VRT to be put on classics in the budget?

junkyard

I heard today from a reliable source that the government plan on putting VRT on classics in the budget, has anyone else heard this? It's bad enough with the hike in road tax and VRT on modern cars but this is the last straw. Those bloody greens will have us all on bikes in another while if we don't make a stand.:mad:

mike65

Jebus, don't tell me - they're going to abolish to 30 year motor tax rule as well!

Mike.

Victor

What, you mean the guys driving flash €50,000 1960s classic to work every day will have to pay their fair share of tax? **Shock**

mike65

How about a 3 grand Alfa from 1973 with rusty sills and dodgy electrics?

Mike.

junkyard

Victor wrote: »

What, you mean the guys driving flash €50,000 1960s classic to work every day will have to pay their fair share of tax? **Shock**

A lot of us are paying more than our fair share of tax and cars are peoples hobbies like some play golf or own boats and the like. In fairness very few drive their classics every day and to most it's a hobby. If they want to screw people they should bring in limited mileage whereby if you do clock up a big mileage tax that and leave the rest of us alone.

mike65

Classics have paid thier way already. Time to give something back. Or put another - not take so much.

Mike.

maidhc

Victor wrote: »

What, you mean the guys driving flash €50,000 1960s classic to work every day will have to pay their fair share of tax? **Shock**

NO ONE does that.

Anyone who has a flash 1960's classic will have more respect for it (and themselves) than drive it through rush hour traffic and leave it in a car park.

They are a hobby.. some people like watches, more like bicycles, others cameras. Pathetic small mindedness.

I have a classic, and like 99.99999% of people it is a second car that is rarely driven. I spend what I would spend on tax maintainaing it and looking after it.

Anan1

maidhc wrote: »

NO ONE does that.

Actually, they do.

maidhc

Anan1 wrote: »

Actually, they do.

Drive to work, evey day in a valuable classic car? My Capri (which isn't particularly valauble) has most of the running gear from a 20 yr old car, and it would be a steaming pile of junk if it did my 40 mile round trip + 20 mins stuck in traffic every day.

I bring it to work occasionally, but I (and every other classic owner I know), also have a daily driver for which full tax is payable. Incidentally the Capri also burns petrol (lots of), which is taxed.

Why should I be taxed for what is in effect preserving our heritage?

You can be sure driving a "flash 1960s classic" is NOT an efficient way to avoid tax.

junkyard

There's very little if any interest, in our motoring heritage in this country as far as the government is concerned when you consider the money poured into other hobbies like GAA or hurling and the likes.........as I said earlier, if they just left us alone I for one would be happy or else hit all sports and hobbies and tax them all accordingly. I'd love to see the reaction if they put a tax on footballs, golf clubs and hurleys.

Blue850

the lads selling the old Irish tax books at shows will do a roaring trade:D

Anan1

maidhc wrote: »

You can be sure driving a "flash 1960s classic" is NOT an efficient way to avoid tax.

I never said it was. People do it, all the same.:)

green-blood

yeah a very very very very small number of people who lets face it wont be affect one jot....

btw you pay VRT when you import a classic, only its €50 and not penal.... whats the plan, the minimum on any import is 20% of teh value of a car under 1.4ltr or €315 which ever is lowest. If it the lowest fine, but how do they value a classic... God help us if SIMI are invovled (again)

Anan1

green-blood wrote: »

the minimum on any import is 20% of teh value of a car under 1.4ltr or €315 which ever is lowest.

They charge whichever is the highest.

Dades

junkyard wrote: »

Those bloody greens will have us all on bikes in another while if we don't make a stand.:mad:

Well if a stand needs to be made - just tell me where to show up!

And people who drive their classics to work are unlikely to be doing so to save tax, as they almost certainly have a second car taxed and insured.

MercMad

Dades wrote: »

Well if a stand needs to be made - just tell me where to show up!

And people who drive their classics to work are unlikely to be doing so to save tax, as they almost certainly have a second car taxed and insured.

........yes I was discussing this with other members of a club I am in and we decided that if they change ANYTHING relating to Classic Cars, VRT, Road Tax ANYTHING that we will not pay it and form a very active Protest Group.

I told everyone who ever enjoyed driving a car, before the election that voting Green was going to kick us in the teeth sooner or later !

Irish Motorists have been hit ENOUGH !:mad:

Victor

Dades wrote: »

And people who drive their classics to work are unlikely to be doing so to save tax, as they almost certainly have a second car taxed and insured.

