaps it would be better if this entire thread is deleted because it is by definition a political issue.
 
C2W means "Cycling To Work" but is widely used for other purposes.
Click to expand...

I used the bikes I bought to cycle to work. So did many others that I worked with. However, many bought bikes and never cycled to work. I fact we should have had an empty car park and a massive cycle shed – but it wasn’t quite like that.

And my emtb was relevant to cycling to work, as on the way home I’d often take a wee detour, and climb a good 1500 feet via estate roads, wind farm roads and hydro roads, then descending into the town where I lived. I really enjoyed my cycles home.

I wouldn’t have bought the bike that I did at that time without the scheme. Then I bought two more!
 
RustyMTB said:
The talking points ... are got up bullshit traceable back to shithouse Twitter accounts then propagated through GB news, Alison Pearson & alll the rest of the right wing media dog whistling tossers.
Click to expand...
You missed a trick by failing to get the "fascist", "nazi", "racist" and other quality "left" smears worked into your post. :)
 
As the OP, I started the thread because I thought people would be interested in the rumour, seeing as many folks have mentioned how they’ve purchased some nice e-bikes off the back of it, and its potential negative impact on the UK bike shop industry.

It turns out it was just a rumour, and the temporary disturbance in the force is over, so happy for @Moderator to close the thread to avoid any more politics! 👍
 
RustyMTB said:
Only smears if they aren't true gramps. And since you transparently don't have enough self control to stop picking at the scab in a thread that has already attracted mod warnings for descending into politics, fill your boots.
Click to expand...

RustyMTB said:
... bullshit traceable back to shithouse Twitter accounts then propagated through GB news, Alison Pearson & alll the rest of the right wing media dog whistling tossers.
Click to expand...

Your scab.
 
Ok boys and girls. Lets not piss of @cozzy

Clearly this is an usual thread which by it's very nature is political. But that doesn't mean you have an open door to abuse that.

I won't say who, but please try to start engaging your brain and some empathy to the situation before your hammer fingers of joy smash out your latest tunnel vision replies.
 
So your position is the linked article cannot possibly be accurate because the paper thjat printed it solicits donations. No one can possibly compete with that kind of 4D thinking. :ROFLMAO:

Best take this to Pistonheads, its natural gammony home. I'm all done with it.
 
RustyMTB said:
So your position is the linked article cannot possibly be accurate because the paper thjat printed it solicits donations. No one can possibly compete with that kind of 4D thinking. :ROFLMAO:
Click to expand...

Not being owned by a billionaire does seem like some leftie BS.
 
C2W means "Cycling To Work" but is widely used for other purposes.
Click to expand...

The primary purpose is to encourage people to cycle to work, but there is no restriction on what else you may use the bicycle for.

To be eligible you need to have a viable cycle route to work. However, this does not necessarily mean you need cycle from your home address to your place of work. Your C2W route could be from your home address to a railway station, and then to work via the train.

I did have to wait a couple of months to get access to the scheme for my first bike. Apparently, my company’s scheme had been closed after HMRC had taken an interest. This was in early 2021. Apparently numerous people who had been locked down or had switched to indefinite working from home had been ordering C2W bikes. So, our scheme closed down for a few months whilst the mess was sorted out.

As I’ve said I no longer have access to the scheme, and I won't have any access moving forward. Which is a real shame as the discount is fantastic. It also brings bicycle shops a lot of business they wouldn’t otherwise get, and is therefore beneficial to the UK cycle industry as a whole. But I’m not gonna winge and moan about those who are fortunate enough to have access, which I suspect is what the above petty bitching is about.
 
May I ask what's the time likely time scales involved if there are to be changes to the Cycle to work scheme ?
My current cycle scheme contract has just ended so would it be advisable to sign up for a new bike ASAP before the changes .
My employer has set a £3k limit but LBS lets me top up
Thanks in advance for any advice
 
deertrackdoctor said:
May I ask what's the time likely time scales involved if there are to be changes to the Cycle to work scheme ?
My current cycle scheme contract has just ended so would it be advisable to sign up for a new bike ASAP before the changes .
My employer has set a £3k limit but LBS lets me top up
Thanks in advance for any advice
Click to expand...
There are no changes pending.
 
Dax said:
Not being owned by a billionaire does seem like some leftie BS.
Click to expand...

The Guardian link simply explains PIP entitlement in relation to the mobility scheme. To qualify for the mobility scheme, you must be in receipt of the enhanced rate mobility component. Anyone who is disabled, in work or not, can apply, and it is not means tested.

What on earth has that got to do with billionaires and "leftie BS"?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Keep reading
    Browse all

    Similar Threads

    Community Stats

    Since 2018
    671K
    Messages
    41,322
    Members
    Join 30,000+ Riders, it's free!
    Back
    Top