Motor tax question

Luckydog69

A friend of mine bought a car end of august last year for a new job that was about an hours drive from home, changed log book into his name but in the meantime his work situation changed and he was going to be kept on in his old job..( they won a new contract) .However he never taxed the car and now if he taxes it he will have to pay arrears to last august. I told him to just register the car in his wife's name so she can tax it then from the 1st of this month..I know it'll add another owner to the car but its not a very new car to begin with. He wouldn't be breaking the law if he done this..Would he? Thanks in advance.

boardsuser1

Luckydog69 wrote: »

A friend of mine bought a car end of august last year for a new job that was about an hours drive from home, changed log book into his name but in the meantime his work situation changed and he was going to be kept on in his old job..( they won a new contract) .However he never taxed the car and now if he taxes it he will have to pay arrears to last august. I told him to just register the car in his wife's name so she can tax it then from the 1st of this month..I know it'll add another owner to the car but its not a very new car to begin with. He wouldn't be breaking the law if he done this..Would he? Thanks in advance.

Nope, no laws being broken. I've done it myself.

Only a matter of time before that loophole is closed though.

colm_mcm

There isn't a practical way to close it.

boardsuser1

colm_mcm wrote: »

There isn't a practical way to close it.

It involves politicians and money, they'll find a way somehow

.G.

Can you not declare it off the road from the period from August to end of January?

uck51js9zml2yt

colm_mcm wrote: »

There isn't a practical way to close it.

Yes there is...Look at the UK. Continuous taxation....The government are looking closely at it.

uck51js9zml2yt

superg wrote: »

Can you not declare it off the road from the period from August to end of January?

No! You have 21 days from date of sale to declare it off the road. This includes the date of sale as day 1.

colm_mcm

Aranza Gorgeous Hurricane wrote: »

Yes there is...Look at the UK. Continuous taxation....The government are looking closely at it.

So you're saying if someone buys a car in the uk that hasn't been SORNd that the new owner is liable for the previous owners arrears?

grogi

colm_mcm wrote: »

There isn't a practical way to close it.

There is no loophole anymore, the previous owner still owes that tax. There is no enforcement. But that is fixable too - the moment you want to register a new car, the arrears could be transferred... Or the Revenue could actively chase the evaders

honda boi

colm_mcm wrote: »

So you're saying if someone buys a car in the uk that hasn't been SORNd that the new owner is liable for the previous owners arrears?

If they were to do it I'd say they,d put the arrears on the current owner?

uck51js9zml2yt

colm_mcm wrote: »

So you're saying if someone buys a car in the uk that hasn't been SORNd that the new owner is liable for the previous owners arrears?

I never said that!
The new owner is never liable for tax owed by someone else. They pay from month of purchase.

UK has continuous taxation of the vehicle. A new owner can't drive off without taxing it first.
The Irish gov are looking to see if they can implement it.
Personally, I hope they do. This joke of having arrears and just transferring ownership to evade them is stupid

colm_mcm

Uk also has continuous SORN and insurance which we don't have.

CiniO

grogi wrote: »

There is no loophole anymore, the previous owner still owes that tax. There is no enforcement.

That's actually not true.
Person who lets the tax lapse, and doesn't tax it, is not committing any offence.
There is no law in Ireland, stipulating that tax on vehicle should be paid (not unless it's used on public places).
So by not taxing a car, you are not committing any offence provided car is not used in public place.
If it's not taxed for a year, that doesn't mean you owe that year in arrears. You don't.

You only become liable for arrears, when you go to tax the car.
But if instead of taxing you decide to scrap the car, sell it or do whatever else with it, then you don't owe anything and no enforcement could possibly ask you to pay the arrears.

Isambard

colm_mcm wrote: »

So you're saying if someone buys a car in the uk that hasn't been SORNd that the new owner is liable for the previous owners arrears?

no I think the old owner is responsible in the UK and will likely get a fine in the post

grogi

CiniO wrote: »

That's actually not true.

Thanks, I see the difference now. So that's what needs to change - no arrears, but 'continuous taxation' unless the vehicle is declared of the road.

colm_mcm

Just because another country does things a certain way doesn't mean we need to copy them. Uk tax is far less than ours, plus they have enforcement and ANPR that works.

