Prepare for end of EV grants ....

0lddog

Step 1. Manipulate public opinion :

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/its-a-farcical-situation-wealthy-drivers-using-5000-state-electric-vehicle-grants-to-buy-teslas-and-porsches-40116308.html

AhHaor

Renault Kangoo? It's hard to take these pieces seriously when the type of car is incorrect

Lurching

TD says scheme where the taxpayer is chipping in to help millionaire motorists buy luxury sports cars must be changed

The taxpayer isn't chipping anything in, it just means the already ludicrous VRT take is a bit lower.

Buddy Bubs

Very few people buying decent expensive cars vote sinn fein and they cant bear to see anyone with a few quid do well. The VAT and VRT take on these cars is still significant. They stillpay motor tax. They still pay tolls. The rebate encourages people to buy new cars, be careful what you wish for, if nobody buys new cars they arent going to get any revenue.
The people that buy them contribute most to the exchequer as well, business owners with employees and high earners paying high tax.

I fear this whole covid thing will play into their hands in next general election but they are the most anti business, anti progressive party out there

Their voters traditionally need the tax take to support them and see this as lost money they can give to their layabout voter base.

Sinn Fein are a thundering disgrace of a party. As for the accuracy in the article, Mercedes only selling 8 and BMW selling 580 sounds wrong. Along with the Renault Kangoo, dont think there is an electric one is there??

KCross

0lddog wrote: »

Step 1. Manipulate public opinion :

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/its-a-farcical-situation-wealthy-drivers-using-5000-state-electric-vehicle-grants-to-buy-teslas-and-porsches-40116308.html

Not much wrong with the article to be honest... the main thrust of it is this

"... a scheme where the taxpayer was chipping in to help millionaire motorists buy luxury sports cars was farcical."


You cant really argue with that. I'd rather the grant have a cap also. What value exactly you would set the cap at Im sure would be a contentious discussion, but its reasonable to suggest it anyway and focus the grant at the lower end of the market which is where we need EV's to take off.

KCross

Lurching wrote: »

The taxpayer isn't chipping anything in, it just means the already ludicrous VRT take is a bit lower.

Not really true.

There are two elements to EV incentive.... VRT relief and SEAI grant. The grant is a straight €5k out of the taxpayer current account.

And any VRT relief means less revenue so an overall reduced tax take so someone somewhere is "suffering" as a result of that foregone tax.

Old diesel

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

Very few people buying decent expensive cars vote sinn fein and they cant bear to see anyone with a few quid do well. The VAT and VRT take on these cars is still significant. They stillpay motor tax. They still pay tolls. The rebate encourages people to buy new cars, be careful what you wish for, if nobody buys new cars they arent going to get any revenue.
The people that buy them contribute most to the exchequer as well, business owners with employees and high earners paying high tax.

I fear this whole covid thing will play into their hands in next general election but they are the most anti business, anti progressive party out there

Their voters traditionally need the tax take to support them and see this as lost money they can give to their layabout voter base.

Sinn Fein are a thundering disgrace of a party. As for the accuracy in the article, Mercedes only selling 8 and BMW selling 580 sounds wrong. Along with the Renault Kangoo, dont think there is an electric one is there??

The point the SF TD makes is valid.

The point of a grant should be to allow a normal motorist - bridge the gap between the normal 26 k Golf they might buy and an EV.

So that while the EV is more expensive then an ICE car pre grant - its the same net price after grant.

EVs are also dearer 2nd hand so the SF mans point on grant for 2nd hand EVs is also valid. (1 k not enough though)

Rodin

KCross wrote: »

Not really true.

There are two elements to EV incentive.... VRT relief and SEAI grant. The grant is a straight €5k out of the taxpayer current account.

And any VRT relief means less revenue so an overall reduced tax take so someone somewhere is "suffering" as a result of that foregone tax.

Id say most people buying an expensive electric vehicle pay a lot more than 5k in tax.
Rather than seeing it as something out of others' pockets, the person paying high tax is finally getting something back from it.

RandomViewer

AhHaor wrote: »

Renault Kangoo? It's hard to take these pieces seriously when the type of car is incorrect

Independent stopped noticing car models after the Austin A35,

ewj1978

Kia Niro at the low end? Personally wouldn't call €41k low.

As for the piece itself. Yep do away with the grants.

