This is an interesting proposal, but I'd like to add a few points to the discussion. As has been mentioned, we don't have a "road tax" as such, but we do have fuel levies, vehicle licence fees, etc. None of this money is ring-fenced for road infrastructure but goes into the general fiscus, as does all the VAT on whatever bicycle parts you purchase, etc. The maintenance of the existing roads is affected by the weight of the vehicles that use the roads. Check out roads where there are frequently heavy lorries and you'll often see that the tar warps like someone has sat down on a leather couch and the surface is all wobbly. With that in mind, bicycles contribute effectively zero to road wear-and-tear in comparison with cars. Every person on a bicycle (for commuting anyway, not necessarily training or recreational cycling) is a net win for the maintenance of traffic infrastructure. And since traffic is highly non-linear, if even a few % of motorists commute on a bicycle instead, the general population gets to work considerably quicker. This will save the economy money which would otherwise be wasted sitting in traffic.I therefore propose that cycle commuters receive some sort of subsidy rather than a tax. It may encourage significantly more motorists not to drive, and therefore the roads will need less maintenance - thus saving the fiscus more money than what the subsidy would cost (IMO). The suggestion for cyclists to have some kind of K53 licence is quite reasonable, I can't say I really have much of an opinion on that. I've been out on the road cycling since I was 12 or 13 though, so obviously an entirely different set of rules would need to apply. Perhaps having cyclist education as a subject in schools may help? (In the way that Americans do it with driving.)
