New VRT Bands in todays Indo

Aidan Mc

j2dab wrote: »

Are these 100%?

Also, is there any good websites to check list of "g CO2/km" on different cars?

No they're not official, only published in today's Sunday Indo. But I doubt they made them up themselves, though of course it is technically a possibility.

Manufacturers websites should show you the list, as does carzone if you go into the car details. I suspect that over the coming months we'll see many pricelists and websites showing what category the cars fit into. That could depend on how the government decide to legislate it.

Golferx

colm_mcm wrote: »

If anyone asks me what the VRT on a car is, I have no problem telling them. they never do, unless it's for a pickup and it affects the VAT figure.

The VRT for every particular car is decided before the car is even sold. Each car gets a "birth cert" with the model type and any factory options on it.
when the car is being registered online, the statistical code and birth cert number for the car is entered, this tells ROS exactly what model it is, all details like chassis number. and how much VRT is to be charged.
Because of this, the dealer has no control on how much VRT is applied, and whether a certain model of car is sold for €20,000 or €25,000 the VRT paid is exactly the same.

You'll tell them, IF YOU ARE ASKED ? Which is my point, SIMI do not tell the customer voluntarily.

OMSP is determined (how ironic is that) before the car goes on sale. It is not the list price of the car but something close to it, something in the order of 90% of the List price, so the dealer, if he can get more than the OMSP can keep the difference, only having to pay the original sum, i.e. VRT of OMSP.

Anyone remember MDL being before the Courts a few years back? They agreed an OMSP with Revenue but were selling the cars at a much higher figure, too high for Revenue.

I go back to my previous point, OMSP is a lie, it is a fraud and SIMI are complicit. They do not care about VRT, they do not care about Road safety, they are only concerned with making big profits for it's members. They represent the sellers, not the consumers.


BTW, my new car, in January, would be in the 36% bracket, by the calculations offered. But, what if the seller decided to sell it at the same list price? The net effect would be no increase in cost to the buyer, but a higher tax take for Revenue.

E92

HarryHood wrote: »

So having put down a grand for a 08 316 should I cancel the order and wait another year to buy or?

Any final thoughts/advice?

I'm not going to tell you what to do with your own money, but this is some of what I posted in response to your question on Page2, Post Nr 34:

E92 wrote:

Well the 316i's emissions aren't on the BMW website(the Efficient Dynamics ones certainly are not) but a reasonable guess is that they certainly won't be any more than the 318i's 142 g/km. The 316i ES retails for €38,300. The 118i pollutes 140 g/km, while the 116i pollutes 139 g/km. So lets for arguments sake say that the 316i pollutes 141 g/km then(remember I can't promise this as I don't have the figures, so I'm making an educated guess) VRT will have fallen from 25% to 20%.

The 316i ES will now cost €35,906.25 so around €35,900 or €2,400 less than the PV of the car. However, what is far more interesting is the price of a 318i ES. It goes from €40,650 to €35,568.75 so around €35,600 so according to my calculations the 318i will actually be around €300 cheaper to buy than the 316i. So the next logical question is to ask why would you pay more for a car that is slower?

It gets better than this, lets take the 318d. The 318d ES is currently yours for €44,650. However under the new regime, it's VRT rate falls from 30% to 16%. So it now costs €37,208.33 or around €37,200 which is actually a grand less than the current price of the 316i ES. So you could have a car with 22 extra bhp, a car that averages a claimed 60.1 mpg, and a car with 103 lb ft of torque(221 vs 118 for the 316i). Torque is the main thing that gets a car to overtake quickly, so again I ask the question why would you get a 316i for early next year, when if you were prepared to wait till July, you could buy a petrol with more power and likely no less economical, and have around €3,000 to spare(318i) and still be cheaper than a 316i adjusted for the new rates or still save money(compared to the current price of a 316i) and have a car with a huge increase in torque and 12 mpg better?(318d)

Henry Ford III

Aidan Mc wrote: »

let's not get into how good or bad renaults are! i was just trying to give an example of the differences across different engines & models

I know. I was only slagging. Totally out of character

p.s. Renaults suck

.Longshanks.

smcgiff wrote: »

I don't think so.

Personally I'll be pissed if I have to pay old VRT rates and new road tax after the upcoming budget on my 159.

In my case (I think) it will work in my favour now that i'm changing in Jan '08. Im trading in a small diesel engined car and the VRT changes will mean that come July it will be cheaper to buy new - knock on effect is that it reduces the value of my current car after July. (VRT going down from 25% to 16%)
I'm changing to a 1.6 turbo car in Jan '08, which the VRT on will increase from 25% to 28%. I actually predicted this back in August!

