Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

pburns · 06-03-2012 12:22PM

I bought a car in July 08 - because it was time for a change but it also helped that I benefited from the new tax bands. TBH though the system became unfair very quickly.

I'll lose out I'd say - an AWD tax-band C car - but I always knew this was coming and I'm not obsessed with road tax. I don't have much sympathy for numpties stupid enough to buy a post-08 to benefit from the new system. At least things will be more equitable for those with pre-08s. Not that their tax is going to be any cheaper!

Top Dog · 06-03-2012 12:32PM

creedp wrote: »

Why is commercial motor tax a std rate irrespective of the vehicle you are driving? Not just a taxi issue

To be fair - commercials are charged €310 now (since the most recent hike) which is only €10 more than a lot of people have suggested as being the flat rate for tax on this very thread (with the balance being applied to fuel).

creedp · 06-03-2012 12:48PM

Top Dog wrote: »

To be fair - commercials are charged €310 now (since the most recent hike) which is only €10 more than a lot of people have suggested as being the flat rate for tax on this very thread (with the balance being applied to fuel).

Wasn't aware and as you say to be fair that's a reasonable annual rate in my book. What's not fair is the massive difference in rate applying to equivalent private vehicles. I'm not advocating an increase in the commercial rate but a reduction in the top rate applying to private vehicles. A €2,000 plus annual Motor Tax rate is simply prohibitive and not justifiable in my view.

Atomic Pineapple · 06-03-2012 12:54PM

creedp wrote: »

Wasn't aware and as you say to be fair that's a reasonable annual rate in my book. What's not fair is the massive difference in rate applying to equivalent private vehicles. I'm not advocating an increase in the commercial rate but a reduction in the top rate applying to private vehicles. A €2,000 plus annual Motor Tax rate is simply prohibitive and not justifiable in my view.

Its just plain stupid, at a time when no one wants to give the government their hard earned money having crazy rates like €2000 per annum simply doesn't make sense, if a fairer rate was applied then you'd see an increase in people in the higher bands/rate and therefore an increase in revenue, rather than forcing everyone to abandon cars in the high bands/rates for low bands/rates and losing revenue.

Top Dog · 06-03-2012 12:55PM

You'll get no argument from me there.

I'd go so far as to say that anything over €1000 annually is insane in this day and age, especially when cars get older and the road tax becomes the same (and in some cases more than) the value of the actual vehicle! A quick look in the bangernomics thread will throw up multiple vehicles where the cost to tax them for a year is more than the actual purchase price - any number of Lexus LS400's prove this point

dgt · 06-03-2012 01:11PM

Vicxas wrote: »

Does this affect pre 08 cars? As my tax for my 1.6 corolla is a bit much as is...

Nope just the newer co2 stuff

If they did that older cars would be taxed off the road!

They'd go medieval on my arse with all the old stuff I have if they did that...

vectra · 06-03-2012 01:15PM

They should raise the road tax on PSV's for a start..

Voodoomelon · 06-03-2012 01:24PM

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

So you don't like depreciation associated with buying new cars (but forget to mention the many other benefits) and you also appear not to like the increased taxes/costs for drivers of old cars with very large and energy inefficient engines which are also causing much more pollution than their modern equivalents.

I suggest you make your choices and learn to cope with the consequences?

To an extent, I do agree with you in that we do have the choice to spend maybe €8k-€10k on a family hatchback or the likes, and avail of cheaper tax and insurance. Having a 12 year old 7 series and complaining about the cost of running it falls on deaf ears and maybe rightly so.

However changing to anything else results in additional cost. It makes no financial sense to drop an additional €5k-€6k to get a very average car to avail of cheaper running costs, as it would take years to claw the savings back. With a large engine, petrol costs and environmental concerns are largely irrelevant if you only do 5000 miles or less a year. Which we are.

creedp · 06-03-2012 01:34PM

Voodoomelon wrote: »

With a large engine, petrol costs and environmental concerns are largely irrelevant if you only do 5000 miles or less a year. Which we are.

