Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

Next they will hit taxi drivers with their current €88 motor tax. Oh wait, that's me. Yay.

sean1141 wrote: »

and when electric cars become more common do you think they wont tax the crap out of them too? they will find some way to get money out of them even if its not true motor tax or vrt

When did I say lower taxes on EV's and super low emission vehicles will last forever? It will be a long time before EV's become the norm on the roads. Until then, I'll avail of the tax advantages as they exist in the here and now.

Petrol or Diesel cars can only be powered by oil. An EV can be powered by Wind, Nuclear, Solar, Gas, Coal, Tidal and even Oil. It makes sense not to be dependent on only one source of energy for transportation. As such I expect Europe as a whole to continue to encourage the adoption of EV's which are not so completely dependent on the price of oil.

In the past I have met a more senior civil servant in DCENR and while I don't have anything specific, my impression is that more fuel efficient vehicles will still be encouraged, just the goal posts will have been adjusted. To get the new lowest tax band, your car is going to have to be even more efficient than before.

ShadowHearth wrote: »

To be honest I have no simpothy to people who bought new diesels to save money on tax... If you had atleast two brain cells you would know that it won't last forever and as thick this goverment is, they will come around eventually and realise: "a bejesus, we did a fook up!"

What really makes me interested in that article: " a 40k BMW pays same tax as Toyota yaris! That must be stoped!"
If they were so environmentally coutions, then why the feck they care what kind of car makes that co2?! Is BMW co2 is more hazardous then same amount of co2 made by yaris?!
All it shows that they want to make motor tax a luxury tax, not an enviroment protection tax. They don't give a jacks shiet about enviroment, they just need money generated by this system.

It is known as having a progressive tax system. Those who can afford to pay the most.... etc etc

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0224/1224312309019.html

HIGHER EARNERS have taken the brunt of the hit in take-home pay as a result of the harsh budgets of the past four years, a new report from the ESRI states.

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

It is known as having a progressive tax system. Those who can afford to pay the most.... etc etc

They paid more in VRT and VAT when buying the car.

Increasing the higher rate of income tax would be more progressive.

Cionád wrote: »

They paid more in VRT and VAT when buying the car.

Increasing the higher rate of income tax would be more progressive.

Increasing the higher rate of income tax would break some promise FG made at election time right? Motor tax is technically discretionary. The tax system in Ireland is very opaque! I'd love to be able to see clearly how much I pay for local government, how much for national government etc.

What about pre emission based cars. Driving a 02 1.9tdi. Nearly 600 notes as it is!!!

Sesshoumaru wrote: »

It is known as having a progressive tax system. Those who can afford to pay the most.... etc etc

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/finance/2012/0224/1224312309019.html

More the case of those who are prepared to spend the most (many others can afford it but choose not to) will be taxed the most. It is a discretionary spend therefore more a luxury tax than a progressive one.

Why not introduce a flat rate of motor tax for owning any car...Say €300 and load fuel taxes. Then this way, the consumer who consumes most, pays most. Would encourage those who can use public transport to do so too. Thus producing a fall in overall emissions.

i.e. What is the point of taxing a car based on emissions if say a guy in a 520d drives say 60,000 km in a year and a pensioner in a 1.0 Yaris drives 7500km per annum and they pay the same motor tax. Clearly the 520d driver is a bigger polluter than the Yaris.

Or move the scope of the emission based tax system back further. Say, back 10 years.

Would be a bit rough on those with older cars who hadn't banked on emissions being a factor in taxation 10 years ago.

Would probably finish off the 2nd hand market too

Gophur wrote: »

Please don't post such clap-trap without quoting those "some sources"!

His post is not clap-trap, as you say yourself.

It is estimated that the CO2 associated with manufacture of a standard family car is equivalent to that produced during the first 8-10 years of driving (assuming average mileage per annum). This is approx 20 tonnes of CO2 based on a quick calc of 120g/km, 16000km/annum and 10 yrs.

Think about the process:
1. Mining
2. Transportation of raw materials all around the world
3. Component manufacturing process (hugely energy intensive)
4. Transportation of said components from all around the globe to a centralised manufacturing location.
5. Energy associated directly with the assembly process.

And that's just an outline. The most environmentally friendly option is usually to run a car into the ground, not to replace it with a brand new car that may produce less CO2.

Take the earlier example of the manufacturing CO2 emissions of a new car being approx 20 tonnes. And assume instead of buying a new car @ 120g/km and incurring that 20tonnes, you run an older more polluting car @ 240g/km.

The breakeven point for the two occurs after approx 100,000 miles despite car B being twice as CO2 polluting as car A.

That's why hiding behind an environmental banner for all of this is complete horse-sh1t.

RoverJames wrote: »

Not a lot.

On the likes of a Cork to Thurles return trip with 4 adults a 1997 Rover 400 diesel returned 53mpg for me, I can't see late 90s VAG diesel stuff being any worse and new stuff wouldn't be much better.

So I guess in that case the fact that a new car is marginally more frugal and cleaner (than its equivalent older one), motor manufacturers will milk this of course and use it to try and sell more new cars. Fair enough, that's their job. But if motoring journos who are wined and dined in exotic locations, go along with this (without highlighting what the figures/costs are in real terms), many of the motoring public will be easily manipulated and persuaded into buying new (if they can afford to do so).

Am I the only one thinking the whole idea of lower tax for low-emission cars were a simple case of protecting the business interests of SIMI and other similar parties by the previous government?

No one kicked up a fuzz then because those who could afford new cars were getting cheaper motoring, and those who couldn't - well it worked against them slightly (value of the car dropped) but not massively as the tax remained as is. So essentialy the motor trade dealers pulled off an amazing trick of boosting their sales, while delaying the pain - and now the pain is coming - and what else can we do other than bend over and curse ourselves for not protesting earlier?