Change to VRT system annouced in Budget.

kluivert

It was annouced that VRT will change to CO2 basis rather than engine size to encourage the registration of Diesel operated cars.

Hopefully. When further details are annouced that it wil mean that VRT is cheaper over all.

MercMad

Mmm I cant help but be suspicious that this will end up being an increase rather than a decrease !

dubstub

Looks like motor tax will be changed to also favour lower emission cars. No details yet.

mike65

The text

In the case of Vehicle Registration Tax, I intend to change the current rating system to relate it more closely to environmental policy objectives, in this case reducing carbon dioxide emissions. I intend that there should be some reward in the VRT system for choosing lower-emission vehicles, and that those choosing higher-emission vehicles should pay more.

For that reason, I am setting out a range of options in the Budget booklet for making such a move. My Department will carry out a public consultation process on these proposals before coming back to Government. Any changes will have effect from a target date of 1 January 2008.

At the same time, my colleague, the Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government will consult on his proposals for a complementary rebalancing of annual motor tax. This would provide a further incentive through the motor tax system for the motoring public to drive cleaner cars and would impose some additional cost in respect of cars with higher carbon dioxide emission levels. This would apply to vehicles registered on or after 1 January 2008. Underpinning both of these initiatives will be a new mandatory labelling system for cars based on CO2 emission levels.

Linking consumption taxes to environmental goals requires us to discuss the details of such moves thoroughly with stakeholders if we want to get it right.

All to play for yet.

Mike.

kluivert

Thanks Mike for that.

I didnt the deadline for 2008 though :rolleyes:

connundrum

MercMad wrote:

Mmm I cant help but be suspicious that this will end up being an increase rather than a decrease !

Car dealers are clapping themselves on the back. I bet that whatever decrease will be allowed for in VRT will be levelled out with dealer's profits.

Bah

kluivert

connundrum wrote:

Car dealers are clapping themselves on the back. I bet that whatever decrease will be allowed for in VRT will be levelled out with dealer's profits.

Bah

I knew there was a catch somewhere along the line.

They are saying the the doubling of interest relief for first time buyers will lead to house price increases.

Do you ever get the feeling that we are on the wrong side of the counter.

MercMad

Linking consumption taxes to environmental goals requires us to discuss the details of such moves thoroughly with stakeholders if we want to get it right.

........stakeholders ??

Eitherway I expect the changes to be minimal !

mike65

We're all customers, clients or stakeholders now!

Mike.

mike65

Regarding consultation over road tax, I wonder with whom such talks will take place? Sounds like us motorists need to get organised and decide what we think would be best and start making representations.

Mike.

mickoneill30

connundrum wrote:

Car dealers are clapping themselves on the back. I bet that whatever decrease will be allowed for in VRT will be levelled out with dealer's profits.

Bah

What the...? Why do you think that? Is there no competition amongst dealers or do you suppose every dealer is going to increase the price of their cars by whatever reduction in price we get from the budget? Sounds a bit daft to me.

All you need is for one dealer not to increase prices and he gets the business that the other dealers would miss out on.

Anyway we don't know if the change is going to put the price of VRT up or down yet?

unkel

:eek:

ireland.com wrote:

Cowen to consult on VRT rates


Budget 2007:The Government may consider introducing an increased rate of vehicle registration tax (VRT) of 35 per cent on large vehicles over 2400cc or else charging taxes on the basis of a vehicle's CO2 emissions.

In a consultation document published with today's Budget, Minister for Finance Brian Cowen outlined a number of options for a more environmentally friendly vehicle taxation system, which he said should be broadly "revenue neutral".

Mr Cowen said he wanted to change the current rating system to "relate it more closely to environmental policy objectives, in this case reducing carbon dioxide emissions".

"I intend that there should be some reward in the VRT system for choosing lower-emission vehicles, and that those choosing higher-emission vehicles should pay more," Mr Cowen said.

Among the options outlined are adjusting the existing bands and VRT rates to encourage the purchase of smaller cars, with a rate of 15 per cent VRT applying to cars up to 1200cc, a reduction in the current A1 rate of 22.5 per cent to 20 per cent for cars between 1201cc and 1400cc and a new band for larger engine vehicles at a 35 per cent rate.

