VRT Megathread - ALL VRT DISCUSSION IN HERE - Read First Post

CosmicJay

kdevitt wrote: »

As much as the other campaign is daft, this is just as ridiculous imo - while I fully accept that VRT is not an illegal tax, no one in their right mind actually wants to pay it?

I don't think it is people wanting to pay it. So much as it is people not wanting Vrt to be abolished and some other area to be taxed heavily.

Personally I would prefer paying Vrt as to paying for more expensive fuel.

Sure it would be amazing if Vrt dissappeared and another area wasnt taxed. Sadly, thats not going to happen.

questionmark?

kdevitt wrote: »

Really not sure if you're being serious. Do you even know what a ricer is? And if so, why would anyone be importing one from the UK?

Eitherway - if it were truly a green tax people wanted, it would be incorporated in the price of fuel. Ever heard of the concept of 'the polluter pays'?

As much as the other campaign is daft, this is just as ridiculous imo - while I fully accept that VRT is not an illegal tax, no one in their right mind actually wants to pay it?

Its called the carbon tax! and no the vast majority of people don't want it!

si_guru

kdevitt wrote: »

Really not sure if you're being serious. Do you even know what a ricer is? And if so, why would anyone be importing one from the UK?

Eitherway - if it were truly a green tax people wanted, it would be incorporated in the price of fuel. Ever heard of the concept of 'the polluter pays'?

As much as the other campaign is daft, this is just as ridiculous imo - while I fully accept that VRT is not an illegal tax, no one in their right mind actually wants to pay it?

We already have fuel tax... but that has to be balanced with transport costs for goods.

kdevitt

questionmark? wrote: »

Its called the carbon tax! and no the vast majority of people don't want it!

Myself included - but VRT is now being charged on the Co2 emissions of a car, so it it perceived at promoting green purchases.

By the way - to all those who would rather 'cheap' petrol and retain VRT - an increase of 30c on the litre would cost you €390 additional per annum for a car doing 10k per year at 35 MPG. It would be over 13 years before you would make up the actual current VRT charge on a family hatch like a Focus.

It would also be a consistent revenue stream for the country, and you wouldn't have any dodgy gits not paying it. You'd also have every single visitor to the country contributing. Commercial users could claim it back like they do on VAT.

And - it would incentivise the purchase of more economical cars - a car doing the same milage at 50MPG would cost you €273 per year.

si_guru

kdevitt wrote: »

Really not sure if you're being serious. Do you even know what a ricer is? And if so, why would anyone be importing one from the UK?

Eitherway - if it were truly a green tax people wanted, it would be incorporated in the price of fuel. Ever heard of the concept of 'the polluter pays'?

As much as the other campaign is daft, this is just as ridiculous imo - while I fully accept that VRT is not an illegal tax, no one in their right mind actually wants to pay it?

Are you suggesting people are drivng to Japan for these old Corollas and Lexus IS/RX then? Funny how they have UK plates. And the Customs are targeting UK plated cars - not Japanese or Australian or Maltese plates.

Any One

Thanks to the people who joined so far

Yeah the people who are complaining about paying the VRT are the same people who can afford to buy a new car, if they can afford to buy a new car they can afford to pay the VRT.

And by paying the VRT they wouldn't have to worry about the Customs seizing their car as they would no longer be breaking the law.

The woman living in Greencastle (But is originally from Derry) got her Lexus Jeep seized because she never paid the VRT then she made a big song and dance about it.

Did anyone ever check out the price of a new Lexus Jeep?

Theres a lot of people who live in Northern Ireland & also have addresses in the Republic who come out into the Freestate as they like to call it and flaunt the law because they know they can get away with it.

But they can't get away with not paying VRT and thats whats annoying them.

And another thing thats puzzling me is that the other facebook page has over 10,000 members but how many of them actually ever bought a car from the North or had any bother what so ever with Customs because of VRT or are they just all jumping the band wagon?

Did they join because all their friends joined?

