Major tax fraud linked to the registration of luxury cars

Wossack wrote: »

any 1.3 turbo Glanza's?

They wouldn't care as they ain't tax fraud. Both turbo and non turbo pay the same tax.


Lets not forget the real thieves here, the green parties two tier tax system.

Put the tax on the fuel, simples.

BarryD wrote: »

I don't think Atlantic Dawn is arguing that the insurance companies be tax collectors but that insurance companies normally price their policies on the basis of engine capacity etc. If someone makes a fraudulent claim that the engine in their car is smaller than in reality to save on car tax and uses the same basis for insurance purposes, the question that arose is - are they insured? Clearly this practice is not in the insurance companies interest just as clearly it isn't for the taxman??

Yes it's a means for them to get out of the claim, they look to get out of claims over technicalities. Similarly if you were to insure your car for double its actual value they will only give you the book value regardless of the extra premium you have paid. A car which has a different engine on the logbook than is in the car has little or no resale value until this "intentional fraud/clerical error" has been removed.

Pic from RTÉ news of an M3, someone doesn't incorrectly declare a 3.2 litre engine in an M3 as 2 litre due to any simple error...

Toyotafanboi wrote: »

i doubt it because the turbo and N/A are the exact same cc.

The crack with the glanzas was basically an insurance scam. Getting a cheaper quote because the car 'had no turbo' on the system

kona wrote: »

A idiot tax in this country aimed at politicians and the like who make these laws would yield more than catching some lad driving a m3 paying 2l tax.

Remember the lad is still being bent over for 710 a year if he's mental enough to pay it upfront.

The worst thing about it is , they tax the ****e outta fuel anyway...and we pay massive motor tax...It's another classic Ireland double hitter...

Special Circumstances wrote: »

If it makes you feel any better, some cute hoor with a stack of cash in hand money is running a 530d regged as a 2L on agri diesel and laughing his hole off at you?

Just ban diesels too

Seriously this agri diesel and road diesel is nonsense too

muckwarrior wrote: »

Not sure how an insurance company could legitimately refuse to pay based on the wrong cc engine under the bonnet. My car is a 1.3, 1.7 on the book, insured as a 2.6 and yet it's all above board :rolleyes:

Your car is a rotary engine, there's different ways to calculate volume in them as opposed to a piston engine.

I agree with ya tho, they do what they want when it suits them and by that I mean what way they can ride ya the most for cash.

Ha.

Haha.

Hahahahahahaahah.

Glad.

Korat wrote: »

This invalidates their insurance as well.

They'd be liable for all the damages if they hit anyone.

Insurance company would still be obliged to pay 3rd party claims, but they can then go after the policy holder to recoup the money. In a case like this, the insurance company might not even chase the policy holder. What chance have they recovering possibly €10,000's from some tight git would risk having his car seized rather than pay an extra €20pw motor tax.

Motor tax rates have got out of hand anyway.

Especially when you consider most of the people taxing pre 08 cars are not exactly flush.

Tax on fuel is the only fair system.
- Polluter pays (drive more pay more/want a lowmpg car then you pay for it that way)
- Less office work/hassle
- Evasion becomes almost impossible
- Weekend cars become a reality

Special Circumstances wrote: »

Oh I know how it works, I'm just saying I've never seen 2 stroke and 4 stroke differentiated in tax (admittedly there's very few trabants around), so why differentiate for rotary. It's academic and pedantic and off topic anyway, lets get back to the schadenfreude fest for the tax dodgers...

Because rotary make lots of power and cost lots of money so since the government don't want anybody to have fun on the cheap they just pull a figure out of their bum. Bit like vrt!

Cee-Jay-Cee wrote: »

Unless the NCT tester strips the engine snd measures cubic capacity then in many cases there isn't any other way to tell.

This mainly happens with imported cars and not newly registered irish cars as it easier to change particulars on import paper work before its handed over to revenue

Engine number , turbos and the amount of spark plugs is a giveaway.

Most petrol head could spot one without opening the bonnet.

everyone is going on about the road tax....what about the vrt that is lost due to cars being imported and different cc on the log book....i know yoiu cant really get away with that now because the car is inspected but back in the day cars were been registered as all sorts

BeachView wrote: »

How much would they save? Would think anyone with a bmw 3 litre would not be short of money to pay tax

Save nearly a grand a year. 3l BMW can be bought for less than some Eco ****box. Madness really, tax bands have caused the car prices in this country to be bizzare

BarryD wrote: »

Increase tax on fuel? Two or three things come to mind:

- you put greater costs onto law abiding rural folk, as they inevitably have to drive further to access normal things like shops, schools, jobs. Public transport ain't an option in most places as there is none and what there is here & there, is being eroded.Most rural folk driving diesels are paying over the odd's as it is in pre CO2 system cars, will probably work out cheaper unless doing huge milage

- some rural folk will use green diesel. We've had diesel motors since 2003, use auto diesel but never been checked once in that time. Kind of Illegal sorry

- you hit the road haulage industry and push up other costs in shops etc., that way. Tax rebate