Change to VRT system annouced in Budget.

unkel

Biro wrote:

How about a Subaru Impreza WR1.... 265 g/kg... 2 litre!!
Exact same as a 4 litre tdi A8....
Going by engine cc is just stupid.

Exactly. Even a 4.0l BMW 740i petrol V8 produces less than that

And then there's the small factor that a frugal little diesel doing 50,000km per year outputs more than twice that of a huge fook-off petrol V8 saloon doing only 10,000km

All taxes should be payed at the pump!

kluivert

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

So alternatives please to the VRT system.

Although you have a point.

Bazzy

The elections are summer 2007 and the new changes are planned for 2008

This stinks of empty promise from Bertie and the boys.

I wonder will they be charging interest on Loans from Paddy the Plasterer that dont need to be paid back

I wouldnt believe it for a minute, The main reason why there saying this is because we were way behind on our co2 emissions levels and the jokers in the Dail are afraid they'll be fined.

If there that worried about emmissions Bertie 7 his band of merry men should get a hybrid engine cars !

The government is a sham just look at our minisiter for health ( in case your wondering who ate all the pies)

IT's time to take action and its long overdue. We need to get them to listen to us. They dont pay tax or vrt they get it all for free!

AND THERE RUNNING THIS COUNTRY INTO THE GROUND!*



* a lot done and more to do!

unkel

kluivert wrote:

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

We have until 2008 to get it into the thick heads of those in charge so

connundrum

unkel wrote:

All taxes should be payed at the pump!

++

The more you drive the more you pay. I'd drive about 5000 miles per year, and pay the same tax & vrt as someone who'd do 20,000 per year.

At the pump ftw!

Its done in South Africa and other countries. Just copy a working model, easy. No?

kluivert

I think you guys are fueling the wrong fire here.

Surely VRT cannot be taxed at the pumps.

If VRT on a car as of now is say 5000e

And you drive 20000 miles per year and say of every mile you drive you pay 10c thats 2000e per year.

So if you have the same car for five years then the figure paid over to the Revenue is 10000e.

I would rather the current system thank you very much

If you drive 5000 miles at the same rate over five years then you ll pay over 2500e to the Revenue.

Its one theory, i suppose.

unkel

connundrum wrote:

At the pump ftw!

Its done in South Africa and other countries. Just copy a working model, easy. No?

Sure enough. Only in recent years motor tax was abolished in France and replaced with higher excise duty

Our petrol is cheap compared to other EU(15) countries, especially the UK (think border issues), so there is plenty of opportunity to up the excise by say €0.30 - €0.50 per liter

Government policy stimulating cleaner cars can then be handled in the form of direct subsidies* (on electrical cars, hybrids, hydrogen cars, etc.) or excise discounts (on fuel: biodiesel / alcopetrol / hydrogen, etc.) rather than as a discount of VRT

*This has also been tried and tested in many EU countries during the period that manufacturers started fitting cars with expensive catalytic converters during the 80s

unkel

kluivert wrote:

Surely VRT cannot be taxed at the pumps.

Of course it can. A very simplistic sum:

Car with VRT of €5000. Now the VRT is scrapped, so the €5000 has to be recouped at the pump. Say car lasts 12 years and does 10,000 miles per annum and does 35MPG. That's 120,000 miles, so 15,000 liters, so an excise increase of about €0.30 per liter covers the lost VRT

kluivert wrote:

I would rather the current system thank you very much

Of course you would

The whole point is that people that pollute more than average are not punished and the people that pollute less than average are not awarded at present. If they were than we'd have a system of the polluter pays

In the new system you would be worse of because you pollute more

peasant

ts, ts, ts ...you've all fallen for it already ! :eek:

VRT is NOT an environmental tax, never was, never will be.
VRT under EU free trade regulations is highly questionable if not illegal.
In the interest of free trade within the EU VRT should be abolished...

but not to be replaced by something else ...just plain abolished, full stop.

