Auditor-general's report on Motor tax

ardmacha · 27-09-2012 7:06pm #1

http://www.audgen.gov.ie/documents/annualreports/2011/report/en/Chapter26.pdf

Over 7% of vehicles travelling on the M50 on the sampled dates did not have current motor tax.
When vehicles where the tax had expired within one month of the date of travel are excluded, the apparent rate of evasion was about 5%.
Just under half of the vehicles identified as not having a valid tax disc on the sampled dates were taxed three months later. Payment covered the period of travel in less than half of these cases.

bobin fudge · 27-09-2012 7:36pm

if tax was a lot lower more people would pay and probably more revenue than at the moment with the current rates

27-09-2012 7:42pm

bobin fudge wrote: »

if tax was a lot lower more people would pay and probably more revenue than at the moment with the current rates

Yeah I love the way the compare to the uk's rate of compliance. Shockingly different rates, I would have no problem paying uk rates year in year out.

Voodoomelon · 27-09-2012 8:01pm

I still think that the figures displayed both here and in RoverJames poll are largely optimistic. You can be sure there's a much higher compliance rate around the M50; the national figure has to be at least 20% not taxed, probably way more.

bobin fudge · 27-09-2012 8:07pm

I tax my car about 3 maybe 6 months of the year, granted I have a garage and the months I am not taxed I dont drive but if the tax rates were alot lowere I for one would probably tax the car the whole year round instead of picking and choosing.

Cuddlesworth · 27-09-2012 8:13pm

Voodoomelon wrote: »

I still think that the figures displayed both here and in RoverJames poll are largely optimistic. You can be sure there's a much higher compliance rate around the M50; the national figure has to be at least 20% not taxed, probably way more.

Why? Not to be smart but I have never been stopped at a checkpoint when travelling at rush hour. If you only used a car for commuting, your chances of being caught would be at near 0.

CiniO · 27-09-2012 8:23pm

ardmacha wrote: »

Over 7% of vehicles travelling on the M50 on the sampled dates did not have current motor tax.

It generally is very not representative measure.

I know plenty of people who drive cars without tax, insurance, nct, driving licence, etc...
Those people never been caught, and most likely never will if nothing will change about roadchecks in rural areas. I personally never seen a roadcheck over last 5 years within 20km radius from my home.
But all those people would never even think of driving through m50.

So while 7% of vehicles were untaxed on m50, then if they set up such checkpoint in my area, it would more likely be over 50%.

27-09-2012 8:26pm

CiniO wrote: »

...........

So while 7% of vehicles were untaxed on m50, then if they set up such checkpoint in my area, it would more likely be over 50%.

And the size of the respective data pools wouldn't be similar either

ShadowHearth · 27-09-2012 8:28pm

girl at work drives 1.3 KA ad she complains about paying tax... :rolleyes:

made me want to give her a good wee slap, after i payed 360eu for both cars 3 month tax.

_Kaiser_ · 27-09-2012 8:30pm

Cuddlesworth wrote: »

Why? Not to be smart but I have never been stopped at a checkpoint when travelling at rush hour. If you only used a car for commuting, your chances of being caught would be at near 0.

I think his point is that your chance of running across a Garda car in Dublin is a LOT higher than in the countryside. Bearing in mind a lot/most? of these now have ANPR cameras fitted, the days of needing a checkpoint to pull you over are long gone

Contrast that to when I was living in the country - nearest Garda station was 20 mins away and I could easily go a fortnight without even passing a squad car on the road

CiniO · 27-09-2012 8:30pm

RoverJames wrote: »

And the size of the respective data pools wouldn't be similar either

True, but there is hundreds of places in Ireland like the one I live.
There is only one m50 though.

27-09-2012 8:42pm

CiniO wrote: »

.........
There is only one m50 though.

But there's Cork city, Galway City, Limerick City etc etc etc where the vast majority of people drive taxed cars

People don't just tax the car because they use the M50.

There's probably 50 thousand cars travelling the M50 daily, it's no doubt representative enough of the motor tax compliance in Dublin City and the other cities in Ireland imo.

Logically the figure drops when cars out less than a month are omitted.

awec · 27-09-2012 8:49pm

This post has been deleted.

Voodoomelon · 27-09-2012 8:59pm

^^Whilst what you say is obviously true, do you believe the tax system is fair?

challengemaster · 27-09-2012 9:06pm

awec wrote: »

Everyone knows the tax rate of the car before you buy it. There really is no excuse for non-compliance.

If you feel you are paying too much motor tax, buy a car in a lower tax bracket.

