Advertisement
Please note that it is not permitted to have referral links posted in your signature. Keep these links contained in the appropriate forum. Thank you.

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2055940817/signature-rules
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

12357…22

Comments

  • #122
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Has anyone official ever spoken about whether or not a fuel/usage based system has even been considered, or why it would be knocked back?

    It seems simple to me.

    € Revenue from Tax in 2008 = X
    Number of litres of fuel sold in 2011 = Y
    Cost of administering current motor tax regime = Z

    (X-Z*100)/Y = tax in cent per litre required to make desired tax take

    Revisit every budget based on consumption in the previous year.


  • #123
    Tea 1000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,497 ✭✭✭Tea 1000


    Seweryn wrote: »
    That is one of the problems with the taxation rates. The bands are too wide and the system should be designed more simply, i.e there should be 3-4 tax rates with small enough steps in between them. The curent system is mad in its basis, as we have some cars that are 14 times more expensive to tax than others.
    This here is the key problem. The bands are too wide and the increments are completely daft, starting small then going crazy.
    I have to say though that as a general principal, CO2 based tax systems are better than CC based ones, if for no other reason that you can't have the likes of an Evo FQ400 cheaper to tax than a 2.2 diesel family car.
    But the question remains: Should more expensive cars hold a higher tax rate than cheaper cars of the same emissions or engine size?


  • #124
    Eric Cartman
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 26,242 ✭✭✭✭Eric Cartman


    The problem is , you have the tax brigade who will buy a car with the lowest tax , the. You have people not paying the tax on larger cars. Set it to a fixed amount of 333 euro a year for all cars that arent vintage , youd generate the lost revenue for the band A brigade and youd increase compliance among larger car drivers, youd also have people stoP being afraid to buy bigger cars and generate more fuel tax


  • #125
    Big Nasty
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 22,066 ✭✭✭✭Big Nasty


    Voodoomelon wrote: »
    If the pre C02 rates go up again, i'll, i'll! ... I give up. Cry myself to sleep every night.

    You and me both! :(


  • #126
    listermint
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 34,636 ✭✭✭✭listermint


    Tea 1000 wrote: »
    This here is the key problem. The bands are too wide and the increments are completely daft, starting small then going crazy.
    I have to say though that as a general principal, CO2 based tax systems are better than CC based ones, if for no other reason that you can't have the likes of an Evo FQ400 cheaper to tax than a 2.2 diesel family car.
    But the question remains: Should more expensive cars hold a higher tax rate than cheaper cars of the same emissions or engine size?

    Larger CC cars are self policing, they tend to be driven on the roads far far less than the daily 3 / 5 door hatches.

    Tax system at the moment is disgracefully unfair. It wont change unless we take away all the driving privileges and mileage allowance and any other travel allowances that ministers have and make them pay for their own car out of their own pocket 'so to speak'.

    It simple their ignorance is their bliss.


  • Advertisement
  • #127
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    RoverJames wrote: »
    €333/annum to tax what?

    mitsubishi colt GL 1999 1.3


  • #128
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 23,497 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    zenno wrote: »
    mitsubishi colt GL 1999 1.3

    Your tax rate isn't based on the emissions, I wouldn't be overly concerned if I was you, might go up €50 or so next year admittedly but nothing too drastic.


  • #129
    zenno
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,377 ✭✭✭zenno


    RoverJames wrote: »
    Your tax rate isn't based on the emissions, I wouldn't be overly concerned if I was you, might go up €50 or so next year admittedly but nothing too drastic.

    Cheers James was getting worried with this Lark but it's expensive enough as it is, oh the joys of motoring. ;)


  • #130
    Voodoomelon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,653 ✭✭✭Voodoomelon


    I still hate the constant implication that larger sized, more expensive, larger engined cars should pay more. Perhaps its true that the original owner should pay a higher amount in the first year, like in the UK, as they can obviously afford to. Not that they should have to in my view, better off people deserve to not to be taxed beyond belief because on their success.

    But regardless, after 4-5 years, these cars are essentially worthless in this country. At this stage, the then owners of these cars are deemed to be also wealthy and are continued to be taxed accordingly. The stone age idea that larger engined cars equate to wealth is still there, as there is no account for depreciation or mileage.

    You even see it in that article, the poor, humble folks who spent their hard earned on Fords, Toyotas and Nissans are going to have to shell out with increased rates, whilst those who paid shed loads more in VAT and VRT on 520ds have the nerve to pay the same because their emissions are the same. How dare they!

    And increasing the pre C02 rates will result in even less compliance, that is of course until they close the off the road loophole.


