Why VRT?

newby.204

Pardon my ignorance but why does our government still get away with charging us VRT on our cars?, its my *understanding that its basically illegal but they do it anyways because the fine from the EU doesnt match the tax accrued from charging VRT?

*this understanding comes from info from people so it could be completely flawed!!

dougie-lampkin

There is no EU fine, that is just pub talk. It's perfectly legal. The touted line is that it "discriminates under EU law" or something, which makes no sense. The EU commission have said it's unfair, yet legal. We're not the only EU country to have a "VRT". There's a similar import tax in Denmark, Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Slovenia, Cyprus and Poland according to Revenue.

It's just Yet Another Tax™, I don't see the fuss myself. If they abolished VRT they'd just lob an extra few euros onto our motor tax to make up the loss of income. I'd rather see the motor tax rates sorted out first, paying €710 on a pre-08 diesel when the same engine post-08 is €290 is wrong.

newby.204

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

There is no EU fine, that is just pub talk. It's perfectly legal. The touted line is that it "discriminates under EU law" or something, which makes no sense. The EU commission have said it's unfair, yet legal. We're not the only EU country to have a "VRT". There's a similar import tax in Denmark, Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Slovenia, Cyprus and Poland according to Revenue.

It's just Yet Another Tax™, I don't see the fuss myself. If they abolished VRT they'd just lob an extra few euros onto our motor tax to make up the loss of income. I'd rather see the motor tax rates sorted out first, paying €710 on a pre-08 diesel when the same engine post-08 is €290 is wrong.

Cheers for that, as i said i got second hand info which was wrong apparently!! yea, this thread arose from the other thread i have going, ive seen some great cars up north but then ive to vrt the fookin thing, and also i have a 04 and want to get to a 08 so as i can avail of the new taxbands!!

Sobanek

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

There is no EU fine, that is just pub talk. It's perfectly legal. The touted line is that it "discriminates under EU law" or something, which makes no sense. The EU commission have said it's unfair, yet legal. We're not the only EU country to have a "VRT". There's a similar import tax in Denmark, Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Slovenia, Cyprus and Poland according to Revenue.

There would be riots if we had to pay 36% Tax on Imports in Poland.

3.1% of Purchase Price for <2.0L
18.6% of Purchase Price for >2.0L
None of that co2 and OMSP rubbish

Idbatterim

Dougie if its that simple, why does anyone drive an 07 instead of an 08 2L for example?

toyotaavensis

The 07 is cheaper to buy. This might have something to do with it. Not everyone has the money for the premium you pay for the car with cheap tax.

Idbatterim

That's exactly my point its sometimes made out as if its some fantastic loophole, your going to be paying a heap more because of the lower tax. Ergo your not saving anything...

toyotaavensis

You are kind of right. I the short term you are saving and some people dont have much money these days to pay the extra price of an 08 plate. Unfortunately they end up paying the extra money in yearly installments.

Guy:Incognito

Sobanek wrote: »

3.1% of Purchase Price for <2.0L
18.6% of Purchase Price for >2.0L
None of that co2 and OMSP rubbish

If it's on the purchase price why does everyone not just say they got the car for nothing off a guy they know?

Marcusm

Sobanek wrote: »

There would be riots if we had to pay 36% Tax on Imports in Poland.

3.1% of Purchase Price for <2.0L
18.6% of Purchase Price for >2.0L
None of that co2 and OMSP rubbish

But the pointyouneed to realise is that from anEU level, the rate is irrelevant.

Idbatterim

The money they lose on yearly instalments, will be more than saved IF they are borrowing cash from car from bank for an 08 v an 07...

Supergurrier

Because f**k you Irish motorist.

dougie-lampkin

Sobanek wrote: »

There would be riots if we had to pay 36% Tax on Imports in Poland.

3.1% of Purchase Price for <2.0L
18.6% of Purchase Price for >2.0L
None of that co2 and OMSP rubbish

Not many people pay the 36% here either, unless you're importing something special. Regardless of the rate, it's still an import tax though, right? So there's nothing illegal about it.

