Pay by weight will be a big part of the mix too I'd say.
I think they offer some savings to the state in that carbon taxes are avoided and they provide energy security and independence as we are not importing fossil fuels. And hence exporting money from the economy. Thus will be more noticeable as we increase our RES penetration.
mire and more people are going with PV. It’ll be interesting to see how the government deal with loss of revenue there.
as for motor tax. I think we’ll eventually move towards a pay per Km.
Cheaper due largely to how the fuel is taxed though.
In my view it's a hidden incentive to buy an EV.
In time taxation on EV's will have to be higher to compensate the government for what they will be losing on fuel duty and VAT.
In simple terms EV drivers will have to start footing more of the bill for maintaining the roads they drive on.
But that's a while away yet.
Which, in my view, makes buying an EV today an extremely smart choice
1/ prices have been reduced
2/ no great demand so better bargaining power
3/ road maintenance contributions will remain deflated until mass adaptation, which right now seems further away than ever.
Well he said a congestion charge again this is with the loss of 6 billion in Revenue so I'm assuming charges for EV included so really it's nothing to do with the environment just taxes/levy.
If you compare to London, ULEZ wouldn’t have any effect if the whole country went EV. They are low emission vehicles so they are exempt from paying. A congestion charge would affect all vehicles regardless of their emissions, but it would be very unfair to introduce this in Ireland because our public transport is so bad.
I never said EV's pay nothing.
Read back my posts and quote where I said it please.
Well no I'm just challenging the notion that you started with and then changed that evs were paying nothing. Wasn't true at the start I'm glad to see you changed tack.
Incidentally I'm paying ev, van and 2 motorcycles tax. Should I get more road as I pay more tax than you ?
Carefully waterwelly will love that.
A while back John Fitzgerald from the ESRI said that the government take in 6 billion in petroleum receipts, So if the whole country went EV they need to make the shortfall up.
So he suggested a ULEZ style tax for all the cities and make it almost impossible to drive into the city center. Then have a distance levy/tax so someone driving from Dublin to Cork pays more than someone going to kildare etc.
Of course there are off setting expenditure savings associated with reducing consumption of fossil fuels but how will we fund the not insignificant cost of upgrading the electricity grid and wind/solar infrastructure to enable us to generate the additional electricity necessary to replace fossil fuels. Renewable energy is not free to generate and will require massive Govt investment and support in the coming years. Methinks EV drivers will have to dig deep to contribute to this renewable revolution
It's only cheap until the government start charging EV drivers a proportionate "user pays" tax on EV's.
Which is what everybody else on the thread has been discussing all along. Except you.
It's comparable, if you only looked at the excise duty on tobacco you'd say any measures to reduce tobacco use are bad for the exchequer. It ignores the reduction in health costs from reduced use of tobacco products. Similarly an increase in EV usage will result in a drop in excise duties from oil products. Based on what we know now about local pollutants the removal of combustion waste from our streets will have positive health affects, and we'll also see a reduction in the amount of money used to import petroleum products. 4% of our GNI is used to import fossil fuel products from the Middle East, Norway and the UK. If that money stays in the Irish economy will it make up a shortfall?
I don't think the equation is as simple as we currently get X from motor tax + excise, we need to replace X completely to maintain the balance.
No the comparable thinking would be how can we make up the lost revenue from the reduction is tobacco exise duty.
I don't think anyone is advocating we should force people to burn more fuel
I was referring to @waterwelly EV figure of 20cent per 100km which would be a lot less that the true cost but he subsequently clarified his figure only related to the Govt tax take, ie the VAT on electricity.
In any case point still stands that EVs are far cheaper to run so long as you can charge at home or at work.
In relation to this thread, the majority of this difference is down to the minimal taxation on EV fuel
Sounds pretty cheap move then as opposed to " are certainly cheaper than ICEs to run but not that cheap unless you have free work charging or are robbing electricity from your neighbour or family"
Based on this thinking let's encourage people to smoke and drink otherwise gov looses revenue. ;)
My Smax diesel costs about €10 per 100km
Yea I get you and its why moving entirely to EVs will leave an almighty hole in the tax base.
Ballpark €10 of which government take €6
As opposed to an EV costing ballpark €2 of which the government get €0.20c
How much would say a bog standard mondeo 2 ltr diesel cost same distance
It's what the government get I am referring to.
Roughly 6 litres / 100km and they take about a €1 a litre in duty plus VAT, so €6 per 100km
If an EV gets about 20kwh per 100kms, charged at 10c night rate thats €2 +9% vat. So the government get roughly €20c / 100kms. If it's 16kwh and pinergy it's only 10c/100kms.
Yep, for people who have to run on public charging the cost of an ID.4 vs a Tiguan will end up pretty much the same.
EVs are certainly cheaper than ICEs to run but not that cheap unless you have free work charging or are robbing electricity from your neighbour or family😀
A decently efficient EV might be getting an average of say 16kwh per 100km which combined with the cheapest night rate available from Pinenergy at 5 cent per kW would be 80cent or in my case, paying 18cent per kW, €2.90 per 100km.
No I never said EV's run for free.
I said they pay about 20c per 100km V €6 per 100kms for ICE. (Ballpark figures there)
What we should be more worried about is VRT. Motor tax increases may only be a couple of hundred per year, but currently EV’s only have a VRT rate of 7% compared to up to 40% for petrol or diesel vehicles.
I’d imagine electric cars will sky rocket starting in a few years. The following years after that VRT will slowly be increased back to petrol/diesel levels.
Its a good opportunity for Gov to actually give us a fair VRT price similar to the rest of the EU but I can’t see that happening.
Or EV tax by kwh or KW power output, or a combination of all these metrics, etc. There are plenty of ways to introduce higher taxes on EVs without getting into the complications of user based charges. People seem to forget that before we introduced the virtuous CO2 based motor taxation system, for many many years ICEs were taxed based on engine size. Its only a matter of when EV taxes will increase or maybe some people would prefer an increase in the marginal income tax rate or VAT, etc to offset the reduced motor tax revenues arising from the transition to EVs. Either way the tax will be collected
Apologies I thought that's what you were asserting.
Given thread title I assumed this was a discussion on EV taxes in the future rather than a specific timeframe (i.e. during transition to net zero)
I still believe the state will levy new taxes to make up the decrease in revenues when the EV sized hole in budget begins to show prominently. Whether they *should* or not, is a different matter.
No question of any substantially increased taxes on EV's until ICE's are much further down the road to extinction. Otherwise people just won't bother switching.
What we could see soon thoug is EV tax by weight.
Who argued that ? You did. I'm just battling that posters assertion that evs seem to be running free and not paying a dime whilst using up all his precious 100s of km’s.
Facts are we spend too much on fuel and it costs us money in various other ways. Liam above put it far more clearly than I ever could.
People need to plug the notion that this is just a fuel tax thing. It's not it's wider implications all the way out to the costs of healthcare surprisingly enough.
Carbon fines are driving the transition to EVs. There will still be a hole in revenue to the exchequer either way - arguing that with more EVs it will be a smaller hole is a fairly stupid argument.
Why would govt be content to reduce revenues from pre-carbon fines point?
They won't, they will aim to get motoring related revenues back up to where they stood before fines came into play.