After some quick sums I think the difference in changing cars in Jan, as apposed to July '08, could be about €2k to me:eek:

JHMEG

colm_mcm wrote: »

you get the UK VAT back. how does giving money to the government through ROS every time a car is registered benefit SIMI or it's members?

Does this "arrangement", where VAT has to be paid twice, exist on any other items that can be bought in the EU? If not, why not?

colm_mcm

Golferx wrote: »

You'll tell them, IF YOU ARE ASKED ? Which is my point, SIMI do not tell the customer voluntarily.

OMSP is determined (how ironic is that) before the car goes on sale. It is not the list price of the car but something close to it, something in the order of 90% of the List price, so the dealer, if he can get more than the OMSP can keep the difference, only having to pay the original sum, i.e. VRT of OMSP.

Anyone remember MDL being before the Courts a few years back? They agreed an OMSP with Revenue but were selling the cars at a much higher figure, too high for Revenue.

I go back to my previous point, OMSP is a lie, it is a fraud and SIMI are complicit. They do not care about VRT, they do not care about Road safety, they are only concerned with making big profits for it's members. They represent the sellers, not the consumers.


BTW, my new car, in January, would be in the 36% bracket, by the calculations offered. But, what if the seller decided to sell it at the same list price? The net effect would be no increase in cost to the buyer, but a higher tax take for Revenue.

I don't mention the VRT amount because customers don't care what portion is VAT and what portion is VRT, all they care is how much the car costs in total. What possible benefit could knowing the amount of VAT or VRT on a particular car be to you when deciding on a new car, unless you could claim it back.

To clarify, "The VRT for every particular car is decided before the car is even sold" means that each particular model has a VRT amount, and if the garage sells the car for over or under the OMSP it still pays that VRT amount.

Re: your new car for 08. If the distributor keeps the list price and supply price to dealers the same, but the VRT goes up, then the dealer simply has less margin.
__________________

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

I'm not going to tell you what to do with your own money, but this is some of what I posted in response to your question on Page2, Post Nr 34:

It's quite possible that BMW aren't going to EfficientDynamic-ise the 316, and that could be the reason why there are no figures on BMW's site.

E92

JHMEG wrote: »

It's quite possible that BMW aren't going to EfficientDynamic-ise the 316, and that could be the reason why there are no figures on BMW's site.

Which if true would make it all the more pointless to get a 316i. However I would strongly suggest it's not, as per BMW's website it has 122 bhp(BMW Ireland says it has 121 but it has 122) and the 116i which has the aforementioned EfficientDynamics also has 122 bhp(it had 115 bhp like the pre facelift 316i when it had no EfficientDynamics), so I would be 99% sure 316i has.

In saying all that, even if it does have them, see my earlier post on this page, the 316i turns out to be dearer than the 318i when adjusted for new VRT rates(assuming they both lie in the same VRT bracket of course;)), so I can't see either way why anyone would bother with it over a 318i.

EDIT: I've just seen that HarryHood has been told by BMW that the 316i does indeed do 142 g/km, so it must have been EfficientDynamicised. Still considering that once VRT is adjusted, the 316i will actually be dearer than the 318i, the future for it looks very bleak indeed come 1/7/08.

ninty9er

BrianD3 wrote: »

A huge issue it is alright - I'm surprised the Indo didn't put it on the front page.

They did!

hotshots85 wrote: »

i also think that its just a fianna fail give "the greens something "after poolebeg got the go ahead .

This has been coming down the line since before the election...pushed from the backbench and Ógra within the party. I was one of the members whose cumann submitted a proposal to the deaprtment.

JHMEG

ninty9er wrote:

pushed from the backbench and Ógra within the party. I was one of the members whose cumann submitted a proposal to the deaprtment.

Reading stuff like this makes me truly embarrassed to be Irish.

copacetic

JHMEG wrote: »

Reading stuff like this makes me truly embarrassed to be Irish.

but sure tisn't it great to see the ógra and backbench pushing something that the rest of the country has been saying for years? they must be so proud.

Oilrig

JHMEG, I feel your pain.

I was involved as an outside technical adviser in the "discussions" back in the '90's regarding the establishment of the technical criteria to be used in the NCT tests. The politicos shredded the original proposal on the basis that they would never get elected again if they were implemented.

