Motor tax......the mind boggles

Jesh1

As 2008 diesel plate/low cc petrol cars depreciate they are becoming alot more affordable to the average joe. This in turn will reduce the revenue the Government (or local councils) take as more people opt for cars falling in the lower tax band.

I've heard some people on this forum talk of motor tax reform.
I guess my question is, what hair brain scheme will the guardians of the people think of next? The Government will complain the current system is unfair and not sustainable*, so how soon will we see a reform of the current system?

*This was not an issue when people were paying VRT for their shiny new motor:rolleyes:

-Chris-

People are still paying VRT for their shiny new motor.

This was a Green initiative, it was never meant to be anything more than break even.

Once it stop breaking even, the gov't will increase the motor tax rates to make up any shortfall (and probably a bit more, just in case).

The issue is though that the deficit won't be recouped from the actual motor tax, 2007 520d BMW, €600 ish to tax, 2008 520d BMW €130 ish to tax, the 2008 motor tax won't be going up the bridge the shortfall. Some poor bastad driving a 1998 Polo will shoulder some of the cost, the Greens, utter numpties.

si_guru

RoverJames wrote: »

The issue is though that the deficit won't be recouped from the actual motor tax, 2007 520d BMW, €600 ish to tax, 2008 520d BMW €130 ish to tax, the 2008 motor tax won't be going up the bridge the shortfall. Some poor bastad driving a 1998 Polo will shoulder some of the cost, the Greens, utter numpties.

But the BMW owner probably contributed +8K VAT that the "poor" VW owner did not. Plus any VAT made during re-sale for the first few years at dealers.

Fuel duty should be used to bridge the gap not road tax. I like the new system - we get more interesting, economical cars. You don't have to buy a 2.0 litre "gas guzzler" just to get spec and performance anymore.

shawnee

si_guru wrote: »

But the BMW owner probably contributed +8K VAT that the "poor" VW owner did not. Plus any VAT made during re-sale for the first few years at dealers.

Fuel duty should be used to bridge the gap not road tax. I like the new system - we get more interesting, economical cars. You don't have to buy a 2.0 litre "gas guzzler" just to get spec and performance anymore.

I think it is a hair brained system which has only benefited those who are able to afford new cars. Granted you can now buy the occasional secondhand 08 but there are now a huge amount of 08 diesels being imported to cater for the need. There is little doubt that the Govt will alter this tax system and up the tax as soon as there is sufficient owners of these cars.
The road tax in Ireland is a joke ! should be based on road usage as in many countries not on the size of the engine (which makes the tax inequitable);)

johnos1984

It's simple.

The next step will be to get rid of motor tax and add it as a charge on to the price of fuel.

si_guru

shawnee wrote: »

I think it is a hair brained system which has only benefited those who are able to afford new cars.

That will change in time - somebody has to buy them new whatever the tax scheme! Or are you suggesting new cars should be available free on welfare? (note wink)

..should be based on road usage as in many countries.

(IMHO) I think it already is. One would imagine more duty comes from fuel that monies raised in road tax already. Also emissions based VRT is a showroom tax with "green" angle - this exists is other countries too.

Remember VRT also staves of depreciation for those with newish cars and protects the local Motor Trade who pay PRSI and tax in Ireland!

L-M

I was listening to talk on the radio and they made out the reason for all the new Road tolling was to make up for what was lost on the 08 tax system. The mind really does boggle because it was an initiative for people to buy Greener cars so they'd save money, now they're trying to charge it anyway. The country is ridiculous.

Needler

johnos1984 wrote: »

It's simple.

The next step will be to get rid of motor tax and add it as a charge on to the price of fuel.

and when the electric cars come in they'll bring in a mandatory GPS based tracking system so they can see how many miles you have done and also where you've been. I prefer the current system tbh

pajo1981

The point of the scheme was to reduce CO2 emissions, which it did.

It was cost neutral based on the emissions of cars being sold before 2008 but it did not anticipate the new ultra-low CO2 cars around now.

Cookie_Monster

just stick it on fuel and be done with it. the administrative savings along would be gigantic. no more motor tax offices required, get rid of all the staff, no paper costs for fancy uncopyable discs, no postal cost, no courts costs for evaders etc etc etc.

The system might actually bring in some revenue, rather than swallowing more of it back up in admin.

Kashkai

This is Ireland, land of the tax you to death mentality. What will happen is that they'll get enough people to buy cars with large "green" diesel engines and then revert to the old pay by size of your engine capacity to catch these people in the tax net.