As an aside, is that not a poor model to base a tax on? What's to stop someone declaring a lower value? Surely OMSP is the fairest way to determine the value of the car?

Idbatterim wrote: »

Dougie if its that simple, why does anyone drive an 07 instead of an 08 2L for example?

Because this difference in motor tax causes a rift in the price between 07 and 08 examples of the same car. This means that the prices for post 08 supposed low emissions models are artificially higher, and over the average ownership of the car, the tax versus purchase price will balance out.

But why is it fair that a 2007 520d is considered a large, polluting car with a hefty tax bill, yet in 2008 the same 520d is considered a green, economic car in the second lowest tax band? If the incentive is to promote supposed green cars, why not retrospectively apply the CO2 tax rates instead of the old CC based system?

keithclancy

Sobanek wrote: »

There would be riots if we had to pay 36% Tax on Imports in Poland.

3.1% of Purchase Price for <2.0L
18.6% of Purchase Price for >2.0L
None of that co2 and OMSP rubbish

On the other side of that the average wage in Poland is half that of Ireland.

Comparatively speaking the purchasing power in Ireland makes running a car quite easy, even with VRT.

Imagine how I feel ... I work in Germany and the lads in work can get a car for far less that what I pay living in the Netherlands and with better spec plus lower kilometers.

To top it off you can lease a car and get a large benefit on your taxes, which I cannot do as I would have to pay the BPM on a lease car that I would only have for 2-3 years.

I can't even frikking rent a car with German or Belgian plates without jumping through some loops with the Belastingdienst (Tax Service) basically I can drive one license plate once a year for 2 weeks, if I get the same car twice from a car rental place I am knackered :P

But on the other side I get the benefit of a mileage allowance which gives me a rebate of around 350 euros a month on my taxes, so the longer I keep my car the better the value is.

Swings and roundabouts as they say.

If your a certain grade and work for a European office, NATO or for hold a diplomatic position you pay no tax, no BTW (VAT) no BPM (VRT) no Motorrijtuigenbelasting (Motor Tax) and you pay no income tax at all, usually you'll pay 3% Internal tax.

To top it off you'll get some plates that have "CD" on them and you can park wherever you like and drive like your on the frikking autobahn :P


If you want the benefit from being in a situation, go and live in that situation. To be honest I just try not to think about it !:D

MrDerp

Idbatterim wrote: »

That's exactly my point its sometimes made out as if its some fantastic loophole, your going to be paying a heap more because of the lower tax. Ergo your not saving anything...

Also, while the lower tax is a factor, so is a shortage of second hand cars. This change in VRT/Motor tax unfortunately coincided with a rapid reduction in the purchase of new cars in this country

According to beepbeep.ie (total new registrations):
2007 total passenger car sales - 186,238
2008 total passenger car sales - 151,444
2009 total passenger car sales - 57,118
2010 total passenger car sales - 88,446

now that's all cars, not just diesel, but you get the picture of the trend.

While there's a good few 08s knocking around, it's the premium end of the market (which already had efficient engines) which benefits most from the emissions based motor tax.

Furthermore, there was still a lot of petrol sales at the time:
2007: 71% Petrol; 28% Diesel => 52,000 Diesel & 132,000 Petrol cars
2008: 63% Petrol; 32% Diesel => 52,000 Diesel & 95,000 Petrol cars
2009: 42% Petrol; 51% Diesel => 32,000 Diesel & 24,000 Petrol cars
2010: 32% Petrol; 64% Diesel => 56,000 Diesel & 28,000 Petrol cars

So there's been a few imports since, sure, but what are we really comparing? Unfortunately I can't find 2006 figures, but you can quickly extrapolate that there is a hell of a lot more 2006-2008 petrol cars knocking around than there is 2008-2010 Diesels.

This shortage of what people want (cheaper tax cars) will continue for years. That anomaly in the market isn't just about 2007 v 2008, it's a blob 4 years wide with theoretically 279,000 07-10 petrol cars on the road and only 140,000 08-10 Diesel.