KCross

Rodin wrote: »

Id say most people buying an expensive electric vehicle pay a lot more than 5k in tax.
Rather than seeing it as something out of others' pockets, the person paying high tax is finally getting something back from it.

Of course they would see it that way. Thats human nature isnt it.

However, government policy is to get 1m EV's on the road by 2030. Is subsidising a very expensive EV a good use of that money? Thats the question being asked. Opinions will differ.

Put another way, if someone is buying a car for €100k, are they likely to run away from that purchase if it costs €105k instead with the grant removed? I'd suggest not.

Now, if you move that €5k to supporting the other end of the market will someone looking to buy a €35k EV be more likely to buy it if its €30k.... i think the answer to that is yes.... hence better use of scarce government resource.

Rodin

KCross wrote: »

Of course they would see it that way. Thats human nature isnt it.

However, government policy is to get 1m EV's on the road by 2030. Is subsidising a very expensive EV a good use of that money? Thats the question being asked. Opinions will differ.

Put another way, if someone is buying a car for €100k, are they likely to run away from that purchase if it costs €105k instead with the grant removed? I'd suggest not.

Now, if you move that €5k to supporting the other end of the market will someone looking to buy a €35k EV be more likely to buy it if its €30k.... i think the answer to that is yes.... hence better use of scarce government resource.

You would need to multiply 5k x the number of low cost cars and compare that with 5k x number of high cost cars.

If the govt us to drive electric cars I agree they should incentivise. Im looking at a new car and I certainly won't be buying an EV. Will probably go for a diesel. Not like diesel pumps will disappear in 10 years time

latency89

Bang on

Only affordable EV's below €30,000 should get the grant

For too long autogiants have been taking the piss here

€41,000 after grants for a bloody Hyundai Kona

Petrol one is €21,000 with no ****ing grant's

liamog

If you remove the grants from car's over €30,000, the only effect will be to move the sales to other European countries where the manufacturer can make the sale to fulfil it's EU wide regulatory compliance.

We're already missing our CO2 reduction commitments and paying fines, so introducing a measure that slows the transition of Irish private vehicles would likely end up costing us more money than it saves.

latency89

liamog wrote: »

If you remove the grants from car's over €30,000, the only effect will be to move the sales to other European countries where the manufacturer can make the sale to fulfil it's EU wide regulatory compliance.

We're already missing our CO2 reduction commitments and paying fines, so introducing a measure that slows the transition of Irish private vehicles would likely end up costing us more money than it saves.

So?

EU should have used the head and made a certain % of sales per country to combat that.

Would prefer them sell no EV's here than being fleeced and for us to plant more trees, wind mills, whatever to get CO2 down

liamog

latency89 wrote: »

Would prefer them sell no EV's here than being fleeced and for us to plant more trees, wind mills, whatever to get CO2 down

Planting more tree's isn't going to put a dent in our CO2 emissions from transportation use.
Transportation accounts for about 1/3 of Ireland's CO2 emissions, the numbers from a couple of years ago were around €600,000,000 in fines for missing our commitments, wouldn't you rather see that money spent on measures to reduce local emissions instead of being paid as a fine?

RandomViewer

The sales of EVs are rising Europe wide so I'd expect the prices to align closer to petrol/diesel so there wouldnt be any need for grants

latency89

liamog wrote: »

Planting more tree's isn't going to put a dent in our CO2 emissions from transportation use.
Transportation accounts for about 1/3 of Ireland's CO2 emissions, the numbers from a couple of years ago were around €600,000,000 in fines for missing our commitments, wouldn't you rather see that money spent on measures to reduce local emissions instead of being paid as a fine?

Your saying we get best bang for buck on emmissions for that €10,000 vrt relief/grant?

How much has this cost us since 2014? Or whenever it was introduced?

liamog

latency89 wrote: »

Your saying we get best bang for buck on emmissions for that €10,000 vrt relief/grant?

How much has this cost us since 2014? Or whenever it was introduced?

I'm saying that if VW need to reach an EU level target, they will sell the cars in countries where they can make the most profit. I would prefer that to be Ireland as it helps us with our own targets and reduces any fines our government has to pay, and zero emission vehicles directly improve the air quality in our towns and cities by reducing particle emissions.