"The IMF made us do it!" - think property tax, water charges

pajo1981

Prosperous Dave wrote: »

This is Ireland, land of the tax you to death mentality. What will happen is that they'll get enough people to buy cars with large "green" diesel engines and then revert to the old pay by size of your engine capacity to catch these people in the tax net.

"The IMF made us do it!" - think property tax, water charges

Actually Dave, compared to most of Europe, Ireland is a low-tax state.

If you want ultra fiscal conservatism, pack your bags , buy a 'I wasn't born in Texas, but I got here as soon as I could' T-shirt, and head to the US.

Triangla

People saying tax fuel as if it petrol & diesel isn't already being taxed.

Kashkai

No we're not. It's the so called stealth taxes that you have to take into account when deciding if this country is a low tax state. Most other countries are upfront with their tax system. In this country, they like to tax your net pay by any means possible.

Triangla

Triangla wrote: »

People saying tax fuel as if it petrol & diesel isn't already being taxed.

We know it's already taxed, folks are suggesting that motor tax is scrapped and an extra per litre cost added to fuel in lieu of it.

si_guru

RoverJames wrote: »

We know it's already taxed, folks are suggesting that motor tax is scrapped and an extra per litre cost added to fuel in lieu of it.

I like the merits of the system... but would it drive up the cost of all goods and therefore inflation???

Scrap road tax and double the tax on fags is my idea... stands back.

Atomic Pineapple

si_guru wrote: »

But the BMW owner probably contributed +8K VAT that the "poor" VW owner did not. Plus any VAT made during re-sale for the first few years at dealers.

Hence they are likely to be in a better financial position to pay €600 a year tax than someone with a Polo.

meep

si_guru wrote: »

I like the merits of the system... but would it drive up the cost of all goods and therefore inflation???

Not necessarily as if done right, the extra tax on fuel would be offset by savings in not paying annual road tax. Should be done so as to be cost neutral to hauliers etc. and as someone stated, the savings in administration would be immense.

However, it will probably never happen as it will start driving motorists across the border for cheaper (lower tax) fuel thus motorists in more southerly counties would be effectively subsidising tax dodgers within easy reach of the border.

ct5amr2ig1nfhp

I think it could be a good idea to scrap motor tax and increase the fuel tax.

People using their cars/roads more - pay more.
As a side bonus, it would also mean revenue from all the foreign reg'd cars on our roads.

Edit: Should the road tolls be scrapped also? Instead increase the fuel tax further?

bazzachazza

BearNecessities wrote: »

I think it could be a good idea to scrap motor tax and increase the fuel tax.

People using their cars/roads more - pay more.
As a side bonus, it would also mean revenue from all the foreign reg'd cars on our roads.

Edit: Should the road tolls be scrapped also? Instead increase the fuel tax further?

All well and good till someone starts a topic on "Robbing B@*&%ds and their huge TAXES on fuel" :rolleyes:

pajo1981

Taxing fuel in lieu of motor tax would mean that people who drive to work/ drive as part of their job would pay more, so that people commute/drive for leisure can pay less.

Surely this will push up the cost of doing business?

keithclancy

Prosperous Dave wrote: »

No we're not. It's the so called stealth taxes that you have to take into account when deciding if this country is a low tax state. Most other countries are upfront with their tax system. In this country, they like to tax your net pay by any means possible.

No way, live in another European country before you make a sweeping statement like that.

i.e.
I pay Income tax, afterwards I have to pay

Property Tax
Council Tax
Water Tax
Water Metering
Water Protection Tax
Regional Motor Tax
National Motor Tax
BPM (More than VRT)

All of the Above DOESN'T come out of my pay.

If anything, in Ireland it was all very clear, you register with City Hall in a european country and you start getting bills for all sorts of random sh*t.

If you get to the Netherlands and sign up for Health Insurance locally, they'll back date it to when you arrived as thats whats legally required, i.e. you got here 14 months ago (your VHI or whatever doesn't matter) you end up paying 14x110 euros, 1540 euros back.

Have you ever had to hire an accountant to do a Tax Return as a payrolled employee in Ireland, I never have and its the Norm here in NL and the same in Germany.

Stealth Taxes me arse.

listermint

pajo1981 wrote: »

The point of the scheme was to reduce CO2 emissions, which it did.

It was cost neutral based on the emissions of cars being sold before 2008 but it did not anticipate the new ultra-low CO2 cars around now.