Isn't this the point .. if you have a large engined petrol car then you pay for the priviledge at the pumps already .. the more you drive the more you pay so it could be considered fair up to a certain point. However, why then should such cars be also subject to a prohibitive motor tax rate? The only justification is purely revenue generation and the fact that cars are traditionally seen as an old reliables. There is no justification for charging €200 per year for one car and €2000 for another on the basis of efficiency, greeness or any other measure (excuse). It was the greens and their constant withering on about the polar ice caps and the polar bears made all of this trash acceptable in people's minds allowing the likes of FF to plunder the motorist at will.

Voodoomelon · 06-03-2012 01:38PM

Yup, you won't get a disagreement from me!

On a different note, I was in the tax office last week and its funny, they don't even show any tax rates for cars great than 2000cc on the wall. The massive signage stops at 2 litres.

Professey Chin · 06-03-2012 02:28PM

Some of the jumps in the pre 08 system show the complete idiocy of whoever makes these decisions.
660 for 1901-2000cc but suddenly 843 for 2001-2100.
How in the absolute fcuk does that make any sense O_o

ShadowHearth · 06-03-2012 02:41PM

The Great Chinholio wrote: »

Some of the jumps in the pre 08 system show the complete idiocy of whoever makes these decisions.
660 for 1901-2000cc but suddenly 843 for 2001-2100.
How in the absolute fcuk does that make any sense O_o

thats my most hated jump. there are cars like honda accord 2.2 engines and volvo t5 2.3 engines, which get really shafted by that jump

Henry Ford III · 06-03-2012 03:28PM

ShadowHearth wrote: »

thats my most hated jump. there are cars like honda accord 2.2 engines and volvo t5 2.3 engines, which get really shafted by that jump

Unfortuantely a lot of tax is unfair.

I suppose (and I'm not defending the existing convoluted system in any way) that the reasoning might have been that big engines belonged in the main in big, luxurious, or possibly high performance cars. All of these would have been more expensive than the norm, so their owners could afford to pay extra in motor tax for the privilege.

The advent of the C02 system signalled the end of new registration of certain cars (RX8's, Subaru Turbos and Evos etc.) and the dawn of diesel domination of sales.

It also had the effect of dramatically reducing the value of the cars that compared less than favourably under the old system - mainly larger petrol engined ones - quite dramatically.

I think it's a bit rich for owners of these cars to moan about the motor tax that applies to them now. It was always higher than norm, and it hasn't increased dramatically either. There's no reasonable case to be made for lowering it.

There's a certain amount of jealousy aimed at those who in good faith stumped up for newer cars (and paid a goodly hike of VAT and VRT in the process) and these folk are the ones who are getting really reamed now.

As I said at the start a lot of tax isn't fair.

Fizman · 06-03-2012 03:42PM

ShadowHearth wrote: »

thats my most hated jump. there are cars like honda accord 2.2 engines and volvo t5 2.3 engines, which get really shafted by that jump

This is true. However, if you're in the market for one, I'm guessing their retail prices are reflective of this (07 cars being in some cases 5-7k cheaper than the equivalent 08) and you are in theory getting much more car for your money?

Big Nasty · 06-03-2012 03:48PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

It also had the effect of dramatically reducing the value of the cars that compared less than favourably under the old system - mainly larger petrol engined ones - quite dramatically. I think it's a bit rich for owners of these cars to moan about the motor tax that applies to them now. It was always higher than norm, and it hasn't increased dramatically either. There's no reasonable case to be made for lowering it.

A bit rich?

I do 5k miles a year, why should I pay ten times more in tax than some who does 10 times more mileage than me?

Henry Ford III wrote: »

There's a certain amount of jealousy aimed at those who in good faith stumped up for newer cars (and paid a goodly hike of VAT and VRT in the process) and these folk are the ones who are getting really reamed now.

I'm not jealous of them at all, more the fact that those who pollute more should be taxed more. As in the example above the guy doing 50k a year in a 1.9 smoker is polluting a lot more than me doing 5k in a 3.5 yet I pay ten times more tax than he does.

inforfun · 06-03-2012 04:00PM

Just do like in Holland, tax cars on their weight.

