Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

07-03-2012 09:21PM

MCMLXXV wrote: »

But yee get cheaper gaffs!;)

ha yeah I'll give ye that, but I wouldn't have bought a house in Dublin at those crazy prices in a million years, no way!

keithclancy · 07-03-2012 09:40PM

Deleted User wrote: »

ha yeah I'll give ye that, but I wouldn't have bought a house in Dublin at those crazy prices in a million years, no way!

Or Cork ... don't forget Cork :P

bazz26 · 07-03-2012 10:22PM

rebel.ranter wrote: »

And they wonder why there is no revenue coming in through the motor tax system! :rolleyes:

The most sickening thing about this is that only the wealthy can benefit from the "savings" (based on comparison with old cc based system). That to me smacks of inequality in the system.

But what about revenue from other forms of tax such as VRT and VAT on the purchase price of that A7 and the likes?

The revenue lost from reduced motor tax is minimal compared to the revenue brought in from VRT/VAT on that car. The buyer of that car is still paying alot of tax on it, just not motor tax. A person with a 10 year old car on the other hand pays more in motor tax but little or nothing in VRT/VAT.

creedp · 07-03-2012 10:32PM

bazz26 wrote: »

But what about revenue from other forms of tax such as VRT and VAT on the purchase price of that A7 and the likes?

The revenue lost from reduced motor tax is minimal compared to the revenue brought in from VRT/VAT on that car. The buyer of that car is still paying alot of tax on it, just not motor tax. A person with a 10 year old car on the other hand pays more in motor tax but little or nothing in VRT/VAT.

No one saying that the A7 owner should be hit with extortionate tax such as the €1,000 plus a year hit on many ordinary cars at present. But I don't think its credible to claim that if the tax on this bus was €300 to €500 a year the person who could afford it would say nah because of the tax! Raising the tax on higher end cars to a more reasonable level might allow a reduction on the top end rates thereby allowing owners currently afflicted by them to keep there cars on the road. I know all is not fair with tax in general but in my view that would also be more fair to all.

bazz26 · 07-03-2012 10:56PM

At the end of the day they are going to screw all motorists over, not just those currently with low motor tax. Low motor tax was never sustainable but when emmisions based cars come into line with engine size based cars you can bet they will not stop there. Just like the Income levy and Household charge, it is only the begining.

Vertakill · 07-03-2012 10:57PM

rebel.ranter wrote: »

The most sickening thing about this is that only the wealthy can benefit from the "savings" (based on comparison with old cc based system). That to me smacks of inequality in the system.

Got it in one! The people capable of buying 2008 520d's are not the people that are in need of tax breaks!

We're also alienating the big engine market as well.
If there were less of a difference between taxing a 1litre and a 3litre+, more people would splash out on the larger engine cars and be pumping more money into the economy on fuel costs.
But most people who actually have the disposable income to fund gas guzzlers and would like a nice big engined car, won't put up with the extortionate motor tax and I don't blame them.

The way it is now is basically geared toward 2008+ diesels or everyone driving 1 to 1.4 petrols... and as we've seen, there's fck all money to be had from that for the revenue.

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

Every one will not contribute equally if you add it to fuel the unemployed person who has not to travel to work has another reason to not take a job.

Firstly, you make it sound like the majority of unemployed are looking for excuses not to take a job... There are thousands of people in dire straits and looking down on them and making it out as if they prefer being on the dole is a sickening outlook.

Secondly, what if this unemployed person had a 2litre diesel (pre 2008) and his tax was costing him a fortune so he couldn't afford to make the car road legal for a prospective job?
But if the fuel was taxed, driving his, probably 40-50mpg car to and from work was very much doable?

You can look at it any way you want - there's always two sides.

Top Dog · 07-03-2012 11:58PM

creedp wrote: »

Raising the tax on higher end cars to a more reasonable level might allow a reduction on the top end rates thereby allowing owners currently afflicted by them to keep there cars on the road. I know all is not fair with tax in general but in my view that would also be more fair to all.