Its a point of fact that the newer cars have expelled far more CO2 in construction that older cars would have ever ever been able to expel over their lifetime. Reduce CO2 it did not. It was an ill thought out showcase of nonsense from the Green fundamentalists, thank fully they will never see the light of day here again.

pajo1981

listermint wrote: »

Its a point of fact that the newer cars have expelled far more CO2 in construction that older cars would have ever ever been able to expel over their lifetime. Reduce CO2 it did not. It was an ill thought out showcase of nonsense from the Green fundamentalists, thank fully they will never see the light of day here again.

Eh, I think you are getting mixed up with the scrappage scheme thread?

What I said was that the point of the CO2 based tax system was to encourage people to buy lower emitting cars, when they go to change.

savagecabbages

listermint wrote: »

Its a point of fact that the newer cars have expelled far more CO2 in construction that older cars would have ever ever been able to expel over their lifetime.

Could you elaborate how a newer, LOWER emissions car can produce more Co2 than an older HIGHER emissions one is a point of fact???

The current tax system was brought in to reduce emissions from cars, which it has succeeded in doing. New cars sold are generally much less polluting than those sold new 5 years ago.
I'm not an economist, but if the government are making less money from car tax now, they'll either have to spend less (cuts elsewhere), or change the tax system again by increasing motor tax.

Come to think of it, wasn't this new cheaper tax system meant to co-inside with a carbon tax to make up any shortfalls?

charlemont

Limerick man wrote: »

I was listening to talk on the radio and they made out the reason for all the new Road tolling was to make up for what was lost on the 08 tax system. The mind really does boggle because it was an initiative for people to buy Greener cars so they'd save money, now they're trying to charge it anyway. The country is ridiculous.

It'll never change, People dont have the bottle here anymore.

challengemaster

savagecabbages wrote: »

Could you elaborate how a newer, LOWER emissions car can produce more Co2 than an older HIGHER emissions one is a point of fact???

The current tax system was brought in to reduce emissions from cars, which it has succeeded in doing. New cars sold are generally much less polluting than those sold new 5 years ago.

You either didn't read the post or weren't trying to - so here it is again

The newer cars may be more efficent and emit less CO2, but the production process of these cars emits massive amount of CO2. It's basically a cop-out

keithclancy

savagecabbages wrote: »

Could you elaborate how a newer, LOWER emissions car can produce more Co2 than an older HIGHER emissions one is a point of fact???

The current tax system was brought in to reduce emissions from cars, which it has succeeded in doing. New cars sold are generally much less polluting than those sold new 5 years ago.
I'm not an economist, but if the government are making less money from car tax now, they'll either have to spend less (cuts elsewhere), or change the tax system again by increasing motor tax.

Come to think of it, wasn't this new cheaper tax system meant to co-inside with a carbon tax to make up any shortfalls?

Becuase there was CO2 created when they
Extracted/Recycled the Raw Materials
Transported the parts
Fabricated the parts
Assembled the car
Used electricity in the entire process
Employees coming to and from the plant to do the work
Transported the finished product

The C02 footprint in the Manufacturing of a car is huge, its been proved far cleaner to run a car till end of life than build a new one.

A 1998 Merc S320 V8 Petrol Engine running on LPG is far far cleaner than a new BMW 520D Efficient Dynamics.

LPG is much cleaner than diesel in terms of NOx and other particulates which impact on our local air quality. 20 cars running on LPG produce less NOx than 1 car running on Diesel! The particulates that we often visibly see coming from diesel vehicles are a major contribution to the poor air quality in our inner cities. LPG produces 90% less particulates than a diesel engine.

CO2 wise, a 10 year old car is far more enviromentally friendly to keep running when you take into account the Co2 cost to Manufacture a new car and dispose of the old one.

Its just a Financial thing really for the country, knacker all to do with the Environment as you've just shifted the Co2 emissions to wherever the car was manufactured.

I guess it would work if Toyota or VW had a Factory on Mars.

listermint

savagecabbages wrote: »

Could you elaborate how a newer, LOWER emissions car can produce more Co2 than an older HIGHER emissions one is a point of fact???

The current tax system was brought in to reduce emissions from cars, which it has succeeded in doing. New cars sold are generally much less polluting than those sold new 5 years ago.
I'm not an economist, but if the government are making less money from car tax now, they'll either have to spend less (cuts elsewhere), or change the tax system again by increasing motor tax.

Come to think of it, wasn't this new cheaper tax system meant to co-inside with a carbon tax to make up any shortfalls?

You Clearly overlooked a core point - CONSTRUCTION . that i made it the first post. It expels more CO2 in the production of the newer vehicle than keeping an older vehicle on the road.