I'm a little bit selfish, in that I'd prefer the city I live in to have cleaner air, and for the taxes that I'd pay to be spent more on services that benefit me than on emissions fines and and buying credits under the emissions trading schemes.

RandomViewer

latency89 wrote: »

Your saying we get best bang for buck on emmissions for that €10,000 vrt relief/grant?

How much has this cost us since 2014? Or whenever it was introduced?

https://stats.beepbeep.ie/

slave1

What about the cost of that mouthful of diesel fumes as that car revs up past you when you're out for a walk....

RandomViewer

slave1 wrote: »

What about the cost of that mouthful of diesel fumes as that car revs up past you when you're out for a walk....

Its gone through a diesel particulate filter and a catalytic converter so bar a slight diesel pong not a lot, people smoking indoors thats what you should be targeting

Del2005

liamog wrote: »

Planting more tree's isn't going to put a dent in our CO2 emissions from transportation use.
Transportation accounts for about 1/3 of Ireland's CO2 emissions, the numbers from a couple of years ago were around €600,000,000 in fines for missing our commitments, wouldn't you rather see that money spent on measures to reduce local emissions instead of being paid as a fine?

How much is agriculture cutting to decrease our fines? No point in targeting motorists if we have more cows belching.

liamog

Del2005 wrote: »

How much is agriculture cutting to decrease our fines? No point in targeting motorists if we have more cows belching.

Transport, Agriculture and Energy Generation are the three biggies roughly 1/3 each. Energy Generation and Transport are largely seen as solved problems which just require time and resources to transition.

If you've got an approach for 2/3 of the problem areas, and not much of an answer for the 1/3 then it makes sense to target your investment at the areas you can make a difference too.

Lantus

Grants in general distort a market and just ensure the seller adjusts their price to avail of the free money. It's just human nature.

Car manufacturers have been designing and releasing new cars for decades and none required a grant to ensure success. But swap the engine and transmission for a battery which is simpler with less parts bar all the thousands of common parts as per a normal car and it's suddenly only viable with a grant. Rubbish.

ELM327

RandomViewer wrote: »

Its gone through a diesel particulate filter and a catalytic converter so bar a slight diesel pong not a lot, people smoking indoors thats what you should be targeting

There are still cars on the road that only have one or none of those measures.

And a diesel is not producing no harmful emissions unless it also has a fully functioning DEF/adblue system too.

ELM327

Lantus wrote: »

Grants in general distort a market and just ensure the seller adjusts their price to avail of the free money. It's just human nature.

Car manufacturers have been designing and releasing new cars for decades and none required a grant to ensure success. But swap the engine and transmission for a battery which is simpler with less parts bar all the thousands of common parts as per a normal car and it's suddenly only viable with a grant. Rubbish.

I agree. There should be no grants to OEMs and instead a tax credit to purchasers, like they do in CA and other ZEV states in the US

liamog

ELM327 wrote: »

I agree. There should be no grants to OEMs and instead a tax credit to purchasers, like they do in CA and other ZEV states in the US

That wouldn't change anything, the cars will still be priced according to final price with tax credit.

ELM327

Compare pricing in CA to pricing here though. They are not priced the same at all.

Markcheese

Del2005 wrote: »

How much is agriculture cutting to decrease our fines? No point in targeting motorists if we have more cows belching.

Believe it or not the number of cows Is decreasing , more farmers are moving to dairying and getting out of suckler cows ,but the total number is decreasing ,
And the cows that belch methane now are replacing the methane that was belched out by cows 10 years ago , whereas the Co2 from the back of a car is adding to the Co2 that was produced 10 years ago , and the Co2 that was produced 100s of years ago and beyond ....
( Not to say agriculture In ireland is squeaky clean ,theyve a lot of work to do )

latency89

Markcheese wrote: »

Believe it or not the number of cows Is decreasing , more farmers are moving to dairying and getting out of suckler cows ,but the total number is decreasing ,
And the cows that belch methane now are replacing the methane that was belched out by cows 10 years ago , whereas the Co2 from the back of a car is adding to the Co2 that was produced 10 years ago , and the Co2 that was produced 100s of years ago and beyond ....
( Not to say agriculture In ireland is squeaky clean ,theyve a lot of work to do )

Cows lol

We have spent the last 12 months in lockdown, with 5km rule for most of it, are the EU going to subtract that from the CO2 emissions targets?

