VRT to be abolished?

Seth Brundle

the govt do slap a huge amount of tax onto the price of gargle (and the fags)!

Kersh

I know that. My point is, if you had to cough up the extra at the bar, as a total added to your drink, so you could see just how much, then their would be complaints. Lets say for arguments sake, a pint costs 4 eu. And the gov take 2 eu of that. Most people dont care, cos a pint is 4 eu.
But if a pint cost 2 eur, and when you go to the bar, the barman says, 2 eur plus the vat plus the vrt, so thats 4 euro, the country would go mad. Cos they will realise everytime they buy a pint, just how much goes to the government.
Thats my point. A bit like buying a car. 13000 for the car, plus 21%, plus 30 %.

dcGT

Kersh wrote:

Not really true, cos a 1 litre 1989 micra pollutes more than a 2002 bmw 750i, cos new cars have better emmissions equipment. So by todays system the guy in the 750i pays more, yet the ****box micra pollutes more.

Well of course we'd have to compare cars of the same age to be fair. After all, they have become much cleaner over the years. I'd say a 1989 BMW 750i would pump out a few more gases than a 1989 Micra but yeah I know what you mean.

DC.

Furp

It would be great to finally see the VRT go as at the moment with my expanding family it looks like I need an mpv but between all the bills can't afford to buy one they are in the up €40,000 price bracket, and above.

One thing though what will happen to all those people that take out a car loan say for a €30,000 car and then the VRT(say 25%) is knocked off the car is now selling for €24,000 yet they owe for the full price so they have a large negative equity on their car.

I did see something about refund of vrt but how far back could this go.

Also anyone who contacts the VRT office's know how difficult it is to get an accurate vrt quote on importing a car because of the magic book of the OMSP(open market selling price) which is not published and seems to vary between offices, but I am sure that if they did have to refund VRt that we would not only see this being published but being drastically undervalued so as not to give back all the tax collected.

Kaskade

this luxury sh1t really annoys me. Really we only need bread and water so is everything else not a bloody luxury?!?! Bought a house recently and found out that getting the solicitor to do their work on closing the sale is considered a luxury - how is that. Its not a product. I would do it myself if I could and its not like getting a bloody full body massage - now that is a luxury.

I so think car tax should be based on your emmissions. Should go on manufactures spec for the first 4 years and it should go on your NCT reading after that.

mike65

dcGT wrote:

This is an interesting point. Increasing the cost of road freight would mean that the price of almost everything we buy in shops would increase would it not? After all, most goods have to travel by road at some stage, and the hauliers are hardly going to absorb the increased costs. I suppose the government could reduce the fuel tax for hauliers to prevent this though? If not though, it could mean more inflation.

DC.

See my post about a tax rebate here

Mike.

silverside

Kersh, I could be wrong, but I think since catalytic converters came in around 1992,
the main emmissions from a car are just
- The CO2 used from its fuel
- The energy used in its manufacture
- Diesel cars emit particulates (soot) also.

On that basis, I don't think a 2002 BMW would be any cleaner than a 1992 Micra, assuming both are well-looked after. On the contrary, it would use more fuel (because it is heavier), and more energy would have gone into building it.

Kersh

So put the tax on the fuel. Road tax here is for the upkeep of roads, and has nothing to do with pollution. Thats in the UK.
So why do we pay vrt on the vat included price?

impr0v

Gurgle wrote:

Get the people to pay for the roads so that the corporations can use them.

....to make profits to pay the people. Same reason the corporation tax in this country is very low relative to the rest of Europe, if the corporations start to bail out, then VRT on new cars will be far from your worst complaint.

Borzoi wrote:

Of course the elimination of VRT will cause a corresponding drop in the prices of second hand cars, so anyone selling or trading in may not see that great a benefit

And everyone with a car in the country at the time of VRT's removal will take a large hit to the value of their asset at the same time, obviously to a different extent, depending on the age and value of their car. Unless you change your car regularly, or are the proud owner of something very eligible for scrappage, your immediate experience of VRT's removal will be negative on two counts, the value wiped off your asset in terms of sell on price, and the negative effect on public services which would presumably manifest itself given the removal of the VRT entry on the budget balance sheet.

full forward

ESP or Electronic Stablilty Programme saves 800 lives a year in Germany alone. It is standard in the new VW Golf right accross europe. It is an optional extra in Ireland because VW want to keep the price down. Most people dont know what it is so they dont ask for it. It costs about €1000 extra on the Golf in ireland. Its no wonder that we have one of the highest road death rates in Europe. VRT is killing us.

impr0v

full forward wrote:

Its no wonder that we have one of the highest road death rates in Europe. VRT is killing us.

