society+problem+legislation=solution

cjgib

How many fuel laundering plants will have to be found in Monaghan before the penny drops on the cabinet table that there is a paper based method of rebating vat to the agriculture industry?

Why do our TDs think that issues like this are not their problem?

Can anyone else think of problems in life that are crying out for legislative change.?

Maybe we could send a list to Leinster house every week until they get up off their bums and LEGISLATE!

Sticky_Fingers

cjgib wrote: »

How many fuel laundering plants will have to be found in Monaghan before the penny drops on the cabinet table that there is a paper based method of rebating vat to the agriculture industry?

Why do our TDs think that issues like this are not their problem?

Can anyone else think of problems in life that are crying out for legislative change.?

Maybe we could send a list to Leinster house every week until they get up off their bums and LEGISLATE!

Erm, isn't the fuel laundering up in Monaghan primarily concerned with NI and not the Republic? As for more legislation, I think we have quite enough of that already (too much of it IMO), it's the lack of enforcement that is the problem not the lack of laws.

SeanW

Nonetheless the OP does have a point: a "refund" based system for farmers would make more sense than the system of dyed diesel that we have at present.

later12

Sticky_Fingers wrote: »

Erm, isn't the fuel laundering up in Monaghan primarily concerned with NI and not the Republic?

Monaghan is in the republic....

Sticky_Fingers

later10 wrote: »

Monaghan is in the republic....

Ta for the geography lesson, the point I was making (as you well know) was that the activities up there are not taking money out of the Irish Exchequer so implementing a plan to tackle them would not be for our benefit but for Northern Irelands. There is an argument to be made for being good neighbours but can we really afford to spend money on this problem now when said money can be better used to help the taxpayers of this country and not the British government?

cjgib

The cost of cleaning up the toxic sludge left behind by these plants is running into the millions for Monaghan and Louth co councils.
(Louth is also in the republic).
The profits are being used to finance drug dealing and weapons importation.

Sticky_Fingers

cjgib wrote: »

The cost of cleaning up the toxic sludge left behind by these plants is running into the millions for Monaghan and Louth co councils.
(Louth is also in the republic).
The profits are being used to finance drug dealing and weapons importation.

Do we not already have laws dealing with these very issues? How would the imposition of yet another layer of bureaucracy improve the situation? What happens when a way is found to circumvent the new procedures that cost a small fortune to implement, do we issue yet another law and then another after that one fails?
How about we go the other direction, instead of making up new laws and procedures we actually enforce the ones we already have and hand out stiffer sentences to those who break them.

(Louth is also in the republic).

Funny, funny guy, with material like that a life in showbiz beckons :rolleyes:

SeanW

The problem is that the current system gives rise to all this: without dyed diesel there would be no use for "washing" plants:

Here's what the OP is suggesting, I think: Forget about dyeing diesel and replace it with a system whereby a farmer buys diesel for his farm, and claims the fuel duty back.

Farmers already have forms to fill out AFAIK and these already have to be processed by D.O.A. officials.

Obviously the system would have to have some oversight (e.g. you would have to be able to spot a "farmer" who claimed a rebate on 2000 litres of fuel for his 5 acre apple farm), but unless the system was completely incoherent you would have far less abuse of the duty free fuel and no toxic sludge cleanups to do.
That you would take some money out of the hands of high end criminal gangs and terrorists organisations alone makes it worthwhile.

Zubeneschamali

SeanW wrote: »

That you would take some money out of the hands of high end criminal gangs and terrorists organisations alone makes it worthwhile.

Legalizing drugs would be a lot more effective.

ardmacha

What happens when a way is found to circumvent the new procedures that cost a small fortune to implement, do we issue yet another law and then another after that one fails?
How about we go the other direction, instead of making up new laws and procedures we actually enforce the ones we already have and hand out stiffer sentences to those who break them.

But that is the whole point, have you thought about this at all. Instead of having complex rules on different sorts of diesel, you only have one sort of diesel and so there is no need for new laws.

Legalizing drugs would be a lot more effective.

But this might have downsides. Having only one sort of diesel might mean only a bit of paperwork for farmers, which seems like a modest price to pay.

rasper

why do farmers get cheap diesal as opposed to say a taxi driver or bus driver actually providing a service , is this an EU thing or just an Irish , surely it flies against the farce of the carbon tax.

OMD

rasper wrote: »

why do farmers get cheap diesal as opposed to say a taxi driver or bus driver actually providing a service , is this an EU thing or just an Irish , surely it flies against the farce of the carbon tax.

Exactly. Time to end red diesel completely and do it without any new form filling. Farmer then writes the cost of the diesel off against his tax at end of the year like everyone else does with such expenses

SeanW

rasper wrote: »

why do farmers get cheap diesal as opposed to say a taxi driver or bus driver actually providing a service , is this an EU thing or just an Irish , surely it flies against the farce of the carbon tax.

They do it in the U.K. too, hence the distinction between red diesel and green diesel. (They use red dye in the U.K. versus green dye here). Think the U.S. has an off road diesel setup as well, though I don't think they dye it.

imitation

rasper wrote: »

why do farmers get cheap diesal as opposed to say a taxi driver or bus driver actually providing a service , is this an EU thing or just an Irish , surely it flies against the farce of the carbon tax.

While I'm not against tax breaks for mass transit fuel, its not fair to suggest farmers don't provide a service. You have to remember a tractor or combine harvester doesn't get great MPG and the margins aren't exactly amazing in farming.

keithclancy

Rebate isn't a fair system, it means the Farmer has to front double the money and wait for the return at the end of the year.


Some farmers would have a fuel bill of 5000-6000 euros, full price your talking a 10000-12000 euro bill.

seamus

What's to stop the farmer from selling half his diesel on the black market and claiming the rebate?

Ultimately any oversight still requires inspections to keep everything above board. If the IRA were to employ the assistance of 20 random farmers and pay them for 10% of their diesel, it would be next to impossible for revenue to prove anything except that some farmers are 10% less efficient than others.
The only way to prove wrongdoing would be a full audit of the farm, which is no better than what we have at present IMO.

cjgib

VAT is rebated to zero rated industries on a monthly basis.Should be simple to do this for farmers.

cjgib

Farmers are not criminals.Most of them are honest and law abiding.
The people laundering diesel are on the other hand hardened criminals.
Their will always be fellas who'll chance it but thats happening at the moment anyway.
The revenue have sophisticated software that shows up financial patterns that are outside the norm,thats how they identify people for audit presently.