JHMEG

si_guru wrote: »

So you'd hike fuel duty by 20 to 30 % to cover a tax on only new cars that is most cases under 20%...

a) VRT is a one-off payment on *all* cars
b) It's not duty, it's VAT
c) Increasing VAT on diesel to 25% or 30% is increasing the total tax take between 5 and 10%
d) I'd sooner see motor tax rates lowered to UK-like rates.

kdevitt

si_guru wrote: »

Are you suggesting people are drivng to Japan for these old Corollas and Lexus IS/RX then? Funny how they have UK plates. And the Customs are targeting UK plated cars - not Japanese or Australian or Maltese plates.

Your point was that only people importing 'ricers from the UK' are against VRT. Its a daft point.

There are far more german cars coming in from the UK than Japanese cars - you may not have realised, but a lot of Japanese imports actually come direct from Japan on a big boat, and they're all subject the VRT as well.

Any One

JHMEG wrote: »

The simple solution to that is to increase the VAT on fuel.

But, the last hike in duty on cigarettes resulted in less duty to the exchequer due to people buying elsewhere, and while we have plenty of scope for a hike on diesel, we have none on petrol.

Hike VAT on diesel to 25 or 30% maybe?

What about the peopel who have already paid their VRT?

Will they have to pay more for fuel because other people don't want to pay their VRT?

si_guru

Any One wrote: »

And another thing thats puzzling me is that the other facebook page has over 10,000 members...

... in 2010 there have been 57,898 new cars sold so far... so the protesters are in the minroity.

Any One

si_guru wrote: »

... in 2010 there have been 57,898 new cars sold so far... so the protesters are in the minroity.

But how many of out of the 57,898 were bought in Northern Ireland?

si_guru

kdevitt wrote: »

Your point was that only people importing 'ricers from the UK' are against VRT. Its a daft point.

There are far more german cars coming in from the UK than Japanese cars - you may not have realised, but a lot of Japanese imports actually come direct from Japan on a big boat, and they're all subject the VRT as well.

My point is that most people complaing about VRT are those at the bottom of the food chain... those buying 3rd hand cars cheap and crying coz the VRT is more than the value of the car in the UK.

Ireland has a sound top to bottom domestic market - if the UK drove on the right nobody would give a ****.

si_guru

Any One wrote: »

But how many of out of the 57,898 were bought in Northern Ireland?

zero, 32, 1254?... who cares.. they all attracted VRT.

kdevitt

si_guru wrote: »

My point is that most people complaing about VRT are those at the bottom of the food chain...

Hmm - I'm sure your post specifically said ricers?

si_guru

kdevitt wrote: »

Hmm - I'm sure your post specifically said ricers?

Well it seems everyone is rushing over there for those kind of cars.. but equally the A4 seems to be sought after too... sorry I didn't mean to offend any IS200 drivers.

...funny thing is in 1990 I had an Audi 100 I couldn't give away!... times change!

VRT is a mechanism that produces revenue.. it is fair in that you have choice whether to buy a new (or imported) car. The whole thing is blown out of proportion because the country next to us is rammed with 10s of 1000s of cheap cars.

Any One

Well the people who paid their VRT won't have to worry about Customs seizing their cars will they?

And seeing as the Irish Government brought in the car scrappage scheme last year i'd go so far as to say that there were more cars sold in the Republic then there were than in Northern Ireland.

So therefore not all cars attracted VRT only the ones imported from Northern Ireland and judging the way things are at the minute those people who imported a car don't want to pay VRT as they want to flaunt the law.

Cookie_Monster

I'd support you too just to get at those anti-VRT people but facebook is stupid and its silly campaigns will never achieve anything

Any One

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

I'd support you too just to get at those anti-VRT people but facebook is stupid and its illy campaigns will never achieve anything

What would you suggest then?

I don't really like facebook myself but there seems to be a campaign on there for everything lol so i thought i would have my say on there to get it of the ground and see how many people have the same opinion as me because i know theres just as many out there as the anti-VRT mob.

Eoin

kdevitt wrote: »

By the way - to all those who would rather 'cheap' petrol and retain VRT - an increase of 30c on the litre would cost you €390 additional per annum for a car doing 10k per year at 35 MPG. It would be over 13 years before you would make up the actual current VRT charge on a family hatch like a Focus.

It would also be a consistent revenue stream for the country, and you wouldn't have any dodgy gits not paying it. You'd also have every single visitor to the country contributing. Commercial users could claim it back like they do on VAT.

