New VRT Bands in todays Indo

CorporalCarrot

pburns wrote: »

290gm CO2/km?

The guy doing >20,000 a year in a diesel Mondeo (mostly stuck in traffic) may be pumping out more CO2 than you but he doesn't exactly have much choice in the matter if that's part of his work.

I like cars as well but if someone actually WANTS to drive something that pumps out 290gm CO2/km most ordinary Joes will say they can damn well afford to contribute a nice juicy lump of VRT to the government - a balancing out the distribution of wealth blah blah...

OK, strictly speaking I can see your point. But I'm afraid not too many people will have sympathy with the fat cat who complains 'cos it's gonna cost more to drive a 4.0 litre V8 Bimmer M3 (which roughly equates to your stated CO2 output).

Between the 'anti-fast' lobby and the environmentalists I don't really see the point of a such a car anyway. If they get their way we'll all be driving 1.5 litre diesels.:(

You see, thats typical of the begrudging nature of Ireland. Its easy to label everyone who likes a nice car as a "fat cat" that can automatically afford a big tax increase. You know, having made a success of your life does not automatically make you fair game for whatever inequitable tax that comes along. Also, I know lots of people who aren't exactly rich but don't smoke or drink and like to put their money into their passion.

As it happens I have no issue with progressive taxation and pay more than my fair share, but if thats what it is then call it that, don't dress it up as environmentalism just to rationalise John Gormleys existence in this rag tag government.

By the way, you make some fundamental assumptions there that are totally flawed. (1) That the guy driving 20k HAS TO do it, and (2) That I am not making sacrifices in my method of transport for other reasons (health etc).

And although I picked extremes, the analysis is the same if you pick, say 150g cars and 200g cars. The person with the nominally lower co2 output could be doing far more enviromental damage but doesnt get penalised for it. Its not just fat cats who are getting hit here. Its anyone who chooses a greener lifestyle but needs a car for certain aspects of their life who is subsidising others.

As for the point of such cars, well what if I like to do a lot fo track driving? We going to ban all motorsports while we're at it?


C

E92

peasant wrote: »

Do you really think anyone in the governement is going to give a fiddlers fart?

Nope, because the people that run our Government wouldn't know that such an analomy exists. But I guess if they do find out, they'll slap the higher rate on all models(altho Opel could just delete 19s from the option list and then we're back to where we started)

galwaytt

well, for what it's worth - as soon as Toyota start making this hybrid available, I'll quite happily sign up for one:

peasant

E92 wrote: »

Nope, because the people that run our Government wouldn't know that such an analomy exists. But I guess if they do find out, they'll slap the higher rate on all models(altho Opel could just delete 19s from the option list and then we're back to where we started)

I see you're learning fast

copacetic

E92 wrote: »

Nope, because the people that run our Government wouldn't know that such an analomy exists. But I guess if they do find out, they'll slap the higher rate on all models(altho Opel could just delete 19s from the option list and then we're back to where we started)

what they will do it charge vrt based on what is std, there are different rates on auto as opposed to manual cars and I know the rate on my car was different as it has bigger wheels than the base model. when you go to the calculator it asks for the spec of the model and lists all the available std spec ones. they may not catch options but otherwise it will be caught.

Oilrig

Can someone blow the fog away on the hybrid emission mystery for me? I drive a 190g/km "old" petrol car at the mo. My commute is rural, about 25kms each way. Out of curiosity I looked at a Prius but apparently my type of journey would cost me as much in fuel - as the leccy bit would be unemployed and have to be hauled around 'unnecessarily' ?

What about the bigger versions doing cross country runs?

I assume the official figures are based on the extra urban cycle, but what are the benefits (if any) for someone (rep for eg) using a hybrid on long haul?

Doesn't this distort the issue?

You would think that once you exit a 60kph zone the hybrid bits are redundant? don't give me the regenerative stuff as you can't use it for the main journey.

astraboy

CorporalCarrot wrote: »

Sometimes it sickens me being a motor enthusiast in this country.