They do - to avoid BIK and road tax and VRT.

junkyard wrote: »

when you consider the money poured into other hobbies like GAA or hurling and the likes

Hurling is GAA and they are sports, not hobbies. Whatever the argument about preserving the past, we also need to preserve the present in encouraging healthier lifestyles.

junkyard

Victor wrote: »

Hurling is GAA and they are sports, not hobbies. Whatever the argument about preserving the past, we also need to preserve the present in encouraging healthier lifestyles.

In all honesty I can't see a few hundred classic cars making much of a difference to global warming. When you look at the skies in the morning and see the pollution from planes alone, even one plane would probably cause more pollution in one short trip as many classic cars would in a life time. It's a case of everyone to their own, some are into cars and that's their thing and I don't see why anyone should be allowed to eliminate someones hobby by introducing taxes and fines. Personally if they want to bring in NCT testing and higher taxes on classics I'm not paying, I'll just use my trade plates.

ds20prefecture

Victor wrote: »

They do - to avoid BIK and road tax and VRT.

Yes they do. I do anyway. Is this a crime of some sort?

--amadeus--

My car isn't worth anything like 50K but it is a 60's classic and I do use it for work driving - but since I usually work from home that's not a lot! It did go to Galway yesterday and Ennis last week though so it gets about. It's partly a tax thing and partly an enjoyment thing.

Anyway the amount of money that would be raised by VRT on classics is fairly negligible in the grand scheme of things. If you look at the hole that the fall off in construction is going to blow in the budget I can understand why they are looking at alternative options. As with all loopholes you'll get away with it as long as the number of people availing of teh loophole is fairly small. However in the last 12 - 24 months there has been an explosion of people bringinging in classics from the UK, every ferry has a classic or two. The revenue tracks foreign registrations and they see the trends. All of a sudden it's seen not as a tax break for hobbyists but a loophole for teh masses and it slams shut.

I wouldn't see this as a Greens driven initiative actually. A very strong case can be made for teh environmental aspects of driving old cars versus new ones due to teh energy and carbon costs of manufacture. The Greens are more likely to push up taxes on fuel - indeed I seem to remember one of them talking about phasing out VRT and moving it onto petrol. This is - if true - just a measure to raise revenue.

And it's still just a rumour.

maidhc

Victor wrote: »

Hurling is GAA and they are sports, not hobbies. Whatever the argument about preserving the past, we also need to preserve the present in encouraging healthier lifestyles.

Would you approve of "VRT"ing, say, art?

Dades

Victor wrote: »

They do - to avoid BIK and road tax and VRT.

In all honesty, how many people in Ireland run a classic as a company car? I read a piece about that in the Times' motoring section maybe 7 years ago and don't know a single person doing it. I have no doubt there are some - but it seems like awful begrudgery to seek to penalise hobbyists for that reason.

The problem is the greens and their black & white science. Big engine capacity - big emissions. Old car - big emissions. What about the energy used to build a new car? Or a car's actual annual mileage?

Why don't we knock down a few listed buildings while we're at it. I'd imagine the GPO isn't exactly energy efficient.

corktina

Victor wrote: »

They do - to avoid BIK and road tax and VRT.

Hurling is GAA and they are sports, not hobbies. Whatever the argument about preserving the past, we also need to preserve the present in encouraging healthier lifestyles.

not quite true....PLAYING GAA is a sport...WATCHING it is a hobby....and yet we all paid for their stadium....and a lot more.

--amadeus--

Dades wrote: »

The problem is the greens and their black & white science. Big engine capacity - big emissions. Old car - big emissions. What about the energy used to build a new car? Or a car's actual annual mileage?

Actually part of teh problem is a lack of understanding, rumour mongering and a people making assumptions without checking teh facts.

The official Green Party position is to abolish all VRT charges - link here and move the revenue to petrol, hence based on a cars actual mileage, just as you want.

As I said this isn't about cars or teh environment - if it's true it's about increasing revenue. And at the moment we don't even know if it's true.

galwaytt

it's exciting over here, too.... http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?p=910047#910047

and, just sent this to the Green Party as well:

Dear Sir's,

Please advise how you could possibly reconcile your manifesto, posted here: http://www.greenparty.ie/en/policies/economy/abolishing_motor_tax_and_vrt with your recent announcement to penalise, essentially, irish families by the recent announced tax increase.

