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

MagicSean

Just had a look at that site. God help anyone who follows their advice. They'll most likely end up with a fine, an arrest record and no car. Their policy seems to be along the lines of "If you don't believe in the law it can't get you".

squod

-Chris- wrote: »

Correct.



VRT controls or influences the Irish market in line with the government's objectives. At the moment that's collecting revenue while at the same time being eco-friendly.
The change in the VRT system in 2008 has been spectacularly successful in influencing new car buyers to buy lower-CO2 cars. Unfortunately the way it was implemented, and the timing of that was less successful and has reduced the VRT take.

I don't understand how the government is providing a direct subsidy to a foreign manufacturer, can you please elaborate?




VRT gave €1.4bn to the government coffers in 2007 and €1.1bn in 2008. I can't find the figure for 2009, but let's pretend it's €1bn.

Please briefly explain exactly where you intend to recoup €1bn worth of revenue that the government will lose if they abolish VRT. What are the other ways of recouping this revenue?




Again, what are the direct subsidies that we're giving to the foreign economies?




VRT is spent on us (maybe inefficiently, but that's one for the politics forum). The scrappage scheme creates a VRT reduction that encourages people to buy cars and create work/jobs for people in the motor industry and the finance institutions who fund these purchases. These people then pay taxes and provide employment in other sectors through their purchases.

The scrappage scheme promotes economic activity within Ireland, and provides no subsidy to any foreign industry. Whether VRT is 1,000% or VRT is abolished, BMW Germany still sell a 5-Series to BMW Ireland for the same price.

The argument as outline previously is pretty straight foward. I have no idea why you would try to justify the scrappage scheme, even if it does support some tertiary jobs & taxation. The fact is the benefit is (obviously) more widely felt in the foreign primary sector, with a huge knock-on in their' economy.

The fact that the government is still charging VRT in the manner it does while providing such subsidies is beyond comprehension. Bear in mind that this is a recession.

Guy:Incognito

squod wrote: »

. Bear in mind that this is a recession.

You keep saying that. Sticking [outrage] IT'S A RECESSION [outrage] after everything ,doesnt give you any more leverage.

A subsidy would be givign the manufacturers money towards their cost of doing business here. A reduction in vrt just reduces the cost for the customer and reduces the governments tax take on cars. The only benefit to the manufacturer is through higher sales. Whether VRT is €0 or €100,000 the manufacturer gets the same amount from the sale.

If 5,000 extra people buy cars this year that were not going to otherwise that's 5,000 x the vat amount and the reduced vrt take goign straight to th exchequer that otherwise would'nt be.

What about peopel shopping in Tesco and other foreign stores and not buyign Irish goods, I assume your venting your anger at them? The government also gave them on of your subsidies by reducing the vat rate.

squod

Stekelly wrote: »

What about peopel shopping in Tesco and other foreign stores and not buyign Irish goods, I assume your venting your anger at them?

No. You'll find there's still incentives or opportunity to buy Irish ( support primary sector workers) there too. AFAIK this state isn't handing out benefits to foreign primary sector industries through tesco.

-Chris-

You do know that Tesco isn't an Irish company, don't you?


Also, can you define what you mean by subsidy, foreign and primary sector industry please? You keep using these words/phrases and I don't know if I'm understanding you or not.

Drummerboy08

-Chris- wrote: »

You do know that Tesco isn't an Irish company, don't you?


Also, can you define what you mean by subsidy, foreign and primary sector industry please? You keep using these words/phrases and I don't know if I'm understanding you or not.

He's trying to use big words and phrases to confuse you into thinking VRT is somehow illegal.

Sofiztikated

Let me present 2 scenarios to you, one WITH VRT and one WITHOUT VRT.
(These are completely pulled out of my ass figures, but the premise still holds true.)

With VRT

BMW 5 Series.
€50000 to the customer

Of that €50000, BMW get €40000, the government get €8000 in VRT and VAT, the remaining €2000 goes to the sales team in wages,yadda yadda.