I think replacing motor tax with a levy on petrol would make more sense.

samsemtex

si_guru wrote: »

Well it seems everyone is rushing over there for those kind of cars.. but equally the A4 seems to be sought after too... sorry I didn't mean to offend any IS200 drivers.

...funny thing is in 1990 I had an Audi 100 I couldn't give away!... times change!

VRT is a mechanism that produces revenue.. it is fair in that you have choice whether to buy a new (or imported) car. The whole thing is blown out of proportion because the country next to us is rammed with 10s of 1000s of cheap cars.

What a crock of ****...

Here are the stats for the 10 most imported vehicles in Ireland this year.

1 VOLKSWAGEN PASSAT 1,275 8.4%
2 AUDI A4 994 6.5%
3 FORD FOCUS 941 6.2%
4 BMW 3 SERIES 846 5.5%
5 TOYOTA AVENSIS 767 5.0%
6 BMW 5 SERIES 568 3.7%
7 VOLKSWAGEN GOLF 555 3.6%
8 TOYOTA COROLLA 453 3.0%
9 FORD MONDEO 374 2.5%
10 AUDI A6 291 1.9%

VRT may not be illegal but there are far more sensible and reliable ways of gathering revenue.

And clearly anyone who is setting up a pro-VRT facebook site is just being controversial and difficult for the sake of it. There is very little positive things to be said about VRT as it is a very flawed system regardless of the income it generates.

Vertakill

si_guru wrote: »

My point is that most people complaing about VRT are those at the bottom of the food chain... those buying 3rd hand cars cheap and crying coz the VRT is more than the value of the car in the UK.

Ireland has a sound top to bottom domestic market - if the UK drove on the right nobody would give a ****.

That's an incredibly stupid comment.

I'm not at the bottom of the food chain and I bought a car from the UK because I was unwilling to pay the extortionate prices that were being charged in Ireland. DESPITE the just under 6k VRT I paid, I got the car cheaper than what it would've been in Ireland.

My brother spent nearly triple that on VRT on a rare car as well.

The reason people want to look abroad, whether it be for new or old cars, is because the prices of Irish cars are usually higher than the UK because the dealers are paying VRT on the cars themselves and then passing it on to the customer.

The OMSP of Irish cars is usually far too high as it is because the market value of our cars is already influenced by the VRT, before you even pay your own VRT to register the car.

Your comment about 'ricers' is ill-informed and idiotic, as well as probably being offensive to some.
Old Jap cars don't command a high amount for VRT in most cases because their OMSP can be quite low considering they're 10+ years old.

The people who are FOR the VRT are people that are not enthusiastic about their cars and don't have the time, patience or the knowledge to go and get themselves a bargain in the UK and are quite happy with paying over the odds for a lower standard of car in Ireland.

Until these people realise that, in a lot of circumstances, they're paying more money for less car (spec) in comparison to the UK, they'll be happy shouting from the rooftops that us 'bottom of the food chain' people are wrong.

Vertakill

si_guru wrote: »

... sorry I didn't mean to offend any IS200 drivers.

It's an Altezza that 'ricers' drive. There's nothing remotely 'ricer' about an IS200.

If you're going to lump a demographic into one category, at least get your facts right.

CosmicJay

Vertakill wrote: »

The people who are FOR the VRT are people that are not enthusiastic about their cars and don't have the time, patience or the knowledge to go and get themselves a bargain in the UK and are quite happy with paying over the odds for a lower standard of car in Ireland.

I would'nt say that to be honest. I would just rather pay off one lump sum rather than have to spend even more money on the fun juice a.k.a petrol.

The OMSP really isn't bad nowadays!(In some cases) Ive been looking at a few 02 passat sports and the vrt on em is only 640 euro! Thats a car which sells on carzone for about 4k.

eire1990

i think the main reason the anti vrt group was started was because some people are saying It is a tax that goes against the stated principles of open trade within the European Union and also that ricer comment had no relavance on the argument

Vertakill

CosmicJay wrote: »

I would'nt say that to be honest. I would just rather pay off one lump sum rather than have to spend even more money on the fun juice a.k.a petrol.