C

Join the club my friend, being a car enthusiast in Ireland is akin to having a rare disease. I'm sick of reading UK car magazines and looking at their prices compared to here. Anyone with the "nerve" to desire a car over 1.6 with decent power in Ireland is viewed as an enemy to the environment and a soft touch on the tax front. I also only drive probably 3 days a week, I walk to college every day yet pay high tax on my 1.8 because I enjoy a bit of power on my jaunts.

Before people get on their high horses, yes I knew the tax when I bought it, it still does not make it easy to swallow though, knowing people in older smaller cars are using the road more and paying less tax. A tax on fuel is the way forward. I would have no problem getting decent public transport to work(if such a thing exists in Ireland!) and keeping my car for weekends, once it was a fun powerful car!:D Paying tax on CC and with no mileage limits is silly in this day and age.

As for VRT, its been a scam since Heir Bertie thought of it 1st day. :mad: Dressing it up as an environmental measure does not make it right!

MarkN

Great ! My BMW 335 puts out 228! I suppose if I can sell you a 2 year old one in '09 a fair bit cheaper than a dealer can sell you a new one then I could be quids in though??

mike65

http://www.radioireland.ie/lastword/26112007-17.wmv

its a low res 5.3mb wmv file, fast forwards to 35 mins.

The SIMI chap seems only concerned about imports.

Mike.

E92

Oilrig wrote: »

Can someone blow the fog away on the hybrid emission mystery for me? I drive a 190g/km "old" petrol car at the mo. My commute is rural, about 25kms each way. Out of curiosity I looked at a Prius but apparently my type of journey would cost me as much in fuel - as the leccy bit would be unemployed and have to be hauled around 'unnecessarily' ?

What about the bigger versions doing cross country runs?

I assume the official figures are based on the extra urban cycle, but what are the benefits (if any) for someone (rep for eg) using a hybrid on long haul?

Doesn't this distort the issue?

You would think that once you exit a 60kph zone the hybrid bits are redundant? don't give me the regenerative stuff as you can't use it for the main journey.

Well if you look at JHMEG's sig you will see that they *can* do 70+ mpg.

However, there are plenty of diesels on the way soon that come very close to matching the Prius on mpg(BMW 118d(60.1 mpg), 120d(58.9 mpg) already on sale), soon to be launched Volvo C30 Efficiency(62.8 mpg),Ford Focus ECOnetic(the same AFAIK), Golf Bluemotion(same AFAIK), Audi A3 TDI'e'(same), and the Bluemotion VW Polo(74.3 mpg) and 99 g/km of CO2(Prius does 104) and MINI Cooper D(72.4 mpg) and same CO2 as Prius. There are 2 health warnings about both, for hybrids the battery issue(the enviornmental impact of battery making and disposal which seems to be ignored) and in the diesel the increase in Particulates and Nitrous Oxide, so they are bad for the enviornment that way.

Oilrig

Guys, you know, sometimes I wonder if the senior mandarins in the various civil servant departments have migrated their mindsets in tune with our economic fortunes of late? They still seem fixated on capturing revenue above all else - (terrified by the memories of the bad old days) whereas our similarly wealthy peers have long ago moved on to a more balanced view of where they want to be. Call it incentive based rather than punitive, whatever. We need a mindset change by the decision makers in order to move forward. Vision...

Given the money's so good, is there any chance we may see a political leader with this quality at some stage in the not too distant future

:rolleyes:

PS don't give me the 'Inda' instead of Biffo argument, there Must be someone out there?

Oilrig

E92, you missed my point. I've no doubt they can do fantastic MPG around X circumstance, my point is what would they do on a daily run of 100km with no urban to speak of?

JHMEG

Oilrig wrote: »

Can someone blow the fog away on the hybrid emission mystery for me? I drive a 190g/km "old" petrol car at the mo. My commute is rural, about 25kms each way. Out of curiosity I looked at a Prius but apparently my type of journey would cost me as much in fuel - as the leccy bit would be unemployed and have to be hauled around 'unnecessarily' ?