CJhaughey

Not alone that UK tax is cheaper the owner of the car gets an instant refund of any tax remaining when the car is sold.
I can't see the tax authorities being too keen on handing back a grand or more if the owner sold a high tax vehicle.
They also don't refund unused tax here if you take a car off the road (SORN) in the UK they do.

grogi

colm_mcm wrote: »

Just because another country does things a certain way doesn't mean we need to copy them. Uk tax is far less than ours, plus they have enforcement and ANPR that works.

Of course not.

But if a system here is broken, one can reasonably easy evade the tax while honest people can't get refunds - it needs to be changed.

I know it is an Irishman speaking through you, but the UK really have it the right way this time. Well, as long as motortax is concerned; I believe it should be abolished completely in favour of increased fuel levy...

unkel

Motor tax should be scrapped, so we can forget about all this nonsense and we no longer need an army of civil servants to work on it. Just add it to the excise duty on fuel and compliance will automatically be 100%

blackbox

unkel wrote: »

Motor tax should be scrapped, so we can forget about all this nonsense and we no longer need an army of civil servants to work on it. Just add it to the excise duty on fuel and compliance will automatically be 100%

A significant improvement but not quite 100%. Still some washed diesel and stretched petrol.


.

grogi

blackbox wrote: »

A significant improvement but not quite 100%. Still some washed diesel and stretched petrol.

With newish cars and complex engines it is above stupid to buy fuel at dodgy places. The practice will die out together with the cars that were using washed fuel.

mgbgt1978

KC161 wrote: »

Nope, no laws being broken. I've done it myself.

Only a matter of time before that loophole is closed though.

For about the 20th time, it's not a "loophole". It's the the way that Motor Tax has worked in Ireland since it's inception.
It's the Law.
Why is it now "only a matter of time before this 'loophole' is closed" when it's been this way for over a Century ?

The 1st Motor Tax offices were created in 1903 according to many archives.

mgbgt1978

unkel wrote: »

Motor tax should be scrapped, so we can forget about all this nonsense and we no longer need an army of civil servants to work on it. Just add it to the excise duty on fuel and compliance will automatically be 100%

Apart from those who live within close enough proximity to N. Ireland. If the cost of fuel here is even slightly more than UK prices they will fill up in the North. If it is significantly higher that radius increases .
Apart from that the "Army" of Civil Servants would simply be redeployed. There would definitely be Zero wage saving there....

grogi

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Apart from those who live within close enough proximity to N. Ireland. If the cost of fuel here is even slightly more than UK prices they will fill up in the North. If it is significantly higher that radius increases .
Apart from that the "Army" of Civil Servants would simply be redeployed. There would definitely be Zero wage saving there....

Sure, that is the risk. But people value their time as well... I don't have enough free time to waste half an hour a week to drive to NI...

mgbgt1978

....depends how much it's worth to you. Or anybody else.

JohnBoy26

grogi wrote: »

Of course not.

But if a system here is broken, one can reasonably easy evade the tax while honest people can't get refunds - it needs to be changed.

I know it is an Irishman speaking through you, but the UK really have it the right way this time. Well, as long as motortax is concerned; I believe it should be abolished completely in favour of increased fuel levy...

There is nothing wrong with the system. It's in the enforcement is where things need to improve.

The uk isn't as perfect as you might think either.

grogi

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

There is nothing wrong with the system. It's in the enforcement is where things need to improve.

The uk isn't as perfect as you might think either.

It is tax... It by definition is imperfect...

unkel

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Apart from those who live within close enough proximity to N. Ireland. If the cost of fuel here is even slightly more than UK prices they will fill up in the North.

Of course. That's a well used argument but only a tiny percentage of total Irish fuel sales (and thus taxes / excise duties) will actually go to the UK (NI) if our fuels become a lot more expensive than they are across the border.