  • #131
    Sesshoumaru
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,897 ✭✭✭Sesshoumaru


    creedp wrote: »
    Yes but if future proofing you policy is NB you would now plan for a world with lots of electric cars ... and dream of all that lolly! By the way the argument that because there is only a few what difference would it make is also applied to the top earners in this country when it comes to getting rid of tax breaks or increasing income tax on earners over €100k, €200k, €500k ... Doesn't mean to say it shouldn't happen if it is fair to do so

    It car tax is a 'luxury tax' rather that a saving the environment tax why shouldn't it apply to EV's? An EV is still a car .. it still uses the roads .. I can see why you might give a VRT reduction to encourage people to swop from ICE's if they are as good [for the env] as everyone says they are but after that they should be taxed like every other car when used on the road.

    I think we can all agree that in Ireland at least, motor taxation policy has proven very effective at steering people towards fuel efficient cars. Your argument isn't sound because if low taxation (on fuel efficient cars) encourages the purchase of fuel efficient cars, then high taxation will undoubtedly do the opposite. Then there won't be lots of fuel efficient / EV cars in the future, so what would be the point of hiking tax on EV's and super low fuel consumption vehicles to €1,000?

    As I stated previously, Petrol and Diesel cars are dependent on one source of energy; Oil. It does not make strategic sense for the country to be dependent on only one source of energy for transportation. EV's can be powered by anything that produces electricity e.g. Nuclear, Solar, Coal, Tidal, Gas, Wind & Oil etc.


  • Advertisement
  • #132
    kuro2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭kuro2k


    Voodoomelon wrote: »
    And increasing the pre C02 rates will result in even less compliance, that is of course until they close the off the road loophole.

    Gardai were lifting untaxed car at lunchtime on the South Link in Cork today, they had about 20 cars/trucks pulled in when I passed....


  • #133
    Voodoomelon
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,653 ✭✭✭Voodoomelon


    kuro2k wrote: »
    Gardai were lifting untaxed car at lunchtime on the South Link in Cork today, they had about 20 cars/trucks pulled in when I passed....

    Gardai stop cars every day, doesn't stop the other 99.9% of drivers out there with no tax. :)


  • #134
    Timmaay
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 11,391 ✭✭✭✭Timmaay


    Voodoomelon wrote: »
    If the pre C02 rates go up again, i'll, i'll! ... I give up. Cry myself to sleep every night.

    I was well surprised at the budget last year! I knew that the new A/B/C tax band cars would go up, but for the idiots to do a blanket 5% increase on the old cc system proved that the current government is totally incompetent and lazy! Back then, the headlines were a big 50% increase in motor tax bands a/b, and everything else was only 5%, when being realistic about it, 50% on 104/156 is only 50 or 70quid, and will not hurt anyone who could afford to buy an 08+ car, whereas 5% on top of a ridiculous 600/1000quid bill on the old system further widened the gap between the the top and bottom, and hit alot of people with lower incomes that cannot afford an 08+ vehicle.

    I have no hope that they will get it right this time either to be honest, I can see them adoption another ah sure lets hit the a/b bands another 50% (still only an extra 80quid a year), and throw the old system/higher tax bands up by 5% again to keep the people who bought a new car on the bases of low tax happy.

    We near a radical overhaul of the entire system, narrow the spread in tax bands (min 200e, max 1000e), or better again, lump the whole tax on fuel as has been said many times here. Will they listen? Probably not. Maybe now is the time to get everyone on the boards motor forum together, and send in emails to get the government to listen!


  • #135
    gozunda
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,992 ✭✭✭✭gozunda


    I believe the aim is to have the entire country (with the exception of the Government Ministers) driving trabants or equivalent in the next few years..
    (in the interests of social equality of course!)

    Of those few remaining in gainfull employment, their income can be taxed, taxed and taxed again. (in the interests of social equality )

    Any movement by a tax payer to spend anything left over after paying their taxes (whether its a slightly bigger car etc) will be then also taxed to the hilt (in the interests of social equality )

    Finanly the govenment will abolish all employment and just pay everyone the same amount whether they are working or not (in the interests of social equality )

    That way - hey it will all be fair and there will none of those rich b*st*rds sorry I mean average tax payers lording it above anyone else (in the interests of social equality)

    Oh hang on a minute...those still working are actually funding the whole system atm! Tax them into the ground and they just might all just bog off - permanently....


  • #136
    kuro2k
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 587 ✭✭✭kuro2k


    kuro2k wrote: »
    Gardai were lifting untaxed car at lunchtime on the South Link in Cork today, they had about 20 cars/trucks pulled in when I passed....
    Voodoomelon wrote: »
    Gardai stop cars every day, doesn't stop the other 99.9% of drivers out there with no tax. :)

    tbh I haven't seen or heard of this happening in Cork on this scale before, Dublin yea but not in Cork.


  • #137
    Dammer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 343 ✭✭Dammer


    spockety wrote: »
    Has anyone official ever spoken about whether or not a fuel/usage based system has even been considered, or why it would be knocked back?

