Car registration tax to be phased out

Seth Brundle

from http://www.breakingnews.ie/2006/02/24/story246335.html

Car registration tax to be phased out
24/02/2006 - 15:03:42

Costly car registration tax is to be phased out over the next decade in a bid to ensure a true EU single market for vehicles, it was revealed today.

European Commissioner for Taxation, Laszlo Kovacs, admitted the Irish Government was strongly against the elimination of the revenue-generating Vehicle Registration Tax (VRT), as well as any attempts to harmonise corporate taxes across the EU.

On car taxes, Mr Kovacs said: “The idea is to eliminate in a period, not in one step, of five to 10 years, to eliminate the registration tax.”

Mr Kovacs said 16 EU member states operated VRT taxes varying from a couple of hundred euro to thousands.

“For the car manufacturers it results in a very, very fragmented market. They simply cannot benefit from the single market, with 450 million consumers, in the case of the car industry, in the case of the car market it simply doesn’t function,” he said, as he prepared to meet Finance Minister Brian Cowen to discuss the issues.

But Mr Kovacs said rather than completely removing the registration tax it would be integrated with an annual circulation tax so individual governments would not suffer a major loss in revenue.

“Owners of the car would not pay it in a lump sum with the purchase of the car but year after year as a part of the annual circulation tax,” he said.

Mr Kovacs, who said the commission’s proposals on altering vehicle tax were citizen, industry and environmentally friendly, said currently people often faced double taxation on the vehicle if they moved country.

The commissioner said that from 2008 onwards a quarter of the combined car tax would be based on the carbon dioxide emissions of the engine.

Mr Kovacs said the commission had no ambition to propose the harmonisation of corporate tax rates across the EU.

But he said the commission intends to begin working towards a common consolidated corporate tax base to present a legislative framework by 2008.

The commissioner said this would involve harmonising the method of calculating the tax base in EU countries.

“There are too many tax measures which encourage firms to invest and operate domestically rather than in another Member State,” he said.

The commissioner said he did not believe the economic success of Ireland was solely attributable to the favourable corporate tax concessions the country has offered since the 1960s.

“The majority of Member States are supportive or at least open to this idea, while some Member States, including Ireland, have expressed serious reservations,” he said.

“If necessary we will propose the adoption of the common tax base by those Member States who are interested under the enhanced cooperation mechanism because we cannot allow some States to hold others back.”

Great news

unkel

rather than completely removing the registration tax it would be integrated with an annual circulation tax so individual governments would not suffer a major loss in revenue.

“Owners of the car would not pay it in a lump sum with the purchase of the car but year after year as a part of the annual circulation tax,” he said.

So just being replaced by a huge annual tax? :rolleyes:

mike65

I'll be most interested to see what level the annual tax is pitched at, will there be many different levels, a la the road tax?

Mike.

faigs

'Phased out', as in, covered over by other taxes and costs I reckon. We probably won't notice a difference at all.

mike65

mike65 wrote:

I'll be most interested to see what level the annual tax is pitched at, will there be many different levels, a la the road tax?

Mike.

I'm sure it will be based on emissions or how much fun your car supposedly is.

Interceptor

Its very hard when you've been fukcing someone for years to suddenly just stop, and governments are no different. VRT is one of the greatest injustices of the current government. I depressed myself by reading the latest Top Marques magazine and realising what an automotive backwater this country is. There are more TVR's for sale in one small garage in the UK than there are in the whole of Ireland. If it wasn't for VRT.... BRRRRMM, BRRRRM

'cptr

Tipsy Mac

The current system of VRT suits the government and most of all car dealers, can't see it changing anytime soon.

Owen

How the hell does it suit car dealers/manufacturers? I work for one, and let me tell you it's a nightmare. More paperwork, more hassle, and more accounting. I'd rather it be over and done with, thank you very much!

Owen

And let me tell you, if VRT which is currently a source of millions for the Government is phased out, it will be levied in other places. On road tax, on more stringent NCT tests, and more importantly, on Petrol. Don't be fooled, in Ireland, with a population as small as ours, they will find a way to tax us to death. Whether it's up front as in VRT, or sneakily as in Petrol, we will end up paying for it.

faigs

Tipsy Mac wrote:

The current system of VRT suits the government and most of all car dealers, can't see it changing anytime soon.