That's right folks, there are roughly twice as many petrol 07-10 petrol cars as there are 08-10 Diesel cars. As well as a high demand, there's a shortage of supply of low tax diesel cars.

There's a madness to it, and I recently convinced MrsDerp into an 09 petrol. She didn't need much help, to be honest. "Look at this low-mileage top spec 09 petrol with panoramic roof, it's 2k cheaper than a higher-mileage boggo-spec 08 diesel"

I'm currently in an 07 petrol, I think I'll be buying an 08/09 petrol next, and I do Diesel mileage. It'll be a few years before my second hand market gets out of 07-10 supply/demand kink and Diesel actually saves me money

Idbatterim

Because this difference in motor tax causes a rift in the price between 07 and 08 examples of the same car. This means that the prices for post 08 supposed low emissions models are artificially higher, and over the average ownership of the car, the tax versus purchase price will balance out.

This depends majorly on how long you keep if for an the exact car in question... Also residuals wise in 2/3 years, even 08's will be deemed as old, you wont be getting much for them anyway, so if cost is an issue, i dont see how saving say E200 x 3 years = 600 = better than paying 2-3k more as an example. Actually every car and scenario would have to be judged on its own facts. The savings for the vast majority of people arent coming down from something insane like E1809 or E1494 anyway. Most were or are driving relatively cheap to tax cars under the CC system if they are 2L are under, which I am assuming is 90% or more of cars...

While there's a good few 08s knocking around, it's the premium end of the market (which already had efficient engines) which benefits most from the emissions based motor tax.

Exactly and that was my point above, people driving your average small engined **** box are saving peanuts in the scheme of things, but this "da cheap tax" seems to have sent all logic out the window, like they feel they are some financial wizards or getting one over on the government LOL! BMW particularly in the early based emissions years are the only ones who were putting out relatively high bhp, low emissions and correspondingly low VRT. Also BMW up until recently had always been naturally aspirated engines (as in the past 10 years, in 2006 they had the 335 and 535 and 635d, but they would have made up a minuscule percentage of Irish BMW sales), you could drive around 1.8 E classes or A6's for years before. Anybody who is paying high tax whatever you want to deem that, but say 3L, they can afford to pay E1500 year and I am meant to believe they cant afford an emissions based car? LOL! Like me, they can afford one alright, but it either wont be a patch on their current car OR they arent prepared to lose a few grand a year to save a few hundred (like me)...

CiniO

keithclancy wrote: »

On the other side of that the average wage in Poland is half that of Ireland.

Comparatively speaking the purchasing power in Ireland makes running a car quite easy, even with VRT.

Average salary in Poland last year was about €900 per month, which makes it around €10800 per annum.
I think that's much lower than half of what you get in Ireland.

It still doesn't justify horrendous Irish VRT.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

If it's on the purchase price why does everyone not just say they got the car for nothing off a guy they know?

Because they check it. If price of car is significently lower than average price of that car, they will question it.

It's much better anyway than larcenous Irish VRT, which is charged od OMSP which price already include VRT. So VRT is charged on VRT - by simple maths trick it's double taxation making effective VRT rates much higher than they really are.

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

Because they check it. If price of car is significently lower than average price of that car, they will question it..

How can they question a private sale from a foreign country? "I got it off my mate for nothing/€500/€1000". Who are they to say you should have forced the guy to take money/more money?

CiniO wrote: »

It's much better anyway than larcenous Irish VRT, which is charged od OMSP which price already include VRT. So VRT is charged on VRT - by simple maths trick it's double taxation making effective VRT rates much higher than they really are.

It brings the price to the same as what you'd pay for one here. If it was making it significantly dearer then youd have a point

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

How can they question a private sale from a foreign country? "I got it off my mate for nothing/€500/€1000". Who are they to say you should have forced the guy to take money/more money?