You wonder how this may be so, so allow me to elaborate:

Current vehicles size (exclusive of engines), is now influenced a great deal by safety. This is a good thing. Legislation also plays it's part in vehicle choice, as you must choose one to fit your requirements, e.g. to take child seats, etc. Now, anyone who has a requirement to carry either, more than two child seats, or, two child seats + 1 other child, cannot fit them into a current 'standard' car. In other words, a car with 3 rear seat belts. This is because there is not enough space for anytyhing other than two child seats in the rear. Accordingly therefore, to accomodate the 3rd/4th etc child, vehicles with more flexible seating options are required. Classic examples of this are the so called '7 seaters'. It is not the we require 7 actual seats, but we can't fit 3 children into the rear of a standard car.

However, now, in your infinate wisdom you have decided that our safety is now negotiable, as there is no 7-seater that will escape Minister Gormley's recently announced car tax hike. In fact, I think the action disgraceful, and your about face, in the face of your published manifesto, proof that the Greens now too, are merely 'yet another self serving' policital party.


I think you should also have a look here, for some debate on the subject: http://www.politics.ie/viewtopic.php?p=910047#910047

Yours, in disgust,

Dades

--amadeus-- wrote: »

Actually part of teh problem is a lack of understanding, rumour mongering and a people making assumptions without checking teh facts.

The official Green Party position is to abolish all VRT charges - link here and move the revenue to petrol, hence based on a cars actual mileage, just as you want.

Well that's what I get for basing my rant on what I heard from John Gormley the other day!

Nice one galwaytt.

3ps

What about me... who was about to buy a 300TD W124 Merc and run it on veggie oil, most likely with a proper conversion kit.... I'm doing "the right thing" and yet I'll be penalised?

I'm holding off until after the budget on this now.

MercMad

The official Green Party position is to abolish all VRT charges - link here and move the revenue to petrol, hence based on a cars actual mileage, just as you want.

..........who says we want it on fuel ? I dont want the cost of motoring to increase at all !

The way I see is the motorist pay enough, tax someone else !

If you put more tax on fuel then EVERYTHING goes up as the costs to get every single item to the shops goes up. So now we pay for the fuel WE use AND we pay more for goods delivered !

Also what about the person who buys a new car right now and pays the big chunk of VRT, then they have to pay another extra tax on fuel as well ??

Galwaytt makes some valid points about safety however it fell on deaf ears before when VRT was charged on options such as airbags and ABS brakes !

--amadeus--

MercMad wrote: »

..........who says we want it on fuel ? I dont want the cost of motoring to increase at all !

That's an ideological debate about taxes versus services. We want european levels of public service coupled with american rates of tax and it can't happen. Ask people if they would like a better health service and they'll say yes. Ask they if they'll pay an extrac 1c in tax to pay for it and they'll say no (ignoring for a moment questions of value). Likewise we all (or the vast majority) understand that climate change is real and a genuine threat yet we don't want to change our personal habits to mitigate the danger.

I don't want VRT on classics. I don't want them to abolish the €42 road tax and I wish they would lower teh duty on petrol and disel. I agree about the knock on effects of increased transport costs hitting general consumer prices. However there are a number of facts that need consideration.

First is that we are probably at, past or close to peak oil. That means that the whole idea that oil prices will fall is nonsense - production will slow while demand rises and that can only push price in one direction. $100+ / barrel oil will soon be the norm and thank God for a weak dollar or we'd be feeling a whole lot more of a pinch. The only viable soloution is to remove - or at least lower - our dependance on fossil fuels and teh only (though blunt) tool that government has in this is tax. Hence VRT rebates on biofuel cars and tax hikes on normal petrol.

The second diffficulty is the fact that the vast majority of teh worlds scientific community are agreed that emissions - particullarly carbon - are adversly affecting the climate. Personally I think that there are avenues that are not being looked at and that transport is a bit of an easy target (methane from cattle generates 18% more greenhouse gas emissions than transport - not just cars but all transport - and no one is taxing burgers). Likewise whatever we do is a drop compared to coal fired power stations in China but that we can't influence. Our own production of greenhouse gases we can so again teh blunt weapon of tax gets deployed.

As I said at teh moment this is conjecture and rumour. I won't like it if it happens and I don't think it's a "green" initiative more a revenue raiser but the world is changing and that will hit the classic car world at some point.

MercMad

Yes fair comments, all of them !

It the other avenues that need looking at, and if we decide to protest then thoise other avenues should be part of the argument !

I'm not convinced about the viabilty, or the benefits of hybrid cars in a large scale situation.

I would accept that life had to change, but I would feel better about it if we saw some real fresh concepts from the Government instead of the usual taxing of the "soft touches" !