Ain't true, my gf's family are car dealers, her dad gets in a few cars a month from england because the demand is here for them(good spec'd GT Golfs, Passats etc). He paid over €60000 in six months clearing cars for VRT. A merc he had in last week had to be cleared at a cost of €11000. The government is screwing the dealers as well as us.

css

faigs wrote:

Ain't true, my gf's family are car dealers, her dad gets in a few cars a month from england because the demand is here for them(good spec'd GT Golfs, Passats etc). He paid over €60000 in six months clearing cars for VRT. A merc he had in last week had to be cleared at a cost of €11000. The government is screwing the dealers as well as us.

What a load of rubbish, screwing the dealers... the dealer is a middle man, anything they pay out, they charge on. How is the dealer being screwed if he gets all his money back, plus more?

MrPudding

faigs wrote:

Ain't true, my gf's family are car dealers, her dad gets in a few cars a month from england because the demand is here for them(good spec'd GT Golfs, Passats etc). He paid over €60000 in six months clearing cars for VRT. A merc he had in last week had to be cleared at a cost of €11000. The government is screwing the dealers as well as us.

So he took an 11k hit on a single car? The margins on the cars must he huge if he can afford to get screwed by the gov to the tune of 11k on a single sale.

MrP

full forward

Great to hear its going. EU good for somthing. I hope they dont mess with our coproration tax though. The government will have to put it up anyway to get back the loss from VRT.

FYI Current VRT rates...

Cars up to 1400 cc 22.5%
Cars 1401cc-1900cc 25%
Cars over 1900cc 30%

mike65

So he took an 11k hit on a single car?

He did'nt take the hit, his customer did (plus a little extra for paperwork).

Mike.

Tipsy Mac

It suits dealers because it basically prevents buyers from going abroad for new cars as by the time they get the car back here and the VRT payed there is little difference for a normal sized car and you would be just as well getting it from your local dealer. Also the price that Revenue calculate the open market selling price from is based on data supplied by the Irish Motor Industry (I think SIMI but not 100%) so it's in their interest to supply a higher price in order to increase the tax take and make importing less attractive and they can then split the profits between the government and the dealer.

Tipsy Mac

ned78 wrote:

And let me tell you, if VRT which is currently a source of millions for the Government is phased out, it will be levied in other places. On road tax, on more stringent NCT tests, and more importantly, on Petrol. Don't be fooled, in Ireland, with a population as small as ours, they will find a way to tax us to death. Whether it's up front as in VRT, or sneakily as in Petrol, we will end up paying for it.

Well the argument you are making that it should stay in place as otherwise it will need to be found somewhere else is the same as you saying a Mafia Don should be given a government grant to make up for the money he has lost when he is found guilty of extorsion. To me it's an illegal tax, I don't care where they have to get the money from to make up the difference, it's wrong and against what the EU was supposed to be about.

murphaph

I expect (and would welcome) VAT on vehicles increasing to 25% (maximum permitted by the EU). I believe a tax based on the car's purchase price is a good thing as pricy cars attract more tax from the wealthy and cheapo cars attract less tax from the poor. I know that's a gross over-simplification, but why should the ordinary taxpayer subsidise Bentley drivers who's car of choice will now be cheaper. The tax has to come from somewhere afterall. Placing all the tax on fuel may also penalise the poorer in society as they may only be able to afford older, less fuel efficient cars and so on. It's not a simple area to tax fairly.

faigs

mike65 wrote:

He did'nt take the hit, his customer did (plus a little extra for paperwork).

Obviously, he takes the initial hit and then has to put the money onto the price of the car. It is his profession, he does need to make a profit after all, and in doing so cover his costs of flying to England and driving the car back. The customer doesn't pay any more than they would for a similiar car coming from ROI, he sells at very reasonable prices and hence has loyal customers. The only reason he gets them there is because they're usually in far better condition and have more extras.

css wrote:

What a load of rubbish...How is the dealer being screwed if he gets all his money back, plus more?