Alternative options include a retention of the current engine size bands and VRT rates but with the application of a discount of, say, 5 percentage points, for cars with lower CO2 emissions and a levy for cars with higher emissions.

The Department of Finance will also examine next year the case for disallowing capital allowances and leasing expenses for high-emission vehicles.

The public consultation process will continue until March 1 st, with a view to implementing any tax changes from January 1 st, 2008.

At the same time, Minister for the Environment Dick Roche will consult on his proposals for a "complementary rebalancing of annual motor tax", Mr Cowen said.

"This would provide a further incentive through the motor tax system for the motoring public to drive cleaner cars and would impose some additional cost in respect of cars with higher carbon dioxide emission levels.

"This would apply to vehicles registered on or after 1 January 2008. Underpinning both of these initiatives will be a new mandatory labelling system for cars based on CO2 emission levels.

"Linking consumption taxes to environmental goals requires us to discuss the details of such moves thoroughly with stakeholders if we want to get it right."

Biro

Typical... "Oh - we're great, we're taxing cars based on emissions.... so we're introducing rates based on engine cc's..."
Silly idiots. When will they learn?

mike65

We have to educate the minister then.

Department of Finance,
Government Buildings,
Upper Merrion Street,
Dublin 2,
Ireland.

VRT Consultation PDF

Mike.

wyndham

It was only a matter of time. Look at the Mayor of London's proposals for the increase in congestion charge for large 4x4 vehicles/bigger engines. Drivers of these vehicles are going to be hit harder and harder in years to come.

peasant

Anybody noticed that these changes will take effect well AFTER half the population had ample time to grab the celtic tiger by the tail and buy themselves a swanky, bigger car?

I mean it isn't like emmission based taxation was an entirely new idea, now is it?

Or dou you really think we would have been swamped with SUV's the way we are, had this tax already existed 5-7 years ago?

Honni soit qui mal y pense

mike65

There's only one n in Honi!

Mike.

ninty9er

Well I'm broadly in favour of seachange in taxation on cars, but do not agree with any of the three proposals, which is why I'll be submitting my own.

I think the tax at point of sale should be CC based because of the amounts of fuel they pump through, regardless of emissions, but the usage tax (annual) should become emissions based. It would be quite simple for a new S-Class to use more fuel and emit less than a 15 yr old Micra

peasant

See... that's why I moved to an English speaking country and not to France ...waaay to complimacated lingo, them there Frenchies

Lex Luthor

Can anyone tell me what are the current rates of VRT and at what engine size they apply to?

Lex Luthor

its ok just found them

The following VRT rates, subject to a minimum VRT of €315, apply to Category A vehicles:

up to 1400cc 22.5% of OMSP
1401cc - 1900cc 25% of OMSP
>over 1900cc 30% of OMSP

Seth Brundle

ninty9er wrote:

Well I'm broadly in favour of seachange in taxation on cars, but do not agree with any of the three proposals, which is why I'll be submitting my own.

I think the tax at point of sale should be CC based because of the amounts of fuel they pump through, regardless of emissions, but the usage tax (annual) should become emissions based. It would be quite simple for a new S-Class to use more fuel and emit less than a 15 yr old Micra

None of these taxes are just, environmentally friendly or voter inspiring.
The simplist method of increasing taxes in a fair and green way is to bump up the price of petrol. That way it is the polluter who pays based on their consumption.
using an emissions based system punished cars with a high emission level regardless of whether they do 100 or 100k kilometres per year.
As for VRT - this should just not be!

Ice_Box

They still would like to hold on to engine size VRT. This is just nuts.

example...

Honda Accord 2.2 L Diesel Co2 level (g/km): 143
Current Charges: VRT (30%)

Mercedes Benz E200 1.8 petrol co2 level (g/km): 195
Current Charges: VRT (25%)

They're afraid that a reduction in car prices will cause people to buy more cars. Thats nuts too. I could probably trade in my 03 Audi for a dozen 10 year old Fiat Unos but why would I do that?

ninty9er

Ice_Box wrote:

They're afraid that a reduction in car prices will cause people to buy more cars. Thats nuts too. I could probably trade in my 03 Audi for a dozen 10 year old Fiat Unos but why would I do that?