So maybe it was badly worded above.
They charge this tax on purchasing price.
Normally they trust you that price you indicated on a receipt/contract of sale is right.
But if that price is way out, they will question it.
I don't see a problem here.
Simples - you bring a car from Germany and have a contract with a seller stating you paid for it €5000.
Polish revenue takes a look, and they discover that average price for that car in Germany is €10,000, so they will question your price, and most likely you will be forced to pay tax on €10,000.
But assuming OMSP in Poland of that car is €12,000 it's still better, because you pay the tax on what you paid (or should have paid) for the car.

It brings the price to the same as what you'd pay for one here. If it was making it significantly dearer then youd have a point

My point is that VRT in current form is just one big deceit.

Example.
I got a car in UK last year. Paid £7000, which converted to around €8505.
VRT rate for that car was 19%. They said OMSP is €10,500, so I had to pay €1995 on VRT (19% of €10,500). All good and clear.

But once you take a look at it, you can see, that I paid €1995 tax on vehicle which was worth €8505. So effectively my tax rate was 23.46%.
That's the tax rate I paid. Not 19% as they advertise.
IMO this is pure fraud what revenue is doing.

I hope you understand what I mean.

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

So maybe it was badly worded above.
They charge this tax on purchasing price.
Normally they trust you that price you indicated on a receipt/contract of sale is right.
But if that price is way out, they will question it.
I don't see a problem here.
Simples - you bring a car from Germany and have a contract with a seller stating you paid for it €5000.
Polish revenue takes a look, and they discover that average price for that car in Germany is €10,000, so they will question your price, and most likely you will be forced to pay tax on €10,000.
But assuming OMSP in Poland of that car is €12,000 it's still better, because you pay the tax on what you paid (or should have paid) for the car.

So, in effect, they do apply an omsp. They just pretend they don't.

CiniO wrote: »

My point is that VRT in current form is just one big deceit.

Example.
I got a car in UK last year. Paid £7000, which converted to around €8505.
VRT rate for that car was 19%. They said OMSP is €10,500, so I had to pay €1995 on VRT (19% of €10,500). All good and clear.

But once you take a look at it, you can see, that I paid €1995 tax on vehicle which was worth €8505. So effectively my tax rate was 23.46%.
That's the tax rate I paid. Not 19% as they advertise.
IMO this is pure fraud what revenue is doing.

I hope you understand what I mean.

What the car is worth (or you paid for it) in a foreign country is irrelevant to its worth here though.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

So, in effect, they do apply an omsp. They just pretend they don't.


What the car is worth (or you paid for it) in a foreign country is irrelevant to its worth here though.

That's true indeed.
But that's not the point.
The point is, that you pay tax, which is calculated as percentage of vehicle price already containing that tax (making it double taxation).

Sure - you are right saying foreign country price is irrelevant to what car is worth here. It's worth in Ireland more, because of VRT.
But tax should be calculated on price you paid.

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

But tax should be calculated on price you paid.

You've just shown that it isn't in Poland even though they claim it is. If I give you a car for nothing and you decide to take it back to Poland they will apply a price they deem it should be taxed at (effectively the OMSP) not what you got it for (free)

If they do believe you then basing it on what you paid just leave it open to abuse.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

You've just shown that it isn't in Poland even though they claim it is. If I give you a car for nothing and you decide to take it back to Poland they will apply a price they deem it should be taxed at (effectively the OMSP) not what you got it for (free)

If they do believe you then basing it on what you paid just leave it open to abuse.

You're still missing my main point - double taxation part.

If you give me you car here for free, and I bring it to Poland - yes - they will want me to pay tax on it based on what I should have paid for it in Ireland. No double taxation.

However if someone gives me the UK car for free, and I bring it down to Ireland, they will charge me VRT on Irish price - not UK price.
Irish price is higher than UK price, because of VRT.
So I have to pay tax on higher price (Irish price). And fact that price is higher in Ireland is because VRT exists.

My example few posts above, showed that what is advertised as 19% VRT tax, in reality is 23.46%.

It doesn't happen with other goods.
If you import anything to Ireland where import tax is due, and tax is calculated as percentage, then you pay it on purchase price - not imaginary Irish market price.

Del2005

CiniO wrote: »

The point is, that you pay tax, which is calculated as percentage of vehicle price already containing that tax (making it double taxation).