I'm just saying that it doesn't suit the dealers just like it doesn't suit us. We're all being screwed on tax, and the dealers have to pay it just like the buyer does, and it only becomes apparent when you see how much you have to pay to clear a car. The only reason extra profit is made on English cars is because they're better cars, the dealer pays VRT as well as more taxes for buying/selling.

nxbyveromdwjpg

Tipsy Mac wrote:

It suits dealers because it basically prevents buyers from going abroad for new cars as by the time they get the car back here and the VRT payed there is little difference for a normal sized car and you would be just as well getting it from your local dealer.

:eek: The reason its the same price as getting it after VRT as buying from the local dealer is because he has already paid for vrt beforehand on the same car if its on his forecourt. Common sense :rolleyes:

It does NOT suit dealers - I mean cmon use your brain here - how would the governments 30% mark up on their product (that is putting off god knows how much custom) be helping them do business?

unkel

nm wrote:

It does NOT suit dealers - I mean cmon use your brain here - how would the governments 30% mark up on their product (that is putting off god knows how much custom) be helping them do business?

Exactly. SIMI would be absolutely delighted if VRT was scrapped

irishpartyboy

Scrapping VRT would have serious repercussions for the used car market and could cause the market to crash.. all the dealers existing stock would be worthless cos the VRT has already been paid.. so why would consumers bother buying the 2nd hands when they could buy the exact same car NEW, for cheaper if VRT is scrapped.

So although dealers dont make any money out of existing VRT, they definitely dont want it scrapped. Plus any private motorists out there could instantly lose anything from 200-16000 on the value of their car.. i.e. VRT already paid.

esskay

irishpartyboy wrote:

Scrapping VRT would have serious repercussions for the used car market and could cause the market to crash.. all the dealers existing stock would be worthless cos the VRT has already been paid.. so why would consumers bother buying the 2nd hands when they could buy the exact same car NEW, for cheaper if VRT is scrapped.

It said VRT would be phased out over a decade so the prices of new cars would drop slowly over 10yrs and then so would the prices of second hand cars.

drdre

thats hopefully good news,

irishpartyboy

A phased approach, yes I would agree with that.. but how exactly would they implement that? that's the difficult one.

Anyway finally we will be able to get good value for money....plus all the new cars will have to be fully specced out like they are in the UK.

Guy:Incognito

I love the way people are sayign the government will "sneakily" add it on to fuel to make up teh differecne.Yes, fuel will go up, but most like to the same price the rest of europe pay, ie a lot more than what we have been paying.

irishpartyboy wrote:

A phased approach, yes I would agree with that.. but how exactly would they implement that? that's the difficult one. .

I would assume phasign it out will kill car sales for a few years as, generally, people should'nt be stupid enough to keep payign for something they won't have to pay for if they wait a while.

Tipsy Mac

The value of 2nd hand cars defreciating will only matter to people who will be retiring from driving and selling their car on, anyone else will have the same deal as before (their current car will be worth less but new car will be less too) or they will get a better deal.

curiosity

I'm sure it will be interesting to see what kind of timetable the Government puts on this (it's quite possible they will dig in their heels for a bit, at least until the supposed SSIA related surge iin car buying dies away). Perhaps car manufacturers will raise pre-tax prices to compensate, meaning we would see no appreciable difference. Does anyone know if our pre tax prices are appreciably lower than other EU states? An increase in standard spec for cars is also possible. Whatever happens, I'd be inclined to hold off on a new car purchase as long as I could now.

And don't we already have an 'annual circulation tax' in the form of road tax?All the Government have to do is jack that up, leading to no loss of revenue. Indeed, this would suit the State's finances better as it would be a more reliable source of revenue, being less dependent on sales peaks and troughs.

However this annual circulation tax will hit those who usually go for older cars, thus avoiding most of the VRT related slice of a cars value. One person might be quite happy to get a 6 year old car, which has depreciated substantially, and pay the same road tax as their neighbour who just bought a brand new set of wheels. At least you have a choice as to whether you splash out on a new car. However, many of us do need to have some type of car. It looks like we are going to have to pay more for that 'privilege'.