In destroying an older vehicle and building a new one you are negating any savings that will be made in terms of CO2 output. So its a false economy to state that these incentives are saving the environment so stop making it.

RobAMerc

si_guru wrote: »

2.0 litre "gas guzzler" just to

:eek::eek:

I think the greens have left their legacy with you.
A 2.0 litre gas guzzler !! haha, do you take on every catchphrase going, do you call people "boy racers" too ?

listermint

RobAMerc wrote: »

:eek::eek:

I think the greens have left their legacy with you.
A 2.0 litre gas guzzler !! haha, do you take on every catchphrase going, do you call people "boy racers" too ?

All that 1987 CC goodness is destroying everything


(even if the a smaller harder worked 1.3 engine is pishing all over its MPG output)

savagecabbages

listermint wrote: »

You Clearly overlooked a core point - CONSTRUCTION

I did read the post. Can any of you experts then explain to me how the emissions produced during CONSTRUCTION of a new car compares to those produced during CONSTRUCTION of an older car? We all know the answer here...

Would you all have been happier if the govt increased the tax take on newer cars to prevent new cars from being constructed???

pajo1981

I'm not disagreeing that the best way to save on CO2 emissions is to simply keep your old car - to a point.

What I'm saying that when someone is looking for a new car now, they'll consider CO2 emissions, which it what the CO2 system serves to do.

savagecabbages

pajo1981 wrote: »

I'm not disagreeing that the best way to save on CO2 emissions is to simply keep your old car - to a point.

I think we are all in agreement that the most sustainable car is a second hand one, but thats not what this thread is about, posters seem to have shoved that in to somehow have a go at the greens or fianna fail or fine gael or whoever

keithclancy

savagecabbages wrote: »

I did read the post. Can any of you experts then explain to me how the emissions produced during CONSTRUCTION of a new car compares to those produced during CONSTRUCTION of an older car? We all know the answer here...

Would you all have been happier if the govt increased the tax take on newer cars to prevent new cars from being constructed???

Its been done to death:
E.G.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/green-living-blog/2010/sep/23/carbon-footprint-new-car

What's the carbon footprint of ... a new car?

Making a new car creates as much carbon pollution as driving it, so it's often better to keep your old banger on the road than to upgrade to a greener model.

What the construction of the old car got to do with anything ?
Its already done you can't turn back the clock.

Making new cars isn't greener, it simply moves the Co2 emissions somewhere else.

Joe 90

johnos1984 wrote: »

It's simple.

The next step will be to get rid of motor tax and add it as a charge on to the price of fuel.

There is a limit as to how much can go on the fuel set by the price in the North.

Twin-go

I thought the reason for the "Green" Motor Tax and VRT was to reduce Irelands future requirements to purchase Carbon Credits.

All the discussion on Stealth taxes, low tax economy etc. are mute points.
What we certainly don't get is value for money for the Tax we pay. The blame for this lays in our overblown Public Sector and overly generous Social Welfare.

savagecabbages

keithclancy wrote: »

What the construction of the old car got to do with anything ?
Its already done you can't turn back the clock.

Making new cars isn't greener, it simply moves the Co2 emissions somewhere else.

Its to do with cars produced under the old system vs cars produced under the new lower emissions system. The big picture here. New cars will be produced anyway. Lets make them less polluting.

If the government made it more expensive to buy new cars you'd all be up in arms about that too...

pajo1981

Twin-go wrote: »

What we certainly don't get is value for money for the Tax we pay. The blame for this lays in our overblown Public Sector and overly generous Social Welfare.

I don't think anyone in the world get value for the taxes they pay. The trick is to keep your public sector as small as possible, IMO.

listermint

savagecabbages wrote: »

I think we are all in agreement that the most sustainable car is a second hand one, but thats not what this thread is about, posters seem to have shoved that in to somehow have a go at the greens or fianna fail or fine gael or whoever

No your wrong, I was simply saying the whole policy is flawed, and if you cant admit that you have your head in the clouds. Green Policy on car tax was fundamentally flawed. It was a showboat for them simple as.

Car Tax should be lumped on fuel as per consumption just like any other Sane Country in the western world. Its a disgraceful system in this country but yeah you'll say im having a go at whatever political party your affiliated with.

savagecabbages

Explain how or why i'm wrong? And on which point?
A reason for being wrong isn't having my head in the clouds. I'm confused as to how i can be wrong on something i haven't even given my opinion on...

Someone said cars produced under a newer lower emissions policy pollute more than those produced under the old one. That is incorrect. That is what i said.

keithclancy

savagecabbages wrote: »

Its to do with cars produced under the old system vs cars produced under the new lower emissions system. The big picture here. New cars will be produced anyway. Lets make them less polluting.

