Yesterday I finished writing, and sent off, my response to the HMRC consultation on the new arrangements for taxing diesel for leisure boats. Since I keep very full records of our engine running and fuel use, I thought it might be useful to analyse them as a case study. This not because I think that Wendy's and my cruising pattern is necessarily anything like typical of continuous cruisers as a group - the variation within that group is likely to be immense - but just as one data point on the spectrum of use.
It has been easy to quantify our engine use when we have been moored. It has been harder to analyse quite how much fuel we use for propulsion, since when cruising our engine simultaneously provides motive power, electricity and hot water. I have attempted to do this as follows : (i) For each quarter I have worked out the daily average number of engine hours on cruising days. (Some of the cruising days in the winter have been for very short trips - less than an hour - to go to a nearby boatyard to use its services). (ii) Also for each quarter I have calculated the daily average number of engine hours on days when we have been moored without a shore power supply. (iii) I have taken the difference between these figures as an estimate of what we have used for actual propulsion, then grossed up that daily average by the number of cruising days in the period, and multiplied by our fuel consumption of 1.16 litres/hour as an estimate of the amount of fuel used for actual propulsion. It was no surprise to me that the proportion of the fuel we buy which is used for propulsion varies seasonally, from a low of 5% to a high of 22%/. Over the 20+ months involved, this works out at an average of 11% of our total fuel use. The principles underlying the new taxation arrangements are that the rebated price will still be allowed for fuel used to generated electricity and for heating. Where a single engine provides both of these plus propulsion, then the solution of installing a second diesel tank (even if practical, which in many cases it won't be) doesn't resolve the problem. HMRC say they are looking for a system whose cost of implementation is in proportion to the very small amount of revenue involved. IWA has already suggested to them that cruising boats should have an entitlement to receive 25% of their fuel at the rebated rate. For residential boats which never cruise, their entitlement is for 100% at the rebated rate. If every boat which combines residential and cruising use was to undergo an analysis like the one I've done, then the implementation costs would be massive. So I've suggested that all genuine residential boats should be entitled to buy all their fuel at the discounted rate. If anybody would like to read my full response and the tabulated figures, they're on my web site at http://tinyurl.com/2hq6jo -- Mike Stevens narrowboat Felis Catus III web-site www.mike-stevens.co.uk No man is an island. So is Man.