On these two points:

When was the last time motor tax (CC linked) decreased? How do you know someone hasn't had the same car for 10 years and had continually increasing motor tax over that period? It's not a fair assumption that "Sure you know before you buy, your own fault"

There's also a slight issue with the second part... Large engined = large tax cars aren't really in demand. You can't just expect someone to sell their car and buy another one to satisfy tax demands. People shouldn't be limited by what car they want to drive by a ridiculous tax system.

hyperborean · 27-09-2012 9:07pm

Car tax should be opt out, if its registered in your name the tax gets paid unless you prove its not using the roads. This however is not going to happen and the real issue>

Its the mentality of some people, a girl who works with us has not taxed her car since 2010, she is forever moaning about having no money while out smoking, and only last weekend had her bathroom re-done,"all new fittings and tiles the works, only 3 grand, bloody bargain"

Bruthal · 27-09-2012 9:09pm

ShadowHearth wrote: »

girl at work drives 1.3 KA ad she complains about paying tax... :rolleyes:

made me want to give her a good wee slap, after i payed 360eu for both cars 3 month tax.

People dont have a right to be unhappy with motor tax rates then, if their car is smaller than yours?

awec · 27-09-2012 9:10pm

This post has been deleted.

CiniO · 27-09-2012 9:14pm

hyperborean wrote: »

Car tax should be opt out, if its registered in your name the tax gets paid unless you prove its not using the roads.

Why should I need to prove to anyone that I'm not using my car.
If they want me to pay tax on it, it's up to them to prove I'm using it.
TBH there shouldn't be any motortax at all. That's my opinion.

Its the mentality of some people, a girl who works with us has not taxed her car since 2010, she is forever moaning about having no money while out smoking, and only last weekend had her bathroom re-done,"all new fittings and tiles the works, only 3 grand, bloody bargain"

Think about it.
You paid your motortax but have old bathroom. She's got brand new bathroom, but no motortax.
Who ended up worse?

Supergurrier · 27-09-2012 9:16pm

You can bet compliance on the m50 is a bad way of getting a real feel for tax evasion tbh, go out the country for the real figures

Bruthal · 27-09-2012 9:19pm

hyperborean wrote: »

Car tax should be opt out, if its registered in your name the tax gets paid unless you prove its not using the roads. This however is not going to happen and the real issue>

Its the mentality of some people, a girl who works with us has not taxed her car since 2010, she is forever moaning about having no money while out smoking, and only last weekend had her bathroom re-done,"all new fittings and tiles the works, only 3 grand, bloody bargain"

Did she collect the tiles in the car?

27-09-2012 9:22pm

Supergurrier wrote: »

You can bet compliance on the m50 is a bad way of getting a real feel for tax evasion tbh, go out the country for the real figures

Because anywhere not on the M50 is "out the country" ?

If you go out the country you are not seeing the picture in urban areas

RustyNut · 27-09-2012 9:24pm

It won't be long before the powers that be cop on and anyone that drives passed a go safe van in an untaxed car gets a fine and demand for back tax in the post.

Supergurrier · 27-09-2012 9:25pm

RoverJames wrote: »

Because anywhere not on the M50 is "out the country" ?

If you go out the country you are not seeing the picture in urban areas

You are assuming i live in an Urban area, i don't not even close tbh, people on the M50 are much much more likely to have a valid tax disc out of neccesity.

All i am saying is it's a very narrow view of motor tax compliance

dar83 · 27-09-2012 9:31pm

I wonder what the stats were for the amount of cars on NI/UK plates on that day. I'm sure they'd find it's close to 5%.

Not that this has any meaning to their poll whatsoever, unless they counted them towards the "no tax" total. But they're all over the M50 Southbound every morning and for people who have an apparent better appreciation for road rules than us Down Southers, they don't half not use their indicators for anything on a Motorway! :P

27-09-2012 9:31pm

I'm not assuming anything about where you live

As I said focussing on out the country is no more accurate of the overall picture.

OU812 · 27-09-2012 9:34pm

Put the tax on the fuel.

100% compliance, zero cost for processing disks, compliance etc.

Matt Simis · 27-09-2012 10:14pm

Supergurrier wrote: »

You can bet compliance on the m50 is a bad way of getting a real feel for tax evasion tbh, go out the country for the real figures

What real figures? The majority of the population live in Leinster and significant number of those use the M50. I used it twice today and live near the centre of Meath.

Given the huge number of cars on the M50 and the fact its located in this countries major population centre, this is the most meaningful statistic as its going to be numerically driven, ie survey the largest pool. If a large percet of a small number of vehicles dont pay tax anywhere else, who cares? At a national level, its not significant.

Supergurrier · 27-09-2012 10:20pm

The vast majority of Irish drivers don't use the m50 on a daily basis

All i am saying is compliance will always be higher in more built up areas where the chances of being caught are much higher

_Kaiser_ · 27-09-2012 10:26pm

OU812 wrote: »

Put the tax on the fuel.

