Traffic & Transport
UK to appeal against tax ruling cutting VAT on public electric car chargers to 5% | Electric, hybrid and low-emission cars
The UK’s tax authorities have decided to fight against a ruling that would cut VAT across all public electric car chargers, despite a judge finding they have been overcharging for years under the law.
Charge My Street, a not-for-profit charging company, last month argued successfully that VAT should have been charged at 5%, rather than 20%, in a case at a London tax tribunal that could have a significant impact on electric car drivers’ costs. HM Revenue and Customs on Tuesday confirmed it will appeal against the ruling.
The appeal will in effect mean the government arguing to extend a disparity that costs some electric car drivers much more to recharge their vehicles, disincentivising the shift away from petrol and diesel.
Charge point operators said the decision to appeal would hold back the transition from polluting petrol and diesel by penalising electric car owners who cannot charge at home.
Electric car drivers have long complained they have to pay an unfair rate of VAT at public chargers. People plugging in at home pay only 5% VAT on electricity for domestic use, but the 20% rate for businesses applies at public chargers.
Campaigns to equalise the rates have appeared forlorn for years, with successive governments unwilling to lose out on future electricity VAT revenues to replace the £24.5bn in annual fuel duties applied on petrol and diesel sales. However, a London tax tribunal last month found that the 5% rate should in fact have applied all along – to the surprise and delight of the EV charging industry.
The VAT difference brings in an extra £85m a year for the Treasury, according to calculations by Zapmap, a charger map company. However, that is projected to rise to £315m by 2030 and billions after that as the number of electric cars rises.
The government does not appear so pleased. If the ruling is upheld it will put the Treasury in a tricky spot, amid fiscal pressures caused by the Iran war and pressure to abandon a planned fuel duty increase. The government is already committed to introducing pay-per-mile taxes on all electric cars.
Will Maden, a director at Charge My Street, said: “About 40% of the UK population, they don’t have drives. Transitioning to EVs is a huge problem. Adding 20% makes a huge difference.
“My personal view is I think we should be making the transition to EVs as cheap as we can. This is an environmental issue.”
Although the ruling only applies to Charge My Street, if the appeal fails, operators are geared up to lodge their own claims for overpaid VAT going back years.
John Lewis, chief executive at char.gy, a charge point operator, said HMRC’s appeal was a “deeply disappointing decision, and one that sends entirely the wrong signal to the millions of people who rely on public charging”. He said the company would immediately pass on a VAT cut to its customers.
He said: “The government talks about accelerating EV adoption, yet is actively choosing to maintain a tax structure that makes public charging more expensive than it needs to be and undermines the transition.”
The case hinges on the interpretation of a few lines in the VAT Act. It says that electricity counts as “always for domestic use” as long as one person does not use more than 1,000 kilowatt hours (kWh) a month at a single premises – enough to recharge a Tesla Model Y 16 times over. Accountancy firm Deloitte discovered the discrepancy, and worked pro bono with Charge My Street.
Three days of arguments at a tax tribunal focused on minutiae, such as the implications of the words “a month” and “premises”, according to Daniel Barlow, a Deloitte tax partner. However, in the end, Judge Harriet Morgan found it would be a “strained construction” to go for the 20% rate.
An HMRC spokesperson said: “We’re appealing this case, as our position is that standard rate VAT applies to electricity supplied through public EV charging infrastructure.”
I enjoyed Polly Hudson’s wisdom on marriage (I know it’s taboo – but I’m a big fan of marriage, 9 June). However, I think she was fundamentally wrong when she wrote: “The haters say marriage is ‘just a piece of paper’, which is fundamentally true”. That would be like saying my degree is only the certificate. In both cases the significance is that which it points towards – something no physical object can truly capture.
Rev Martin Joss
Peterborough
Allow me, a number theorist, to lend support to Ian Harley (Letters, 10 June), and make some sense of the phrase “such fun’’ for Steve Lupton (Letters, 11 June). Many scientists start with fun and enjoyment when young, followed by agony and frustration in their research, but always sustained by the beauty and amazement of their discoveries.
Peter Shiu
Sheffield
David Smith concludes that the US president “has too much power for someone with so little connection to reality” (As Donald Trump turns 80, he faces a foe he can never defeat: Father Time. That’s a problem for us all, 14 June). Doubly worrying that the same can be said of the world’s first trillionaire.
Mark de Brunner
Harrogate, North Yorkshire
Further to Sally Goldsmith’s “Is this bus going to Jump” (Letters, 10 June), a Welsh friend who used to visit me in Manchester would say, “I’ve just seen a bus for Sale”.
Julian Dorr
Wymondham, Norfolk
In the 1970s, the Bradford Argus always called David Hockney: “The mayor of Bradford’s brother” (David Hockney obituary, 12 June).
Angela Singer
Cambridge
So Julian of Norwich was table-turning? Since when has mysticism been a synonym for a belief in the occult (Quick crossword, 9 June). Saints’ bones will be turning in their tombs.