There are too many industries taking large profits without paying their share and they should be targetted first !

Why aren't they encouraging the growth of Rapseed anyway ??

Dades

--amadeus-- wrote: »

First is that we are probably at, past or close to peak oil. That means that the whole idea that oil prices will fall is nonsense - production will slow while demand rises and that can only push price in one direction. $100+ / barrel oil will soon be the norm and thank God for a weak dollar or we'd be feeling a whole lot more of a pinch. The only viable soloution is to remove - or at least lower - our dependance on fossil fuels and teh only (though blunt) tool that government has in this is tax. Hence VRT rebates on biofuel cars and tax hikes on normal petrol.

If we are at peak and oil prices are going to push the cost of petrol up indefinitely, why should the government put more tax on top of that as well?

As for biofuel, it's shortcomings are becoming increasingly obvious. It's one thing to do your bit for the environment, it's another to do it at the expense of the world's poor.

Anan1

Dades wrote: »

If we are at peak and oil prices are going to push the cost of petrol up indefinitely, why should the government put more tax on top of that as well?

To reduce consumption and to fund public transport?

Dades

It's not only commuters who use petrol.

shagman

Have you ever been iritated by those people who fail to see a car as a piece of art but as a device for "getting from A to B". Recently I've been formulating a nice rebuttle to these philistines which ties in with the above discussion......

The real problem with transport and the envoironment are commuters, those on school runs/shop runs and those who don't like driving but only use their cars to get from A to B.

These people shouldn't have cars and shouldn't feel the need to have cars. As they don't love driving they wont miss them much anyway.
There SHOULD IDEALLY be an efficient public transport system in place. Is this not the Green solution the vast majority using public transport freeing up the gridlocked roads for us the driving enthusiasts to enjoy.
If all cars were used as playthings to tootle about with on dark winter nights and bring out for the odd burn up on a weekend there wouldn't be a gridlock or a transport pollution problem.

Are we not the ideal drivers of tomorrow showing others the way!!!!

maidhc

Dades wrote: »

As for biofuel, it's shortcomings are becoming increasingly obvious. It's one thing to do your bit for the environment, it's another to do it at the expense of the world's poor.

Well just taxing things is hardly the solution!

I agree about commuters. I would LOVE to leave my car at home every day. In fact I would be happy to drive the 4 miles to the closest large town (Midleton) and park my car there and get the train the remainder of the way. Guess what though... the rail link to Midleton has been delayed by another 12 months.

I really despise people in government then preaching how things should be done

And anyway... it is fine for Californians to be worried about climate change. I dont think we need be as concerned! The people in Cali have more to loose.

cantdecide

maidhc wrote: »

I would LOVE to leave my car at home every day....the rail link to Midleton has been delayed by another 12 months.

Oh the irony of 2 nicely charred Bus Eirinn buses alongside the shut train station!!:D What has public transport done for our environment now:D It's also not so far from An Rothar (PS, howdley doodley, neighbourino)

w123

I find the earier on topic points raised interesting. We have a 123 merc estate, which we love. Last month I bought a 1977 280e for £300. I bought it as on one or two days a week we need 2 cars, and, being a cheapskate I didn't want to pay road tax for a second car that would be sitting outside the house most of the time. I wonder what does that make me?

gn3dr

Makes you sensible if you ask me.
The frigging Govt. in this country screw motorists so much. It drives me up the wall.

Dades

gn3dr wrote: »

It drives me up the wall.

Soon they'll be charging you for that, too.

--amadeus--

Dades wrote: »

If we are at peak and oil prices are going to push the cost of petrol up indefinitely, why should the government put more tax on top of that as well?

As for biofuel, it's shortcomings are becoming increasingly obvious. It's one thing to do your bit for the environment, it's another to do it at the expense of the world's poor.

I agree about Biofuel, it's never going to be more than a short term solution. There is a book called "The end of oil" by Paul Roberts which is an excellent read. He considers alternatives like biofuel and LPG as simply bridging technologies to whatever will replace oil. They are good for ekking the most out of our remaining fossil fuel reserves but are not sustainable in the long term, unlike teh holy grail of hydrogen.

As for taxing petrol we live in a market driven economy. By taxing petrol up the Govt provide a disincentive for use which drives demand down and encourages teh market to develop both more fuel effieicent technologies and alternatives to oil. Non-intervention would get us there but taxing gets us there faster. I don't neccesarily agree but without the ability or will to impose other solutions (a high mandated minimum mpg standard being an obvious one) this is what we are stuck with.