    It seems simple to me.

    € Revenue from Tax in 2008 = X
    Number of litres of fuel sold in 2011 = Y
    Cost of administering current motor tax regime = Z

    (X-Z*100)/Y = tax in cent per litre required to make desired tax take

    Revisit every budget based on consumption in the previous year.


    Since when did PS/CS/TDs ever do common sense :rolleyes:


  • #138
    calvin_zola
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,028 ✭✭✭calvin_zola


    kuro2k wrote: »
    tbh I haven't seen or heard of this happening in Cork on this scale before, Dublin yea but not in Cork.

    Explains a lot, I was driving back up to cork for the weeks work :( and the cops where pulled in at Middleton/Carraigtwohil and Mahon, it was as if something was going down they where ready for setting up road blocks it would seem


  • #139
    runawaybishop
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,541 ✭✭✭runawaybishop


    spockety wrote: »
    Has anyone official ever spoken about whether or not a fuel/usage based system has even been considered, or why it would be knocked back?

    It seems simple to me.
    .

    Because if fuel were 25% cheaper across the border the queues would reach down to Cork I guess.


  • #140
    spockety
    Moderators, Education Moderators Posts: 5,619 Mod ✭✭✭✭spockety


    Does anyone know if both figures are actually available in Budget supplements?

    i.e. Total revenue from Motor Tax, and total volume in litres of fuel sold in Ireland?

    Would be easy to do a calculation then. I think petrol is still a lot more expensive in the UK anyway.

    And the issue could be gotten around as someone mentioned earlier of having a flat rate (e.g. €300 or so) with fuel tax on top.


  • #141
    Cionád
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,003 ✭✭✭Cionád


    spockety wrote: »
    Does anyone know if both figures are actually available in Budget supplements?

    i.e. Total revenue from Motor Tax, and total volume in litres of fuel sold in Ireland?

    Would be easy to do a calculation then. I think petrol is still a lot more expensive in the UK anyway.

    Someone on here did the calculations a while back, iirc it worked out at around 50c/litre extra to replace motor tax completely.


  • Advertisement
  • #142
    kirving
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,358 ✭✭✭kirving


    Fuel based system is perfect really. Bigger car uses more fuel, smaller cars use less.
    Same goes for effeciency.

    A sliding scale would also work well, ridiculous that people on the (Luxobarge) Bangernomics thread have to pay high taxt becasue the car is deemed to be less effecient, when it fact there probably isn't much difference. Keeping a car on the road is far far more effecient than buying a new one in most cases.

    On the other hand, it's easy for a small, less high tech car to get good MPG. Getting good MPG out of a new 5 series is quite an achievement(I realise CO2 isn't the only factor in MPG/emmissions), so taxing them heavilty because the general public want it, is just stifling innovation.


  • #143
    patwicklow
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,936 ✭✭✭patwicklow


    Time to get the bike out of the shed lads..


  • #144
    whoami1
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 323 ✭✭whoami1


    gozunda wrote: »
    I believe the aim is to have the entire country (with the exception of the Government Ministers) driving trabants or equivalent in the next few years..

    Trabants would be fine under the engine-size rules, but not the emissions! :)


  • #145
    Cionád
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,003 ✭✭✭Cionád


    Cionád wrote: »
    Someone on here did the calculations a while back, iirc it worked out at around 50c/litre extra to replace motor tax completely.

    Here we go, extra 33c a litre

    http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056429013

    "Small family hatch, 10000 miles/yr at 45mpg: €330 "tax"/year

    Family saloon, 10000 mls/year @ 30mpg: €500 "tax"/year

    Sales rep, 40000mls/year @ 50mpg: €1200 "tax"/year"


  • #146
    Professey Chin
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 51,054 ✭✭✭✭Professey Chin


    spockety wrote: »
    Does anyone know if both figures are actually available in Budget supplements?

    i.e. Total revenue from Motor Tax, and total volume in litres of fuel sold in Ireland?

    Would be easy to do a calculation then. I think petrol is still a lot more expensive in the UK anyway.

    And the issue could be gotten around as someone mentioned earlier of having a flat rate (e.g. €300 or so) with fuel tax on top.
    Cionád wrote: »
    Someone on here did the calculations a while back, iirc it worked out at around 50c/litre extra to replace motor tax completely.
    Just did the maths on this for myself and adding 50c/litre and a base tax of 300 works out almost identical in cost terms in my situation. I feel very neutral with this outcome :pac:


  • #147
    R P McMurphy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,129 ✭✭✭R P McMurphy


    Timmaay wrote: »
    I was well surprised at the budget last year! I knew that the new A/B/C tax band cars would go up, but for the idiots to do a blanket 5% increase on the old cc system proved that the current government is totally incompetent and lazy! Back then, the headlines were a big 50% increase in motor tax bands a/b, and everything else was only 5%, when being realistic about it, 50% on 104/156 is only 50 or 70quid, and will not hurt anyone who could afford to buy an 08+ car, whereas 5% on top of a ridiculous 600/1000quid bill on the old system further widened the gap between the the top and bottom, and hit alot of people with lower incomes that cannot afford an 08+ vehicle.