100% compliance, zero cost for processing disks, compliance etc.

As usual the problem with this solution is that it assumes everyone lives in cities and/or has viable public transport options to get where they need to be which is rarely the case once you leave Dublin.

Besides they already take enough tax on fuel as it is

Voodoomelon · 27-09-2012 10:28pm

A list of the 20 largest cities/towns in Ireland:

Dublin 1,110,627
Cork 198,582
Limerick 91,454
Galway 76,778
Waterford 51,519
Drogheda 38,578
Dundalk 37,816
Swords 36,924
Bray 31,872
Navan 28,559
Ennis 25,360
Kilkenny 24,423
Tralee 23,693
Carlow 23,030
Newbridge 21,561
Naas 20,713
Athlone 20,153
Portlaoise 20,145
Mullingar 20,103
Wexford 20,072

Total: 1,921,962, 44% of the population.

Many of the above would also be pushing the "urban" title. So yes, I would say motor tax compliance in rural areas are 'somewhat' significant in the overall picture.

27-09-2012 10:30pm

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

As usual the problem with this solution is that it assumes everyone lives in cities and/or has viable public transport options to get where they need to be which is rarely the case once you leave Dublin.

........

It doesn't assume that at all, it's a pay by use system, tough sh1t if you need to travel more than others

OU812 · 27-09-2012 10:33pm

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

As usual the problem with this solution is that it assumes everyone lives in cities and/or has viable public transport options to get where they need to be which is rarely the case once you leave Dublin.

Besides they already take enough tax on fuel as it is

The point of it is that if you're using the roads, you're paying the tai. it's the ultimate "user pays". If you're car is off the road, no fuel used = no tax paid. All they have to do is put a couple of cent per litre on & it's sorted out. They'd have everyone who uses paying & no way of avoiding it & the best part is light road users would pay less & heavy users would pay more.

Supergurrier · 27-09-2012 10:36pm

It would be the perfect system, but however our government is so motor tax reliant atm they already have fuel taxes at very high levels.

They see a tax in another country that's used as part of an overall taxation system and totally ignore the system and charge it and ramp it up because "Shurrre other countries have the same tax"

_Kaiser_ · 27-09-2012 10:40pm

RoverJames wrote: »

It doesn't assume that at all, it's a pay by use system, tough sh1t if you need to travel more than others

Uh huh..

Explain to me though how giving a government (any Irish government really) more money for them to piss away is going to benefit anyone?

I'm being serious here - We've gone from a nation obsessed with keeping up with our neighbours, to obsessing about what they might be "getting away with" that we're not :rolleyes:

But by all means, lets keep fighting over scraps while our leaders enjoy the high life and hand over our hard-earned to their gambling buddies who lost but whose losses we're covering anyway

Guy:Incognito · 27-09-2012 10:45pm

CiniO wrote: »

Why should I need to prove to anyone that I'm not using my car.
If they want me to pay tax on it, it's up to them to prove I'm using it.

Keep to your own private roads and you dont have to prove anything to anyone. Use someone elses ( the public's) however......

27-09-2012 10:45pm

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Uh huh..

Explain to me though how giving a government (any Irish government really) more money for them to piss away is going to benefit anyone?

I'm being serious here -................

Did I propose it?
I think not so I won't be replying to your request

Although if you think about it tax on fuel could be implemented so it's revenue neutral

Guy:Incognito · 27-09-2012 10:51pm

Kaiser2000 wrote: »

Uh huh..

Explain to me though how giving a government (any Irish government really) more money for them to piss away is going to benefit anyone?

How would you be? Take the motor tax take and divide it by the number of litres of motor fuel sold in the same year. Add the result to the price of fuel and on average the amount of tax given to the government is the same. Your paying the same amount just paying in a different way and in small installments.

Stinicker · 27-09-2012 11:17pm

I'd happily digest our current rates of taxation and fuel duty if we had the infrastructure or decent public transport instead match.

lau1247 · 28-09-2012 7:31am

Guess there will be more compliance when it comes into play..

PRIVATE speed cameras could be used to detect motor tax dodgers as the Government desperately tries to recover €100m worth of car tax lost each year.

Link

It was first argued that it is for safety, soon it will expand into tax collecting..

I can see that soon they will argue that in order to catch tax dodger, they will have to expand the location further, thus no longer placing the vans in blackspot areas (i.e. everywhere).

28-09-2012 9:17am

.... Sounds reasonable, two birds with one stone and all.

OU812 · 28-09-2012 9:18am

So they're going to spend money (presuming revenue share) to collect tax?

It's got to be easy to put it on the fuel & abandon disks.