What about the bigger versions doing cross country runs?

I assume the official figures are based on the extra urban cycle, but what are the benefits (if any) for someone (rep for eg) using a hybrid on long haul?

Doesn't this distort the issue?

You would think that once you exit a 60kph zone the hybrid bits are redundant? don't give me the regenerative stuff as you can't use it for the main journey.

While they excel in urban environs, due to the stop-start stuff, they also excel on long-distance runs because the petrol engines are better than standard cars for various reasons (Toyota is due to Atkinson cycle, Honda is due to cylinder deactivation).

My wife's 2003 Civic IMA does 70mpg, as per my sig, on a handy enough trip of around 100km. Going on that I think a hybrid would suit you perfectly!

Without looking it up the IMA is 114g CO2 per km.

I have a '00 Civic VTI myself. I'm actually considering getting a Honda Insight, 80g CO2/km, to replace it. 97mpg seems handy enough, and they can be had for less than 10k now.

Aidan Mc

If the government were to take on any of the opinions or proposals suggested by people on these boards, surely that could technically be seen as interference because they took on the opinion of somebody who is not actually a Revenue official who presumably has some purpose in their job.

If they were to ask every person in the country what they considered the best method, nothing would happen. I can fully understand the person with a car putting out 220g/km yet travelling 5000kms versus a person with a car doing 120g/km doing 25000kms. You're right, it's not very fair at all. I think most people would acknowledge that putting the tax on fuel would be best because it peanalises those who use the most of it and means that those who choose to drive very little pay little tax. This is the perfect solution, in a perfect world. But it is, in my view, and at the moment at least, very unworkable. Back to something I stated earlier:

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.

That's just what I think though. Can people see where I'm coming from with this?

ninty9er

Aidan Mc wrote: »

If the government were to take on any of the opinions or proposals suggested by people on these boards, surely that could technically be seen as interference because they took on the opinion of somebody who is not actually a Revenue official who presumably has some purpose in their job.

If they were to ask every person in the country what they considered the best method, nothing would happen.

They did ask every person in the country what they thought. They got 60 responses, and if I'm not mistaken about 10 of them eminated from these boards!

Aidan Mc

ninty9er wrote: »

They did ask every person in the country what they thought. They got 60 responses, and if I'm not mistaken about 10 of them eminated from these boards!

Well then let's look at this like with elections - if you don't vote you have no grounds to complain. So if you didn't make a submission about these reforms then you've no grounds to complain. If you didn't do both these things then go back to wherever you've been hiding while all this was happening.

CorporalCarrot

Aidan

The fact that it might be a wrench to put all the tax immediately on fuel should not deflect a courageous politician from doing whats right. Remember, while the value of your car might immediately fall, in the long run, it will make no difference to you because your next car will be that much cheaper.

Also, to lessen the blow they could phase it in over a number of years, or introduce rebates for those who had bought new within a particular timeframe (as they did with some stamp duty reforms).

Finally, remember a few years ago the situation with taxi drivers in Dublin? All the crying because of those who had unfortunately purchased plates for 80k just prior to deregulation. It was still the right decision to deregulate.

Taxing fuel, even if revenue neutral from an exchequer point of view would make the most difference to peoples behaviour because they would feel it every week at the pumps. Whereas now they just stump up the big car loan or whatever and kind of forget about the tax they are actually paying because it disappears from their account on a monthly basis.

C

E92

Oilrig wrote: »

E92, you missed my point. I've no doubt they can do fantastic MPG around X circumstance, my point is what would they do on a daily run of 100km with no urban to speak of?

Well the 118d averages a claimed 70.6 mpg(which you will duly note is 3.3 mpg more than what the Prius averages in out of town driving), the 120d averages 68.9 mpg(the Prius averages 67.3), MINI Cooper D averages 80.7 mpg, and the others haven't gone on sale yet so I don't know. They've only told us what the average is meant to be.