Only problem there is in 5 years time when that car ends up in the second-hand market - anyone who might look at it will rule it out due to the higher tax. Just look at the bangernomics thread for a multitude of examples (Lexus, BMW 7-series, big-engine Jag's). If they could bring in a system whereby the tax reduced as the car aged, then it'd be a whole lot more sensible. Higher tax for the first 3 years of a cars life, with gradual reductions each year after that would be much more beneficial to all concerned.

TGi666 · 08-03-2012 01:19AM

decided to set up a facebook page to vent some anger towards the hikes
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003535438887
anyone any ideas what to add to it?

rebel.ranter · 08-03-2012 01:30AM

They should tax tyre sizes & tyre widths on your car, that's a trick that this government missed the dummies!

Northern Monkey · 08-03-2012 07:13AM

rebel.ranter wrote: »

They should tax tyre sizes & tyre widths on your car, that's a trick that this government missed the dummies!

Would you get a rebate if you switched to winter tyres for a few months of the year?:D

vetstu · 08-03-2012 07:38AM

Northern Monkey wrote: »

Would you get a rebate if you switched to winter tyres for a few months of the year?:D

No, thats extra, the tyre tax apples to each tyre you own.

snaps · 08-03-2012 09:43AM

a tax on fuel is the only way, but i feel the problem with that now is that fuel has already been taxed to the hill, so its not going to happen. Least then you cant avoid paying. Was in tesco the other day and the line of parked cars there i walked past, i would say 60% were at least 1month out. Some as much as a year!

listermint · 08-03-2012 09:47AM

So with all this, how would one start a lobby group on taxing fuel?

What is the AA's stance on it? for or against?

Arent they the largest motoring lobby organisation here?

gbee · 08-03-2012 10:01AM

listermint wrote: »

Arent they the largest motoring lobby organisation here?

No, that would not be my understanding of their role. They always support the government but throw in odd bits of info and ask for delays or periods of grace but ?

creedp · 08-03-2012 10:09AM

listermint wrote: »

So with all this, how would one start a lobby group on taxing fuel?

What is the AA's stance on it? for or against?

Arent they the largest motoring lobby organisation here?

I heard Faughnan in an interview earlier this year highlighting the high and increasing levels of fuel tax in this country and how its was significantly impacting on the running costs of the average car owner. On that basis I couldn't see the AA championing significant further increases in fuel taxes. However, I don't know what their position is on reforming the current CO2 based motor tax system.

08-03-2012 10:13AM

TGi666 wrote: »

decided to set up a facebook page to vent some anger towards the hikes
http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003535438887
anyone any ideas what to add to it?

So you are against hikes in the emissions based rates?

pburns · 08-03-2012 12:08PM

Top Dog wrote: »

Lexus, BMW 7-series, big-engine Jag's... If they could bring in a system whereby the tax reduced as the car aged, then it'd be a whole lot more sensible. Higher tax for the first 3 years of a cars life, with gradual reductions each year after that would be much more beneficial to all concerned.

Sensible? Yes.
Benefical? Certainly.
Fair? Most definetely!

But a higher road tax for new cars? Do you really think the SIMI will allow this?!

I'd buy a new car and have no problem with this but a lot of people in this country don't mind having 30-40k tied up in a new car that will depreciate like a stone but will be obsessed with a couple of hundred extra a year in road tax. It begars belief!

keithclancy · 08-03-2012 01:21PM

Top Dog wrote: »

Only problem there is in 5 years time when that car ends up in the second-hand market - anyone who might look at it will rule it out due to the higher tax. Just look at the bangernomics thread for a multitude of examples (Lexus, BMW 7-series, big-engine Jag's). If they could bring in a system whereby the tax reduced as the car aged, then it'd be a whole lot more sensible. Higher tax for the first 3 years of a cars life, with gradual reductions each year after that would be much more beneficial to all concerned.

I think thats a great idea.

I think the tree huggers would think its a horrible idea and we should all be going out and buying nice shiny new low co2 or co2 emission free cars.

Rather than keep the car you already have for as long as possible.

snaps · 08-03-2012 02:39PM

one of the disadvantages of having the tax on the fuel would be the hit on tourism (how many cars would come across from the uk and mainland europe for their holidays if fuel is sky high?), possibly the closure of the filling stations on the border, plus the loss of all the civil service jobs in the motor tax offices!

creedp · 08-03-2012 02:48PM

snaps wrote: »

one of the disadvantages of having the tax on the fuel would be the hit on tourism (how many cars would come across from the uk and mainland europe for their holidays if fuel is sky high?), possibly the closure of the filling stations on the border, plus the loss of all the civil service jobs in the motor tax offices!