Anyone know much about how the emissions related tax system works in UK?

Tipsy Mac

How I would like to live in a world of no VRT, I can only imagine what I could drive...

Volkswagen Golf GTI

USA (Remember the car is made in Germany)
€18,535.34 ($21990)
www.vw.com/gti/index.html

Ireland
€ 35,260
http://www.volkswagen.ie/configurator/index.cfm?fuseaction=vw.modelOverview&modelID=281&bodyID=4256

unkel

Tipsy Mac wrote:

How I would like to live in a world of no VRT

You forgot to mention VAT - it's almost as bad as VRT and the deadly combination of the two leads to new European cars costing about half in the US compared to what they cost here

Guy:Incognito

Tipsy Mac wrote:

How I would like to live in a world of no VRT, I can only imagine what I could drive...

Volkswagen Golf GTI

USA (Remember the car is made in Germany)
€18,535.34 ($21990)
www.vw.com/gti/index.html

Ireland
€ 35,260
http://www.volkswagen.ie/configurator/index.cfm?fuseaction=vw.modelOverview&modelID=281&bodyID=4256

You say that like its Ireland on 35k and the rest of the world pay the US price. Nowhere else in Europe can you get it at the Us (or anywhere near) we do however have a better welfare (welfare state maybe) and free healthcare system, which would you prefer, the option of choosing not to buy a car (or buying a cheaper one) or haveign to pay everytime you so much as walk by a hospital. It's all a trade off. The also pay 1/3 or 1/2 of what we do on petrol, which isnt feasable for other countries. Plus, as I said, your not going to save anything, you'll just spread the payment. Petrol WILL go up, to be in line with the rest of Europe.

Seth Brundle

murphaph wrote:

I expect (and would welcome) VAT on vehicles increasing to 25% (maximum permitted by the EU). I believe a tax based on the car's purchase price is a good thing as pricy cars attract more tax from the wealthy and cheapo cars attract less tax from the poor. I know that's a gross over-simplification, but why should the ordinary taxpayer subsidise Bentley drivers who's car of choice will now be cheaper. The tax has to come from somewhere afterall. Placing all the tax on fuel may also penalise the poorer in society as they may only be able to afford older, less fuel efficient cars and so on. It's not a simple area to tax fairly.

Placing the tax on the purchase price is (depending on the method used) silly. Currently the government are taxing people under a notion that it is fair to tax a bigger engine more than a small engine. This is not a green policy.

Also you ask 'why should the ordinary taxpayer subsidise Bentley drivers who's car of choice will now be cheaper'? Why would the taxpayer be subsidising Bentley drivers? The Bentley will be cheaper alright - to the point that its price is comparative to the rest of europe but with a 21% (or maybe 25%) VAT rate they will be donating a fair whack of money to the exchequer - more than many pay in PAYE per annum.

Also your point about placing tax on fuel being punitive to poorer people is to me nonsense. If they are that poor then surely they would not be able to afford the large single payments that are part of car ownership. can they afford their road taxes? Can they afford their insurance premia? [I know they can spread it out a bit but then they pay even more]. Also given that cars would be cheaper,they would be able to buy a more fuel efficient car compared to the current taxation system.

The system should follow the polluter pays policy. The current taxation system is grossly unfair. I pay about €850 per annum. Does my car emit more pollutants compared to someone who has a 1985 fiesta? Should the Monk pay proper tax rates on his big stretch hummer or just the paltry sum he is paying currently as it is a PSV? Or someone who does twice the mileage as me? if the fuel carried all the tax burden then it is fairer to everyone.

irishpartyboy wrote:

Scrapping VRT would have serious repercussions for the used car market and could cause the market to crash.. all the dealers existing stock would be worthless cos the VRT has already been paid.. so why would consumers bother buying the 2nd hands when they could buy the exact same car NEW, for cheaper if VRT is scrapped.

