Gormley tax plans in Sunday Times

what_car

JHMEG wrote: »

So you'd think it silly if I started telling you that your car is heavy on juice?

?
there would be feck all difference between a 1.6 and a 2.0 me thinks

spoke to someone who has a civic hybrid new... and


round town high 40's mpg
motorway, high 50's

no where near 70 mpg..

Ice_Box

VW Tiguan 1.4 Litre = 33 mpg
Honda Accord 2.2 Litre = 52mpg

Engine size must be removed from the equasion for the system to work.

Cars can be taxed based on emissions, saftey, price, and usage.

JHMEG

what_car wrote: »

?
there would be feck all difference between a 1.6 and a 2.0 me thinks

My Accord was a 1998 2.0 Coupe, automatic, about 27mpg around town, 31mpg on a run. Civic is a VTI, 32mpg around town, about 38mpg on a run. Civic therefore uses about 20% to 25% less fuel. In addition the Accord costed almost 50% more than the Civic to tax (€599 vs €414)

what_car wrote: »

spoke to someone who has a civic hybrid new... and


round town high 40's mpg
motorway, high 50's

no where near 70 mpg..

Well now you've spoken (sort of) to someone who has a Civic IMA in the family. 68 to 74mpg on a run, 52 to 58mpg around town.

CarLover

Just emailed Minister Gormley - I'll post up his response when/if I get it...

Marcus.Aurelius

As have I, I hope we get some response, if only to prove how arrogant and stupid he is. Or, if he really wants to succeed in cutting emissions, he'll look at the petrol tax system. He is a man of admirable intelligence, I think its about time he used it.

galwaytt

I emailed both Eamonn Ryan and John Gormally last night - we all need to do our bit, doesn't cost anything.......... no shouting mind, be civil and intelligent.

Matt Simis

galwaytt wrote: »

I emailed both Eamonn Ryan and John Gormally last night - we all need to do our bit, doesn't cost anything.......... no shouting mind, be civil and intelligent.

Probably should get his name right tho! I also sent him a mail.

wotisthere

GET A GRIP ! fARMERS AND THEIR ANIMALS PRODUCE MORE EMMISIONS THAN US DRIVERS .GET RID OF CAR TAX , HIT US AT THE PUMPS. pay for what you use !FF/GREEN/PD GOVERMENT CARS !GET A HYBRID YE MUPPETS.

MercMad

I havent the time to read the entire thread at the mo' but if they are going to raise the costs to some poeple they should also lower it for others, otherwaise they are plain guilty of creating a new money making scheme under the auspices of cleaning the environment !

I dont agree with taxing fuel, unless they drop some of the current taxes and duties also, otherwise transport costs will go up, and that will mean EVERYTHING will go up, and Joe Public will loose out again !

Why dont hey creat a company car/commerical vehicle tax. Most of these large SUV's are owned by companies/company directors and they wont blink at a 10% increase. Most companies can absorb such an increase anyway, whilst the rest can not !

Also am I the only one who thinks that the Public Tranport vehicleare are incredibly fuel inneficient. A lot of them anyway !! Also I think its about time the folk using same paid their share ............€2 to get from pretty much anywhere into town is not enough !

Get rid of the bus lanes and concrete up the tracks, and refuse to pay motor tax !!!

dodgyme

I admit to hating SUV's and taxing them is great but taxing a car with a 1.6 engine under the same principle in my eyes is wrong. Also are they going to use the cash to lower the tax on 1 and 1.2 litre cars, otherwise it is just a money making activity.

rebel.ranter

MercMad wrote: »

I dont agree with taxing fuel, unless they drop some of the current taxes and duties also, otherwise transport costs will go up, and that will mean EVERYTHING will go up, and Joe Public will loose out again !

Why dont hey creat a company car/commerical vehicle tax. Most of these large SUV's are owned by companies/company directors and they wont blink at a 10% increase. Most companies can absorb such an increase anyway, whilst the rest can not !

I believe the road tax system shoudl be scrapped in favour of the extra duty on fuel. It woudl mean less checking fo rthe Gardai & we coudl also put all those wasted resources in motor tax offices around the country to beter use. (It would probably result in strike action though).

There should be a re-bate for those in the haulage industry, etc. for the fuel they use, also based on truck emmissions levels, the more efficient your fleet the more you get back. It would mean that effectively only those that pollute needlessly pay the price.

macinalli

dodgyme wrote: »

I admit to hating SUV's and taxing them is great but taxing a car with a 1.6 engine under the same principle in my eyes is wrong. Also are they going to use the cash to lower the tax on 1 and 1.2 litre cars, otherwise it is just a money making activity.

