eFlow keeping the VAT

Craigevans1985

Two stories in the press about the ECJ ruling on VAT. Background, Transport Infrastructure Ireland took the Revenue Commissioners to the EU court to argue about whether or not Revenue should take VAT from the toll collected by eFlow on the M50. (Wonder how much that cost the taxpayer to win an argument in the same country!!!)
They won. Yay! And then announced that they were going to keep the VAT for themselves and not pass it on to the motorists...Boo!
That effectively means that eFlow will profit by 23% by keeping the VAT.
On the flip side, DCC who own the Eastlink now, are also affected (only State owned roads are affected) and they have announced, rightly, that they will be reducing the toll rates by 23% to give it back to the commuters.
It's very annoying that two parts of the "State" can decide to treat taxpayers with such different approaches. Links below if you want to read.
eFlow are saying that they "internally" kept the VAT to one side so that entitles them to keep it both in the past and into the future, so they get 23% more and no saving is passed on again. Anyone else feeling screwed...again...:mad:
https://www.google.ie/amp/s/www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/motorists-paid-almost-100m-in-vat-on-foot-of-flawed-direction-1.3032602%3Fmode%3Damp
http://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/dublin-s-east-link-bridge-toll-to-be-cut-after-vat-ruling-1.3032656

L1011

The original price was dropped to ensure that it stayed the same when the VAT was applied (it was VAT free originally)

Prices did not rise. No consumer is getting screwed - the cash just ended up with the state in a different way - eFlow IS the state.

Businesses were able to reclaim the VAT on state owned tollroads during this period, and now they won't.

Craigevans1985

Would that not apply to DCC the same then? I would have thought that VAT would be treated the same for both? Looking at what they are saying the price was €1.70, and that is now increased to €2.10. (With the VAT removed)
I'm definitely looking at it from my personal commuter point of view, if the ECJ ruled that there was no VAT applicable on anything else I wouldn't expect the price to rise by 23%, but I'd certainly feel screwed if the company put the price up to match. But that's me.

L1011

Craigevans1985 wrote: »

Would that not apply to DCC the same then? I would have thought that VAT would be treated the same for both? Looking at what they are saying the price was €1.70, and that is now increased to €2.10. (With the VAT removed)
I'm definitely looking at it from my personal commuter point of view, if the ECJ ruled that there was no VAT applicable on anything else I wouldn't expect the price to rise by 23%, but I'd certainly feel screwed if the company put the price up to match. But that's me.

The price didn't rise when VAT was applied. DCC operated no tolls at the time.

The price you pay won't be changing and realistically neither is the destination of the cash as its just two arms of the state.

Craigevans1985

The choice was there, they chose to go the other way. We have two cars on the M50, that's more than €300 of vat per year that's staying with eFlow. Since they were passing on the 23% to Revenue it's no skin off their nose to continue not taking it, so keeping it now just screws me and profits them. Don't care that revenue or tii got the money. The choice was there.

L1011

Craigevans1985 wrote: »

The choice was there, they chose to go the other way. We have two cars on the M50, that's more than €300 of vat per year that's staying with eFlow. Since they were passing on the 23% to Revenue it's no skin off their nose to continue not taking it, so keeping it now just screws me and profits them. Don't care that revenue or tii got the money. The choice was there.

eFlow is the state.
Revenue is the state.


The entire point of the appeal was to stop businesses being able to reclaim the VAT. It has zero impact on consumers.

Craigevans1985

I get that. But the choice was there. I feel worse off. If VAT was removed from baked beans, I'd expect the price to go down, not for the company to increase the price and keep it whether they claimed they'd added it in before or not. That's just me. I feel I pay enough, and the little difference it would make for me would not have meant anything to eFlow. €2k a year on tolls on the M50. It bites.

L1011

Craigevans1985 wrote: »

I get that. But the choice was there. I feel worse off. If VAT was removed from baked beans, I'd expect the price to go down, not for the company to increase the price and keep it whether they claimed they'd added it in before or not. That's just me. I feel I pay enough, and the little difference it would make for me would not have meant anything to eFlow. €2k a year on tolls on the M50. It bites.

The price did not go up with VAT was added though. No consumer is any worse off.

The "little difference" is absolutely massive across the entire customer base, which is why this case was taken.