It's not people buying multiple cars, but more people buying new cars, while this would increase tax revenue, it would also fu<k the whole battle with inflation.

I have considered the dropping of cc for emissions and can see the advantages, but it is entirely possible for that Micra I mentioned earlier to pollute more with less petrol which is why it's also not without it's faults.

So basically if you want to pay €3 a litre for diesel or add 2% to the lower rate of PAYE you could drop VRT, but it's more politically edible to have an extra tax on the "product" (being the registration) than the use of it....same principle as stamp duty I suppose. a lot more popular than water sq footage annual rates

Funxy

Lex Luthor wrote:

its ok just found them

The following VRT rates, subject to a minimum VRT of €315, apply to Category A vehicles:

up to 1400cc 22.5% of OMSP
1401cc - 1900cc 25% of OMSP
>over 1900cc 30% of OMSP

And even those figures are the biggest load of trash i've ever seen. 30% my ass. I would be happy if we were charged 'only' 30% of the price but don't forget the revenue can do anything they want. If they are allowed bring in an even higher vrt quote for bigger engines it just means they'll be able to rip us off even more.

MercMad

I dont think taxing fuel is the way to go, what about some elderly couple who are never going to buy a new car, they will pay more for fuel just to reduce the VRT for folk who don't want to pay it on new cars !!



I object strongly to any capacity based system, if you buy one of those Lexus 400h Hybrids, or an Hydrogen powered 7 series ( :eek: ) you'll pay a higher rate !!

I suppose they could redesign it in a uniformed way but an emmision based system would be best............it has to be one or the other and not a mixture of any of the three suggestions...........thats ridiculous !

MercMad

Mike is right, thanks for the link, we need to start lobbying and we need to decide what the best set up is !

WE are the motorists, the road users, the buyers and we have a few months to make a point ! I reckon we should post detailed suggestions here, and when we have it refined and agreed, then we all send in the same suggestion !

Mike...........how about a sticky !!

BTW how do they know what our total emmissions are year to year ? Is this detected and recieved from the NCT reports and is this the sole way to compile the information ?

One last point, I recall that the majority of Jap import cars did not reach the same emmission standard that we had in this Country yet I didn't see the Revenue objecting, or taking even more cash from this source. They saw the idea of recieving HUGE sums of money on USED cars so appealing that emmissions never entered their decision then !! Now the levels have risen and they are in trouble over the Kyoto thing for which IMO they should not have signed up for !

Check this out ..........

"The average emissions of new cars entering the State’s national fleet in 2005 were 167g CO2
per km, with CO2 emissions from new petrol cars at 166g CO2 per km or approximately 3%
3
(five grams) less than for diesel vehicles at 171g CO2 per km. It must be noted that there is
significant variation in the emissions of similar engine sized cars. While, for a given engine
size, diesel cars tend to produce less CO2 than petrol cars, nevertheless, diesel cars tend in
general to be larger than petrol cars. Although diesel cars may produce less CO2 than similar
sized petrol cars, they produce higher emissions in other areas."

Mc-BigE

want to find out the Co2 emissions of your car?

http://www.smmtco2.co.uk/co2search2.asp

E@gle.

Lex Luthor wrote:

its ok just found them

The following VRT rates, subject to a minimum VRT of €315, apply to Category A vehicles:

up to 1400cc 22.5% of OMSP
1401cc - 1900cc 25% of OMSP
>over 1900cc 30% of OMSP

i just paid my VRT the day before the budget. E315 for a 1.3

kluivert

Can we start a lobby here please and post ideas, then the best ideas will be forward as invited to the minister with our proposals.

You must read there invitation in order to understand what they are looking for.

I have read it and there is too many restrictions in my opinion.

Ie They dont want to get rid of the tax bands.

I compared my cars CO2 emmissions

1.4 1999 Opel Astra petrol 188 g/km
2.0 1999 VW Golf Diesel 143 g/km

Yet you will be a larger VRT bill on the diesel because of the size of the engine. Minister what incentive are you talking about.????

There other point noted was that they cant introduce a new system as this will be complicated. Excuse me minister the information is already widely available.

So my idea, the minister wants to keep tax bands but introduce it on the basis of co2 emissions.

You dont need to be a rocket engineer to work this one out.

