Resolution Statement – 06169-25 Young v chroniclelive.co.uk

Summary of Complaint

1. Neil Young complained to the Independent Press Standards Organisation that chroniclelive.co.uk breached Clause 1 (Accuracy) of the Editors’ Code of Practice in an article headlined “Drivers over 70 set to be hit with new £50-a-year road tax”, published on 28 November 2025.

2. The article, which appeared online only, reported in the sub-heading: “The UK government has announced a new mileage-based tax on electric and hybrid cars starting April 2028, with electric vehicle drivers facing a 3p per mile charge and hybrid cars charged 1.5p per mile, equating to around £50 annually for average drivers”.

3. It went on to report, in the text: “Older motorists may be required to pay an additional £50 in tax under new proposals. From April 2028, electric vehicle owners will face a 3p per mile levy, whilst hybrid vehicles will be charged 1.5p per mile. The Treasury has confirmed that mileage will be verified annually at MOT time, with new vehicles being checked on their first and second registration anniversaries. On average, older UK motorists, particularly those aged over 70, cover around 1,665 miles annually, which would result in a total charge of £49.95 over a 12-month period.”

4. It also reported “From 2030 onwards, all new cars must be electric or hybrid, when a ban on selling new petrol and diesel vehicles comes into force. However, some experts fear that the new tax might make electric cars less attractive to buyers.”

5. The complainant said the article breached Clause 1 because the headline was inaccurate and unsupported by the text. He said there was nothing within the Autumn 2025 budget to suggest that over 70s would pay a £50 a year road tax. He also said the headline did not distinguish between comment, conjecture and fact where it used the term “set to” in relation to proposals.

6. The publication did not accept that the article breached Clause 1. It said the basis for the headline was the Autumn 2025 budget summary which stated: "The government has extended the temporary 5p cut in the rates of fuel duty to September 2026 and cancelled the inflation-linked rise in fuel duty rates. This means fuel duty rates have not been uprated for 16 years. The government has committed to a staggered reversal of the 5p cut between September and December 2026, and to increase fuel duty rates by Retail Price Index inflation from April 2027.” It added that the article highlighted the cost impact on pensioners, as they are likely to be most affected by this increase.

7. The complainant said that the section of the Autumn Budget referred to by the publication did not support the claims made in the article. He also said the article was inaccurate as it failed to provide a source for the claim that “On average, older UK motorists, particularly those aged over 70, cover around 1,665 miles annually”. He further said the article contained no evidence that the proposed mileage based tax would disproportionately affect pensioners. He added that the article was misleading as it omitted the fact that the tax would apply to all drivers of electric and hybrid vehicles, not specifically or uniquely those over 70.

8. The complainant also stated that the article was inaccurate where it reported: “From 2030 onwards, all new cars must be electric or hybrid”. He said that the sale of new petrol and diesel cars is due to end in 2030, certain hybrid vehicles may continue to be sold until 2035, and manufacturers producing fewer than 2,500 vehicles per year are exempt.

9. The publication did not accept that the headline failed to distinguish between comment conjecture and fact: it said “set to” indicates something which may happen in future but is subject to change.

10. The publication said its claim regarding the average mileage by older drivers was based on a 2022 government fact sheet about older drivers (aged 70 and over) which notes that "Older people in England are estimated to drive fewer miles per person per year compared with the total population. On average, in 2020, older car or van drivers drove 1,665 miles per year in comparison with 2,323 miles for all drivers ". It said this was one of the most recent figures available and, as such, that it was entitled to rely on this information.

11. The publication did not accept that the article was significantly inaccurate in regard to the claim that “From 2030 onwards, all new cars must be electric or hybrid, when a ban on selling new petrol and diesel vehicles comes into force.” It said it had relied on government issued information that "No new petrol or diesel cars will be sold after 2030. All new cars and vans will need to be 100% zero emission by 2035". It said that the publication had not been aware of an exemption for manufacturers producing fewer than 2,500 vehicles, and, upon receipt of evidence from the complainant, it would be happy to update the article.

Relevant Clause Provisions

Clause 1 (Accuracy)

i) The Press must take care not to publish inaccurate, misleading or distorted information or images, including headlines not supported by the text.

ii) A significant inaccuracy, misleading statement or distortion must be corrected, promptly and with due prominence, and — where appropriate — an apology published. In cases involving IPSO, due prominence should be as required by the regulator.

iii) A fair opportunity to reply to significant inaccuracies should be given, when reasonably called for.

iv) The Press, while free to editorialise and campaign, must distinguish clearly between comment, conjecture and fact.

Mediated Outcome

12. While the publication did not consider the headline to be inaccurate, it offered to amend the headline to “Older drivers may face estimated £50 a year road tax charges in some electric cars” and to add the following clarification at the top of the article:

A previous version of this article reported that 'Drivers over 70 set to be hit with new £50-a-year road tax'. We would like to clarify that the £50 charge referred to is based on the estimated new electric vehicle road tax charges that the average older driver would face if driving an affected electric vehicle. We are happy to clarify this and the article has been amended accordingly.

13. The complainant said that the offered amendment to the headline and clarification would resolve the matter to his satisfaction.

14. As the complaint was successfully mediated, the Complaints Committee did not make a determination as to whether there had been any breach of the Code.

Date complaint received: 28/11/2025

Date complaint concluded by IPSO: 09/03/2026