WITHOUT VRT

BMW 5 Series.
€44000 to the customer

Of that €50000, BMW get €40000, the government get €2000 VAT, the remaining €2000 goes to the sales team in wages,yadda yadda.

Without VRT, the "Gubberment" gets less cash in their coffers, they have less to spend on whatever they spend it on, more debt, etc etc etc.

You still with us?

While I don't agree with the percentages, and the skewed OMSP, it is still important.

JHMEG

Sofiztikated wrote: »

BMW 5 Series.
€44000 to the customer

Of that €50000, BMW get €40000, the government get €2000 VAT, the remaining €2000 goes to the sales team in wages,yadda yadda

Sorry, can't let those figures go.

€44000 to the customer means the government gets €7636 in VAT.

€50000 to the customer means the government gets €8677 in VAT.

MagicSean

JHMEG wrote: »

Sorry, can't let those figures go.

€44000 to the customer means the government gets €7636 in VAT.

€50000 to the customer means the government gets €8677 in VAT.

I don't think he was using a calculator. Just demonstrating a point that VRT is worth a lot to the tax payer and has no direct effect on the salesman.

JHMEG

k_mac wrote: »

I don't think he was using a calculator

Are you serious?

Sofiztikated

JHMEG wrote: »

Sorry, can't let those figures go.

€44000 to the customer means the government gets €7636 in VAT.

€50000 to the customer means the government gets €8677 in VAT.

I refer you to the second line of my argument.

Sofiztikated wrote: »

Let me present 2 scenarios to you, one WITH VRT and one WITHOUT VRT.
(These are completely pulled out of my ass figures, but the premise still holds true.)

With VRT

BMW 5 Series.
€50000 to the customer

Of that €50000, BMW get €40000, the government get €8000 in VRT and VAT, the remaining €2000 goes to the sales team in wages,yadda yadda.

WITHOUT VRT

BMW 5 Series.
€44000 to the customer

Of that €50000, BMW get €40000, the government get €2000 VAT, the remaining €2000 goes to the sales team in wages,yadda yadda.

Without VRT, the "Gubberment" gets less cash in their coffers, they have less to spend on whatever they spend it on, more debt, etc etc etc.

You still with us?

While I don't agree with the percentages, and the skewed OMSP, it is still important.

See. I even bolded it for you, just in case you still happen to suffer from selective reading sysndrome. As I said, the figures are not correct, just used to point it out to you. That extra €6000 is the VRT that goes straight into the coffers, not too anyone else.

k_mac wrote: »

I don't think he was using a calculator. Just demonstrating a point that VRT is worth a lot to the tax payer and has no direct effect on the salesman.

Exactly.

Eoin

Keep it civil please

@JHMEG - I've deleted your last post.

@Sofiztikated - unbunch the panties.

JHMEG

Sofiztikated wrote: »

I even bolded it for you, just in case you still happen to suffer from selective reading sysndrome.

Since eoin deleted my tongue-in-cheek post, how's about this: If you're going to present an argument you can't be using makey-upey numbers. At least go to the effort of making a factually correct post.

Shane732

This has to be the most ridiculous thread I've ever read.

Some people have some seriously pigeonholed opinions.

RoundyMooney

JHMEG wrote: »

:eek: Are you serious?

Bertie wasn't even able to count the money he stuffed under the mattress.

Indeed, hence my sarcasm at even an accounting clerk in the Mater being able to recognise the revenue stream from VRT

Don't get me wrong, I think it's a dumb way to raise revenue from personal transportation, but we're stuck with it, for a while yet at least.

Sofiztikated

Right you wanted figures, just checked Vrt.ie

BMW 530d MSport, reg 2010 with 50 miles in the clock, garage miles.

Price, €73112 VRT €23995, €49117. That's a hell of a chunk of change to take out if the coffers.

Take VAT of that. None of that leaves the country.

Don't get me wrong, I don't agree with the way its calculated, but none the less, its an important revenue for the government.

hurleronditch

This is a bonkers thread, and a truly bonkers argument from the campaign in general.

I have never facepalmed so many times in such a short space of time.