How to tax cars according to their environmental impact is a totally different kettle of fish altogether.

Any discussion that involves factoring VRT into a new "environemental" taxation system is playing into the governements hands. They are throwing two totally unrelated matters (one a punitive, anti free trade tax; the other pseudo-green "concerns") into one pot, stir it a little and ye all fall for it.

Lambs to the slaughter ...:D

Seth Brundle

kluivert wrote:

But the option of taxing at the pumps is not there.

Simply because no politician/party want to introduce something that may initially get the ire of the voters!
if they got off their arses and used their heads they would think of it quick enough.

The proposed system, like the existing taxation system does not actively encourage people into considering public transport options.
If tax was applied to fuel then people may be more willing to leave the car at home. this would have the net effect of both reducing the number of cars on the roads and also reducing the level of emissions.

peasant

kbannon wrote:

The proposed system, like the existing taxation system does not actively encourage people into considering public transport options.
If tax was applied to fuel then people may be more willing to leave the car at home. this would have the net effect of both reducing the number of cars on the roads and also reducing the level of emissions.

All very well ...in theory ...

To most of us, considering public transport is all we can do ...because there isn't any.
And there never will be sufficient public transport to cover the dispersed settlements that we have in Ireland ...the numbers just won't add up.

Personally, as a rural, dispersed peasant, I do not cherish the thought that my 5 euro per litre of fuel will cover the expense to provide somebody living in Navan with convenient and efficient public transport to Citywest or the IFC ...because there never will be a bus/train/Luas/Metro for me.

I would, on the other hand be very grateful for any tax incentive that I could get, that would entice me to buy a new (without VRT) fuel effiecient and green means of transport.

And at least 50% of the population find themselves in the same position.

So, all taxes at the pump is grossly unfair on quite a large number of the population ...because they have no alternative to using the car.
The one thing they have a choice over, is whether they do their daily commute in a big stonking V8 X5 or a miserly 1.3 JTD Panda.
In the interest of "saving the environment" that choice should be guided towards the environmentally correct direction.

mike65

Just to clarify VRT is a Dept of Finance issue, Motor Tax is a Dept of Environment matter.

Also MercMad I have'nt modded this board for a few months now (pay attention at the back!) So ask KBannon for sticky.

I'd also put third party insurance on the price of fuel as well - kill two birds with one stone and that way no-one can avoid being covered.

Mike.

opus

kbannon wrote:

None of these taxes are just, environmentally friendly or voter inspiring.
The simplist method of increasing taxes in a fair and green way is to bump up the price of petrol. That way it is the polluter who pays based on their consumption.
using an emissions based system punished cars with a high emission level regardless of whether they do 100 or 100k kilometres per year.
As for VRT - this should just not be!

Totally agree, I drive a car (oldish BMW 328) that would is already heavily taxed so I hate to think what it might be like under the new system. But I take the bus to work every day & cycle around when I can. Putting the tax on the fuel cost would save me a fortune and make the people who never leave the car at home pay more for it.

unkel

peasant wrote:

In the interest of free trade within the EU VRT should be abolished...

but not to be replaced by something else ...just plain abolished, full stop

If only

I strongly agree with your principle, but public sector budgets don't quite work like that. The €1,000,000,000.00 VRT revenue has to come from somewhere else

opus wrote:

I drive a car (oldish BMW 328) that would is already heavily taxed so I hate to think what it might be like under the new system. But I take the bus to work every day & cycle around when I can. Putting the tax on the fuel cost would save me a fortune and make the people who never leave the car at home pay more for it.

Based on the polluter pays principle, people like you should be heavily rewarded compared to the current taxation regime. Others that could use other means of transport would have a strong incentive to change their ways

And, peasant, every change from one system to another leaves some people worse off than they were before, even if they can't help it

Then again living in the sticks has benefits too compared to living in Dublin. Some of those are way bigger than paying a bit more for fuel, like a 5 bed detached mansion for €300k. You wouldn't get a corpo flat in the worst area of Dublin for that