So although dealers dont make any money out of existing VRT, they definitely dont want it scrapped. Plus any private motorists out there could instantly lose anything from 200-16000 on the value of their car.. i.e. VRT already paid.

If it was phased ou then there shouldn't be much of a problem. the tax would presumably be reduced annually over a good few years to prevent market collapse.

ninty9er

I don't know where this idea came from, but I was at a Charlie McCreevy lecture lastnight (I know he's not minister for finance anymore), but someone asked if VRT should be abolished and he said any govt. would be stupid to do so, considering the amounts of money being spent on cars already. VRT isn't doing any harm. There are also too many cars on the road he said. Abolioshing VRT would further congest the roads.

While i don't agree with VRT I can still see where he's coming from

But why do you think VRT will be phased out

ambro25

murphaph wrote:

I expect (and would welcome) VAT on vehicles increasing to 25% (maximum permitted by the EU). I believe a tax based on the car's purchase price is a good thing as pricy cars attract more tax from the wealthy and cheapo cars attract less tax from the poor. I know that's a gross over-simplification, but why should the ordinary taxpayer subsidise Bentley drivers who's car of choice will now be cheaper. The tax has to come from somewhere afterall.

Erm...:rolleyes: Let's look at a current example:

Bentley €100k new + 30%VRT = €130k + 17%VAT= € 152.1k
cumulative tax = 52.1%

Punto €15k new + 22.5%VRT = €18.4k + 17%VAT= € 21.5k
cumulative tax = 43.3% - surprise, the cheapo car is less taxed :eek:

Now let's try it with your solution:

Bentley €100k new + 25%VAT= € 125k
cumulative tax = 25%

Punto €15k new + 25%VAT= € 18.75k
cumulative tax = ...25% - imagine that, the cheapo car is taxed just as much as the Bentley :eek:

I'm all for your social equality - especially when I get fortunate enough to buy a Bentley in a few years Note that I'd be happy enough for the VAT to be calculated on the car cost only (i.e. ex-VRT), and not on car cost + VRT, as if that's not double taxation (tax calculated on a tax), I don't know what is!
And in that respect, paying VRT on second-hand imported cars is just as much of a double taxation, if only because the OMSP is based on the depreciated value of the car which already includes a VAT component itself when that car was bought new!

Christ on a bike! It's basic maths! :rolleyes:

Stekelly wrote:

I love the way people are sayign the government will "sneakily" add it on to fuel to make up teh differecne.Yes, fuel will go up, but most like to the same price the rest of europe pay, ie a lot more than what we have been paying.

I would assume phasign it out will kill car sales for a few years as, generally, people should'nt be stupid enough to keep payign for something they won't have to pay for if they wait a while.

You're forgetting the 'this-year's-plate' thing in Ireland, however

ninty9er wrote:

I don't know where this idea came from, but I was at a Charlie McCreevy lecture lastnight (I know he's not minister for finance anymore), but someone asked if VRT should be abolished and he said any govt. would be stupid to do so, considering the amounts of money being spent on cars already. VRT isn't doing any harm. There are also too many cars on the road he said. Abolioshing VRT would further congest the roads.

While i don't agree with VRT I can still see where he's coming from

But why do you think VRT will be phased out

What a load of b*ll*cks (not @ ya ninty9er, but @ that McCreevy guy). I don't think I ever heard a more pitiful bunch of arguments by any (ex- or current-) government minister to justify a tax (and conveniently shift the blame attributable to the gvt's ineptitude for all things 'traffic' back onto motorist :eek: !). I think the only one who comes close to that one is good old Prescott at the time of the Two-Jags affair. Cop on, Minister: anyone who needs or wants to drive in ireland is already doing so, only VRT is keeping them from newer/more efficient/safer/less polluting models :mad:

Henry Ford III

Revenue from the motorist is reckoned to be €4.5 billion per annum, between VAT, VRT, excise duires on taxes on fuel, etc.

I hate VRT and the crazy price of cars here, and would love to be able to afford to drive in something fancier.

The reality however is that even when illegal VRT is reduced and gradually phased out, the tax will be collected some other way from the motorist.

