A company vehicle is often included in a competitive salary and benefits package. As the shortage of skilled labour continues to worsen in many industries, companies are increasingly struggling to attract and retain talented and highly qualified professionals. A shorter vehicle replacement cycle enables employees to choose a new vehicle sooner. This not only makes vacancies more appealing to new recruits, but also boosts the job satisfaction and loyalty to the company of the existing workforce.
So does this mean that you should renegotiate a shorter vehicle replacement cycle rather than simply extending your contract? The honest answer to this question is ‘it depends’. Some companies like the stability of four-year agreements, which mean fewer changes to budgets and vehicle selection lists and hence less administrative effort. Furthermore, contracts based on 48 months usually result in a monthly lease instalment that is around 6% lower than contracts based on 36 months, which clearly represents a cost saving. Having said that, replacing a lease vehicle with a brand new one after three years usually saves around 2-3% in terms of better fuel efficiency, a higher residual value and so on.
Summing up, if upfront cost savings are the main factor when considering the length of your lease contracts, you will probably decide to extend your agreements for the traditional 4 years. If, however, you are looking to boost employee satisfaction and reduce your company’s environmental impact while also minimising your tax burden and benefiting from discounts, then it could make good business sense to shorten your vehicle replacement cycle.