The OMSP really isn't bad nowadays!(In some cases) Ive been looking at a few 02 passat sports and the vrt on em is only 640 euro! Thats a car which sells on carzone for about 4k.

If you want to throw si_guru's terminology into the mix, YOU are at the bottom of the food chain.

640 euro is nearly the minimum you're going to pay on VRT, so naturally you're not going to be too downbeat about paying it.

If I only had to worry about sub 1k VRT charges, I wouldn't even bother arguing about it.

The point is you're crucified with up to 36% of the OMSP (which is flawed to begin with) of the car if it's deemed ungreen because it pumps out too much c02, even if you're doing only a 2k miles per year....

Whereas you can bring in a commercial van and pay as little as €50 for VRT and rack up 50k miles on it in your first year whilst pumping an extraordinary amount of co2 into the atmosphere.

If the VRT is supposed to be about being green, HOW does that make sense? It severely punishes a certain demographic whilst gains sweet fk all from another and it could be alleviated by doing something along the lines of what kdevitt said in the first page of the thread.

So Joe Soap gets royally fked and White Van Man is laughing and the Revenue could most likely get more money if they reviewed the system.

But yea... what's all the fuss about?

CosmicJay

Vertakill wrote: »

The point is you're crucified with up to 36% of the OMSP

It makes no sense and it severely punishes a certain demographic and it could be alleviated by something along the lines of what kdevitt said in the first few posts of the thread.

I do agree with what you are saying there. Personally on new cars I think vrt is too high. I do agree that Vrt on commercials for 50 is a bit of a joke. The average family car or the executive car really does take the brunt of the tax.

But its one of those things where its been there for god knows how long. It generates much needed revenue for this country. There are rewards for buying green. The lower the c02 emissions the lower the vrt bracket. But if they abolish vrt entirely the second hand market will basically be nuked and I'm pretty confident fuel will go up to about 2 euro+ a litre. just like in sweden.

Edit; *hides* Before crew cab drivers get me.

Vertakill

CosmicJay wrote: »

I do agree with what you are saying there. Personally on new cars I think vrt is too high. I do agree that Vrt on commercials for 50 is a bit of a joke. The average family car or the executive car really does take the brunt of the tax.

But its one of those things where its been there for god knows how long. It generates much needed revenue for this country. There are rewards for buying green. The lower the c02 emissions the lower the vrt bracket. But if they abolish vrt entirely the second hand market will basically be nuked and I'm pretty confident fuel will go up to about 2 euro+ a litre. just like in sweden.

Edit; *hides* Before crew cab drivers get me.

Well, if we all went out and bought ultra low emission cars tomorrow from the UK and stopped driving and paying for our old 'gas guzzlers'... where would VRT get their money from?

We'd all be getting rock bottom VRT fees, paying the lowest bracket of motor tax and using less petrol/diesel. Then what?

If they want us all to go green, and we all complied and bought a bunch of Hybrid's or something... Revenue would be fcked.

So, taking that into account, you have to admit that the current VRT system is a bit of a joke, right?

CosmicJay wrote: »

But if they abolish vrt entirely the second hand market will basically be nuked and I'm pretty confident fuel will go up to about 2 euro+ a litre. just like in sweden.

Not necessarily. Initially, the dealers would take a hit but the next batch of cars they import will have no VRT on them, so they can lower their prices (whilst still making a profit themselves) which would negate the need for people to go over to the UK to get a better deal.

If the dealers were given a timeframe when the VRT was to change, they could adjust their situation in order to limit any adverse affects.

bmw535d

yea i see everyone who has to much money has joined your facebook page,



FAIL

CosmicJay

Vertakill wrote: »

So, taking that into account, you have to admit that the current VRT system is a bit of a joke, right?

Oh I do agree it is a joke. I dont think I ever said it wasnt. Its a right pain too but it still stands to reason that if it gets abolished we will be paying some where else and there will be campaigns against that.

bmw535d wrote: »

yea i see everyone who has to much money has joined your facebook page,



FAIL

Username. *cough*

bmw535d

holding a guitar and wearing a pink shirt long hair etc.do you even drive a car?/bought a car?