€5000 per annum in road tax anyone?

full forward

Is VRT costing Lives? It does cause manafacturers to strip out some expensive safty equipment to keep the price down. eg active seats or extra airbags, stability control etc.

Also manafucturers are forced to bring in special smaller engines for countries with high VRT. Slower cars cannot overtake safely and could be more likly to have an accident.

The agrument sometimes used here is that safty equipment will cause people to take more chances and therefore increase accidents. Thats like saying umbrellas cause rain. If a bus skids on ice and hits my car would I not be better off with extra safty equipment? Would the safty equipment have caused the accident? I think not.

I seems like keeping your children alive is taxed as a luxury in backward old Ireland.

Gurgle

irishpartyboy wrote:

So although dealers dont make any money out of existing VRT, they definitely dont want it scrapped. Plus any private motorists out there could instantly lose anything from 200-16000 on the value of their car.. i.e. VRT already paid.

Bottom line - The national dealership cartel is a major party sponsor. No change will be made that would affect that cheque. There will be some workaround found so that the government makes just as much money and the dealerships don't lose out.

ambro25

Gurgle wrote:

Bottom line - The national dealership cartel is a major party sponsor. No change will be made that would affect that cheque. There will be some workaround found so that the government makes just as much money and the dealerships don't lose out.

Sounds increasingly like a swap of reduced VRT for increased VAT, which would maintain the private second hand values.

€5000 per annum in road tax anyone?

Maybe not 5k but certainly 1k... and petrol hike more likely, methinks, the good old "boiled frog syndrom"

Gurgle

ambro25 wrote:

Maybe not 5k but certainly 1k... and petrol hike more likely, methinks, the good old "boiled frog syndrom"

Not quite sure what a boiled frog syndrome is, but sounds like they will make new cars cheaper and spread the lost revenue across all drivers.
But that can't be right, that would be like taxing poor people as much as rich people, which couldn't possibly be a policy for our socialist government.:rolleyes:

Henry Ford III

Cars will not get cheaper. Illegal VRT has been here for a while, and it'll be replaced by something equally illegal. Number plate tax perhaps?

The govt. cannot afford the loss in revenue. If they stopped wasting taxpayers money perhaps they could but that's an entirely different matter.

ambro25

Gurgle wrote:

Not quite sure what a boiled frog syndrome is

(i) Pour cold water in pan
(ii) Place frog in pan
(iii) Place pan on stove
(iv) Heat gently to a simmer (add garlic and herbs to taste )
(v) Frog will not jump out at any stage

= Frog eventually boiled (scientifically proven).

I'll let you draw your conclusions as to the wisdom of this analogy, when contemplating how the GVT might tweak taxes here and there to balance the budget at the time of scrapping the VRT.

Wouldn't surprise me one icky little bit if we ended up paying more for motoring around Ireland after they've scrapped the VRT

Seth Brundle

ninty9er wrote:

I don't know where this idea came from, but I was at a Charlie McCreevy lecture lastnight (I know he's not minister for finance anymore), but someone asked if VRT should be abolished and he said any govt. would be stupid to do so, considering the amounts of money being spent on cars already. VRT isn't doing any harm. There are also too many cars on the road he said. Abolioshing VRT would further congest the roads.

While i don't agree with VRT I can still see where he's coming from

But why do you think VRT will be phased out

and this is the man supposed to be Commissioner for the Internal Market and Services.
Just read his homepage...
http://europa.eu.int/comm/commission_barroso/mccreevy/index_en.htm

One word - hypocrite!

Gurgle

ambro25 wrote:

Wouldn't surprise me one icky little bit if we ended up paying more for motoring around Ireland after they've scrapped the VRT

Depressingly likely.

More to the point - those of us driving 10 year old Toyotas will be paying more for the privilige while those driving 10 week old Mercedes will find their motoring bill going down.

Lord Nikon

What annoys me, is what VRT stands for. VRT=Vehicle Registration Tax
VRT should be the same for all vehicles, regardless of the engine size, Registration of a vehicle is the reg plates and logbook. Simple.