And I'm the first to say fair play to the people who do cross border shopping in their benefit

uck51js9zml2yt

unkel wrote: »

Motor tax should be scrapped, so we can forget about all this nonsense and we no longer need an army of civil servants to work on it. Just add it to the excise duty on fuel and compliance will automatically be 100%

Its public servants..Not civil
87% of motor tax is done online and automated.
What we need is continuous taxation and a verification of insurance details when taxing.

colm_mcm

Remember when the SORD came in here? The blurb was that anyone that declared their car off the road and then drove it would face massive penalties vs just driving untaxed. This never happened.
That's the whole point. The enforcement is minimal. Like the €1000 fine for holding a mobile phone. Empty threat.
There would be nothing stopping someone doing a SORD and cancelling insurance and then driving. As long as they don't get caught.
The continuous tax/insurance wouldn't stop those who routinely drive without tax/insurance/licence etc.

These are the people that need to be targeted, not those who forget to do anSORD and then have to do 2 changes of ownership to avoid back tax.

grogi

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

For about the 20th time, it's not a "loophole". It's the the way that Motor Tax has worked in Ireland since it's inception.
It's the Law.
Why is it now "only a matter of time before this 'loophole' is closed" when it's been this way for over a Century ?

The 1st Motor Tax offices were created in 1903 according to many archives.

Don't you think that over the century things have changed?





Different cars, different usage, different problems... Simple fact that something worked in the past does not mean it is up to the task today....

JohnBoy26

grogi wrote: »

Don't you think that over the century things have changed?





Different cars, different usage, different problems... Simple fact that something worked in the past does not mean it is up to the task today....

Bit of a ridiculous comparison there tbh. It's not like every joe is driving around in a buggati now is it.

grogi

JohnBoy26 wrote: »

Bit of a ridiculous comparison there tbh. It's not like every joe is driving around in a buggati now is it.

Both cars represent state of the art - the classic is Star, a 10l 70hp racing vehicle... Comparing it to Bugatti is more than adequate...

Was a Joe driving at all back then?

mgbgt1978

Missing the point there a bit Grogi :rolleyes:.
I was simply pointing out that transferring ownership to get rid of Arrears is not a Loophole (and is not a recent change to the motor taxation laws, despite lots of opinion to the contrary on boards ).
You just posted up pictures of an older car and a newer car....which has absolutely nothing to do with Motor Tax Arrears and the length of time that the current laws have been in existence .

But sure, if it makes you happy and keeps you busy in your spare time then fire away :P.


edit; apologies for the late reply. I wasn't following the Thread.

grogi

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

Missing the point there a bit Grogi :rolleyes:.
I was simply pointing out that transferring ownership to get rid of Arrears is not a Loophole (and is not a recent change to the motor taxation laws, despite lots of opinion to the contrary on boards ).

No, I am not. What worked century ago - when only a handful did have cars - is not adequate anymore. And that's what the pictures are for - to show you that the world is moving on, the taxation laws should follow.

Transferring the ownership to someone else in the same household purely to get rid of arrears is not right - regardless if it is lawful or not.

mgbgt1978

Why didn't you search a bit further and find a couple of photos of an old and new log book ? That would have been more Thread appropriate .
Anyway presumably you mean 'not morally right' in your view.
As for legally, it is totally lawful in this country. Which, in fairness, totally overrides your 'opinion'.

uck51js9zml2yt

It's totally legal unfortunately.
Since the did away with retrospective SORDS which in themselves dealt with arrears.
Yo-yo cars are extremely common with a small fortune lost in revenue.

CiniO

Aranza Gorgeous Hurricane wrote: »

It's totally legal unfortunately.
Since the did away with retrospective SORDS which in themselves dealt with arrears.
Yo-yo cars are extremely common with a small fortune lost in revenue.

Why unfortunately?

uck51js9zml2yt

CiniO wrote: »

Why unfortunately?

It's used and abused by families all over the country.
They run up arrears , switch owners, pay 3 months.....Run up arrears, switch owners....Etc.


The rest of us pay it ontime

grogi

mgbgt1978 wrote: »

As for legally, it is totally lawful in this country. Which, in fairness, totally overrides your 'opinion'.

Isn't it what a loophole is? A lawful behaviour, which is generally considered incorrect or immoral?

CiniO wrote: »

Why unfortunately?

Because opens an avenue for evaders to legalise their behaviour, while honest people will simply keep paying.

biko

OP's question is answered in the affirmative.