Is the CO2 output is always stable, the older the engine gets?
Weight will remain the same unless you take out the doors which isnt really an option.

Daved_XB · 06-03-2012 04:02PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

I do 5k miles a year, why should I pay ten times more in tax than some who does 10 times more mileage than me?

I think part of the problem is that we are not actually paying a "Road" tax at all & the money isn't being used to fund the upkeep of the road network.

Like it or not we're paying a "Motor Vehicle" tax which is a tax for the privilege of owning a Motor Vehicle....

So they don't feel the need to have the tax reflect the amount of road use you do.... it's kinda like the TV license in a way, if you own 3 TV's you should have 3 x licenses even if you watch less hours of TV as someone with only 1

Ghost_of_ED209 · 06-03-2012 04:03PM

Just taxed my new 09 1.9 diesel car today for the year.. Only cost 160 squid.!.

Can that be right? Thought it'd be a lot more...

Big Nasty · 06-03-2012 04:12PM

Daved_XB wrote: »

I think part of the problem is that we are not actually paying a "Road" tax at all & the money isn't being used to fund the upkeep of the road network.

Like it or not we're paying a "Motor Vehicle" tax which is a tax for the privilege of owning a Motor Vehicle....

So they don't feel the need to have the tax reflect the amount of road use you do.... it's kinda like the TV license in a way, if you own 3 TV's you should have 3 x licenses even if you watch less hours of TV as someone with only 1

I have to pay the same amount for my TV licence as the fella next door who watches TV 24/7. No issue with that, my choice not to watch much TV. While I don't think a flat rate in motor tax would be fair either I think it's grossly unfair that those polluting less are charged more. If I was doing 30/40k miles a year myself I would expect to be charged more.

CiniO · 06-03-2012 04:13PM

Daved_XB wrote: »

Like it or not we're paying a "Motor Vehicle" tax which is a tax for the privilege of owning a Motor Vehicle....

To be exact, it's not for "privilege of owning a Motor Vehicle", but for privilege of "using your Motor Vehicle on Public Road in Ireland"/

So they don't feel the need to have the tax reflect the amount of road use you do.... it's kinda like the TV license in a way, if you own 3 TV's you should have 3 x licenses even if you watch less hours of TV as someone with only 1

No. You pay only 1 TV licence no matter how many TV's you have.

robertxxx · 06-03-2012 04:14PM

Ghost_of_ED209 wrote: »

Just taxed my new 09 1.9 diesel car today for the year.. Only cost 160 squid.!.

Can that be right? Thought it'd be a lot more...

Well i hope your DMF goes very soon on that VW banger enjoy your low tax while you can!

Daved_XB · 06-03-2012 04:17PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

I have to pay the same amount for my TV licence as the fella next door who watches TV 24/7. No issue with that, my choice not to watch much TV. While I don't think a flat rate in motor tax would be fair either I think it's grossly unfair that those polluting less are charged more.

I actually liked & miss the flat rate system that I had in Australia as that's the easiest way to get closest to what you want... a low flat rate (remember it's a Tax for owning a car not using it) & then the more you drive the more fuel you'll use & the more tax they will get from the fuel.

Ghost_of_ED209 · 06-03-2012 04:19PM

robertxxx wrote: »

Well i hope your DMF goes very soon on that VW banger enjoy your low tax while you can!

She's nay any VW I'll have you know.. And I shall enjoy my low tax then.. Paid enough on it on a 1.3 petrol for the last few years...

Henry Ford III · 06-03-2012 04:21PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

A bit rich?

I do 5k miles a year, why should I pay ten times more in tax than some who does 10 times more mileage than me?

The rules are the rules. That's why. Nobody said they were fair, but at least you knew what they'd be.

You knew you'd have high fixed costs day 1 so why moan about them now?

bazz26 · 06-03-2012 04:22PM

munchkin_utd wrote: »

jaysus!!!!
thats the point

everything thats been said is to "address the new eco friendly" cheap tax on post 08 cars.

