EU decides difference between e-bike and motorbike

CIE

Funny all the important things that Europarl gets to vote on.

EurActiv

The European Parliament has voted to separate regulation on motorised and non-motorised bicycles, a move two-wheeler associations say will safeguard investment in cycling.

In the plenary session, European lawmakers decided on Tuesday (20 November) that any electronically power assisted cycle (EPAC) under 250 watts and a maximum speed of 25 kilometres per hour would remain a bicycle.

Anything more powerful is considered a motorbike, in line with the European Commission’s original proposal.

Ceri Woolsgrove, road safety officer for the European Cyclists’ Federation (ECF), said: “We need a clear border line between what a bicycle is and what exceeds the definition of a ‘bicycle’.”...

Alun

Why do you consider it unimportant? It seems a very sensible thing to make a clear legal distinction between what is a bicycle and what is a motorbike, i.e. a motorized vehicle that requires a licence, insurance, motor tax etc., to me, and one that clearly should be done at a European level. From what I understand, the status of e-bikes here in Ireland has been as clear as mud since they were first imported, so clarity can only be a good thing, no?

CIE

Alun wrote: »

Why do you consider it unimportant? It seems a very sensible thing to make a clear legal distinction between what is a bicycle and what is a motorbike, i.e. a motorized vehicle that requires a licence, insurance, motor tax etc., to me, and one that clearly should be done at a European level. From what I understand, the status of e-bikes here in Ireland has been as clear as mud since they were first imported, so clarity can only be a good thing, no?

Sounds like you like a big government that micromanages everything.

Alun

CIE wrote: »

Sounds like you like a big government that micromanages everything.

What's your alternative suggestion for deciding when an e-bike becomes liable for tax, insurance and the rider to be licensed then?

Run_to_da_hills

You can get unrestricted kits for these things exceeding 2500W / 40A or 45 mph cruising.

These would outpace most mopeds and small scooters that are currently covered by road licencing.

I could see a reason for legislation for the above as people riding these would more than likely be not covered by third party insurance.

http://www.ebay.ie/itm/Crystalyte-Phoenix-II-7240-Electric-Bike-Kit-72V-2880W-40A-Hub-Motor-Front-Rear-/330831312893?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&var=540110866643&hash=item4d071537fd#ht_11023wt_1059

Cookie_Monster

Run_to_da_hills wrote: »

These would outpace most mopeds and small scooters that are currently covered by road licencing.

for 15 mins until the battery goes flat :D:D

dardhal

Alun wrote: »

What's your alternative suggestion for deciding when an e-bike becomes liable for tax, insurance and the rider to be licensed then?

That is precisely the issue: taxation, nos safety, fairness, public welfare , etc. Why should an electric motorbike ownership be taxed? Why should a normal bike ownership be taxed? Why must a motorcar ownership be taxed?

You are taxed to death on income (PAYE, PRSI, USC, corporate tax). You are scr3wd the hard way at purchase time (23% VAT). Environment impact and wear/tear of road infrastructure are more than well covered by fuel and electricity taxation (in excess of 1 €/liter for petrol and diesel), diverse levy, carbon tax and whatnot.

And after paying all of the above, you agree with an outrageous "road tax"? A road tax so fair that those with an old, amortized car, with a medium sized diesel engine doing 50 mpg and worth under 500€ pay yearly MORE than the car is worth, while at the same time, flashing new cars in the 40.000€ pay under 200€/year? Come on. Taxation has always be, and is becoming increasingly, a way to squeeze people to the bones, not to make for a sustainable state and society. The don't charge us taxes because we do something that costs the Exchequer money to repair, build or oversee, they charge taxes because they can and we can NOT oppose.

The euro bureaucrats are the worst of their kind. I may agree to some common sense rules so for example anything that is not a human-powered bike (or anything exceeding 25 Km/h) not being allowed to use cycletracks (wouldn't make sense to allow electric bikes flying at 60 Km/h where no motor vehicles are allowed to keep cyclists safe). But, as said above, this is only partially about bringing common sense to a law. This is about money, truckloads of money.

The day when electricity will be charged according to intended use (so, for example, pluging you electric car or bike will entitle to a levy or additional tax for "road fuel") is not far in the horizon. They will do that and even worse things to keep their pockets full, to spread benefits like if money came from nowhere, and increase the pressure on the few taxpayers that are left.

slimjimmc

dardhal wrote: »

That is precisely the issue: taxation, nos safety, fairness, public welfare , etc. Why should an electric motorbike ownership be taxed? Why should a normal bike ownership be taxed? Why must a motorcar ownership be taxed?

You are taxed to death on income (PAYE, PRSI, USC, corporate tax). You are scr3wd the hard way at purchase time (23% VAT). Environment impact and wear/tear of road infrastructure are more than well covered by fuel and electricity taxation (in excess of 1 €/liter for petrol and diesel), diverse levy, carbon tax and whatnot.

And after paying all of the above, you agree with an outrageous "road tax"? A road tax so fair that those with an old, amortized car, with a medium sized diesel engine doing 50 mpg and worth under 500€ pay yearly MORE than the car is worth, while at the same time, flashing new cars in the 40.000€ pay under 200€/year? Come on. Taxation has always be, and is becoming increasingly, a way to squeeze people to the bones, not to make for a sustainable state and society. The don't charge us taxes because we do something that costs the Exchequer money to repair, build or oversee, they charge taxes because they can and we can NOT oppose.

The euro bureaucrats are the worst of their kind. I may agree to some common sense rules so for example anything that is not a human-powered bike (or anything exceeding 25 Km/h) not being allowed to use cycletracks (wouldn't make sense to allow electric bikes flying at 60 Km/h where no motor vehicles are allowed to keep cyclists safe). But, as said above, this is only partially about bringing common sense to a law. This is about money, truckloads of money.

The day when electricity will be charged according to intended use (so, for example, pluging you electric car or bike will entitle to a levy or additional tax for "road fuel") is not far in the horizon. They will do that and even worse things to keep their pockets full, to spread benefits like if money came from nowhere, and increase the pressure on the few taxpayers that are left.

What has taxation including Motor Tax got to do with EU or euro bureaucrats, they're imposed on us by our own Irish government.

This clarification by the EU is good imo as it clears up a lot of confusion.