If the government made it more expensive to buy new cars you'd all be up in arms about that too...

*shakes head*

Its cheaper and more environmentally friendly to keep your old car till end of life.

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner.

I am thinking of the big picture, your thinking along the lines of the country, I'm thinking globally.

Why would a company manufacture a new car if there was nobody to buy it ?

If anything it should be encouraged to keep your old car and not have this throwaway culture of new shiny stuff

Eric Cartman

RobAMerc wrote: »

You don't have to buy a 2.0 litre "gas guzzler" just to get spec and performance anymore.

if you consider a 2 litre engine a gas guzzler , youd probably want to stay away from my friend over here http://www.mercedes-amg.com/v1260lbiturbo.html#/6-0l-v12-biturbo

listermint

savagecabbages wrote: »

Explain how or why i'm wrong? And on which point?
A reason for being wrong isn't having my head in the clouds. I'm confused as to how i can be wrong on something i haven't even given my opinion on...

Someone said cars produced under a newer lower emissions policy pollute more than those produced under the old one. That is incorrect. That is what i said.

This is as plain as it can be buddy..

keithclancy wrote: »

*shakes head*

Its cheaper and more environmentally friendly to keep your old car till end of life.

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner.

I am thinking of the big picture, your thinking along the lines of the country, I'm thinking globally.

Why would a company manufacture a new car if there was nobody to buy it ?

If anything it should be encouraged to keep your old car and not have this throwaway culture of new shiny stuff

savagecabbages

keithclancy wrote: »

*shakes head*

Its cheaper and more environmentally friendly to keep your old car till end of life.

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner.

*also shakes head*

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner than otherwise buying a new one under the old system

You are arguing that a second hand car is more sustainable than producing a new one. Which it is. We agree here.

I am arguing that new cars produced under the new system have less impact on the environment than new ones produced if the system hadn't changed. You haven't stated how you stand on this.

You are arguing one thing, me another...

challengemaster

keithclancy wrote: »

*shakes head*

Its cheaper and more environmentally friendly to keep your old car till end of life.

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner.

I am thinking of the big picture, your thinking along the lines of the country, I'm thinking globally.

Why would a company manufacture a new car if there was nobody to buy it ?

If anything it should be encouraged to keep your old car and not have this throwaway culture of new shiny stuff

Also pointless in fairness, while the points you're making are valid, on a world-wide scale it's utterly useless.

Most Americans cycle through cars every 2-3 years without fail, and why wouldn't they when they're cheap as chips. Pretending that the Irish market has any major effect on a global scale is silly on both parts.

The fact is, it's all a load of utter bull. If you really think Ireland plays that much of a role in worldwide CO2 emissions you need to think again

savagecabbages

Exactly. New cars will be produced and bought regardless of how polluting/kind they are. There are millions of people employer in the motor industry worldwide who have too much to loose if everyone stopped buying new cars tomorrow.

I would take you up on the notion that theres no point in us here in Ireland taking an environmentally less harmful approach. Us doing nothing or continuing in our old ways doesn't help matters... But I know what you mean;)

Raskolnikov

challengemaster wrote: »

Most Americans cycle through cars every 2-3 years without fail, and why wouldn't they when they're cheap as chips.

Sorry, challengemaster, but I am calling you out on this. I'm sure that there are people in the States who change cars every 2-3 years (just like Ireland or any other country), however to say most Americans change cars every 2-3 years is just ridiculous. According to the interweb, 12 million cars are sold in the States every year. Back of the fag packet calculations clearly show Americans would need to buy several multiples of those figures to have a new car every 2-3 years.

Eric Cartman

challengemaster wrote: »

Most Americans cycle through cars every 2-3 years without fail, and why wouldn't they when they're cheap as chips. Pretending that the Irish market has any major effect on a global scale is silly on both parts.

car finance is easy to get over 5 years in the US , most people will change at 5 years or more , and even still it depends on the car type, most pickup truck drivers will change every 5 years because of the mileage they put on , people in big cities maybee every 10 years, people who buy to modify cars will keep them 10-15 years easily , the only people who change cars every 2-3 years there are the really rich, the financially irresponsible or the people participating in bangernomics (who dont buy new cars anyway)

pajo1981

keithclancy wrote: »

This scheme encourages people to buy a new car under the premise that its cleaner.

No. The scheme encourages people, when buying new (which they will do anyway), to by a cleaner car.