Change size engines to CO2 levels. regards of engine size, car size. This will encourage people to buy cleaner cars.

100 - 120 g/km VRT @ 12.5%
121 - 130 g/km VRT @ 15%
131 - 140 g/km VRT @ 17.5%
141 - 150 g/km VRT @ 20%
151 - 160 g/km VRT @ 22.5%
161 - 170 g/km VRT @ 25%

Ok the rates and bands would need to be examined, but you get the point.

In relation to recycling of old cars. All cars should be recycled as outlined in Europe.

Biro

How about a Subaru Impreza WR1.... 265 g/kg... 2 litre!!
Exact same as a 4 litre tdi A8....
Going by engine cc is just stupid.

unkel

Biro wrote:

How about a Subaru Impreza WR1.... 265 g/kg... 2 litre!!
Exact same as a 4 litre tdi A8....
Going by engine cc is just stupid.

Exactly. Even a 4.0l BMW 740i petrol V8 produces less than that

And then there's the small factor that a frugal little diesel doing 50,000km per year outputs more than twice that of a huge fook-off petrol V8 saloon doing only 10,000km

All taxes should be payed at the pump!

kluivert

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

So alternatives please to the VRT system.

Although you have a point.

Bazzy

The elections are summer 2007 and the new changes are planned for 2008

This stinks of empty promise from Bertie and the boys.

I wonder will they be charging interest on Loans from Paddy the Plasterer that dont need to be paid back

I wouldnt believe it for a minute, The main reason why there saying this is because we were way behind on our co2 emissions levels and the jokers in the Dail are afraid they'll be fined.

If there that worried about emmissions Bertie 7 his band of merry men should get a hybrid engine cars !

The government is a sham just look at our minisiter for health ( in case your wondering who ate all the pies)

IT's time to take action and its long overdue. We need to get them to listen to us. They dont pay tax or vrt they get it all for free!

AND THERE RUNNING THIS COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND!*



* a lot done and more to do!

unkel

kluivert wrote:

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

We have until 2008 to get it into the thick heads of those in charge so

connundrum

unkel wrote:

All taxes should be payed at the pump!

++

The more you drive the more you pay. I'd drive about 5000 miles per year, and pay the same tax & vrt as someone who'd do 20,000 per year.

At the pump ftw!

Its done in South Africa and other countries. Just copy a working model, easy. No?

kluivert

I think you guys are fueling the wrong fire here.

Surely VRT cannot be taxed at the pumps.

If VRT on a car as of now is say 5000e

And you drive 20000 miles per year and say of every mile you drive you pay 10c thats 2000e per year.

So if you have the same car for five years then the figure paid over to the Revenue is 10000e.

I would rather the current system thank you very much

If you drive 5000 miles at the same rate over five years then you ll pay over 2500e to the Revenue.

Its one theory, i suppose.

unkel

connundrum wrote:

At the pump ftw!

Its done in South Africa and other countries. Just copy a working model, easy. No?

Sure enough. Only in recent years motor tax was abolished in France and replaced with higher excise duty

Our petrol is cheap compared to other EU(15) countries, especially the UK (think border issues), so there is plenty of opportunity to up the excise by say €0.30 - €0.50 per liter

Government policy stimulating cleaner cars can then be handled in the form of direct subsidies* (on electrical cars, hybrids, hydrogen cars, etc.) or excise discounts (on fuel: biodiesel / alcopetrol / hydrogen, etc.) rather than as a discount of VRT

*This has also been tried and tested in many EU countries during the period that manufacturers started fitting cars with expensive catalytic converters during the 80s

unkel

kluivert wrote:

Surely VRT cannot be taxed at the pumps.

Of course it can. A very simplistic sum:

Car with VRT of €5000. Now the VRT is scrapped, so the €5000 has to be recouped at the pump. Say car lasts 12 years and does 10,000 miles per annum and does 35MPG. That's 120,000 miles, so 15,000 liters, so an excise increase of about €0.30 per liter covers the lost VRT

kluivert wrote:

I would rather the current system thank you very much

Of course you would

The whole point is that people that pollute more than average are not punished and the people that pollute less than average are not awarded at present. If they were than we'd have a system of the polluter pays

In the new system you would be worse of because you pollute more

peasant

ts, ts, ts ...you've all fallen for it already ! :eek:

VRT is NOT an environmental tax, never was, never will be.
VRT under EU free trade regulations is highly questionable if not illegal.
In the interest of free trade within the EU VRT should be abolished...

but not to be replaced by something else ...just plain abolished, full stop.