It's not double taxation. You forgot that VAT is included in the OMSP. It's triple taxation.

keithclancy

CiniO wrote: »

That's true indeed.
But that's not the point.
The point is, that you pay tax, which is calculated as percentage of vehicle price already containing that tax (making it double taxation).

Sure - you are right saying foreign country price is irrelevant to what car is worth here. It's worth in Ireland more, because of VRT.
But tax should be calculated on price you paid.

Would be rife for abuse unfortunately.

Guy:Incognito

CiniO wrote: »

You're still missing my main point - double taxation part.

If you give me you car here for free, and I bring it to Poland - yes - they will want me to pay tax on it based on what I should have paid for it in Ireland. No double taxation.

However if someone gives me the UK car for free, and I bring it down to Ireland, they will charge me VRT on Irish price - not UK price.
Irish price is higher than UK price, because of VRT.
So I have to pay tax on higher price (Irish price). And fact that price is higher in Ireland is because VRT exists.

My example few posts above, showed that what is advertised as 19% VRT tax, in reality is 23.46%.

It doesn't happen with other goods.
If you import anything to Ireland where import tax is due, and tax is calculated as percentage, then you pay it on purchase price - not imaginary Irish market price.

At the end of the day, double taxation or anything else is irrelevant, the price is all that matters. Would it really make a difference to you if they did it as is or changed the figures around and made it 23.46%? You pay the same either way.

CiniO

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

At the end of the day, double taxation or anything else is irrelevant, the price is all that matters. Would it really make a difference to you if they did it as is or changed the figures around and made it 23.46%? You pay the same either way.

I wouldn't make financial difference.
But yes - I feel cheated.
They tell me - you must pay 19% tax.
In reality I pay 23.46%.

Is this not cheating?

Normal people go to prison for cheating.
Government gets away with it.

Even banks were forced to standarise their interest rates and present them as APR, so people know how much they'll have to pay.

Goverment doesn't give a hell. Just let's call it 19% but charge 23.46%. All cool, isn't it?

keithclancy

CiniO wrote: »

I wouldn't make financial difference.
But yes - I feel cheated.
They tell me - you must pay 19% tax.
In reality I pay 23.46%.

Is this not cheating?

Normal people go to prison for cheating.
Government gets away with it.

Even banks were forced to standarise their interest rates and present them as APR, so people know how much they'll have to pay.

Goverment doesn't give a hell. Just let's call it 19% but charge 23.46%. All cool, isn't it?

You paid 19% on the open market selling price.... this is clearly displayed on the revenue website.

wonski

keithclancy wrote: »

You paid 19% on the open market selling price.... this is clearly displayed on the revenue website.

I think his point was that in some countries - Poland in his example - you pay tax based on the price of the car in the country of origin.
In Ireland you pay it based on value of the car on Irish market.

keithclancy

wonski wrote: »

I think his point was that in some countries - Poland in his example - you pay tax based on the price of the car in the country of origin.
In Ireland you pay it based on value of the car on Irish market.

So the point is Ireland is not Poland .... right then :pac:

wonski

keithclancy wrote: »

So the point is Ireland is not Poland .... right then :pac:

If you go back to the first page you will see the second post where the few countries are quoted on Revenue website as countries that have VRT equivalent. The thing is that the other countries import tax is more attractive to the customers.
The point is the Irish VRT is more expensive than its equivalent in other countries. You can't decide if the VRT is expensive unless you compare it to other countries, can you?

H3llR4iser

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

There is no EU fine, that is just pub talk. It's perfectly legal. The touted line is that it "discriminates under EU law" or something, which makes no sense. The EU commission have said it's unfair, yet legal. We're not the only EU country to have a "VRT". There's a similar import tax in Denmark, Spain, Greece, Italy, Ireland, Netherlands, Austria, Portugal, Finland, Hungary, Latvia, Malta, Slovenia, Cyprus and Poland according to Revenue...