The Uk may have higher spec motors than Ireland, but they pay more in fuel costs than us.
Average price of unleaded in the UK is 88.9p(Stg), that the equivelent of 129.7c(EUR)
Average price of unleaded in Eire is 108.4c(EUR)
That's a staggering 21c(EUR) difference per litre on just unleaded. I'm sure the Uk government can afford to decrease VRT/Car tax/Vat, cosidering theirs well over 32million cars in the uk. They also have zero tolerance to insurance/car tax evading in the uk, too, some fine money to be made their.


Also, consider this in ireland.
I drive a 1.4 litre petrol car 4 seats, road tax = 292euro a year
My mate drives a 2.5turbo diesel jeep commercial, road tax = 253euro a year.
Bus/coach, 61 seats, road tax = 307euro a year.

Do I get penalised because I cause more polution, no
Do I get penalised because I put more weight on the roads and cause damage, no

The reason is, is because the government would make a lot more money by loading the private car owner, because their is so many.

I maybe going somewhat off topic, but you can see where I'm going. If the goverment abolish VRT they need to replace the money. My idea would be to load the tax of commercials, and bus services(not public transport). Driving should be a right, not a privelage.

Also, cars are cheaper in the states and mainland europe because they are left hand drive. Bigger demand for lefthand drive, more cars produced, more competition. Not a whole lot of production for righthand drive, compared to lefthand. it's cheaper for manufacturers to build just lefthand-drive, than both. higher prices than the US

Gurgle

neuromancer wrote:

Also, cars are cheaper in the states and mainland europe because they are left hand drive. Bigger demand for lefthand drive, more cars produced, more competition. Not a whole lot of production for righthand drive, compared to lefthand. it's cheaper for manufacturers to build just lefthand-drive, than both. higher prices than the US

Countries where they drive on the left include India (with 1 billion people) and Japan (127 million and an enormous car manufacturing industry)
Somewhere in the region of 1/3 of the world's population I think.

1. Anguilla
2. Antigua and Barbuda
3. Australia
4. Bahamas
5. Bangladesh
6. Barbados
7. Bermuda
8. Bhutan
9. Botswana
10. Brunei
11. Cayman Islands
12. Christmas Island (Australia)
13. Cook Islands
14. Cyprus
15. Dominica
16. East Timor
17. Falkland Islands
18. Fiji
19. Grenada
20. Guernsey (Channel Islands)
21. Guyana
22. Hong Kong
23. India
24. Indonesia
25. Ireland
26. Isle of Man
27. Jamaica
28. Japan
29. Jersey (Channel Islands)
30. Kenya
31. Kiribati
32. Cocos (Keeling) Islands (Australia)
33. Lesotho
34. Macau
35. Malawi
36. Malaysia
37. Maldives
38. Malta
39. Mauritius
40. Montserrat
41. Mozambique
42. Namibia
43. Nauru
44. Nepal
45. New Zealand
46. Niue
47. Norfolk Island (Australia)
48. Pakistan
49. Papua New Guinea
50. Pitcairn Islands (Britain)
51. Saint Helena
52. Saint Kitts and Nevis
53. Saint Lucia
54. Saint Vincent and the Grenadines
55. Seychelles
56. Singapore
57. Solomon Islands
58. South Africa
59. Sri Lanka
60 . Suriname
61 . Swaziland
62. Tanzania
63. Thailand
64. Tokelau (New Zealand)
65. Tonga
66. Trinidad and Tobago
67. Turks and Caicos Islands
68. Tuvalu
69. Uganda
70. United Kingdom
71. Virgin Islands (British)
72. Virgin Islands (US)
73. Zambia
74. Zimbabwe

Lord Nikon

Gurgle wrote:

Countries where they drive on the left include India (with 1 billion people) and Japan (127 million and an enormous car manufacturing industry)
Somewhere in the region of 1/3 of the world's population I think.

There are still only about eight million passenger vehicles on Indian roads, in a country of more than one billion people. That's a quarter the amount of cars in the UK.