How to tax cars according to their environmental impact is a totally different kettle of fish altogether.

Any discussion that involves factoring VRT into a new "environemental" taxation system is playing into the governements hands. They are throwing two totally unrelated matters (one a punitive, anti free trade tax; the other pseudo-green "concerns") into one pot, stir it a little and ye all fall for it.

Lambs to the slaughter ...:D

Seth Brundle

kluivert wrote:

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

Simply because no politician/party want to introduce something that may initially get the ire of the voters!
if they got off their arses and used their heads they would think of it quick enough.

The proposed system, like the existing taxation system does not actively encourage people into considering public transport options.
If tax was applied to fuel then people may be more willing to leave the car at home. this would have the net effect of both reducing the number of cars on the roads and also reducing the level of emissions.

peasant

kbannon wrote:

The proposed system, like the existing taxation system does not actively encourage people into considering public transport options.
If tax was applied to fuel then people may be more willing to leave the car at home. this would have the net effect of both reducing the number of cars on the roads and also reducing the level of emissions.

All very well ...in theory ...

To most of us, considering public transport is all we can do ...because there isn't any.
And there never will be sufficient public transport to cover the dispersed settlements that we have in Ireland ...the numbers just won't add up.

Personally, as a rural, dispersed peasant, I do not cherish the thought that my 5 euro per litre of fuel will cover the expense to provide somebody living in Navan with convenient and efficient public transport to Citywest or the IFC ...because there never will be a bus/train/Luas/Metro for me.

I would, on the other hand be very grateful for any tax incentive that I could get, that would entice me to buy a new (without VRT) fuel effiecient and green means of transport.

And at least 50% of the population find themselves in the same position.

So, all taxes at the pump is grossly unfair on quite a large number of the population ...because they have no alternative to using the car.
The one thing they have a choice over, is whether they do their daily commute in a big stonking V8 X5 or a miserly 1.3 JTD Panda.
In the interest of "saving the environment" that choice should be guided towards the environmentally correct direction.

mike65

Just to clarify VRT is a Dept of Finance issue, Motor Tax is a Dept of Environment matter.

Also MercMad I have'nt modded this board for a few months now (pay attention at the back!) So ask KBannon for sticky.

I'd also put third party insurance on the price of fuel as well - kill two birds with one stone and that way no-one can avoid being covered.

Mike.

opus

kbannon wrote:

None of these taxes are just, environmentally friendly or voter inspiring.
The simplist method of increasing taxes in a fair and green way is to bump up the price of petrol. That way it is the polluter who pays based on their consumption.
using an emissions based system punished cars with a high emission level regardless of whether they do 100 or 100k kilometres per year.
As for VRT - this should just not be!

Totally agree, I drive a car (oldish BMW 328) that would is already heavily taxed so I hate to think what it might be like under the new system. But I take the bus to work every day & cycle around when I can. Putting the tax on the fuel cost would save me a fortune and make the people who never leave the car at home pay more for it.

unkel

peasant wrote:

In the interest of free trade within the EU VRT should be abolished...

but not to be replaced by something else ...just plain abolished, full stop

If only

I strongly agree with your principle, but public sector budgets don't quite work like that. The €1,000,000,000.00 VRT revenue has to come from somewhere else

opus wrote:

I drive a car (oldish BMW 328) that would is already heavily taxed so I hate to think what it might be like under the new system. But I take the bus to work every day & cycle around when I can. Putting the tax on the fuel cost would save me a fortune and make the people who never leave the car at home pay more for it.

Based on the polluter pays principle, people like you should be heavily rewarded compared to the current taxation regime. Others that could use other means of transport would have a strong incentive to change their ways

And, peasant, every change from one system to another leaves some people worse off than they were before, even if they can't help it

Then again living in the sticks has benefits too compared to living in Dublin. Some of those are way bigger than paying a bit more for fuel, like a 5 bed detached mansion for €300k. You wouldn't get a corpo flat in the worst area of Dublin for that