Just heard - new increases in VRT??

E92

astraboy wrote:

@E92, I agree with what you said earlier about 1.6L saloons, Irish people seem to be stuck in these due to the way tax is applied to CC. However, a heavy car like an avensis may produce less CO2 in 2.0 format over its driving life as the engine will have more disposable power, wheres the 1.6L will be straining if it ever needs to tow a trailer etc. Basing tax on CC alone is far too outdated. If, for instance, I get the train to work each day, yet want a 3.0 M3 BMW for the weekend, then I should only have to pay for the road use I do and the CO2 I put out. Petrol tax is the simplist way, it rewards me for taking public transport yet also lets me enjoy my hobby each weekend!

I absolutely agree with you that taxing cars should be done by fuel tax.
Thats the whole point I have been making(well trying to make;) ) all the time! The rest of what you said basically sums up what I think of it as well.

On a different, but related to the enviornment, point, would ninty9er or indeed anybody else who is a member of a political party like to tell us what they're going to do about the considerable number of cars required by Govt and their agencies/ organisations such as the guards etc going to do to reduce these vehicles' emissions?
Surely it wouldnt be beyond the bounds of possibility that when new cars are being purchased for the state in the future that when the supply of new cars goes to tender, that the tender will require that any new vehicles will only be hybrids or Flexifuel? There are plenty of Garda cars out there similar in size to Focus, and the Focus is available with bioethanol, so why not? Or what about the ministerial fleet? Would it not be beyond the bounds of possibility that instead of them driving big S-classes that they could use the Lexus LS600h or GS450h when it comes out this Autumn? And when BMW and Merc introduce hybrids that they go back to buying European cars? Ninty9er, think of all the good publicity your party would get:D

peasant

quick price check on the internet ...

Fiat Grande Punto 3 door, Germany (incl 19.5% VAT)
1.2 8V "GO" 10.990,- EUR "Active" 11.490,- EUR "DYNAMIC" 12.970,- EUR
Fiat Chroma, Germany
2.4 Multijet 20V Automatik "Emotion" (higher spec than Dynamic) 32.700,- EUR

Fiat Grande Punto 3 door, Ireland (incl 21 % VAT)
1.2 8V "Active" (only model with that engine) 15,195
Fiat Chroma, Ireland
2.4 Multijet 20v Dynamic 38,495

But it gets really crass with the Sedici 1.9 Diesel 4x4 Dynamic

Germany 20.490,- EUR
Ireland 26,400

Altreab

E92 wrote:

I absolutely agree with you that taxing cars should be done by fuel tax.
Thats the whole point I have been making(well trying to make;) ) all the time! The rest of what you said basically sums up what I think of it as well.

On a different, but related to the enviornment, point, would ninty9er or indeed anybody else who is a member of a political party like to tell us what they're going to do about the considerable number of cars required by Govt and their agencies/ organisations such as the guards etc going to do to reduce these vehicles' emissions?
Surely it wouldnt be beyond the bounds of possibility that when new cars are being purchased for the state in the future that when the supply of new cars goes to tender, that the tender will require that any new vehicles will only be hybrids or Flexifuel? There are plenty of Garda cars out there similar in size to Focus, and the Focus is available with bioethanol, so why not? Or what about the ministerial fleet? Would it not be beyond the bounds of possibility that instead of them driving big S-classes that they could use the Lexus LS600h or GS450h when it comes out this Autumn? And when BMW and Merc introduce hybrids that they go back to buying European cars? Ninty9er, think of all the good publicity your party would get:D

IMHO if state cars are to be more envoimentally friendly they should change to diesel. Bio diesel been the fuel of choice. At the moment the carbon footprint of petrol hybrids is still higher than diesels when you take into account the total cost of the batteries involved.
Hybrids should only be considered where we start getting diesel hybrids.
This would be a quick and effective way of reducing the Civil Service fleet's carbon emmissions.

McSandwich

astraboy wrote:

Petrol tax is the simplist way, it rewards me for taking public transport yet also lets me enjoy my hobby each weekend!

This really is the most sensible option as it directly targets pollution but not safety features. Other 'luxury' extras such as aircon would still incur higher tax as they greatly increase fuel consumption.

Altreab

ninty9er wrote:

Colm and some of the other guys here might be able to back this up but a car is VRTd at 92%* of OMSP not 100%. I can't say why, but it may be for safety gadgets

*edit: sorry...I believe this to be true, not sure

Yes i think your actually right there ninty9er ......the 92% is to allow for "cash discount" buyers.

ninty9er

E92 wrote:

I absolutely agree with you that taxing cars should be done by fuel tax.
Thats the whole point I have been making(well trying to make;) ) all the time! The rest of what you said basically sums up what I think of it as well.