The media is spinning this that "the motorist" is due a hit as in all everyone.
Whereas its not.
Its only those in shiny new-ish post 2008 cars are due a hit.

People on the old tax are paying through the hilt already so arent "the problem" and if everything is to be believed then motorists with older cars will see no re-adjustment (not a massive major one like the indo is screaming about anyhow)

You don't really believe that do you? When they are done picking the low hanging fruit (emmissions based cars) and realise that new car sales wiill suffer which means shortfalls in VRT and VAT, not to mind possibly cancelling out any gains they make in motor tax revenue, who do you think they will target next to try and bridge the gap? Low tax cars are only the start of this over the next few years. This will effect everyone who owns a car.

shedweller · 06-03-2012 04:22PM

inforfun wrote: »

Just do like in Holland, tax cars on their weight.

Is the CO2 output is always stable, the older the engine gets?
Weight will remain the same unless you take out the doors which isnt really an option.

So, what could be going on here is offsetting the decrease in fuel revenue (because so many people have either left or are on the dole!) by loading the motor tax instead.

Graphs to show just how much less fuel we use today vs a few years ago:
http://omrpublic.iea.org/demand/ir_dl_ov.pdf
http://omrpublic.iea.org/demand/ir_gs_ov.pdf
Thats 10,000 barrels less of petrol per day and 9,000 barrels less of diesel per day since 2009! Roughly...

That way they will get their tax regardless of how little a person drives, it perhaps not looking as bad as widespread tolling, which may come out anyway.
It will also serve to help keep the price of petrol and diesel down due to not having to load that so much.

We're in for a few more hard years.:mad:

Big Nasty · 06-03-2012 04:27PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

The rules are the rules. That's why. Nobody said they were fair, but at least you knew what they'd be.

You knew you'd have high fixed costs day 1 so why moan about them now?

I have a classic car that I would do a couple thousand miles in a year and it's not very economic at all. If motor tax was absored in to fuel costs it would cost me A LOT more to run that. Yet I would be happier to see that done as I think it would be more fair all around.

Henry Ford III · 06-03-2012 04:32PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

I have a classic car that I would do a couple thousand miles in a year and it's not very economic at all. If motor tax was absored in to fuel costs it would cost me A LOT more to run that. Yet I would be happier to see that done as I think it would be more fair all around.

Forget about motor tax on fuel. It will never happen I reckon.

If you've a low tax classic go and enjoy it.

As I've said tax frequently isn't fair.

Sonnenblumen · 06-03-2012 05:59PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

They're getting close in fairness!:eek::eek::eek:

There was an exercise done here not so long ago on the cost of running your car to include loans, petrol, tax, insurance, repairs, depreciation, etc. For tha same amount of money that I spend running my car I could move down to an '06 1.4 Golf.

I wouldn't get much more than €2k for my car if I sold it - I don't really see the point in letting a fine car go for that money so I can buy a little tin can just to satisfy you.

Furthermore, I do cq. 5k miles a year and even though I'm driving a 3.5 why in hell should I be paying more tax then someone in a 1.9 daysul doing 50k a year and polluting infinitely more than me?

Oh, and my weekend car is a 6.6V8!:p

You don't have to satisfy me. You can drive whatever whenever you like, just pay your taxes and park the moaning.;)

listermint · 06-03-2012 06:12PM

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Forget about motor tax on fuel. It will never happen I reckon.

If you've a low tax classic go and enjoy it.

As I've said tax frequently isn't fair.

But its meant to be balanced reflected on those who can pay.

I cant afford a brand spanking new 520D so i bought a ten year old bmw to enjoy.

Why is my tax nearly 1700 Euro?

Taxation is meant to be balanced otherwise it causes unrest. And we are heading straight for unrest. If you cant see that then your blind to whats going on. We dont have a balanced system here for motor taxation.

And we are ripping the masses off in order to finance absolute poor spending and money management. Tipping point is closing in.

Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

Comments