New constituency-level analysis reveals the stark regional disparities that would emerge under the UK government’s planned Electric Vehicle Excise Duty (eVED), with rural communities bearing a disproportionate financial burden. The research, conducted by the British Vehicle Rental and Leasing Association (BVRLA) in partnership with New Automotive, maps the full financial impact across all 632 UK parliamentary constituencies, highlighting significant inequalities in the proposed pay-per-mile system. While urban constituencies with the highest total bills include Brent East at £7.6 million annually, the sharpest per-driver burdens fall on rural areas where driving is often a necessity rather than choice. The analysis underscores how transport policy intersects with social equity as the UK transitions to electric mobility.

Regional Inequality in Tax Burden

The research reveals a striking geographical divide in how the pay-per-mile taxation would affect different communities. Rural Scottish constituencies dominate the highest-mileage areas, with 18 of the 50 highest-mileage constituencies located north of the border. Drivers in Caithness, Sutherland and Easter Ross face annual bills of £247-260, more than three times the £79 burden facing drivers in the Cities of London and Westminster.

This disparity reflects fundamental differences in transport necessity and infrastructure availability. The constituencies least exposed to the tax burden are also those best served by public transport networks and electric vehicle charging infrastructure. Conversely, the areas facing the highest per-driver costs often have the fewest transport alternatives and the most limited charging infrastructure, creating what researchers describe as an “EV postcode penalty”.

Urban Centres Lead Total Revenue

While per-driver impacts vary significantly, the constituencies generating the highest total revenue under the proposed system are predominantly urban areas with large driving populations. Brent East leads with £7.6 million annually, followed by Stockport, Leeds South, Peterborough, and Exeter rounding out the top five highest-billing constituencies.

These urban concentrations reflect both population density and continued reliance on private vehicles despite better public transport options. The analysis suggests that whilst urban drivers may face lower individual bills, the collective impact on these constituencies could be substantial, potentially influencing local economic dynamics and transport choices.

Industry Concerns Over Adoption Barriers

The findings have prompted concern from industry leaders about the potential impact on electric vehicle adoption rates. Recent research involving more than 13,000 non-electric vehicle drivers found that 55% said pay-per-mile charging would make them less likely to switch to electric vehicles, highlighting the policy’s potential to slow the transition to cleaner transport.

Ginny Buckley, Chief Executive of Electrifying.com, said:

“Pay-per-mile taxation might sound fair to those in Government, but for millions of drivers it will feel like yet another tax on everyday life. If you live in a rural area, driving isn’t a lifestyle choice, it’s a necessity, so there’s a real danger this creates an EV postcode penalty where the people with the fewest transport alternatives end up paying the most.”

The research partnership between industry bodies reflects growing concerns about how transport taxation policy could inadvertently create barriers to the government’s net-zero objectives, particularly in communities where private vehicles remain essential for daily life.

Infrastructure Investment Imperative

The constituency analysis highlights the critical relationship between taxation policy and infrastructure development in the electric vehicle transition. Areas facing the highest per-driver tax burdens are often those with the most limited charging infrastructure and public transport alternatives, suggesting a need for coordinated policy approaches.

Buckley expressed:

“The warning signs to Whitehall to think carefully about this policy are already there. This risks creating yet another barrier to switching.”

The research suggests that effective electric vehicle policy requires balancing revenue generation with equitable access to clean transport options. Rural communities, already facing higher costs for essential services, could see electric vehicle adoption further complicated by taxation structures that penalise necessary travel.

Policy Implications for Sustainable Transport

The constituency-level analysis provides crucial insights for policymakers seeking to design equitable electric vehicle taxation while maintaining momentum towards transport decarbonisation. The data reveals how pay-per-mile systems could exacerbate existing regional inequalities unless accompanied by targeted infrastructure investment and support for rural communities. As the government develops its approach to replacing lost fuel duty revenue, this research underscores the importance of considering geographical and social equity alongside environmental objectives. The findings suggest that successful electric vehicle policy requires a comprehensive approach addressing taxation, infrastructure, and regional development to ensure the transition to clean transport benefits all communities rather than creating new forms of disadvantage.