On a different, but related to the enviornment, point, would ninty9er or indeed anybody else who is a member of a political party like to tell us what they're going to do about the considerable number of cars required by Govt and their agencies/ organisations such as the guards etc going to do to reduce these vehicles' emissions?
Surely it wouldnt be beyond the bounds of possibility that when new cars are being purchased for the state in the future that when the supply of new cars goes to tender, that the tender will require that any new vehicles will only be hybrids or Flexifuel? There are plenty of Garda cars out there similar in size to Focus, and the Focus is available with bioethanol, so why not? Or what about the ministerial fleet? Would it not be beyond the bounds of possibility that instead of them driving big S-classes that they could use the Lexus LS600h or GS450h when it comes out this Autumn? And when BMW and Merc introduce hybrids that they go back to buying European cars? Ninty9er, think of all the good publicity your party would get:D

The ministerial fleet is being phased from E-Class to the GS450h, there are already 2 or 3 on the fleet, however, I think a biofuel alternative would be better and I'm putting a proposal on this together at the moment.

OT:

I put a comprehensive proposal together a few years back making suggestions including a Vehicle Procurement Agency at the Dept. of Transport, but it didn't get much face time at top level as I wasn't a party member back then and really only some 12 year old kid with too much time on his hands. That was more of a cost cutting venture though, so that i.e only 1 brand of mid-size saloon would be bought by any state funded agency (e.g Gardai and Army and Aer Rianta would all have a Corolla hatch) significantly reducing costs...seriously..if I had the power I do things differently, but if you want to get to the top, you have to toe the line along the way or you'll be sidelined. Lemass being a prime example

I did get a letter commending my interest and, but herad no more

How did i get into political philosophy on a motors forum:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:

Back on T:
I'd be all for switching the traffic corps to the new Saab 9-5 biopower, but I hthink the currenrt fleet has about 3-4 years left in it.

Dublin Bus and Bus Éireann are required to (and have agreed to) power new busses with a biodiesel mix under Minister Dempsey's white paper.

We are making the change, but people don't want to know. If Fine Gael get elected and re-elected, we'll be hearing the exact same arguments in 6 years, just different topics

E92

@Peasant what about Germanys finest(apart from Porsche obviously), BMW. 335i Coupé is €44,650 in Germany. The same car is €65,900 or a whopping €21,250 dearer here. A 320i Coupe is only €32,400 for the Germans. A 316i Saloon is €36,600 here. You can have a 325i Coupe in Germany for roughly the same price as a 316i here for Christs sake, and of course before the start of this year they only had to pay 16% VAT, now its 19%! Though of course I must admit that we get more gadgets than the germans. They dont have Climate Control for example, instead air con. But still, its laughable how expensive cars are here.

unkel

E92 wrote:

If what your saying is true, that is the biggest scam ever. I dont have words to describe it

alias no.9 is spot on with his calculations. There is a total tax of up to 73% (VAT and VRT) on new cars

ninty9er

and of course all the people objecting to bus lanes don't help the situation...I've just listened to my dad rant for 5 minutes about the tarffic since the bus lane went in on the road on his way home!!!

My friend's parents lodged an objection with Bord Pleanála against a bus lane outside their house and I've seen numerous others do the same...so it's a lose/lose situation really

astraboy

E92 wrote:

@Peasant what about Germanys finest(apart from Porsche obviously), BMW. 335i Coupé is €44,650 in Germany. The same car is €65,900 or a whopping €21,250 dearer here. A 320i Coupe is only €32,400 for the Germans. A 316i Saloon is €36,600 here. You can have a 325i Coupe in Germany for roughly the same price as a 316i here for Christs sake, and of course before the start of this year they only had to pay 16% VAT, now its 19%! Though of course I must admit that we get more gadgets than the germans. They dont have Climate Control for example, instead air con. But still, its laughable how expensive cars are here.

Plus they have the excellent Autoban, parts of which have no speed limit.:D

....Runs and hides before the PC brigade batter me with sticks................

E92

ninty9er wrote:

We are making the change, but people don't want to know. If Fine Gael get elected and re-elected, we'll be hearing the exact same arguments in 6 years, just different topics

Yes but the difference is Fianna Fáil and the PDs have been there since 1997, and Fianna Fáil have been in Govt for the last 18 of the past 20 years. Its not unreasonable that people are so critical of ye IMO. Its not like climate change became a problem in 2007, which is the impression you get from the Government. They're only taking it seriously now, probably because theres votes in it now, and there wasn't before. I'm sorry for being so condescending, but thats just the way I am. Fine Gael, Labour and the Greens may well be the same when they're in power, who knows? You might say that ye need to be put in again for a stability, but theres stability in a dictatorship as well. And you can be sure of one thing. I'd criticise them just as much if they are a case of more of the same. I didnt have the interest in this whole thing when the rainbow was in the last time.

I very much welcome the move to change the ministerial fleet to something more enviornmentally friendly. Anyway whos going to complain about cars with 341 bhp as featured in the GS450h? Hybrids cut CO2 emissions by 30%. Bioethanol cuts CO2 by a whopping 80%, plus you get more bhp too;) , the 300bhp Saab 93 with bioethanol for instance. I'd like to see the garda fleet running the Focus FFV instead of say a Prius naturally(the Focus is a much better car for a start:D), but I dont see ministers changing from Mercs to Focuses however, so hybrids are the next best thing. Hybrids are of course not very enviornmentally friendly at all, but they are a start.

Your proposals about the govt buying one type of car for all the different agencies is an excellent idea, but this notion that you 'have to tow the line' kinda sucks really, I realise that you all have to sing off the same hymn sheet, but still.

ninty9er

astraboy wrote:

Plus they have the excellent Autoban, parts of which have no speed limit.:D

....Runs and hides before the PC brigade batter me with sticks................

But we have 400,000 people on provisional permits, more than 50% of whom haven't applied for a test.

Then again theres' probably 100,000 of them who don't drive.

I'm all for increasing motorway and dual-carriageway limits...but the PC brigade won't let me get near Martin Cullen!!!!!

Before the tirade of abuse arrives about this man...I thought the same up to 2 weeks ago when I spoke to him...he's fine 1-1, but just needs a bit of public speaking coaching

edit: Climate change was never as big an issue anywhere in the world until 2005 really, but I do get your point, the focus was very mush on recycling more than energy the past few years and we've gone above and beyond what was expected (the public have that is); but woiuldn't have without the push. People always grumble at change...remember the plastic bag...but there's nothing about it now

There's a few bombshell environmental advances in the pipeline if re-elected, a group of about 10 Ógra members had a hand in it.............DEAR GOD I'M GONE OFF TOPIC AGAIN....can a mod please ban me from this thread!!!!!

Sorry everyone!!!

E92

astraboy wrote:

Plus they have the excellent Autoban, parts of which have no speed limit.:D

....Runs and hides before the PC brigade batter me with sticks................

Your quite right, but this apparantly is going, when I was there in February, I was told by Germans that they're bringing in more speed limits on the Autobahn, plus the German Greens want a blanket speed limit of 130 km/h on them, for climate change reasons, even though its reckoned that excess speed only accounts for 2% of transport emissions alone there. At least Angela Merkel has vowed that there will not be any more speed limits on it though. She has to be one of the most car friendly politicians ever, especially considering she the is the chancellor of a country way more eco conscious than we are. At the moment, speed limits are only a 'suggestion' on the autobahn I believe;) .

Tanabe

ninty9er wrote:

There's a few bombshell environmental advances in the pipeline if re-elected, a group of about 10 Ógra members had a hand in it.............DEAR GOD I'M GONE OFF TOPIC AGAIN....can a mod please ban me from this thread!!!!!

Sorry everyone!!!

I wish somebody would! You've got way too much time on your hands.

overdriver

ninty9er wrote:

There's a few bombshell environmental advances in the pipeline if re-elected...

Christ Jesus! Will they be using these advances to fund local government again? They don't give a monkeys about the environment, unless it's an earner. You really need to wake up.

Martin Cullen is one of the most incompetent politicians ever to have his bum in a Dail seat.

As for re-election, it's a BIG "if", by the way...

Seth Brundle

Either get back to discussing VRT and stop fighting the forthcoming election or this thread gets locked.

overdriver

9 pages? Lock 'er up, Danno!

overdriver

That is concensus! Where's the keys?

ninty9er

Tanabe wrote:

I wish somebody would! You've got way too much time on your hands.

Yup, I'm off sick at the moment.

I've said all I have to say on VRT so I'll get my coat (long overdue methinks):o

Tanabe

Just out of curiousity, what car do you drive yourself?

alias no.9

ninty9er wrote:

The "spirit" of VRT is actually to discourage higher capacity engines, which isn't exactly effecient in reducing emissions. By applying a Co2 method, this is what is the intention.

The spirit of VRT is revenue generation, it's the fiscal rape of motorists.

ninty9er wrote:

To discourage something you tax it, and if that doesn't work tax it more...to encourage something, tax it less...you talk of the a €500 saving as if it's not a significant chunk of money to be missing out of the average person's póca.

If you really want to use tax to change purchasing habits, why fudge the rates in such a way that people assume they're paying less than they are?

ninty9er wrote:

In reference to the accounting methods...check with the Revenue Commissioners as I'm not a qualified chartered financial auditor.

The calculations are correct, I simply want your opinioin as to why someone would want to construct taxation mechanisms in such a way as to make it look like the rates are lower than they actually are?

ninty9er wrote:

When you buy a new car...the quote will (or should if it doesn't...but I don't know where you're buying if it doesn't) give a detailed breakdown of

• pre-tax price
• VRT
• Vat

So nobody buying a new car can claim they don't know how much they're paying in VAT and VRT.

Is that significantly satisfactory??

Absolutely not. Why is VRT applied in such a way that the published rates are much lower than the effective rates? Why call an effective 29% tax rate 22.5%, why call an effective 33.33% tax rate 25%, why call an effective 42.9% tax rate 30%?

[Joe Duffey]I put it to you[/Joe Duffey] that this is deception of the highest order, that the purpose of this was not to discourage the purchase of higher CC cars, or in the future if CO2 is used to bracket the bands, it's not to discourage the purchase of high emmission cars but to decieve the purchasers of such cars that they're not paying that much extra and in effect not discourage the purchase of high emissions cars.

Green tax, my arse!

ninty9er

Tanabe wrote:

Just out of curiousity, what car do you drive yourself?

I drive a Corsa, currently looking at a 316. I would prefer if new cars were a few grand cheaper, but I can live with the prices as they are, as I'm a good 10 years off buying a brand new car.

alias no.9 wrote:

The spirit of VRT is revenue generation, it's the fiscal rape of motorists.

wrong. revenue generation; a "fiscal rape" as you so put it, is a result of VRT, not the spirit of it.

alias no.9 wrote:

Absolutely not. Why is VRT applied in such a way that the published rates are much lower than the effective rates? Why call an effective 29% tax rate 22.5%, why call an effective 33.33% tax rate 25%, why call an effective 42.9% tax rate 30%?

[Joe Duffey]I put it to you[/Joe Duffey] that this is deception of the highest order, that the purpose of this was not to discourage the purchase of higher CC cars, or in the future if CO2 is used to bracket the bands, it's not to discourage the purchase of high emmission cars but to decieve the purchasers of such cars that they're not paying that much extra and in effect not discourage the purchase of high emissions cars.

Green tax, my arse!

Well I put it to you Joe, that VRT is not like other taxes, it is ad valorem, therefore it applies at one rate and is calculated at that rate. The difference is what it is calculated from, therefore the effective rates of VRT on the pre-calculation price are as stated.

And I've seen a few invoices recently with VRT figures that scared me singled out under the heading VRT
I suggest next time you're buying you turn away if you don't get one!!

Again to the people buying the 4.0 X5s etc which are killing the planet 5%-10% of €70k is a fair chunk of cash so these people are in effect paying more for their gas guzzler

overdriver

You're a born politician, God help us. You'd be better off leaving that aul ogra and going to a few dishcos at your age, youngfella!

You still haven't answered the question he asked, which i why your clown's army is hiding the true rate of VRT if they are using it as a deterrent?

ninty9er

overdriver wrote:

You're a born politician, God help us. You'd be better off leaving that aul ogra and going to a few dishcos at your age, youngfella!

You still haven't answered the question he asked, which i why your clown's army is hiding the true rate of VRT if they are using it as a deterrent?

No idea!!

(Example - Not meaning to be political)
I suppose it's the same as tax credits making the 20% PAYE rate effectively 15% for some people. It's a base rate which is affected by other elements.

the 73% example may rise further depending on the original price of the car, therefore making it unworkable to publish the effective rate of Overall tax, not just VRT; as it varies from price to price.

Possibly.

PS:
I do plenty a the aul "discho thing"...I can be seen most Tuesday nights in some of the hottest spots in town (being burned at the stake etc):D

overdriver

Makes you think, though, right? Saying one thing, but doing another. I think that they've figured out that taxes in general are easier to implement if they are dressed up as a green issue. Typical underhand FF tactics.

Personally, I won't buy a new car because it's a waste of money - let someone else take the big hit - but the cost oif VRT filters down through the second hand market anyway. So it does affect you, even if it's 10 years before you buy a new car, and the safety features that were omitted because they are taxable won't be there either, which also affects you. That part of it is a disgrace.