So it is clear that diesels would indeed outperform a Prius in out of town driving, however these are only guides, because the tests are simplistic and may suit one car more than another etc. Btw I'm using the extra urban figures, which are supposed to be reflective of what you will get in out of town driving but it is a simplistic test so probably won't be what you will really get.

Aidan Mc

CorporalCarrot wrote: »

Aidan

The fact that it might be a wrench to put all the tax immediately on fuel should not deflect a courageous politician from doing whats right. Remember, while the value of your car might immediately fall, in the long run, it will make no difference to you because your next car will be that much cheaper.

Also, to lessen the blow they could phase it in over a number of years, or introduce rebates for those who had bought new within a particular timeframe (as they did with some stamp duty reforms).

Finally, remember a few years ago the situation with taxi drivers in Dublin? All the crying because of those who had unfortunately purchased plates for 80k just prior to deregulation. It was still the right decision to deregulate.

Taxing fuel, even if revenue neutral from an exchequer point of view would make the most difference to peoples behaviour because they would feel it every week at the pumps. Whereas now they just stump up the big car loan or whatever and kind of forget about the tax they are actually paying because it disappears from their account on a monthly basis.

C

Agreed.

It's not going to happen any time soon though

pburns

CorporalCarrot wrote: »

You see, thats typical of the begrudging nature of Ireland. Its easy to label everyone who likes a nice car as a "fat cat" that can automatically afford a big tax increase. You know, having made a success of your life does not automatically make you fair game for whatever inequitable tax that comes along. Also, I know lots of people who aren't exactly rich but don't smoke or drink and like to put their money into their passion.

As it happens I have no issue with progressive taxation and pay more than my fair share, but if thats what it is then call it that, don't dress it up as environmentalism just to rationalise John Gormleys existence in this rag tag government.

By the way, you make some fundamental assumptions there that are totally flawed. (1) That the guy driving 20k HAS TO do it, and (2) That I am not making sacrifices in my method of transport for other reasons (health etc).

And although I picked extremes, the analysis is the same if you pick, say 150g cars and 200g cars. The person with the nominally lower co2 output could be doing far more enviromental damage but doesnt get penalised for it. Its not just fat cats who are getting hit here. Its anyone who chooses a greener lifestyle but needs a car for certain aspects of their life who is subsidising others.

As for the point of such cars, well what if I like to do a lot fo track driving? We going to ban all motorsports while we're at it?


C

If you want a track car buy a 200SX or failing that, a Caterham...

I don't fundementally disagree with some of your points, I just don't see how your definition of a 'nice car' has to necessarily mean something that falls beyond even the top VRT (CO2) bracket.

I think it's ridiculous that manufacturers are running around panicing about impending environmental legislation when some (BMW, Merc and Audi spring to mind) have spent the last decade in an arms race to see who could produce the fastest, heaviest saloons and SUVs.

In fairness the Krauts have been quick off the mark in adopting to the changing circumstances - BMW cars have very low CO2 emissions for their power and size, all the Germans have high capacity powerful diesels. Mazda has got the ball rolling on making more standard cars lighter and that Lexus hybrid looks well tasty.

You see, I'm excited to see what the top manufacturers will come up with to meet the new political/environmental pressures. I'm actually glad they have been jolted out of the traditional, Clarksonite time warp because in the long run it was unsustainable anyway. That doesn't make me part of the anti-car lobby or a sandal-wearing environmentalist - quite the opposite, I think...

O and I'm sorry I called you a 'fat cat', it obviously hit close to the bone. However, it's a bit rich(:D) having a go at me about making assumptions and than 'assuming' my point of view is motivated by begrudgery just because it is different to yours.

ismynametoolong

This whole CO2 based tax is lip service by the Gov to conform with EU policy.
The government advised all in the consultation process that the introduction
of a CO2 based tax would be revenue neutral, however forgetting about registration % and looking at revenue % across the 180,000 registrations
it is clear a disproportionatly higher amount of VRT is garnished from 1.6cc and above and they are expecting to maintain if not increase their VRT revenue across smaller registration figures in the coming years.