All these sob stories about having their cars taken and being not able to afford to pay VRT as their kids would be starving otherwise (but god, they should be happy that daddy can drive them to school in the 5 series he picked up in the north for half nothing) are absolutely cringe.

Squods continuous reference of the governments 'direct subsidy' of foreign industry is laughable. That you equate the scrappage scheme to a direct subsidy just complete voids any leg you had to stand on from an economics point of view even wikipedia can defeat that argument in one sentence

Gophur

So, no doubt, after this campaign is successful, we will have the Donegal Brigade deciding

1. We want to buy our cars in the UK,
2. Draw the dole in the Republic
3. Buy our Groceries in the North
4. Pay our Council Tax in the Republic
5. Visit the Dentist in the North
6. Go to school in the Republic
7. Visit A&RE in the North

..........................etc., etc.,

So, cherry picking is the way forward

squod

hurleronditch wrote: »

Squods continuous reference of the governments 'direct subsidy' of foreign industry is laughable.

What would you call it? Obviously, (according to you) the scrappage scheme is having no impact on the manufacturers.........:rolleyes:

http://ostrichdefense.com/images/suited-man-head-in-sand.gif

stephendevlin

JHMEG wrote: »

The should start a facebook campaign to allow Donegal rejoin the United Kingdom. I don't think I'd miss them

Ignorance.... Donegal was never part of the north (UK).

I was asked as at a Dublin vs Donegal match a few years ago by a dub "how did I find it changing over my sterling .... " I just looked at him an thought ... you idiot.

Eoin

Let's keep it on topic please.

Ush1

Can someone tell me the formula used to calculate VRT on a particular car? It certainly doesn't seem percentage of the value it was purchased for.

Eoin

From the revenue site (this page)

Since 1 July 2008 VRT is no longer based on the engine size but rather on the CO2 emissions from the car. This is a fundamental change in the method of charging VRT and impacts on the amount of VRT charged on all new cars on sale in the State and also on second-hand cars imported from abroad. Linking the VRT rates to CO2 emission levels means that those purchasing cleaner, low emission cars will pay less VRT while those opting to purchase higher emitting vehicles will pay more.

Zubeneschamali

stephendevlin wrote: »

Ignorance.... Donegal was never part of the north (UK).

It was never part of the North, but it certainly was part of the UK from 1800 to 1922.

JHMEG

stephendevlin wrote: »

Ignorance.... Donegal was never part of the (UK).

Donegal was a fully fledged part of the UK until 1920.

Ush1

eoin wrote: »

From the revenue site (this page)

Just for the craic I'm looking at how much it would be to get a brand new Chevrolet Camaro on the road over here.:pac:

They cost 22k dollars new in America. I can't seem to find the emissions on them and they aren't listed on the vrt.ie website.

hurleronditch

squod wrote: »

What would you call it? Obviously, (according to you) the scrappage scheme is having no impact on the manufacturers.........:rolleyes:

http://ostrichdefense.com/images/suited-man-head-in-sand.gif

i never said it was having no effect, my argument is that it is not a direct subsidy, which it plainly isnt.

A Direct subsidy is where the government writes a cheque to a company to do business. This is evidenced in things like the UK government paying cash to some of the private rail companies to get them to run unprofitable routes in obscure regions.

The scrappage scheme isnt even a subsidy, its a tax relief/incentive.

The purpose of the SS is to promote purchase of new cars, having the triple benefit of improving the standard of cars on our roads (both safer and better for the environment), promoting the irish motor trade stimulating trade and helping to support a business that was haemorraging jobs, and increasing the tax take.

There is a definite and unquestionable benefit to foreign car manufacturers, but the purpose of the SS was to benefit Ireland as i outlined above and the incentive is doing a damn good job of doing that.

Id like you to walk into any of the car dealers near you and ask the youngest salesman on the forecourt how this has effected him. I guarantee you he will tell you that it has kept him and thousands more like him in their jobs. So what if volkswagen sell 500 more cars and make more profit, the irish tax coffers are fuller, and more people have a reason to get up on a monday morning, and for that, i am very happy.

squod wrote: »

Providing direct subsidy for the primary sector of foreign economies is all wrong, while we are in a recession. It's a long way off from what should be done to fix this economy.