In fairness I think the above statement is more than a little sensationalist. You can legitimately blame the price issue, and lower standard spec of new cars here on VRT, but to state bluntly that 'VRT is killing us' is going too far. Manufacturers including ESP and other such currently optional safety equipment on new cars as standard will possibly have some small effect on road fatalities, but it could just as easily lead to an increase, as some other posters have made the argument here before in relation to ABS, that there is evidence to suggest drivers feel more confident with such electronic aids and are therefore more likely to take risks. To find more culpable contributory factors to our high rate of road deaths, I suggest you look to our abysmal standards of driving and, to a lesser extent, the poor state of our road infrastructure.

ShiverinEskimo

Would removing the VRT not increase some car owner's assets looking to sell. Especially here in ireland with the border.
A mate of mine just bought a northern reg'd BMW from a guy in blaney. The car was 6500 and will cost 2200 in VRT.

The reason the car was priced at 6500 was because the owner knew that he would not sell it to a southerner at a higher price because the southerner's price is that plus 30% it ended up costing 2200 to import. (p.s. he did have a sterling price to anyone interested in the north which equated to more than 6500 euro)

Had the VRT not been in place that seller would have been able to sell that car at 7k maybe 7500 knowing that the buyer's budget needs only accomdate the car and not the car and the VRT.

Also while the uk enjoys lower prices and lower road tax everyone who owns or rents property has to pay council tax which is measured on the size of your house. We had a 4 bed detached and the council tax was 140 a month. now we paid our road tax, our water rates, sewerage rates, bin rates, leccy, gas, you name it. but then still got landed with this madatory council tax that apparently is used to pay for admin and maintenance on all of the above. so anyone buying a house has to budget at least 1200 a year in dead money towards just having a roof over the nut. VRT is rough. but every country has its bull**** taxes. some more annoying than others...

shiv

Gurgle

impr0v wrote:

To find more culpable contributory factors to our high rate of road deaths, I suggest you look to our abysmal standards of driving and, to a lesser extent, the poor state of our road infrastructure.

I nearly agree but imo the road infrastructure is more to blame than the poor driving.

The roads in the dublin area are fine, the national primary roads are mostly reasonable but everything else is absolutely abysmal.

I'm not going trawling for statistics but I think the majority of crashes occur on the crappy secondary roads.

unkel

impr0v wrote:

I suggest you look to our abysmal standards of driving and, to a lesser extent, the poor state of our road infrastructure.

Nail on head

ShiverinEskimo

They were talking about the abysmal roads on a talk show on the radio the other day except were talking in relation to speed cameras: money maker or safe maker. They were quoting statistics saying the ratio of gatso's on national and motorway routes to secondary and worse is terrible considering the vast majority of accidents do in fact occur on roads of lesser quality than national primary routes. ie, motorways are the safest roads in the country.
Its the idiots doing 70 mph on a two lane mway, 60 on a wide, hard shouldered primary route and then 60 on a narrow windy (windey?) country road with many slow vehicles and concealed exits. especially in the conditions we have been having this summer. wet narrow roads with no markings and high ditches do not leave an awful lot of room for error. Error being difficult to avoid it seems for many of our road users.

To my knowledge, too much of the revenue from gatsos and partols goes towards major route improvment which is necessary, however the rural roads go without maintenance and straightening/improvement despite record funds being clawed from the public through such measures as speeding fines.

I beleive that the majority of our governement do not need to make use of such rural roads reguarly enough to be reminded that while the major routes could do with improvment it is the rural routes that are in dire need if this country is ever going to be able to curb the death rate on our roads.