Christopher Cook
Deal, Kent
I see an alarming trend in your report (9 June). It seems “children are more likely to be bitten by dogs than adults”. Please can you publish the number of incidents of children being bitten by adults?
Vee Singleton
Framlingham, Suffolk
Unless a valid reason is given for denying the referee Omar Artan entry to the US, the other World Cup referees should go on strike (Top African referee Omar Artan refused access to US and will miss World Cup, 8 June).
Frank Cosgrove
Presteigne, Powys
I read Ian Harley’s letter (10 June) about the nine times table and other number bases carefully. I think I understood most of it. The bit I really could not make any sense of was the last phrase: “Such fun.”
Steve Lupton
Prestwich, Greater Manchester
As a Speke lad, I know that the train to Speke would never speak (Letters, 10 June), because there isn’t one – we don’t have a railway station. However, the joke I grew up with was: “What is the quickest way to get a parrot to speak?” The answer: “On an 82 bus.”
Rev Frank Cain
Liverpool
I had a similar quip after running for a bus, when I asked the driver if he was the No 1, as I hadn’t checked. He replied that his wife thought so.
Ann Spencer
Newcastle upon Tyne
Traffic & Transport
Sole survivor of Air India crash demands ‘honesty and answers’ one year on | Air India Ahmedabad plane crash
The only survivor of the Air India plane crash that killed 260 people in June 2025 has called for “honesty, transparency and answers” a year on from the disaster, and spoken about his “significant psychological scars” and financial hardship.
Vishwash Kumar Ramesh, a British national, has previously described his fate as a “miracle” after being the only person to survive the incident, in which a Boeing 787 Dreamliner struck a medical college shortly after taking off from Ahmedabad airport.
The crash killed 241 people onboard the London-bound flight, including 169 Indian nationals and 52 Britons, as well as 19 people who were on or near the site of the incident. A further 67 were seriously injured.
Ramesh, who lost his brother in the crash, demanded answers as investigators are yet to publish their findings. Last month, India’s civil aviation minister said the investigation was in the “last stage” and the report would “mostly” be finished by the anniversary of the crash, on 12 June.
Exactly 30 days after the crash last year, the Indian authorities released a preliminary report, which was in line with standard procedure. It found both of the plane’s fuel switches had moved to the “cut-off” position “immediately” after take-off, stopping fuel supply to the engine.
Speaking to the Press Association, Ramesh said there were more “unanswered questions” he wanted addressed, and that his trauma had not ended on the day of the crash. “I live with the significant psychological scars, the loss of my brother, and the constant unanswered questions around how and why this happened,” he said.
“I know those questions are not just on my mind; they are on the minds of every affected family. More than anything, people need honesty, transparency and answers. Nothing will ever change what happened, but families deserve clarity.”
Ramesh has received £21,500 from Air India to support his wife and five-year-old son, according to his representative, Sanjiv Patel, but continues to face financial hardship as well as psychological and emotional.
“We’ve repeatedly asked to meet the chief executive of Air India but that has not happened,” Patel said. “We recently met with executives of Air India and representatives connected to the Tata Group [which has a controlling stake in the business].
“Those discussions were constructive and have resulted in some positive progress, although a number of important issues remain under discussion.”
Patel said that, due to the impact of the crash, Ramesh had not been able to return to work as normal and his family was living on less than £1,000 a month.
Ramesh is also taking civil action. Patel said: “Despite one of the worst aviation disasters involving British citizens in recent years, neither Vishwash nor many of the affected families we have spoken to have received any direct contact or tailored support from the UK government.”
An Air India spokesperson confirmed that representatives from Air India and the Tata Group had met Ramesh, and remained in “close contact” with him and his team. The company said they were “actively working to ensure that appropriate support continues to be extended to him”.
Paul McClorry at Hudgell Solicitors said civil claims were being considered against a number of potential defendants. “We are awaiting the findings of the investigations, and we should finally start to see some clarity as to how and why this awful disaster happened, and, crucially, how it could have been avoided,” he said.
The UK Foreign Office has been approached for comment.
Ardmore Group files for administration after 52 years
Ex-Oxford United star Andy Whing opens up on Banbury exit
Nottinghamshire v Somerset, Leicestershire v Essex, and more: county cricket day four – live | Sport
-
Crime & Safety4 weeks agoWhat happens to Halifax customers if Lloyds makes changes?
-
Crime & Safety4 weeks agoFlock of clay birds set to take flight in special exhibition
-
Oxford News4 weeks agoActor steps down from major role in new Harry Potter series
-
Crime & Safety4 weeks agoOxfordshire bridge closure comes as management ‘weaknesses’ found
-
Oxford News4 weeks agoNHS fracture service helps support extra 1,000 patients
-
Oxford News4 weeks agoHenley pub once owned by Russell Brand reopens after 6 years
-
Crime & Safety4 weeks agoFriends of the Ridgeway appoint Matthew Barber as president
-
UK News4 weeks agoThe race to replace Starmer is on – but he still faces a momentous choice