I agree - the vast majority of SUVs are owned by people who don't need a car near that big. Personally I reckon they should be crucified in any new tax scheme. I also think they need to incentivise those driving small engined cars - there needs to be a reward for staying away from the gas guzzlers...

ambro25

MercMad wrote: »

I dont agree with taxing fuel, unless they drop some of the current taxes and duties also, otherwise transport costs will go up, and that will mean EVERYTHING will go up, and Joe Public will loose out again !

Why dont hey creat a company car/commerical vehicle tax. Most of these large SUV's are owned by companies/company directors and they wont blink at a 10% increase. Most companies can absorb such an increase anyway, whilst the rest can not !

Do you not think that companies hit by that (example) 10% tax hike would pass it on?

Sure, transport Cos. would be worst-hit and the effect would probably filter quicker down to the end-customer. But kid yourself not, the effect when all Cos. with company cars are hit by the (example) 10% hike would probably have the exact same effect.

All that said, what better incentive to promote alternative goods transport (and/or improve transport efficiency) - e.g. by rail, boat etc. ? Electric-powered artics ftw (and as we all know, electric is best for torque/towing and maintenance - just need to work some more on autonomy now).

IE is now a powerhouse of R&D, some of the best/brightest working in alternative energies (wind etc.). Put tax on fuel only, apportion proceeds (those over and above current GVT take-home, as I'm sure there would be) to University R&D into greener transport tech. That's green policy with a pinch of common sense

testicle

Someone suggested that this tax was anti-family. Large families are forced to buy MPVs and the like, which, as we all know have > 1.6 engines.

galwaytt

there's an element of truth in this, but it's basically driven by safety legislation. It's one seatbelt per person, but most 5-seaters won't fit 3 baby seats in the back, hence the need for 7 seaters. It's not that we need 7 seats per se, just that child seats etc are so big, you can't fit 3 side by side.

So, 3 kids is not a 'large' family. 2 kids + collect one of their friends puts you in the same spot. Would you want your kid to be the one without the seat belt............?

Triangle

Am i right in thinking the whole idea of road tax was for the upkeep of the roads? I.e. Signposts, Tarmacadam, Foot Paths etc?

If so where do the grrens get off moving this from upkeep of roads to an environmental tax?

Do small cars and large not do the same damage to the roads?
Should the greens not be looking at saving the environment elsewhere? like maybe more green zones, Electiricity generation, Better Public transport (or at a minimum Some public transport in some areas.


Am i on the wrong track here or is this where the tax is meant to go?

stevo86

since when is a 1.6 a "gas guzzler"?

RobAMerc

dcGT wrote: »

Another good idea. I'll be getting on to my local TD about this and giving them an ear-full, and hopefully there'll be a few email inboxes in the oireachtas today full of 'Motor Tax' emails

There are some great points (rants) being made on this thread, don't let them go to waste

TD contact details here:
http://www.oireachtas.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=8016&CatID=138

DC.

I mailed him months ago asking why the Maxol's 20% ethanol mix fuel did not incur 20% less excise duty than normal petrol.

I am still waiting - I took it as a screw you ( I will remember that )

mike65

Matt Cooper is talking about this www.todayfm.com

Mike.

RobAMerc

stevo86 wrote: »

since when is a 1.6 a "gas guzzler"?

There is very few Gas Guzzlers in Ireland of any sort.

Its an imported incorrect term used by the Greens to square tax increases with most of the begrudging Irish hoard as people here see:

Gas Guzzler = SUV = Rich Person = not me = begrudgery = happy I get taxed a little more coz he gets taxed way more

Gaz Guzzler = American 25ft 8.5litre V8 petrol SUV that struggles to get into double mpg figures

And 3000cc turbo diesel X5 is not one -but the average Irish pleb loves to hate them because they are Gas Guzzlers !

give me a break

Golferx

Apparently, in Ireland, a big car is anything with 1.6 litre engine, and above. Obviously a definition created by some idiot who knows nothing about cars.

Ask anyone with three teenage children how they are expected to fit them into a 1.4 litre car?

Most families with three small children will require an MPV of sorts, there are always occasions when one has to bring an extra passenger, Granny, little buddy, or whoever.

To all the critics of "gas-guzzlers", you are obviously educationally challenged. Very few cars in Ireland use Gas, most all use petrol or diesel.

If you succeed in eliminating all those horrible big engines, be satisfied that you, in your pukey little Corolla/Almera/whatever will be asked to make up the revenue shortfall as the Civil Service/Govt do not like reductions in tax-take.