Markcheese

It's an emerging technology, with time the price of batteries will drop, the grants will reduce , the taxation take will probably increase ,
There's no fuel taxes on electric cars (obviously enough) so it'll probably need to be on road tax... Depends then will there just be a flat rate? (everyone pays the same ) , based on the weight of the car (battery size would count a lot ) , or a mileage based fee ,( that'd be rife with fraud ) ,
But that's a long way in the future , when battery availability goes up ,and battery prices come down then most people will buy an electric car without the grant ,cos it's cheaper ...
Think of the bitching when the Co2 based system came in ( 2008 ) , sure most people spent extra for a diesel ( that they didnt need ) to save a few quid on road tax ..and within 10 years most cars were on the new system ,

Article is correct. There is something ill about subsidised for the wealthy. What should be, take subsidies away from cars over €40k - these people don't need, and increase for under €35k.

Always the more affluent get the benefits, like when diesel tax was cut, the benefit went to those who could afford new BMW etc. Those who cannot afford? Pay big tax.

Same with the ev cars. The wealthier get the subsidy and the low tax, the rest get the shaft.

Kramer

Isn't the future looking great!

Soulless electric cars, owned by mega corporations, shuttling us around as we look out on empty fields, devoid of cows, or farmers. We'll be eating insects & lab produced beef protein blocks, need immunity apps on our phones to access a gym & only have "virtual" holidays, through a screen, as air travel will have been banned for both environmental reasons & to prevent the spread of common flu deadly pathogens.

What a future to look forward to - I can't wait .

liamog

ELM327 wrote: »

Compare pricing in CA to pricing here though. They are not priced the same at all.

That's not down to grants vs tax credits.
It's to do with things like VAT, VRT and Import Duty.
It's all down to how we choose to fund society.

liamog

Deleted User wrote: »

Article is correct. There is something ill about subsidised for the wealthy. What should be, take subsidies away from cars over €40k - these people don't need, and increase for under €35k.

Always the more affluent get the benefits, like when diesel tax was cut, the benefit went to those who could afford new BMW etc. Those who cannot afford? Pay big tax.

Same with the ev cars. The wealthier get the subsidy and the low tax, the rest get the shaft.

What would be a sensible system, I can't think of an incentive that would dramatically increase the supply of 6 year old vehicles with zero emissions other than providing grants and subsidies at the point of entry into the market.
The grant and subsidy get's passed on to future owners of the car as the depreciation is against the on the road price instead of the pre incentive price.

ELM327

Deleted User wrote: »

Article is correct. There is something ill about subsidised for the wealthy. What should be, take subsidies away from cars over €40k - these people don't need, and increase for under €35k.

Always the more affluent get the benefits, like when diesel tax was cut, the benefit went to those who could afford new BMW etc. Those who cannot afford? Pay big tax.

Same with the ev cars. The wealthier get the subsidy and the low tax, the rest get the shaft.

This has already been done. 5k VRT grant removed for >50k cars.

latency89

Kramer wrote: »

Isn't the future looking great!

Soulless electric cars, owned by mega corporations, shuttling us around as we look out on empty fields, devoid of cows, or farmers. We'll be eating insects & lab produced beef protein blocks, need immunity apps on our phones to access a gym & only have "virtual" holidays, through a screen, as air travel will have been banned for both environmental reasons & to prevent the spread of common flu deadly pathogens.

What a future to look forward to - I can't wait .

Would be funny if it wasn't true

My 4 and 8 year old have that hell to look forward to

It is sad

RandomViewer

ELM327 wrote: »

There are still cars on the road that only have one or none of those measures.

And a diesel is not producing no harmful emissions unless it also has a fully functioning DEF/adblue system too.

Oil fired burner just sends the burning diesel straight up the flue yet its the cars fault you can smell diesel in towns,

Orebro

RandomViewer wrote: »

Its gone through a diesel particulate filter and a catalytic converter so bar a slight diesel pong not a lot, people smoking indoors thats what you should be targeting

Sorry, but if you're burning something then you're going to get harmful emissions regardless of what fancy tech or filters you put between the burning fuel and exhaust at the back.

marklazarcovic

AhHaor wrote: »

Renault Kangoo? It's hard to take these pieces seriously when the type of car is incorrect

an post put a awful lot of them into operation last year,kangoo ev's.