False, as there is no such thing as an equivalent for the VRT in Italy. There are certainly costs associated with importing a car, but they are mostly due to the absurdly long and convoluted bureaucracy involved; Most of the money paid in this process is, however for services (e.g. translation of documentation, you need a conveyancer to stamp every single thing and so on). The whole operation can cost between 250 and 1000 Euro, depending on vehicle and country of origin in the case of EU-bought cars; Of these, about 150-200 euro are taxes - mostly for the release of new logbook and registration plates. Anyway, the process can be so long and frustrating that, with the exception of border areas (mostly with France and Germany), importing vehicles is extremely rare.

Things become expensive if you try to import a car that originates from outside the EU, as you'd need to pay the equivalent VAT on its value, or if the car is not sold in Italy at all - in that case, you'd need to test and certify it as an "unique" vehicle.

For Forks Sake

wonski wrote: »

I think his point was that in some countries - Poland in his example - you pay tax based on the price of the car in the country of origin.
In Ireland you pay it based on value of the car on Irish market.

While you have to pay on the OMSP based on the Irish market, if you've paid less for the car (as is the primary reason for a lot of people buying from the UK/NI), you can the appeal the Revenue valuation and, if successful, they refund the difference. Takes time, but I know a few people who successfully appealed.

dougie-lampkin

Those are Revenue's words, not mine.

H3llR4iser wrote: »

False, as there is no such thing as an equivalent for the VRT in Italy. There are certainly costs associated with importing a car, but they are mostly due to the absurdly long and convoluted bureaucracy involved; Most of the money paid in this process is, however for services (e.g. translation of documentation, you need a conveyancer to stamp every single thing and so on). The whole operation can cost between 250 and 1000 Euro, depending on vehicle and country of origin in the case of EU-bought cars; Of these, about 150-200 euro are taxes - mostly for the release of new logbook and registration plates. Anyway, the process can be so long and frustrating that, with the exception of border areas (mostly with France and Germany), importing vehicles is extremely rare.

So, I guess you could call it...a Vehicle Registration Tax?

wonski

For Forks Sake wrote: »

While you have to pay on the OMSP based on the Irish market, if you've paid less for the car (as is the primary reason for a lot of people buying from the UK/NI), you can the appeal the Revenue valuation and, if successful, they refund the difference. Takes time, but I know a few people who successfully appealed.

The main problem i see with VRT is that most people don't just go to UK to buy car because it is cheaper. It is the wider choice of the cars on offer, access to vehicles with much better specs etc.
The Revenue is somehow trying to protect Irish dealers - which is good thing - but forgets that the Irish market is relatively small and there is not much to be protected really. Especially when lot of cars sold by Irish dealers are imports, some of those are not even registered until the custome decides to buy it.

wonski

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

Those are Revenue's words, not mine.



So, I guess you could call it...a Vehicle Registration Tax?

Which cost 150-200 euro. Some difference there.

CiniO

keithclancy wrote: »

You paid 19% on the open market selling price.... this is clearly displayed on the revenue website.

Not that clearly.
But yes - once you read all info about VRT, you will discover what's it about.

I paid 23.46% tax on a car, and it would be nice if revenue was clear about it and say openly that's the tax rate.

23.46% tax sounds more clearly than 19% of OMSP, doesn't it?

Quotation from wikipedia in relation to Irish VRT:

Criticisms[edit]

Critics of VRT claim that it is effectively a continuation of the excise duty (which was applicable to vehicles in Ireland prior to 1992) and as such is illegal under European union law. It should also be noted that as it is calculated on the selling price of a vehicle, inclusive of VAT and VRT, so is in effect a double taxation. Along with complaints about the very high rate of tax, critics maintain the tax is ineffective in one of its stated aims the reduction of pollution from vehicles because while it may limit the number of vehicles on the road (by making new cars less affordable), it provides a disincentive for owners of older (more polluting) vehicles to replace their cars. As the tax is on vehicle ownership rather than usage there is little incentive for those who do manage to buy a car to ever consider using less polluting methods of transport.

CiniO

wonski wrote: »

I think his point was that in some countries - Poland in his example - you pay tax based on the price of the car in the country of origin.
In Ireland you pay it based on value of the car on Irish market.