There is already a "Polluter Pays" tax in Ireland, it's called Excise Duty/VAT, whatever the fancy term for fuel tax is. An increase in Motor Tax will not reduce the number of larger cars on the roads, there must be upwards of a million cars of 1.6l and above already running about the place. Imposing it on the existing cars is increasing the current tax, which is an "ownership" tax.


The Green sold their soul for power and FF are grinning like cats at all the bad press they are going to get.

Turbulent Bill

Triangle wrote: »

Am i right in thinking the whole idea of road tax was for the upkeep of the roads? I.e. Signposts, Tarmacadam, Foot Paths etc?

If so where do the grrens get off moving this from upkeep of roads to an environmental tax?

Do small cars and large not do the same damage to the roads?
Should the greens not be looking at saving the environment elsewhere? like maybe more green zones, Electiricity generation, Better Public transport (or at a minimum Some public transport in some areas.


Am i on the wrong track here or is this where the tax is meant to go?

It's motor tax, i.e., your vehicle is taxed rather than your use of the road. As far as I know, the money goes into the general tax pool, and doesn't directly go back into the roads infrastructure. I'm not sure if the Government gives (or has to give) reasons for particular taxes (apart from obvious ones like smoking).

The damage caused by a vehicle to the road surface is proportional to the fourth power of its weight, which explains why heavy vehicles carve up small laneways so badly.

MOH

Golferx wrote: »

Apparently, in Ireland, a big car is anything with 1.6 litre engine, and above. Obviously a definition created by some idiot who knows nothing about cars.

Ask anyone with three teenage children how they are expected to fit them into a 1.4 litre car?

Most families with three small children will require an MPV of sorts, there are always occasions when one has to bring an extra passenger, Granny, little buddy, or whoever.

Not attacking your post, but curious: what did people do 15/20 years ago when they had large families but didn't have MPVs?

Golferx

MOH wrote: »

Not attacking your post, but curious: what did people do 15/20 years ago when they had large families but didn't have MPVs?

Well, the first Espace came out in 1984, but was a very small seller.


People shoved their children into the back of whatever they had, without any child restraints of any kind. The baby of the family was usually sat on Mam's lap in the front of the car, being the first airbag. It wasn't uncommon to see up to 6 or 7 of a family crammed into a VW Beetle, for example.

Also it wasn't uncommon to see three abreast in the front of many cars, again completely without the use of safety restraints.

For those who could afford it the predecessor of the VW Caravelle was the vehicle of choice, with a few in the Nissan Serena or a Transit minibus.


Times have changed, people are wiser, and safety is much more a focus that it was in those days. Unfortunately the powers that be don't assist in ensuring people have safe transport. Look at the tax on safety features in cars? Up to 100% tax. Ridiculous.

peasant

MOH wrote: »

Not attacking your post, but curious: what did people do 15/20 years ago when they had large families but didn't have MPVs?

They didn't have bulky child seats either, so kids could be piled up three deep in the back of the Beetle,

But, rightly so, this is illegal now.

EDIT ...what GolferX said

Alun

MOH wrote: »

Not attacking your post, but curious: what did people do 15/20 years ago when they had large families but didn't have MPVs?

I was wondering that too. I remember me, my sister and our parents plus the dog and all our luggage driving from central England down to Cornwall on our holidays in a 997cc Ford Anglia back in the late 60's / early 70's, so it can be done.

NBar

Alun wrote: »

I was wondering that too. I remember me, my sister and our parents plus the dog and all our luggage driving from central England down to Cornwall on our holidays in a 997cc Ford Anglia back in the late 60's / early 70's, so it can be done.

Yeah but not safely and legally

mike65

Pah, do it in a Hillman Husky like we did in the 60s! Thats motoring!

Mike.

mike65

Full discussion on Today FM with Friends of the Earth and SIMI reps.

http://www.radioireland.ie/lastword/12112007-17.wmv the piece starts 4/5 mins in.

Mike.

Gatster

Originally Posted by JHMEG
Did any of you need a 3.2 etc? Would a 1.6 not have done A-to-B equally as well? If it's bought for "driving pleasure", well why not keep it for real driving as a track day car and drive it only around Mondello. That way you don't have to pay VRT or road tax etc.

Seriously, why do you even bother posting this sort of thing - from what I can gather most people who post here don't see cars as purely a form of transport. Who wants to drive round in a 500cc Hybrid people carrier, which from most of your posts is what you'd ideally like us all to drive eventually . Why shouldn't people have a nice, large engined car (if they can afford it and don't bitch about the running costs - I agree about taxing fuel as a fairer system, BTW)? In a cross country dash, most 1.6 cars don't do it as well as quick, nicely sorted, larger engined car.