My plan is to stop supporting foreign industry when we should be looking after our own primary sector.

From what i can tell the point of this facebook group is to object to having to pay VRT when you buy a UK car and bring it into the 26 counties. You are saying the government is promoting foreign industry, yet what is your aim?

To be able to buy a car made in another country, originally bought and tax paid in another country, from a dealer in a foreign country, to bring it into our country, not pay any tax on it, and drive it on our roads.

How is that in any way beneficial to Ireland? I would imagine the core purpose of charging VRT on the importation of foreign vehicles is to push people to buy them in ireland, thereby promoting irish business and keeping irish jobs IN A RECESSION as you so politely and irrelevantly remind us at regular intervals.

The point is to make money for Ireland every time a new car hits our roads by whatever means. If you doint support irish business by buying elsewhere, then you should pay a premium

R.O.R

hurleronditch wrote: »

i never said it was having no effect, my argument is that it is not a direct subsidy, which it plainly isnt.

A Direct subsidy is where the government writes a cheque to a company to do business. This is evidenced in things like the UK government paying cash to some of the private rail companies to get them to run unprofitable routes in obscure regions.

The scrappage scheme isnt even a subsidy, its a tax relief/incentive.

The purpose of the SS is to promote purchase of new cars, having the triple benefit of improving the standard of cars on our roads (both safer and better for the environment), promoting the irish motor trade stimulating trade and helping to support a business that was haemorraging jobs, and increasing the tax take.

There is a definite and unquestionable benefit to foreign car manufacturers, but the purpose of the SS was to benefit Ireland as i outlined above and the incentive is doing a damn good job of doing that.

Id like you to walk into any of the car dealers near you and ask the youngest salesman on the forecourt how this has effected him. I guarantee you he will tell you that it has kept him and thousands more like him in their jobs. So what if volkswagen sell 500 more cars and make more profit, the irish tax coffers are fuller, and more people have a reason to get up on a monday morning, and for that, i am very happy.



From what i can tell the point of this facebook group is to object to having to pay VRT when you buy a UK car and bring it into the 26 counties. You are saying the government is promoting foreign industry, yet what is your aim?

To be able to buy a car made in another country, originally bought and tax paid in another country, from a dealer in a foreign country, to bring it into our country, not pay any tax on it, and drive it on our roads.

How is that in any way beneficial to Ireland? I would imagine the core purpose of charging VRT on the importation of foreign vehicles is to push people to buy them in ireland, thereby promoting irish business and keeping irish jobs IN A RECESSION as you so politely and irrelevantly remind us at regular intervals.

The point is to make money for Ireland every time a new car hits our roads by whatever means. If you doint support irish business by buying elsewhere, then you should pay a premium

Thank you - so much better than I ever could have put it, and sums it up perfectly.

squod

hurleronditch wrote: »

1/From what i can tell the point of this facebook group is to object to having to pay VRT when you buy a UK car and bring it into the 26 counties. 2/You are saying the government is promoting foreign industry.....

1/ don't know how this has anything to do with me, my argument is about SS
2/ that's exactly whats happening

Gophur

So, if supporting foreign industry is "wrong" that means one should not buy any American/Japanese/Korean/Chinese Computer ?

We take EU subsidies for donkey's years, but object to buying their cars?

The scrappage scheme has freed up money and got it circulating again, money that was lying dormant in various places.

If even the VRT was refunded 100% (up to the €1,500 level), the Govt is still benefiting from the VAT take, the PAYE/PRSI take for the people in the Motor Industry, and saving possible Social Welfare payments.

Facts are, the volume of sales in 2009 was not repeatable, without catastrophic consequences for the Motor Industry. Anyone who survived those volumes in 2009 could not do so, again, in 2010.


Going back to the OP? Launching a FB campaign is foolish and doomed to failure. For a start it excludes anyone who isn't on FB.

If you want such a campaign to succeed, then do the sums and get the facts ready for debate. Do not be peddling wishes (like VRT = illegal) as fact.