One thing is for sure, whatever tinkering they do with road tax rates and VRT rates - very different beasts as the revenue goes to different coffers - there will be no reduction in the overall take. I predict an increase for just about everyone, with guzzlers getting hammered. Same circus - different clowns.

Scrap road tax. Tax fuel. User pays. Use it efficiently, pay less. Commonsense answer but politically unpalatable.

Price of a "democracy" unfortunately.

... don't get me going on 38% pay increases :mad:

If we want to pay the "going rate" for our leaders why don't we get leaders of the calibre of the Sean Quinns, etc. ? instead of the accountant that stuffs money in his mattress, doesn't keep records, etc etc.

what_car

testicle wrote: »

The Accord diesel appears to be dropping from 30% to 20% VRT so, as it's 143 g/km

for the accord petrol 2.0 on my logbook it states
V7. Co2 emissions g/km 200

i think currently that the 2.0 petrol accord (1998cc) falls under 30%

by the ops figures thats gonna be 32% next year

gulp:eek:

what other cars have Co2 emissions g/km 200? any more examples?

Aidan Mc

Oilrig wrote: »

Scrap road tax. Tax fuel. User pays. Use it efficiently, pay less. Commonsense answer but politically unpalatable.

I see where you're going as regard political interference, though to some extent we (as a nation) voted them in there. But that's not the issue here.

Scrapping VRT and road tax and putting the tax on fuel would be the ideal solution if you were starting at the very beginning. If you were to do it, the price of new cars would fall, but suddenly every second hand car (i.e. mine and yours too) would be worth significantly less, and we'd already have paid our contribution to VRT and motor tax, and then we'd be asked to pay higher tax on fuel too. The problem is that it's very hard to introduce such a radical system because it isn't very equitable, and if I had just spent my hard earned money on a car taxed under the old system and then had to live with the fact the price of a brand new one could soon be 30% less than I paid AND I've to pay higher fuel tax, I wouldn't find it very equitable.

While ideally I'd love to see such a system whereby you pay your taxes as conveniently and fairly as on your fuel, it just won't work here (regardless of who is in government, etc etc etc). That's just what I think though

ninty9er

JHMEG wrote: »

Reading stuff like this makes me truly embarrassed to be Irish.

Sometimes the Irish people make me sick...they bitch moan and set out to demoralise anyone who takes an active interest while sitting on their arse and do fu<k all themselves!

Do you fall into that category??

Without political "interference" nothing would ever happen and we'd all still be living in caves around Lough Gur and similar prehistoric settlements.

Grow up

cancan

So everyone who bought a fuel efficient car in the last few years.

Your attempt at being green just got you a big depreciation hit!

Nice one.

I'm off to build a few coal power stations as they obviously do nothing to the environment.

Santa Claus

ninty9er wrote: »

Without political "interference" nothing would ever happen and we'd all still be living in caves around Lough Gur and similar prehistoric settlements.

Grow up

Some would say that without politicians to ruin things we'd all be living in a Utopia....and as you're a member of young fianna fail it's you that has the growing up to do !


Surely a better move before they decide to tax fuel is to add new road tax categories above 3 litre. Current system stops at "3,001 or more" which is 1343 per year, so if someone wants to buy a 6 litre Bentley/Aston Martin/Ferrari then they can afford to pay 3 or 4k a year in road tax !

Another VRT change I'd like to see is getting rid of the 50€ VRT for "commercial vehicles"....I've seen 3 Dodge Rams (6 litre fuel guzzling pickups) in the past month in Dublin that all qualify for the 50€ VRT!


How about the goverment start leading by example and replace all those big mercs with lower emission hybrids, then we'll see how keen they are to cut emmisions !

kaiser sauze

smcgiff wrote: »

One thing to add here. We've been assuming the purchaser will pick up 100% of the reducion in VRT. I imagine the Car dealers will increase the base cost somewhat.

At the moment Irish ALFA's are discounted quite a bit compared to UK Alfas. Whereas BMW base cost is quite a bit more expensive here than in the UK. So, even at the moment they're not standard across Europe, and I imagine the change in VRT will impact base cost.

I'm amazed that the bigger issue of whether these reductions will actually make it to us, the consumer, has not been talked about more than the poster quoted and one other, if I recall rightly.

I really can't see our struggling dealers, with their tiny margins, being able to pass on a decrease in price that does not affect their bottom line.
[/end sarcasm]

Henry Ford III wrote: »

I know. I was only slagging. Totally out of character

p.s. Renaults suck

I disagree. :cool: Changed from a VW to one a year ago.

I'm. Never. Going. Back.

TheBigEvil

I think people are getting a bit carried away with how much they think new cars are going to drop in price, because of the new VRT rates being suggested

There are still too many variables left in the equation:

1) How will the new VRT rates actually be calculated. Everyone is assuming that they will be calculated in exactly the same way as they currently are. Can you see the government tax take being reduced?? Who are we kidding here!

2) What changes are happening to the Motor Tax Rates. Still only rumoured to be a 10% blanket increase. Not very "green" is it, taxing the larger engines (1.8l, 2.0l, 2.2, 2.5l) heavily as polluters when they are generally more efficient and produce less CO2 than a 1.4l or 1.6l which are appearing in more and more saloon type cars.

3) The pre-tax price of a car in Ireland is one of the cheapest in Europe. Has to be so the aren't so rediculously priced after all the VRT and VAT are added on. Somehow or other, don't be suprised to see these base prices increase if VRT is reduced, thus negating the effect of any benifits. The car manufacturers shipping to us would only jump at the chance to increase there margins here.

It really is a case of wait and see, although I'd say either way it will have an effect on car sales for the eraly part of the year. People more likely to wait until June/July 08 to see exactly what effect this will all have.

JHMEG

ninty9er wrote: »

Sometimes the Irish people make me sick...they bitch moan and set out to demoralise anyone who takes an active interest while sitting on their arse and do fu<k all themselves!

Do you fall into that category??

Nope. At every possible opportunity I vote for ABFF.

ninty9er wrote: »

Without political "interference"

Political interference has given us the banana republic we have today.

mike65

If anyone would like to check Co2 output for thier car

http://www.smmtco2.co.uk/co2search2.asp

Mike.

Henry Ford III

Ford are developing an Econetic Mondeo TDCI diesel, for launch in 2008, which will have CO2 emissions of less than 140 g/km.

16% VRT anyone?

smcgiff

Henry Ford III wrote: »

16% VRT anyone?

Now, if they stick it into the Volvo we might be on to something!

JHMEG

hmboards wrote: »

0-120 ... 14%

Mmm. Civic IMA/Hybrid is currently 11.25%. Altho I think there should be another band for less than 100g.. I might get an 80g Insight if there was!

Hotwheels

Nice link Mike65
My 159 1.9 16V JTDm is 159 g/km

mike65 wrote: »

If anyone would like to check Co2 output for thier car

http://www.smmtco2.co.uk/co2search2.asp

Mike.

E92

smcgiff wrote: »

Now, if they stick it into the Volvo we might be on to something!

What about the 62.8 mpg C30 Efficiency! See here

testicle

what_car wrote: »

for the accord petrol 2.0 on my logbook it states
V7. Co2 emissions g/km 200

i think currently that the 2.0 petrol accord (1998cc) falls under 30%

by the ops figures thats gonna be 32% next year

gulp:eek:

what other cars have Co2 emissions g/km 200? any more examples?

I was on about the 2.2 CDTi diesel version!

mike65

what other cars have Co2 emissions g/km 200? any more examples?

Aston Martin Vanquish 448 g/km

Mike.

Golferx

Henry Ford III wrote: »

Ford are developing an Econetic Mondeo TDCI diesel, for launch in 2008, which will have CO2 emissions of less than 140 g/km.

16% VRT anyone?

Yeah, but 16% of what?

As long as we have the current calculation method then it's open to abuse.

Does everyone who hopes to buy a cheaper car (i.e. lower percentage VRT) realise that the first line in the request for submissions from Revenue contained the following phrase "any changes must be revenue neutral", i.e. for every Range Rover sale that is prevented there will be approximately €60,000 in tax revenue that will have to be made up from the "cleaner" cars.

If this Govt initiative (I have using such a word for a shower of tossers with no initiative) is successful Ireland will, in a few years time, have a fleet of low emission vehicles contributing the exact same tax as the current fleet. The effect will be to raise the tax take from so-called cleaner cars.

I'm slowly coming around to the idea we should not have signed up to Kyoto while we still have the USA, INDIA and CHINA polluting the bejaysus out of our planet. Ireland's effect on global warming is negligible.


How about the Govt doing something like reducing the number of flights from Dublin Airport by, let's say, 2 flights per day. That would reduce fuel consumption by something in the region of 30,000 tonnes per year. There are so many unnecessary flights out of the country there would be no problem reducing them by a few.;