Poor Indians rely, in addition to their feet, on an extraordinary array of contraptions for transport. They pile on top of buses in the Indian version of the double-decker. They ride tractors and bullock carts and pack 13 into Tempo taxis made for six.

I remember reading that Japan had very restrictive requirements on new car registration. Specifically, you had to show that you owned a parking space for a car before you could buy one, a rule that amounted to needing to already own a car before buying one.

the Japanese have a very strict system of auto inspection:

The first ones to talk to the government about this were the car manufacturers, and they convinced the government to enforce a rule that used cars have to go to the technical inspection after 3 years, and this is a costly matter since a check costs between 1500 and 3500 EUR. Once you're in the system, you have to get your car checked every 2 years, and once your car is 10 years old, you need to go there every year. This is a reson why the Japanese change cars quite fast, usually before the car is 3 years old. Important aspect is that you have no control whatsoever on the cost of possible repairs, because after the technical check, the car is driven to the garage and they do the repairs that the technical check asked them to do, you just get the bill with your car. A very nice rip-off

alias no.9

ambro25 wrote:

Christ on a bike! It's basic maths! :rolleyes:

I'm afraid VRT is nothing of the sort. If the government were in any way honest about how much they were charging in VRT, it would be one thing, but VRT is the ultimate scam, they don't charge it as a percentage of the pre VRT price as all other sales taxes are calculated, oh no, VRT is calculated on the final retail price or open market selling price (OMSP) of a car. If you were to calculate VRT as a markup tax on the pre-VRT price, the 22.5%, 25% and 30% rates will become 29%, 33.3% and 42.9% respectively. Who dreamt up this wonderful scheme where you tell the people you're taxing them 30% but take almost 43% (that's theft in my books)? None other than Bebebebertie.

It's not a case of double taxation, it's triple or quadruple taxation because of the way it is calculated, you effectively pay VRT on top of VRT, on top of VAT and if the car is made outside of the EU all of this is on top of Duty or Common Customs Tarrif (CCT).

alias no.9

neuromancer wrote:

Also, cars are cheaper in the states and mainland europe because they are left hand drive. Bigger demand for lefthand drive, more cars produced, more competition. Not a whole lot of production for righthand drive, compared to lefthand. it's cheaper for manufacturers to build just lefthand-drive, than both. higher prices than the US

As a mechanics of solids lecturer I once had used to say, "that's bollix that is". Pre-tax prices in Ireland are amongst the lowest pre-tax prices in the EU. EU legislation currently being enacted will ensure that the pre-tax prices for equivalent models will have to be identical across the EU. There may well be economies of scale in LHD v's RHD, but they do not dictate the price differential between Ireland and mainland europe / the US, taxes do.

ninty9er

VRT will have to be abolished but will obviously have to be replaced. consider a country like Sweden or Finland where they pay a top rate of 49% Income tax and a 1.0 bog standard Yaris is €18k

Gurgle

ninty9er wrote:

VRT will have to be abolished but will obviously have to be replaced. consider a country like Sweden or Finland where they pay a top rate of 49% Income tax and a 1.0 bog standard Yaris is €18k

Whats more relevant is not how much they're taxed, its where the money goes.

They have these long black shiny things all over Scandanavia, known as 'roads' in English.
We have 3 or 4 partial 'roads', the M1, M4, M7 and M50 spring to mind.

For the most part we have to get by with dirt tracks the Scandanavians wouldn't drive their tractors on.

ambro25

alias no.9 wrote:

(...)but VRT is the ultimate scam, they don't charge it as a percentage of the pre VRT price as all other sales taxes are calculated, oh no, VRT is calculated on the final retail price or open market selling price (OMSP) of a car.

I always thought OMSP values were actually reasonably spot-on (but biased by the fact they already include depreciated VRT of course), but I didn't know about final retail price.

So, essentially (I like things plain and simple )

(i) if dealer A sells me a new 2.0 car €10k, VRT = €3.3k (30%),

but if I'm dumb and don't shop around
(ii) dealer A sells me the very same new 2.0 car €20k, VRT = €6.6k (30%)?

F*ckin'ell :eek: :mad: