Dodging vrt?

upsfan

Tony Danza wrote:

I suppose you're going to say there is absolutely no difference between somebody trying to save themselves a few quid and somebody consciously deciding to get themselves in power and abuse peoples trust?

Ok, so the corruption/payments bit is bad but you'd have no trouble with the tax evasion (for which he was jailed) is what you are saying?

Anan1

Tony Danza wrote:

I suppose you're going to say there is absolutely no difference between somebody trying to save themselves a few quid and somebody consciously deciding to get themselves in power and abuse peoples trust?

There is a difference of scale, no more.

upsfan

Tony Danza wrote:

You know what he's getting it, you're just being pedantic.

jhegarty is hardly being pedantic, it's the garage doing the tax evasion here, not the customer.

Tony Danza

Anan1 wrote:

There is a difference of scale, no more.

Exactly, as is breaking the speed limit and murdering somebody (to use your example) are both illegal. Which have you done? Are you a bad person?

Tony Danza

upsfan wrote:

jhegarty is hardly being pedantic, it's the garage doing the tax evasion here, not the customer.

In that case the customer knows full well what's going on, if they really cared about their social duty, they would pay the higher price, forcing the garage to put the transaction through the books. The garage is just giving the customer an option on what they want to do. Everybody that read that post knew that, the garage is hardly blameless but nor is the customer and if you think the customer isn't guilty then you have yourself fooled.

Anan1

Tony Danza wrote:

Exactly, as is breaking the speed limit and murdering somebody (to use your example) are both illegal. Which have you done? Are you a bad person?

This thread was never about whether the owner of the car mentioned by the OP is a bad person. With respect, you cannot avoid the point for ever.

el tel

upsfan wrote:

jhegarty is hardly being pedantic, it's the garage doing the tax evasion here, not the customer.

Yes, but would he report them to the revenue? And if it was an excellent job and excellent value, would he go back to the *criminals* in the future?

Stark

steve06 wrote:

if you're offered a service for 2k or 1k cash.... you know they're not going to pay tax on it.

It's more a case of not putting the "you're going through insurance? Ka-ching." loading on the service usually.

Tony Danza

Anan1 wrote:

This thread was never about whether the owner of the car mentioned by the OP is a bad person. With respect, you cannot avoid the point for ever.

OK, you've convinced me, you must pay every single penny you owe to the state, in fact if I'm driving home and I go 5mph over the speed limit by mistake, I'm going to go into my local garda station and insist on them giving me 2 penalty points and a fine, because that's what an upstanding citizen does, pays what they owe to the state, as you have done you're entire life.

All I hope is that tonight when I eat my spuds, that the butter is already melted before it goes into my mouth.

Raiser

Its true, I dodged it gleefully and for as long as I could possibly manage, if you check the € total € payable, it drops nicely every month & between December and January it freefalls - I nearly wore out the online VRT calculator counting my savings

- Sure, when I drove past the local Hospital I'd sometimes notice a piece fall off and its no secret that the local schoolteachers around here cannot afford shoes - on dry days they've resorted to wearing pieces of cardboard sellotaped to their soles - but hey VRT is an unfair tax imposed by crooks and thieves. And it is those crooks and thieves who are the real reason why public services are in disarray

* Disclaimer: none of the above is true - all statements are factually incorrect and have been posted only to illustrate the fact that the Internet is awash with misleading, disinformation.

parsi

ambro25 wrote:

There's no VRT or road tax in France. It now goes on the fuel mostly (and insurance, a little). I'll not comment on the German stuff, which although I find mildly offensive for personal reasons, I understand to have been posted in jest.

Just 'thought you'd like to know (meant in a nice way )

How magnanimous. I really do care. Must add not in anyway slagging the French to the long list of things we can't do. 'Allo 'Allo must have been really hard to bear.

ambro25 wrote:

Parsi - btw, my question was dripping with sarcasm.

As was my response....

jhegarty

Tony Danza wrote:

In that case the customer knows full well what's going on, if they really cared about their social duty, they would pay the higher price, forcing the garage to put the transaction through the books. The garage is just giving the customer an option on what they want to do. Everybody that read that post knew that, the garage is hardly blameless but nor is the customer and if you think the customer isn't guilty then you have yourself fooled.

Why would you expect a garage that doesn't pay its taxes to start paying them just because you paid more....


And yes I would report them ... I have to pay my tax , why shouldn't they....

ambro25

parsi wrote:

How magnanimous. I really do care. Must add not in anyway slagging the French to the long list of things we can't do. 'Allo 'Allo must have been really hard to bear.

I have posted something for general (& your) knowledge, not to get at you. So what is your problem?

I don't have a problem with Allo Allo which is a pretty light-hearted TV sitcom, but I do have a problem with more politically-tainted comments about the period. I guess about the same as some or most Irish would have when jesting about British occupancy pre-1916.

Viz your earlier reply - no, the sarcasm didn't escape me. Nonetheless, I thought it useful to highlight the difference in tax regime, since you'd sought to make a parallel with Brits/Irish in France.

el tel

jhegarty

unkel

I'll leave it open for a bit, but keep it nice, folks...

parsi

ambro25 wrote:

I have posted something for general (& your) knowledge, not to get at you. So what the f*ck is your problem?

The Germans (in 1940, which is what you alluded to) evicted my family (who was given 1 hour to pack 2 suitcases - max allowed), disposessed my family of our ancestral family home, lands and possessions, and demolished half of it when they were eventually chased off. Because my family didn't want to become naturalised Germans in 1940. But then, that's also why I precised it was a personal matter and why I wouldn't make more of an issue - no reason to, as you wouldn't know the particulars. You can slag the French all you want, for all I care - there's just bounds of decency where particular historical "periods" and "parties" involved that are a bit closer to the bone than others.

So no, I don't have a problem with Allo Allo which is a pretty light-hearted TV sitcom, but I do have a problem with more politically-tainted comments about the period. I guess about the same as some or most Irish would have when jesting about British occupancy pre-1916.

Viz your earlier reply - no, the sarcasm didn't escape me. Nonetheless, I thought it useful to highlight the difference in tax regime, since you'd sought to make a parallel with Brits/Irish in France. Well, sorry me now.

Read it again:

I really do care -> means I care.

Allo Allo must have been hard to bear -> means that it must have been hard to bear (some people used get upset by the O'Reilly men in Fawlty Towers).

As someone else said it's all down to societal precepts -> means different things mean different things to folk.

Now, let's all do as Unkel says and get back to the matter in hand: which is : if VRT is not paid will it affect anybody ?

Judging by today's exchequer figures there must be a few bods in Finance wondering how to make up the deficit.

ambro25

parsi wrote:

Read it again:
etc

Didn't read that way to me, so just a misunderstanding I guess.

parsi wrote:

Now, let's all do as Unkel says and get back to the matter in hand: which is : if VRT is not paid will it affect anybody ?

There's some to take and some to leave about this.

With understanding the question to mean 'all of it', then considering the scale of this particular tax income, if it is not paid, then yes, I expect it would have an effect.

However, that's to be contrasted by the Exchequer's tax profit for the '06 tax year announced earlier this year: if total VRT income is less than said profit, then of course not. Anyone with the actual numbers at hand?

Without understanding the question to mean 'all of it', then considering the fact that VRT is paid on every single car sold new (at some stage) in Ireland and a vast majority of the 2nd hand imports, then it becomes a question of scale. Of course, that's not meant to 'excuse' those who don't pay it.

However, the situation wherein VRT is frankly unacceptable whichever you put it (bar the pedantic "it's teh LAW" approach, which skirts the issue and is worthless in the context of a debate about the pros and cons of the thing), is where people move residence to Ireland with their own car: the Law does provide a exemption, but the condition of 6 months ownership is arbitrary in the extreme. Though I have no doubt the intent behind this 6-month-ownership criteria is to ensure only bona fide cases qualify, it totally abstracts cases of 'more urgent' relocations (i.e. wherein the opportunity to move, and the actual move, takes place inside 3 months, and the car was *say* bought a month before that) - of which there are many. Some will say it's anecdotal - to which I'd respond that, in the grand scheme of things (the total number of cars in Ireland and the total tax income), probably no more anecdotal than voluntary VRT evaders.

parsi wrote:

Judging by today's exchequer figures there must be a few bods in Finance wondering how to make up the deficit.

The law of ever-diminishing returns at work

gyppo

ambro25 wrote:

However, the situation wherein VRT is frankly unacceptable whichever you put it (bar the pedantic "it's teh LAW" approach, which skirts the issue and is worthless in the context of a debate about the pros and cons of the thing)

I totally agree that VRT is taxation of questionable legality within the EU.
However, this very thread was not about the pros and cons of VRT, but ultimately whether people feel it is right/wrong to avoid paying VRT when required to do so.

I will repeat something I said earlier - breaking any law because you do not agree with it AND there is a financial incentive in doing so smells of a cop-out.
I'll ask the question - do people
a) determine not to obey this law as a matter of principle?
or
b) determine not to obey this law because they'll save a few quid?

I havent heard of anyone going to jail yet on VRT as a matter of principle.

How many posters here brought up the issue of VRT when politicians were knocking on their door a few weeks ago - sod all, I would imagine.
Instead, the paddy irishman mentality prevails - "ah sure feck it, what can I do, I'll chance me arm and maybe I'll get away with it." Exactly the same mentality that has hung around this country like the smell of a bad fart for decades.

If you dont agree with a law, talk to your elected representative and force a change, rather than sitting back waiting for someone else to do it. In other words, sh1t or get off the pot.

ambro25

gyppo wrote:

a) determine not to obey this law as a matter of principle?

Was the issue before me, then that would be my choice...

gyppo wrote:

b) determine not to obey this law because they'll save a few quid?

...and that would be the way my choice was perceived by any onlooker, such as the OP and many of the posters in here. For any reason amongst begrudgery, high morals, societal compliance, perceived slight, xenophobism, psychological self-satisfaction, etc. - whichever. So the (a) & (b) questions are somewhat redundant.

Exactly what this thread has demonstrated, like so many dozens or hundreds in the Motors section before that.

Mc-BigE

come on lads, pay up your VRT;)

http://www.irishexaminer.com/irishexaminer/pages/story.aspx-qqqg=business-qqqm=business-qqqa=business-qqqid=36460-qqqx=1.asp