Should Cyclists Pay Road Tax

Corkfeen · 21-05-2013 4:59pm

Padraig Mor wrote: »

LOL. Bike shops up and down the country are helping customers to tear the arse out of the scheme. People buying bikes to sell on, for their kids, etc.

Which doesn't really matter as the scheme has profited the state in terms of tax.....

RainyDay · 21-05-2013 5:07pm

Padraig Mor wrote: »

LOL. Bike shops up and down the country are helping customers to tear the arse out of the scheme. People buying bikes to sell on, for their kids, etc.

I presume you've reported the evidence that you have of these abuses to Revenue - right?

FoxT · 21-05-2013 5:27pm

UCDVet wrote: »

I'd like to see a system where everyone paid an amount directly related to the actual cost of maintaining the roads, with consideration for the number of kms driven and the wear and tear caused.

The damage done, in terms of road wear, increases in proportion to the 4th power of the vehicle axle weight. A large truck can cause 10,000 times as much damage as a car, and the car, in turn, will do about 1500 times as much damage as a cyclist. Using your suggestion then, if a cyclist was to pay 1c road tax, a truck would have to pay eu150k.

I don't think this is a good idea, myself..

hardCopy · 21-05-2013 5:41pm

Padraig Mor wrote: »

LOL. Bike shops up and down the country are helping customers to tear the arse out of the scheme. People buying bikes to sell on, for their kids, etc.

Seeing as you can only avail of the scheme once every 5 years, there's not much scope for running a sideline in buying bikes to sell second hand.

hardCopy · 21-05-2013 5:55pm

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

Might be completely wrong, but from my observations surely the majority of cyclists in the country are in clubs. Especially in the last year or so, the amount of clubs in the country must have doubled. I've been in a club with 3 years, and 2 more clubs have started since then within 15 miles of me, each with probably 30-40 members.

Unless they buy a Road Bike or a Mountain Bike they're unlikely to be affiliated to CI, of the roadies and MTBs that are bought, many won't have any interest in racing. Then you have all the hybrids and city bikes that wouldn't be suitable for racing so they can be ruled out. All those kids who get bikes for their confirmation are unlikely to join either.

I know CI have experienced a massive growth in recent years but I'd imagine the number of non-affiliated cyclists has seen a similar rise.

I don't have any figures on it, that's just my own guess based on friends and colleagues who have used the scheme.

MajesticDonkey · 21-05-2013 9:00pm

hardCopy wrote: »

Unless they buy a Road Bike or a Mountain Bike they're unlikely to be affiliated to CI, of the roadies and MTBs that are bought, many won't have any interest in racing. Then you have all the hybrids and city bikes that wouldn't be suitable for racing so they can be ruled out. All those kids who get bikes for their confirmation are unlikely to join either.

I know, that's why I'm specifically talking about cyclists in road clubs. 95% of the road clubs in the country are affiliated with CI, and as such, their members have CI insurance. They don't necessarily have to race.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 1:04pm

hardCopy wrote: »

Insurance is not mandatory because we need to cover small claims, it's mandatory because cars regularly cause more damage than the driver could afford to pay out of their pocket.

A cyclist is less likely to do more damage than they can pay for.

what if you crashed and knocked all your teeth out? 2000 euros per implant

endacl · 22-05-2013 1:16pm

stephen97 wrote: »

what if you crashed and knocked all your teeth out? 2000 euros per implant

That'd be unfortunate, but wouldn't affect anybody besides the crashee. Drivers aren't required to have insurance because they might hurt themselves. That's why 3rd party is the bare minimum.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 1:26pm

endacl wrote: »

That'd be unfortunate, but wouldn't affect anybody besides the crashee. Drivers aren't required to have insurance because they might hurt themselves. That's why 3rd party is the bare minimum.

wow thanks i didn't know that, you really are a joy of information

endacl · 22-05-2013 1:31pm

stephen97 wrote: »

wow thanks i didn't know that, you really are a joy of information

You thought we had 'road tax'. You're in need of information.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 1:47pm

endacl wrote: »

You thought we had 'road tax'. You're in need of information.

i know we have road tax, not think you bufoon, its called motor tax in ireland but ireland is such a small island on the planet earth. the majority of humans on the planet earth know what road tax is, in all its guises, are you that up your own arse?

endacl · 22-05-2013 1:49pm

stephen97 wrote: »

i know we have road tax, not think you bufoon, its called motor tax in ireland but ireland is such a small island on the planet earth. the majority of humans on the planet earth know what road tax is, in all its guises, are you that up your own arse?

Seriously? You know we have 'road tax'? And I'm the bufoon?

It's spelled buffoon by the way, you buffoon.

;-)

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 1:53pm

endacl wrote: »

Seriously? You know we have 'road tax'? And I'm the bufoon?

It's spelled buffoon by the way, you buffoon.

;-)

ok you win you are the biggest child here, wow, you win , 3 cheers for the child

endacl · 22-05-2013 1:55pm

stephen97 wrote: »

ok you win you are the biggest child here, wow, you win , 3 cheers for the child

Ah go on now! That reads as a little childish. Does Stephen need a nap?

Corkfeen · 22-05-2013 1:58pm

stephen97 wrote: »

i know we have road tax, not think you bufoon, its called motor tax in ireland but ireland is such a small island on the planet earth. the majority of humans on the planet earth know what road tax is, in all its guises, are you that up your own arse?

Motor tax is for vehicles with motors that use the roads...... How exactly would we calculate a motorless vehicle's motor tax? :pac:

endacl · 22-05-2013 2:00pm

Corkfeen wrote: »

Motor tax is for vehicles with motors that use the roads...... How exactly would we calculate a motorless vehicle's motor tax? :pac:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance

You'd have to add an extra tax to power gels as well though.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:03pm

Corkfeen wrote: »

Motor tax is for vehicles with motors that use the roads...... How exactly would we calculate a motorless vehicle's motor tax? :pac:

well for first if you read the thread, you would see i called it road tax for bicycles, not motor tax, that's why i didn't change the thread title, so it refers to bicycles

22-05-2013 2:11pm

stephen97 wrote: »

i know we have road tax, not think you bufoon, its called motor tax in ireland but ireland is such a small island on the planet earth. the majority of humans on the planet earth know what road tax is, in all its guises, are you that up your own arse?

endacl wrote: »

Seriously? You know we have 'road tax'? And I'm the bufoon?

It's spelled buffoon by the way, you buffoon.

;-)

stephen97 wrote: »

ok you win you are the biggest child here, wow, you win , 3 cheers for the child

endacl wrote: »

Ah go on now! That reads as a little childish. Does Stephen need a nap?

Mod

You can both stop the childish sniping now please.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:14pm

Deleted User wrote: »

Mod

You can both stop the childish sniping now please.

i have since changed my initial thread to stop any confusion

Corkfeen · 22-05-2013 2:15pm

stephen97 wrote: »

well for first if you read the thread, you would see i called it road tax for bicycles, not motor tax, that's why i didn't change the thread title, so it refers to bicycles

Except bikes cause literally no damage to the roads so can't be classified as a major expense. The most you can legitimately charge would be less than a cent a year as they aren't a strain on the infrastructure.

endacl · 22-05-2013 2:16pm

stephen97 wrote: »

well for first if you read the thread, you would see i called it road tax for bicycles, not motor tax, that's why i didn't change the thread title, so it refers to bicycles

Most posters have been reading the thread. Its been one of the funniest on the topic for a while.

Why would you want a new (and unimplementable) tax introduced? People pay enough as it stands. As has been repeatedly explained, having people cycle rather than drive actually saves the state money.

I get it. You're young, idealistic and have all this stuff sorted out in your head. You think you pay a tax to use the road. You think everybody else should too. Its just not fair, is it? If you have an aul'l browse back through the thread, and the many others on the topic, you'll find lots of smart people explaining clearly to some slightly-less-than-smart-people, that use of the roads is free. You pay to use a vehicle with an engine on them. If you don't want to pay 'road' tax, maybe you should find an empty field and do your driving there.

Cyclists don't pay a tax because there is no tax due, and this is as it should be. I pay a motor tax. Some of this goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Most of which doesn't. I also pay VAT on every purchase. Some of which goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Again, most of which doesn't. There's no direct correlation between motor tax paid and roads, in the same way that there's no correlation between VAT paid on sweeties and welfare payments for dental work.

If you want to keep digging, you're going to need a bigger shovel.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:24pm

endacl wrote: »

Most posters have been reading the thread. Its been one of the funniest on the topic for a while.

Why would you want a new (and unimplementable) tax introduced? People pay enough as it stands. As has been repeatedly explained, having people cycle rather than drive actually saves the state money.

I get it. You're young, idealistic and have all this stuff sorted out in your head. You think you pay a tax to use the road. You think everybody else should too. Its just not fair, is it? If you have an aul'l browse back through the thread, and the many others on the topic, you'll find lots of smart people explaining clearly to some slightly-less-than-smart-people, that use of the roads is free. You pay to use a vehicle with an engine on them. If you don't want to pay 'road' tax, maybe you should find an empty field and do your driving there.

Cyclists don't pay a tax because there is no tax due, and this is as it should be. I pay a motor tax. Some of this goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Most of which doesn't. I also pay VAT on every purchase. Some of which goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Again, most of which doesn't. There's no direct correlation between motor tax paid and roads, in the same way that there's no correlation between VAT paid on sweeties and welfare payments for dental work.

If you want to keep digging, you're going to need a bigger shovel.

its so funny you cant keep away, like a fly on *****

MajesticDonkey · 22-05-2013 2:24pm

I think there should be an expiry date/time on polls so they don't drag on and on and we can actually get a result from them.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:27pm

MajesticDonkey wrote: »

I think there should be an expiry date/time on polls so they don't drag on and on and we can actually get a result from them.

this one is valid for 7 days, so it started on 20th, so not too long left

ArmaniJeanss · 22-05-2013 2:27pm

stephen97 wrote: »

its so funny you cant keep away, like a fly on *****

Why did you start the thread, did you want a debate or did you just want replies that agree with you?

endacl · 22-05-2013 2:28pm

stephen97 wrote: »

i have since changed my initial thread to stop any confusion

Cool. There was no confusion though. Voted.

MajesticDonkey · 22-05-2013 2:31pm

stephen97 wrote: »

this one is valid for 7 days, so it started on 20th, so not too long left

Never saw that!

07Lapierre · 22-05-2013 2:36pm

endacl wrote: »

Most posters have been reading the thread. Its been one of the funniest on the topic for a while.

Why would you want a new (and unimplementable) tax introduced? People pay enough as it stands. As has been repeatedly explained, having people cycle rather than drive actually saves the state money.

I get it. You're young, idealistic and have all this stuff sorted out in your head. You think you pay a tax to use the road. You think everybody else should too. Its just not fair, is it? If you have an aul'l browse back through the thread, and the many others on the topic, you'll find lots of smart people explaining clearly to some slightly-less-than-smart-people, that use of the roads is free. You pay to use a vehicle with an engine on them. If you don't want to pay 'road' tax, maybe you should find an empty field and do your driving there.

Cyclists don't pay a tax because there is no tax due, and this is as it should be. I pay a motor tax. Some of this goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Most of which doesn't. I also pay VAT on every purchase. Some of which goes to pay for the upkeep and maintenance of infrastructure. Again, most of which doesn't. There's no direct correlation between motor tax paid and roads, in the same way that there's no correlation between VAT paid on sweeties and welfare payments for dental work.

If you want to keep digging, you're going to need a bigger shovel.

Best reply yet! Well done.

geeky · 22-05-2013 2:39pm

Leaving aside the 'road tax/motor tax' splitting hairs.

I'm a driver/walker and, to me, it's obvious that people shouldn't pay to cycle. They take up far less resources in terms of wear and tear on roads, policing, pollution, HSE expense to deal with injuries. Aside from the fact that a healthy lifestyle involving exercise such as cycling means people are less likely to weigh on the public purse after picking up obesity-related diseases.

Lunatics like the helmet-cammed man featured in a recent thread, and people who cycler dangerously should be prosecuted to the full extent of the law. Beyond that, we should encourage people to cycle as much as possible.*

*yes, my stance is a little hypocritical, but I spend my travelling time listening to podcasts and audiobooks, and can't really do that safely on a bike.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:39pm

ArmaniJeanss wrote: »

Why did you start the thread, did you want a debate or did you just want replies that agree with you?

well initialy i was bored, but recently, since because i didnt see the other previous poll on the subject i was interested to see the result of the poll, remember its supposed to be a poll with 3 choices, yes , no or a chance to explain a different choice.

ArmaniJeanss · 22-05-2013 2:54pm

stephen97 wrote: »

well initialy i was bored, but recently, since because i didnt see the other previous poll on the subject i was interested to see the result of the poll, remember its supposed to be a poll with 3 choices, yes , no or a chance to explain a different choice.

Fair enough, you just came across as a little tetchy with replies that didn't agree with you. (FWIW you should be advised that generally when you start a thread the people who agree with you will just nod and maybe click thanks, whereas the people who disagree will be incentivised to post, so you need a thick skin).

FWIW I think the pro-tax side have a mental picture of the man/woman who cycles to work every day come rain or sun. And don't see why a €50/€100/€200 tax is unreasonable for the facilities they are provided.

Whereas most of us who cycle are once/twice/thrice a week cyclists (sad to admit I'd say in my case it's less than 20 times a year, I'm the ultimate fair weather cyclist) who drive or get public transport the rest of the week or during winter or when it rains or when its too hot or when they couldn't be arsed. And thus we do actually 'pay our way'.

So its immediately problematical to see how you could pitch a cycle tax at a fair level to cater for the 'normal cyclist', but not too low that the income would actually be less than the cost of collection.

endacl · 22-05-2013 2:54pm

stephen97 wrote: »

well initialy i was bored, but recently, since because i didnt see the other previous poll on the subject i was interested to see the result of the poll, remember its supposed to be a poll with 3 choices, yes , no or a chance to explain a different choice.

Stephen, the poll was flawed from the start. You omitted an option for cyclists who drive a car or bike. 'Other. Please explain' doesn't account for this.

I drive and pay motor tax. I've no problem with this. I cycle and pay no direct tax for the privilege, and don't think I should.

Where's my option? It would also apply to many who responded.

Seaneh · 22-05-2013 2:56pm

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

LOL

I'll say it again. Trucks do way more damage.

Trucks are allowed 5,000Kg per wheel. This is 100 times more than a combination of bike and rider of 100Kg. 4th power means that the truck will do 100,000,000 times as much damage per wheel, take the number of wheels into account and it's closer to half a billion times as much damage.

€5,195 divided half a billion ways is pretty close to zero.

Update on HGV's weight increases

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1986/02/19/00046.asp In 1983, regulations were made providing for a very significant increase in the maximum permissible gross vehicle weight from 32 tons to 38 tonnes (37.4 tons) for a five or six axle articulated truck or road train,

http://www.rsa.ie/RSA/Your-Vehicle/Vehicle-Standards/Weights--Dimensions-/46-tonne-weight-limit/ From 1st April 2013 six axle (3+3) articulated vehicle combinations will be allowed operate at a gross combination weight of 46 tonnes.

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/cyclists-in-dublin-double-survey-1.1254789
Nearly one in every 10 (8.8 per cent) of journeys taken in the capital now is on a bike, the latest figures show. So yeah cyclists are reducing drving and parking congestion by a good bit.

Just from working this out, for every 1 cent you charged a bicycle per wheel, you'd have to charge a truck €20,000,000 per axle? Did I do that math right?

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 2:57pm

endacl wrote: »

Stephen, the poll was flawed from the start. You omitted an option for cyclists who drive a car or bike. 'Other. Please explain' doesn't account for this.

I drive and pay motor tax. I've no problem with this. I cycle and pay no direct tax for the privilege, and don't think I should.

Where's my option? It would also apply to many who responded.

ok so what does other cover?

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 7:31pm

endacl wrote: »

Stephen, the poll was flawed from the start. You omitted an option for cyclists who drive a car or bike. 'Other. Please explain' doesn't account for this.

I drive and pay motor tax. I've no problem with this. I cycle and pay no direct tax for the privilege, and don't think I should.

Where's my option? It would also apply to many who responded.

what about an option for people who drive, cycle, then use a wheelbarrow? if you want ridiculous options, then you should start your own poll. or do you just prefer to split hairs and argue useless information, to make up for your own shortcomings?

K-9 · 22-05-2013 8:13pm

stephen97 wrote: »

what about an option for people who drive, cycle, then use a wheelbarrow? if you want ridiculous options, then you should start your own poll. or do you just prefer to split hairs and argue useless information, to make up for your own shortcomings?

Mod:

Less of this personal crap please, you can't expect people to take your thread seriously if you're going to throw insults like that.

peterjmaxwell · 22-05-2013 8:33pm

I don't think cyclist's should pay "road tax" but let's say a tax on cyclists was introduced and I paid this tax to use the road, do you think it would change motorist's opinions and that I could cycle about town and take my place as a tax paying road user without fear of maniac drivers with a chip on their shoulder?

I think some motorists need the crutch of "cyclists don't pay road tax so I have more rights than them" as seen by the recent emmaway20 tweets. It'd just be another excuse to treat cyclists as second rate road users.

endacl · 22-05-2013 8:38pm

K-9 wrote: »

Mod:

Less of this personal crap please, you can't expect people to take your thread seriously if you're going to throw insults like that.

S'ok. It hasn't been taken seriously since post #001

endacl · 22-05-2013 9:49pm

stephen97 wrote: »

Do you just prefer to split hairs and argue useless information point out inaccuracies and argue rationally using fact as opposed to factoid, to make up for your own shortcomings demonstrate the weakness of the opposing argument?

FYP. No charge.

My answer would be 'yes'. To your amended post.

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 10:26pm

endacl wrote: »

FYP. No charge.

My answer would be 'yes'. To your amended post.

so you actually mean yes to my previous post by just proving yourself again, as the class clown, clowning loudly
empty vessels making the most noise, i understand now

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 10:28pm

stephen97 wrote: »

so you actually mean yes to my previous post by just proving yourself again, as the class clown

i just got what the cl was , no charge endaCL

endacl · 22-05-2013 10:32pm

stephen97 wrote: »

so you actually mean yes to my previous post by just proving yourself again, as the class clown, clowning loudly

Did your keyboard just fart?

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 10:35pm

endacl wrote: »

Did your keyboard just fart?

you recognize your own scent, how adorable

oldyouth · 22-05-2013 10:47pm

Assuming the OP means Motor Tax, then No, I don't think cyclists should pay. To argue otherwise would be to suggest that motor tax is in some way related to road construction and maintenance, when the truth is that it is just another general tax

endacl · 22-05-2013 10:47pm

stephen97 wrote: »

you recognize your own scent, how adorable

OK, I'll let this thread go now.

I'll just point out first that, as others have already, acting like a stroppy kid when people don't agree with you is never going to reflect well on you. Worse again when they disagree, and go to the trouble of pointing out the flaws and fallacies in your line of thinking, that you have toddleresque tantrums. It was pointed out many times on this thread why your arguments were wrong. In fact the very premise upon which you built your argument was wrong. As the discussion developed, and tangents were explored, you didn't engage much. You took everything personally and finished up with outbursts more suited to the playground . AH in particular tends to be a bit merciless when this attitude is presented. Maybe you were looking for the 'People who agree with me forum'? I've been wrong on Boards plenty of times. I find the best course of action to be either gracious acknowledgement or just saying nothing. Grownups respect that. I'll admit, I did pull the pi55 out of you just a bit, but in fairness you were asking for it. And you made it very easy.

I'll leave it there. If you can't converse with grownups, maybe you'd be more at home on twitter?

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 10:58pm

endacl wrote: »

OK, I'll let this thread go now.

I'll just point out first that, as others have already, acting like a stroppy kid when people don't agree with you is never going to reflect well on you. Worse again when they disagree, and go to the trouble of pointing out the flaws and fallacies in your line of thinking, that you have toddleresque tantrums. It was pointed out many times on this thread why your arguments were wrong. In fact the very premise upon which you built your argument was wrong. As the discussion developed, and tangents were explored, you didn't engage much. You took everything personally and finished up with outbursts more suited to the playground . AH in particular tends to be a bit merciless when this attitude is presented. Maybe you were looking for the 'People who agree with me forum'? I've been wrong on Boards plenty of times. I find the best course of action to be either gracious acknowledgement or just saying nothing. Grownups respect that. I'll admit, I did pull the pi55 out of you just a bit, but in fairness you were asking for it. And you made it very easy.

I'll leave it there. If you can't converse with grownups, maybe you'd be more at home on twitter?

cool, go back to your toilet humour and fart jokes, and if they dont work you can always steal another opinion, that isn't your own,

Irlandczyk · 22-05-2013 11:33pm

stephen97 wrote: »

cool, go back to your toilet humour and fart jokes, and if they dont work you can always steal another opinion, that isn't your own,

I'm sorry, but what are you actually talking about? Why are you taking cheap digs at people who disagree with your line of thinking? Listen for a bit, mull other people's opinions over in your head for a bit, and you might learn something. Least it can do is open your mind up just a little.

Personally, I'm not entirely sure what your argument is at this point. This needless throwing of faeces over the last few posts has sorta brought the whole thread down a bit. I vote no, anyway. I don't believe cyclists should pay tax when they already bring so many benefits - economically speaking.

af_thefragile · 22-05-2013 11:38pm

No! What next, tax for walking?!

stephen97 · 22-05-2013 11:39pm

Irlandczyk wrote: »

I'm sorry, but what are you actually talking about? Why are you taking cheap digs at people who disagree with your line of thinking? Listen for a bit, mull other people's opinions over in your head for a bit, and you might learn something. Least it can do is open your mind up just a little.

Personally, I'm not entirely sure what your argument is at this point. This needless throwing of faeces over the last few posts has sorta brought the whole thread down a bit. I vote no, anyway. I don't believe cyclists should pay tax when they already bring so many benefits - economically speaking.

well you are one of the few who actually read the instructions and voted, yes the poll has not gone as intended but i will know in future. thanks for your vote

K-9 · 22-05-2013 11:40pm

stephen97 wrote: »

so you actually mean yes to my previous post by just proving yourself again, as the class clown, clowning loudly
empty vessels making the most noise, i understand now

Mod:

Banned for continuously ignoring cards and on thread warnings.

Should Cyclists Pay Road Tax

Comments