Irish and UK car prices would be probably very similar if VRT didn't exist.
Because VRT exists Irish prices are higher.
So basing VRT calculations on Irish price, is cheating, because this price is higher because it already contains VRT. Basing a tax on price already including this tax - madness.

keithclancy

CiniO wrote: »

Not that clearly.
But yes - once you read all info about VRT, you will discover what's it about.

I paid 23.46% tax on a car, and it would be nice if revenue was clear about it and say openly that's the tax rate.

23.46% tax sounds more clearly than 19% of OMSP, doesn't it?

Quotation from wikipedia in relation to Irish VRT:

Quotation from Wikipedia.... ... sure its the same everywhere, your paying a percentage on the tax office has it down on the book.

dougie-lampkin

wonski wrote: »

Which cost 150-200 euro. Some difference there.

That's a bit irrelevant, I thought the point of this thread was whether VRT was illegal or not? Half of the EU seems to have a VRT so I think that's been answered.

We pay more tax than Italy in some areas, they pay more than us in others. Such is life. It still doesn't prove VRT is illegal.

Del2005

wonski wrote: »

The Revenue is somehow trying to protect Irish dealers - which is good thing -

The revenue don't care about protecting Irish dealers. They are protecting a valuable revenue stream to the exchequer so we can run our country. If the high rate of VRT was removed the money would have to be found elsewhere, where there's no chance for an individual to reduce the amount they pay.

wonski

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

That's a bit irrelevant, I thought the point of this thread was whether VRT was illegal or not? Half of the EU seems to have a VRT so I think that's been answered.

We pay more tax than Italy in some areas, they pay more than us in others. Such is life. It still doesn't prove VRT is illegal.

I never said VRT was illegal. It is, however, very expensive and comparing it to other countries is "apples and oranges" really. Therefore in my opinion Irish VRT is a joke.
Agreed that every country has its own taxes, and even the 20% base tax for employees is not as clear given the tax credits we get in Ireland. We win in some areas, we loose in the other - such is a life as you said.

H3llR4iser

dougie-lampkin wrote: »

Those are Revenue's words, not mine.

So, I guess you could call it...a Vehicle Registration Tax?

Oh I know, I pointed out the fact the Revenue itself is blatantly lying in the hope the average Joe doesn't take the time to verify their claims. It's a common enough thing, here like in other places, unfortunately.

And technically speaking you could call "logbook and plates" a VRT, but just the name would be the same - you'd pay a couple hundred euros maximum even if you're registering a McLaren P1 (take it with a pinch of salt, but I seem to remember it's 60 for the logbook and 90 for the plates, total 150 Euro).

bear1

keithclancy wrote: »

On the other side of that the average wage in Poland is half that of Ireland.

Comparatively speaking the purchasing power in Ireland makes running a car quite easy, even with VRT.

Imagine how I feel ... I work in Germany and the lads in work can get a car for far less that what I pay living in the Netherlands and with better spec plus lower kilometers.

To top it off you can lease a car and get a large benefit on your taxes, which I cannot do as I would have to pay the BPM on a lease car that I would only have for 2-3 years.

I can't even frikking rent a car with German or Belgian plates without jumping through some loops with the Belastingdienst (Tax Service) basically I can drive one license plate once a year for 2 weeks, if I get the same car twice from a car rental place I am knackered :P

But on the other side I get the benefit of a mileage allowance which gives me a rebate of around 350 euros a month on my taxes, so the longer I keep my car the better the value is.

Swings and roundabouts as they say.

If your a certain grade and work for a European office, NATO or for hold a diplomatic position you pay no tax, no BTW (VAT) no BPM (VRT) no Motorrijtuigenbelasting (Motor Tax) and you pay no income tax at all, usually you'll pay 3% Internal tax.

To top it off you'll get some plates that have "CD" on them and you can park wherever you like and drive like your on the frikking autobahn :P


If you want the benefit from being in a situation, go and live in that situation. To be honest I just try not to think about it !:D

Whereas I agree with most of your post, the first part is way off
Average salary in Warsaw for example is about 600e after tax.
Have a few friends here working their asses off and one or two get as little 550e per month net.