Put it on at midnight tonight, everyone returns their disks for a rebate, EVERYONE pays road tax from tomorrow. Even people visiting the country would be contributing.

C'mon guys, it's simple. No more waste of Garda resources with tax checks, no more admin & security paper & capex spend on processing disks.

Put those who currently work there into place processing Garda paperwork & free up more Gardai for the streets.

Anyone know how I run for office, because changes like this are simple & could make a huge difference.

28-09-2012 9:24am

How much per litre are you proposing? What are the disadvantages of your proposal? You probably have no answers to either question.....

OU812 · 28-09-2012 9:36am

10¢ per litre.

I currently use about €45 per week. which at current pricing (€1.72 P/L) equates to 26 litres a week, which would mean my contribution would be €2.60 per week or €135.20 per year (figures are rounded up to nearest cent).

My tax is currently about €350, so I'd be better off by almost €215 per year which I could spend in the economy. In addition, I'm paying the tax in small increments per week, & have no way of avoiding paying it.

By putting the tax on the fuel, ensuring it's paid by everyone, the overall tax take would raise.

Regarding the transport industry which would be probably up in arms, work on a rebate system with them. Once they go over a specific amount (the maximum they're now paying for a disk for example), they're allowed claim back the difference on a monthly basis off their monthly tax returns. This would have the added benefit of ensuring they'e tax compliant.

I see no disadvantage in this.

darragh o meara · 28-09-2012 9:37am

RoverJames wrote: »

How much per litre are you proposing? What are the disadvantages of your proposal? You probably have no answers to either question.....

I remember reading a study on this and the author reckoned to make it work it would be in the region of 20-25 cent per litre but the fact that in some point in the future with oil prices rising so quick that the government may have to look at the duty charged on petrol/diesel and most likely reduce it making the motor tax irrelevant. It would be a great idea if it worked especially if you only drove the odd time but the highmilers would suffer expedentially.

CiniO · 28-09-2012 9:39am

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Keep to your own private roads and you dont have to prove anything to anyone. Use someone elses ( the public's) however......

Wait a second.
You are saying that anyone owning a car should be automatically believed to be using it on public roads, and if he/she isn't then it's up to him/her to prove it.

Where did "not guilty unless proven" disappear.

Green Diesel · 28-09-2012 9:40am

OU812 wrote: »

10¢ per litre.

I currently use about €45 per week. which at current pricing (€1.72 P/L) equates to 26 litres a week, which would mean my contribution would be €2.60 per week or €135.20 per year (figures are rounded up to nearest cent).

My tax is currently about €350, so I'd be better off by almost €215 per year which I could spend in the economy. In addition, I'm paying the tax in small increments per week, & have no way of avoiding paying it.

By putting the tax on the fuel, ensuring it's paid by everyone, the overall tax take would raise.

You're being wildly optimistic. 10 cents a litre will never make up the shortfall.

astaines · 28-09-2012 9:45am

One of my concerns was that when the lower taxrates for more efficient cars were introdcued, they were only applied to nely registered cars. I got a Fiat Panda diesel - at the time one of the lowest carbon cars on the market, about six months before the tax change, and have got no motor tax benefit at all from it.

OU812 · 28-09-2012 9:59am

Green Diesel wrote: »

You're being wildly optimistic. 10 cents a litre will never make up the shortfall.

It was off the top of my head, using simple figures. Someone else posted it would need to be 20-25¢ per litre, that's equally acceptable.

28-09-2012 10:00am

OU812 wrote: »

10¢ per litre.

I currently use about €45 per week. which at current pricing (€1.72 P/L) equates to 26 litres a week, which would mean my contribution would be €2.60 per week or €135.20 per year (figures are rounded up to nearest cent).

My tax is currently about €350, so I'd be better off by almost €215 per year which I could spend in the economy. In addition, I'm paying the tax in small increments per week, & have no way of avoiding paying it.

By putting the tax on the fuel, ensuring it's paid by everyone, the overall tax take would raise.

Regarding the transport industry which would be probably up in arms, work on a rebate system with them. Once they go over a specific amount (the maximum they're now paying for a disk for example), they're allowed claim back the difference on a monthly basis off their monthly tax returns. This would have the added benefit of ensuring they'e tax compliant.

I see no disadvantage in this.

No disadvantage, how about the revenue shortfall, cheers for the laugh though.

Pawwed Rig · 28-09-2012 10:04am

lau1247 wrote: »

It was first argued that it is for safety, soon it will expand into tax collecting..

I can see that soon they will argue that in order to catch tax dodger, they will have to expand the location further, thus no longer placing the vans in blackspot areas (i.e. everywhere).

So lets hope they will drop the 'safety camera' title and call it what it really is ie a speed camera revenue generator

Auditor-general's report on Motor tax

Comments