All that will happen is that lots of people will opt for diesel versions which have lower CO2 figures but diesel is a far more damaging fuel than petrol
for the local environment and studies in Norway have demonstrated that the penal CO2 taxes introduced there have led to a massive increase in diesel
resulting in increased cases of chilhood asthma and repiratory other conditions.

Golferx

A Boeing 737 jet produces, on average, 6 tonnes of CO2 per hour of flight, that's 6000 kg, or 6 million grammes of CO2 per hour. (Same as a 2 litre petrol car (200g/km) would produce in 30,000km of driving)

Think of the CO2 reductions we would have if our Govt reduced Dublin Airport flights by two 4-hour flights per day?

There is a hell of a lot of unnecessary air travel these days, any reduction would only be a good thing.

NBar

Any idea of the road tax increases etc that the Greens want to introduce in Jan as this will affect people more than vrt unless you are importing or buying new after June 2008

JHMEG

E92 wrote: »

So it is clear that diesels would indeed outperform a Prius in out of town driving,

Bear in mind that diesel is also typically a few cent cheaper than petrol, when comparing mpg.

Also bear in mind that diesel cars right now are substantially worse than petrol in terms of air pollution.

ned_ie

Hi

Can anyone let me know

1- when is this to kick in and
2 - will it apply to second hand imports.

Am looking at bringing in a 07 Passat 2.0 TDI SE. At the moment that is 30% but under the new rules seems to come in at 24% - not a huge saving but still significant enough.

Thanks

astraboy

Ned, No one knows yet for sure. I would like to think this will apply across the board to both second hand and new cars, but we will have to wait until Cowen speaks to find out.....

larchill

A BMW 318d/320d or Audi 1.9tdi/2.0tdi with a VRT of only 20%! Given the proposed banding system where a car with 141-155gCO2/km will attract 20% VRT. Both of these currently attract 30%! Great if it could be true, the best thing we could possible hope for as they'll never do away with VRT, it would now cost €1.5bn to do so. On it's introduction, the temporary little tax, annual car sales were in the region of probably 60/70,000 anually. It would not have cost so much to get rid of. It would be great to be free of the shackles of engine size, always a device to screw the Irish motorist - nothing more. With the proposed/mooted/rumored system the big boys would still get screwed, but in a world fast running out of oil, we've to be realistic. However there's so much nice choice around the 1.8 - 2.0L class. Add to the above mouth watering choices for somewhat less the Honda Civic 1.8 saloon, or funky hatchback if that takes your fancy at 156g/km (oooh pity they couldn't knock a few more g's off it - it's petrol you see) at 24% VRT down from 30%.

However, there's always a however, or is it just my cynical side coming out? I can just see him - the grey suited little muppet. Yes, its a good proposal, in the trendy to be green times we live in, & it would even keep the greens happy! But what's this - A BMW & AUDI AT 20% - CAN'T HAVE THAT! Maybe it's just my cynical side, I sure hope so, but we'll find out next week when the bulldog barks!

I wonder what they'll do for road tax? A similiar system has been mooted here too. Both the VRT & road tax will almost certainly only apply to new cars though. The existing stock will continue to use the existing cc based system, which must be overdue a hike of around 10% any day now - watch next week. In the UK where they brought in the CO2 based system in 2001, it only applied to 2001 & on models. Older models continued with the old system.

We all wait in earnest & anticipation!

E92

larchill wrote: »

A BMW 318d/320d or Audi 1.9tdi/2.0tdi with a VRT of only 20%!

The BMW 318d and 320d all attract 16% under the new scheme.

testicle

E92 wrote: »

The BMW 318i, 318d and 320d all attract 16% under the new scheme.

and are 25% under the current scheme.

cyborg

testicle wrote: »

and are 25% under the current scheme.

Are they not currently 30% all being over 1.9?