It would obviously add to their cost but an extra 20c on a litre of fuel probably wouldn't be deal breaker given the amount of mileage they would clock up on a week/forthnight stay here. Say they clocked up 2,000km in a car doing 10l per 100 kms would only amount to €40 extra per trip. Extra cost OK but not prohibitive when you consider the overall cost of the trip. No its the poor feckers who have to live here will be affected most as usual.

voojeq · 08-03-2012 03:03PM

In my opinion road tax in fuel prices may help Irish economy in its long road to recovery. Having to pay more for fuel, ultimately puts ourselves into position of visiting the petrol stations more often therefore spending more than now on fuel.

BUT,

cash from tax you'd pay this year for your car could be spent on petrol and other goods which again would boost the economy because we would start spending that cash on various goods not tax only. The thing is, the tax we're paying now is going entirely to governments pocket, if we had tax paid in fuel we would have revenue for government, boost the petrol companies revenues (create jobs maybe?) and of course small companies who sell their stuff on petrol stations (create more jobs).

They're doing it all wrong, tax should not be raised, instead the rates should be lowered to increase the amount of cars and enable the citizens to spend their money freely again which i think is the quickest way to having Celtic Tiger back in Ireland again.

listermint · 08-03-2012 03:07PM

voojeq wrote: »

In my opinion road tax in fuel prices may help Irish economy in its long road to recovery. Having to pay more for fuel, ultimately puts ourselves into position of visiting the petrol stations more often therefore spending more than now on fuel.

BUT,

cash from tax you'd pay this year for your car could be spent on petrol and other goods which again would boost the economy because we would start spending that cash on various goods not tax only. The thing is, the tax we're paying now is going entirely to governments pocket, if we had tax paid in fuel we would have revenue for government, boost the petrol companies revenues (create jobs maybe?) and of course small companies who sell their stuff on petrol stations (create more jobs).

They're doing it all wrong, tax should not be raised, instead the rates should be lowered to increase the amount of cars and enable the citizens to spend their money freely again which i think is the quickest way to having Celtic Tiger back in Ireland again.

we dont have the funds to lower taxes, the money would have to be taken from somewhere else. And to date they havent made any sufficient savings on their outgoings. (its almost like they dont want to)

Top Dog · 08-03-2012 04:45PM

pburns wrote: »

But a higher road tax for new cars? Do you really think the SIMI will allow this?!

Probably not.

Don't the UK have a system like that though? Where the tax applied reduces as the vehicle ages/depreciates?

creedp · 08-03-2012 04:58PM

Top Dog wrote: »

Probably not.

Don't the UK have a system like that though? Where the tax applied reduces as the vehicle ages/depreciates?

My understanding is that there is one-off charge applying in the year of registration only. After that it reverts back to the std Motor Tax Rate for the category of car from year 2 onwards. I don't think that will wash here as it won't raise enough lolly. I would agree with the point that we have no scope to reduce taxes so the best that can be expected is that the system will be reformed such that lower rate cars will pay proportionally more and maybe:) higher rate cars might get a bit of a break in the context of an overall increase in motor tax revenue. However, despite the rhetoric of a review taking place, the reality is that there will probably be an increase for everyone with lower rate cars incurring the biggest increases.

gbee · 08-03-2012 09:58PM

pburns wrote: »

but will be obsessed with a couple of hundred extra a year in road tax. It begars belief!

Look, it's easy to buy a car, a loan, savings, HP, finance ~ OK, you'll either get the money or you won't, in many cases the finance company owns the vehicle until the last payment.

Now, there you are with your new shiny toy, ask them for a loan for the running costs and see how far they'll throw you!

Farmer Pudsey · 08-03-2012 10:37PM

Vertakill wrote: »

Got it in one! The people capable of buying 2008 520d's are not the people that are in need of tax breaks!