Tanabe

ninty9er wrote:

I drive a Corsa, currently looking at a 316. I would prefer if new cars were a few grand cheaper, but I can live with the prices as they are, as I'm a good 10 years off buying a brand new car.

Do you think that the polluter pays system is the fairest & works best?

ninty9er

Tanabe wrote:

Do you think that the polluter pays system is the fairest & works best?

If small cars aren't taxed less in the first place, why bother buying one???

Removing VRT will only have the effect of taking people out of 1.4 Corollas and Foci and buying 2.5l Mondeos and Mercs because they now cost the same.

I personally can afford to take the hit at the credit union because they don't mind when payment comes as long as they get something...on the other hand my petrol tank seems not to run on empty and I simply couldn't afford to pay 1.60-1.70 a litre. that's about €25 onto my cost every 10 days...my employer can't afford to pay more, I can't work more days as I have to go to college and the phone bill has to be paid.

I wouldn't be able to road a car with petrol at those prices...not at the moment anyway

Tanabe

ninty9er wrote:

If small cars aren't taxed less in the first place, why bother buying one???

Removing VRT will only have the effect of taking people out of 1.4 Corollas and Foci and buying 2.5l Mondeos and Mercs because they now cost the same.

Don't think so. Removing VRT will not make insurance any cheaper!

ninty9er wrote:

I personally can afford to take the hit at the credit union because they don't mind when payment comes as long as they get something...on the other hand my petrol tank seems not to run on empty and I simply couldn't afford to pay 1.60-1.70 a litre. that's about €25 onto my cost every 10 days...my employer can't afford to pay more, I can't work more days as I have to go to college and the phone bill has to be paid.

I wouldn't be able to road a car with petrol at those prices...not at the moment anyway

I can see your point, but that point of view is very specific, specific to you & your current affairs. If you look at the bigger picture, when you graduate from college, land yourself a full-time position of employment, then your situation will change again.

I think taxing the fuel (THE polluter) is THE FAIREST way of going about this & truly being 'Green' about the environment too.

alias no.9

ninty9er wrote:

wrong. revenue generation; a "fiscal rape" as you so put it, is a result of VRT, not the spirit of it.

Wrong, don't you just love FF revisionism. VRT was introduced to plug the massive hole in the public coffers left by the abolition of import duty, it was said at the time to be a temporary measure. Import duty was abolished on foot of an EU directive to allow the free movement of goods and services within the EU. Import duties on cars had been made extraordinarilly high by DeValera as part of his isolationist protectionism, intended to encourage the manufacture of cars here in ireland, an activity that would have been economically unsustainable otherwise. Here's a piece of trivia for you, this policy resulted in Ireland being the first country outside germany where the VW beetle was assembled. Mazda and Ford also assembled cars here.

ninty9er wrote:

Well I put it to you Joe, that VRT is not like other taxes, it is ad valorem, therefore it applies at one rate and is calculated at that rate. The difference is what it is calculated from, therefore the effective rates of VRT on the pre-calculation price are as stated.

Why is that? Why is VAT compounded on the ex-VAT? Because it's standard practice al over the western world. Why is VRT not compounded on the ex-VRT price? Why is VRT charged on VRT? To be effective in changing the purchasing habbits of consumers, don't you think the effective compound rate should be used, tell people its 43% on their gas guzzler rather than pretending it's 30%.

ninty9er wrote:

And I've seen a few invoices recently with VRT figures that scared me singled out under the heading VRT

You wouldn't even have looked at the invoice if you were fully aware of how VRT was charged, do you see my point about how the way in which VRT is calculated actually has the opposite effect to what you claim to be the spirit of VRT as a tax aimed at discouraging polution?

ninty9er wrote:

I suggest next time you're buying you turn away if you don't get one!!

Don't worry I won't be going next or near a new car salesman.

ninty9er wrote:

Again to the people buying the 4.0 X5s etc which are killing the planet 5%-10% of €70k is a fair chunk of cash so these people are in effect paying more for their gas guzzler

What about the 13% hidden by Berties fudge calculations? Don't you think telling them about that would discourage them from buying the 4.0 X5 and killing the planet in the first place? Then we get back to the crux of the matter, the intention was never to discourage them, simply to cash in.

unkel

alias no.9 wrote:

Then we get back to the crux of the matter, the intention was never to discourage them, simply to cash in.

Absolutely. And a perfect tax it is from a governments point of view, you've got to hand that to Bertie. As Colbert said nearly 400 years ago: "The art of taxation is the art of plucking the goose so as to get the largest possible amount of feathers with the least possible squealing."