Borzoi

ShiverinEskimo wrote:

Would removing the VRT not increase some car owner's assets looking to sell. Especially here in ireland with the border.
v

No, because the removal of VRT will reduce the sales prices of new cars, and secondhand car values are a fraction of the new price.

Lower new price = lower S/H price.

To take Unkel's example:
New Mazda MX-5 1.6

Netherlands / Ireland €29k
Belgium €20k
and assume ( :rolleyes: ) that the new price drops to that of Belgium.

Say you paid €29K last year for your new MX5 and and want to sell it after a year.
Right now you could possibly expect to sell for €22K.
If all VRT was removed in the meantime and these were now selling new for €20K, who in the hell is going to buy yours second hand for more? In fact in order to sell it you'll have to drop your price to, say, €15K.

So you've just lost €7K. Now in fairness, if you're buying another car, of higher value, you'll save more on that. But if you just wanted to get rid of the car you are out of pocket in a large way.

impr0v

Gurgle wrote:

I nearly agree but imo the road infrastructure is more to blame than the poor driving.

The roads in the dublin area are fine, the national primary roads are mostly reasonable but everything else is absolutely abysmal.

I'm not going trawling for statistics but I think the majority of crashes occur on the crappy secondary roads.

The following quote is from the NRA's Road Accident Facts 2002 Report, which is the latest available, to the best of my knowledge:

"Factors identified by the Gardai as contributing to accidents (where specified) were: driver (86%), pedestrian (10%), road (3%), environment (1%) and vehicle ( <1%)."

The infrastructure is undoubtedly of a less than desirable standard, but if the drivers on that infrastructure drive in such a way as to take account for this fact, then it becomes less of a factor in fatal accidents and more of a factor in delay and productivity loss. Though the Garda at the scene filling in the accident form obviously isn't qualified to hazard a guess as to whether the accident would have occurred had either vehicle been equipped with ESP etc., the low amount of accidents to which vehicle defects were perceived to have been a contributory factor is indicative of how minor a role the mechanics play in the day to day carnage.

ShiverinEskimo wrote:

To my knowledge, too much of the revenue from gatsos and partols goes towards major route improvment which is necessary, however the rural roads go without maintenance and straightening/improvement despite record funds being clawed from the public through such measures as speeding fines.

An awful lot of revenue goes towards non-national roads too, record amounts in fact. This years grants will provide for €4,610 for every km of non-national road in Ireland. Now, Joe average-user will more than likely reply in the negative when asked as to whether he can see this investment on the ground. Fair enough with the large inter-urban schemes under construction, there is obvious progress being made there, but all that seems to be being done with this €4,610 per km is exacerbating the heinous roundabout pox that is plaguing towns country-wide. However, should the cash-cow of VRT be abolished, and the bean-counters act as predicted and use Department of Transport money to fill the resultant hole in the national budget, then it's certain that Joe-average user will notice the deterioration in the non-national road stock that the corresponding reduction in road maintenance grants will induce.

Victor

Kersh wrote:

I dont buy this bollox that a nice car is a luxury, and so should be taxed higher. I bet most people on these boards would have something to moan about if the price of a pint got 21% vat thrown on it and then 30% luxury tax on that total. So you go into a pub, pay 4.50 for a pint and then pay your taxes. I know the barman already payed vat but its a luxury, so bend over, pay your luxury tax and take it.

Eh, you pay VAT @ 21% and excise duty on your beer. On a €4.50, the government makes <€1, the brewery about €1 and the publican makes the rest.

ShiverinEskimo wrote:

To my knowledge, too much of the revenue from gatsos and partols goes towards major route improvment which is necessary, however the rural roads go without maintenance and straightening/improvement despite record funds being clawed from the public through such measures as speeding fines.

Traffic enforcement loses money.

unkel

@Borzoi - clear example, everybody should understand now

impr0v wrote:

"Factors identified by the Gardai as contributing to accidents (where specified) were: driver (86%), pedestrian (10%), road (3%), environment (1%) and vehicle ( <1%)."

:eek: Those statistics sure back up your earlier statement, impr0v. They're even a lot more extreme than I would have thought

Shows that improving the roads has only marginal implications for safety. Very hard to do anything about a drunk jumping in front of your car either. Leaves the main and virtually only reason for accidents in this country: people can't drive :mad: