Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
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

Which would you prefere? VRT question

Options
  • 04-01-2004 1:51pm
    #1
    mike65
    Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭


    Theres a story in todays Tribune about the ending of VRT and how the fiscal shortfall would have to be made up with higher fuel taxes (about 36c per litre)

    The loss of revenue to the state would be about €800 million. Which would you prefere if a choice had to be made...much cheaper motors and costlier petrol/diesel or what we have now?

    Mike.

    Which would you prefere? 5 votes

    High car prices and cheapish fuel
    0% 0 votes
    Cheaper cars and more costly fuel
    100% 5 votes


Comments

  • Options
    #2
    NeRb666
    Registered Users Posts: 483 ✭✭NeRb666


    50/50...reduced VRT and maybe 10c on a litre....and for Tesco to sell petrol everywhere:D


  • Options
    #3
    Capt'n Midnight
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 91,543 Mod ✭✭✭✭Capt'n Midnight


    Since we are on an island lots of things could be done through higher fuel costs (I'm sure the NI executive could do with a couple a quid) - but only if they reduce the costs elsewhere. Fuel tax means lower CO2 and higher costs for bigger vehicles / higher milage.

    How about personnal accident cover done by petrol tax - as there are so many people driving without tax / insurance...

    I rather they just got rid of Motor TAX and put it on fuel instead..

    VRT only takes in €800m - would that even cover the cost overuns in the NRA schemes ?

    It would have to be phased in over two or three years or you'd upset people who have just bought a car or are trying to sell one they got recently. (B&S prices for secondhand cars are HIGHER than New price in other Euro zone countries in many cases !!!)

    Note: If you drop VRT then the dealers will hike thier margins up - you won't see the full benefit. BUT we'd be able to import cars.. (Ok theres still the VAT difference)


  • Options
    #4
    Seth Brundle
    Moderators, Politics Moderators Posts: 39,714 Mod ✭✭✭✭Seth Brundle


    I think what would happen is that McCreevy would say that he would go for increasing petrol tax (Phase 1) and lowering / removing VRT (Phase 2).
    Phase 1 would go according to plan (as of midinght of when he announced it) whereas phase 2 would never happen!


  • Options
    #5
    Victor
    Registered Users Posts: 78,388 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    I would go for the higher fuel prices on environmental / traffic reduction grounds.

    However, it effects not just the domestic motor industry. Fuel exports (yes exports) to the North and Britain would fall dramaticly and we would move closer to the Kyoto limits (we are currently way over).

    Carwise, the "manufacturer recycles" charge / deposit would need to be maintained to discourage the 2 tonne 4x4 mentality and encourge recycling / recyclability.


  • Options
    #6
    unkel
    Registered Users Posts: 65,362 ✭✭✭✭unkel
    Chauffe, Marcel, chauffe!


    Originally posted by Capt'n Midnight
    I rather they just got rid of Motor TAX and put it on fuel instead..

    Same here - polluter pays proportionally - much fairer system


  • Advertisement
Advertisement