We're also alienating the big engine market as well.
If there were less of a difference between taxing a 1litre and a 3litre+, more people would splash out on the larger engine cars and be pumping more money into the economy on fuel costs.
But most people who actually have the disposable income to fund gas guzzlers and would like a nice big engined car, won't put up with the extortionate motor tax and I don't blame them.

The way it is now is basically geared toward 2008+ diesels or everyone driving 1 to 1.4 petrols... and as we've seen, there's fck all money to be had from that for the revenue.

Firstly, you make it sound like the majority of unemployed are looking for excuses not to take a job... There are thousands of people in dire straits and looking down on them and making it out as if they prefer being on the dole is a sickening outlook.

Secondly, what if this unemployed person had a 2litre diesel (pre 2008) and his tax was costing him a fortune so he couldn't afford to make the car road legal for a prospective job?
But if the fuel was taxed, driving his, probably 40-50mpg car to and from work was very much doable?

You can look at it any way you want - there's always two sides.

If people buy 3litre+ car as opposed to 1 litre cars they do not benifit the Irish economy but rather the European economey's ( Germany, France, Italy and Britian) that manafasture cars if you want to benifit the Irish economy use the money to take a holiday in Ireland, do up your house,Garden etc or even spend it in the boozer all there are labour intensive and most of the money stays in Ireland

No I do not believe that a lot of unemployed people are loking for a reason not to take a job however no matter what age you car is you are legally obliged to tax it, however a tax on car fuel is a tax on work take two people both with the same car who has the higher fuel bill ( more than likly) the person who is unemployed or the person who is working and has to travel 5,10,20 or 40 miles a day of a return journey it is simple economics

listermint · 09-03-2012 09:23AM

Farmer Pudsey wrote: »

If people buy 3litre+ car as opposed to 1 litre cars they do not benifit the Irish economy but rather the European economey's ( Germany, France, Italy and Britian) that manafasture cars if you want to benifit the Irish economy use the money to take a holiday in Ireland, do up your house,Garden etc or even spend it in the boozer all there are labour intensive and most of the money stays in Ireland

No I do not believe that a lot of unemployed people are loking for a reason not to take a job however no matter what age you car is you are legally obliged to tax it, however a tax on car fuel is a tax on work take two people both with the same car who has the higher fuel bill ( more than likly) the person who is unemployed or the person who is working and has to travel 5,10,20 or 40 miles a day of a return journey it is simple economics

Its not 'simple economics' the person is paying vehicle tax anyway (supposedly) we are trying to equal the vehicle tax. Which is the point. Only people who are dodging motor tax would be so avidly against such is your points.

And i do know alot of them dodging it entirely. :mad:

Bullseye1 · 09-03-2012 09:27AM

They could also bring in a luxury tax on vehicles costing over a certain price, say €30,000. They would be hitting those who are most capable of taking such a hit on a luxury item. Personally I cannot ever see any Irish government implementing luxury style taxes.

dr.fuzzenstein · 09-03-2012 10:35AM

listermint wrote: »

Its not 'simple economics' the person is paying vehicle tax anyway (supposedly) we are trying to equal the vehicle tax. Which is the point. Only people who are dodging motor tax would be so avidly against such is your points.

And i do know alot of them dodging it entirely. :mad:

Well, if people are dodging motor tax the new system could work in their favor.
If there's no motor tax, there's nothing to dodge and if they could fill up their tank with "alternative" (green, red, chipfat) fuels, their tax evasion would be even harder to detect.
Smuggling of untaxed fuel from the North would go through the fcuking roof, along with laundering of green/red diesel, or people would just stick that into their tank, since now there's a serious financial incentive to do so.
The argument that we simply need to get the North onboard to do the same makes sense, but now there's even more jurisdictions, more voices, more arguments, it would take 20 years before everyone agrees and by that time EV's may be so prevalent that the whole argument is purely academic anyway.

shedweller · 09-03-2012 03:30PM

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

If there's no motor tax, there's nothing to dodge and if they could fill up their tank with "alternative" (green, red, chipfat) fuels, their tax evasion would be even harder to detect.

Agreed on everything but this bit. There would never be enough of a supply of veg oil to meet any demand for it. Not to mention the price of it going crazy due to demand and putting people back where they started, with expensive fuel!

Huge hike in road tax as motor cash dries up

Comments