    I have no hope that they will get it right this time either to be honest, I can see them adoption another ah sure lets hit the a/b bands another 50% (still only an extra 80quid a year), and throw the old system/higher tax bands up by 5% again to keep the people who bought a new car on the bases of low tax happy.

    We near a radical overhaul of the entire system, narrow the spread in tax bands (min 200e, max 1000e), or better again, lump the whole tax on fuel as has been said many times here. Will they listen? Probably not. Maybe now is the time to get everyone on the boards motor forum together, and send in emails to get the government to listen!

    If in the next budget the entire tax went onto fuel, how long do you think it would take the next government to reintroduce motor tax in addition to the higher fuel taxation? I think it would be a disaster


  • #148
    Atomic Pineapple
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 18,272 ✭✭✭✭Atomic Pineapple


    R P McMurphy wrote: »
    If in the next budget the entire tax went onto fuel, how long do you think it would take the next government to reintroduce motor tax in addition to the higher fuel taxation? I think it would be a disaster

    Em.......just a though but don't let them? Protest? Contact your TD's, complain, threaten to change your vote at the next general election?


  • #149
    pburns
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,419 ✭✭✭pburns


    RoverJames wrote: »
    It's surprising to see a motoring editor come out with this "Older cars spew more damaging fumes and use more fuel."

    Not surprising at all. Motor journos are on the gravy train - lots of junkets and free test cars - they'll toe in behind the distributors.


  • #150
    creedp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,493 ✭✭✭creedp


    Voodoomelon wrote: »
    I still hate the constant implication that larger sized, more expensive, larger engined cars should pay more. Perhaps its true that the original owner should pay a higher amount in the first year, like in the UK, as they can obviously afford to. Not that they should have to in my view, better off people deserve to not to be taxed beyond belief because on their success.

    But regardless, after 4-5 years, these cars are essentially worthless in this country. At this stage, the then owners of these cars are deemed to be also wealthy and are continued to be taxed accordingly. The stone age idea that larger engined cars equate to wealth is still there, as there is no account for depreciation or mileage.

    You even see it in that article, the poor, humble folks who spent their hard earned on Fords, Toyotas and Nissans are going to have to shell out with increased rates, whilst those who paid shed loads more in VAT and VRT on 520ds have the nerve to pay the same because their emissions are the same. How dare they!

    And increasing the pre C02 rates will result in even less compliance, that is of course until they close the off the road loophole.


    I think there are 2 issues here: 1. the Govt need revenue so everyone will have to pay more tax, those in the 520D and those in the humble Fords, Toyota's etc. 2. I don't have a problem with people driving luxury cars having the same tax as equivalent 'humble cars' but I think is mad when an 08 car pays €200 but the equivalent 07 car pays €1,000+. That doesn't stack up under any argument, including your own.


  • Advertisement
  • #151
    creedp
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,493 ✭✭✭creedp


    Sesshoumaru wrote: »
    I think we can all agree that in Ireland at least, motor taxation policy has proven very effective at steering people towards fuel efficient cars. Your argument isn't sound because if low taxation (on fuel efficient cars) encourages the purchase of fuel efficient cars, then high taxation will undoubtedly do the opposite. Then there won't be lots of fuel efficient / EV cars in the future, so what would be the point of hiking tax on EV's and super low fuel consumption vehicles to €1,000?

    As I stated previously, Petrol and Diesel cars are dependent on one source of energy; Oil. It does not make strategic sense for the country to be dependent on only one source of energy for transportation. EV's can be powered by anything that produces electricity e.g. Nuclear, Solar, Coal, Tidal, Gas, Wind & Oil etc.

    I think overall taxation policy needs to be taken into a/c not just Motor Tax. At present EV cars (and they are cars so a luxury item in Irish tax policy) don't pay any tax - no VRT, no road tax and no fuel tax, that is not sustainable in the long term in my view. The reality is taxing fuel for cars has little to do with peak oil or environmental issues but all to do with the old reliables, i.e. a soft touch for tax revenues. No matter what you say about the greeness of EV's, they are still cars and will be taxed as such. I keep going back to the same issue - do EV's use the road network? If so they should contribute to roads upkeep as well as contributing to the the general coffers as an old reliable. It difficult to support an argument which says that one type of car should be taxed out of existance becasue it has petrol/diesel in its tank while another has electricity in its batteries that has predominantly been generated by gas/oil/coal. Whatever about the future ...


Advertisement
Advertisement