CiniO

bear1 wrote: »

Whereas I agree with most of your post, the first part is way off
Average salary in Warsaw for example is about 600e after tax.
Have a few friends here working their asses off and one or two get as little 550e per month net.

I don't think you are right.
According to GUS (Polish central statistics office) average salary in 2013 was 3834zl = just over €900 per month.
And we are talking about average for the whole country, so surely it's higher in Warsaw.

bear1

CiniO wrote: »

I don't think you are right.
According to GUS (Polish central statistics office) average salary in 2013 was 3834zl = just over €900 per month.
And we are talking about average for the whole country, so surely it's higher in Warsaw.

Ok I stand corrected.
Just the guys I know don't earn anywhere near that sum, unless we start talking gross.
Any this is getting OT

bear1

Btw Cinio, seeing as you know this stuff.
I bought a few days ago a Fiat Punto JTD here in Warsaw. Now, as I'm not Polish the car can't be in my name so it will be in my wifes name in Bialystok (where she is from).
The car cost 5,500zl but on the seller contract we wrote 4000zl.
So if it's 3,1% to re-register the car from Warsaw to Bialystok plates then it should be 124zl right?
3,1% of 4000zl = 124zl

CiniO

bear1 wrote: »

Btw Cinio, seeing as you know this stuff.
I bought a few days ago a Fiat Punto JTD here in Warsaw. Now, as I'm not Polish the car can't be in my name so it will be in my wifes name in Bialystok (where she is from).

Hmm. Assuming you are resident in Poland, there should be no problem for the car to be in your name.
I'm not sure though what paperwork you would need to prove residency.

The car cost 5,500zl but on the seller contract we wrote 4000zl.

Hmm. That's openly admitting to cheating the revenue :P On the other hand, Polish revenue won't be looking at boards.ie.

So if it's 3,1% to re-register the car from Warsaw to Bialystok plates then it should be 124zl right?

No.
3.1% is import duty.
You pay it when you import car from abroad to Poland.
When you purchase car which is already registered in Poland you need to do other paperwork and fees.

1. Transaction fee of 2%. So you will need to pay 2% on 4000zl = 80zl.
2. Reregistration fee which will include cost of new reg. cert, new number plates, and sticker (this probably costs about 200zl).
3. As insurance policy is attached to the car, you will need to contact insurer to update details (ament policy into your name, and possibly pay extra premium if your NCB is lower then previous owner's).

wonski

CiniO wrote: »

I don't think you are right.
According to GUS (Polish central statistics office) average salary in 2013 was 3834zl = just over €900 per month.
And we are talking about average for the whole country, so surely it's higher in Warsaw.

Now you pissed me off with the figures. The GUS figures are to be flushed down the toilet if you asked me;)
My father, who spent a lot of his time to learn new technology back in the days earns about that being a Construction/Project Manager. My mother who spent most of her time being a mother ended up with less than 250 euro/month cleaning in the hospital (all started by the scheme similiar to the job bridge scheme up here).
The 3834 includes the Company Directors salaries,and is irrelevant in this case. The minimum wage - however - is very relevant and is below or around the 250 euro after tax, unless i am wrong. But I do not think I am.

CiniO

wonski wrote: »

Now you pissed me off with the figures. The GUS figures are to be flushed down the toilet if you asked me;)
My father, who spent a lot of his time to learn new technology back in the days earns about that being a Construction/Project Manager. My mother who spent most of her time being a mother ended up with less than 250 euro/month cleaning in the hospital (all started by the scheme similiar to the job bridge scheme up here).
The 3834 includes the Company Directors salaries,and is irrelevant in this case. The minimum wage - however - is very relevant and is below or around the 250 euro after tax, unless i am wrong. But I do not think I am.

Minimum wage at the moment is 1680zl per month gross.
Nett it comes at 1237.20zl per month.
Converting with todays exchange rate, it comes as €296.8 monthly.