New motor tax and VRT regime. Links + calculations

-Chris-

Nodnedlog wrote: »

Greed doesn't drive everyone this is a false assumption. We all have needs in order to survive and have a reasonable lifestyle.

Some people want more than their fair share and this is what greed is. Once they they are getting this disproportionate amount all the time it becomes in their own minds their entitlement and in fact they will look for more - we are all susceptible to this but for some it's obsessive.

Sorry, greed was too strong a word.

TBH, I was on a bit of a rant last night anyway, playing a little too much devil's advocate...

I understand that everyone is self-motivated without wanting to affect other people negatively, I'm just trying to represent the other side of the arguement.

RoundyMooney

I have no problem with reading opposing views here.

I have a major problem, in the grand scheme of things, with flip flopping and weak leadership. Make no mistake about it, this is what Gormley has done here.

I would support the views of smccarrick et al in terms of what should be, or have been done. Unfortunately, such far sighted leadership and foresight is but a pipedream.

It's all about the dough, people.

port

I my opinion road tax alteration of allowing 08 registered cars opt for co2 road tax rate on renewal will not be enough to significantly boost new car sales now.But introducing the VRT co2 emission rating now will likely boost new car sales for March,April,May, June & July.Otherwise waiting until July as proposed will result in slow sales from now to July.Busy July and slow until Jan 09.

C_Breeze

I hate the way this government can't make their bed and sleep in it.

Can anyone clarify ...

If i was to bring in a Mazda RX-8 from the UK in May - theoretically I should be able to tax it on the Current VRT system and TAX it on current CC rates (1800cc ... even though its actually a 654cc x2 :rolleyes: another perfect example of the government unable to stick by the rules they make)

My main question is - is this likely to change . ie. that i wont be able to VRT&TAX it on current rates in May?

And

If i was, what would be the risk of them changing their mind and turning around further down the line and saying that at the next tax renewal that it will have to be taxed on Co2 .


With this stupid government you can never feel certain about anything ... i just have a underlying feeling that a year down the line they'll turn around and say "ok your CC tax expired ... now at your next tax renewal were gonna tax you under Co2 just so we can screw you make more money from you" :mad:

alpina

Early indications show that new car sales are up 16 per cent compared to the same period in 2007, despite potential uncertainty about the market due to upcoming changes in vehicle registration tax (VRT) in July Irish Times

Even though we are not happy with VRT nor how the govern. have handled the upcoming changeover, why but why do we keep buying, it only shows the government we are happy with what's going on

I know it's not logical for us to freeze car sales but with great sales figures conflicting messages are being sent, that said I don't know the answer...

E92

That must be fairly old info alpina because car sales were down 10% this Feb compared to last Feb, and are slightly down overall.

King Kelly

E92 wrote: »

That must be fairly old info alpina because car sales were down 10% this Feb compared to last Feb, and are slightly down overall.

I was looking at the Hire Drive registration figures for Jan/Feb in work yesterday which (from memory) was around 4500 units. As most of these units are still sitting in the ports/NVD and wouldn't normally be registered until March/Easter holiday period I reckon the actual decline for Feb could be closer to 20%.

The_Conductor

C_Breeze wrote: »

what would be the risk of them changing their mind and turning around further down the line and saying that at the next tax renewal that it will have to be taxed on Co2 .

Given that we are obliged to have an emissions based taxation regime under EU Regulations (despite the fact that the Department have not yet transposed it into EU law)- there is every possibility that at some point in the future that they could get their act together and migrate everyone over to the new regime. That siad there while there would be a lot of very happy people- there would also be massive public outcry- and politicians are averse to bad publicity, as always. Who knows? Toss a coin?

RoundyMooney

It's like the chicken and the egg connundrum. And we all know you can't get an omelette without breaking a few eggs.

As it is, this policy, although welcome, is not enough, nor is it directed as it should be.

If the departments concerned were as quick to close legal loopholes, and implement policies that really matter, as they are to make decisions that involve increasing the tax take, this country would be the envy of the world.

ninty9er

conor_mc wrote: »

Jesus H. Christ - that's typical Irish KK, having our cake and eating it. I supppose you support VRT too?

Ever hear of the European Union, eurozone, free market, etc?

Now the govt have been shafting us with a "local tax" called VRT which somehow manages to circumvent the free market in a legal way.

But this "taking your cash out of the country" argument is pure BS, nothing less. As a revenue measure, they can apply a new tax regime to cars purchased from Jan 1st 2008, whether imported or not. But as an allegedly "green" measure, it's pure hypocrisy.

Bullsh1t. I've been quiet on this for a few weeks. The amendment to this at committee stage was made after pleas and bitching (and probably after a noted influx of high consuming vehicles in the first 2 months)

NOBODY who would have gone abroad anyway to buy a car would have done so on the basis of emissions. People who go to the UK generally go to buy diesel Audi, BMW and Merc models due to higher availability. there are savings to be had, but THEY WOULD NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE OF CAR BECAUSE IT'S GREEN, they were buying these cars ANYWAY.

It would be ultimately unfair if Paddy nextdoor bought an A8 Quattro in the UK last year and Paid 30% and I had to pay 36% this year. I would be doing it ANYWAY regardless of emissions.

Free market my arse...ever heard of Spain, Holland, Sweden.....go and check their VRT equivalents and you'd be praying to keep what we have on the table!!

Like it or not...VRT is not an import tax....it's (now) an environmental levy and had previously been a registration charge based on displacement. There is already an import tax applied to each car that enters the EU, that cannot be recharged anywhere within the Union, however, if you check your facts (I know I'm one to talk:rolleyes:) before puking on this thread, you would find that VRT is the secondary tax on vehicles that hit Irish ports from Japan and other non EU jurisdictions. They pay import duty to Revenue Customs on entry.

Therefore VRT is not = import tax. that is the LEGAL POSITION which is why the EU could have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING had the government chosen to leave VRT as it was. Be glad there's some cha nge for the better. It may not affect us now, but we will all benefit in time.

Oh and ever heard of 30% base rate income tax and no allowances.....try that and come back to me. As someone who doesn't yet earn enough to pay any sort of tax, I know if my wages were taxed that way I'd be living on less than the price of the cheapest available new car on Irish roads (yes that does include the Chevy Matiz).

Do as people do in evry other country in the world....it's a concept about 60% of Irish people can't grasp...RATIONALISATION. If you can't afford, then stop bitching, don't buy it and get on with your life.

ninty9er

C_Breeze wrote: »

I hate the way this government can't make their bed and sleep in it.

Can anyone clarify ...

If i was to bring in a Mazda RX-8 from the UK in May - theoretically I should be able to tax it on the Current VRT system and TAX it on current CC rates (1800cc ... even though its actually a 654cc x2 :rolleyes: another perfect example of the government unable to stick by the rules they make)

My main question is - is this likely to change . ie. that i wont be able to VRT&TAX it on current rates in May?

And

If i was, what would be the risk of them changing their mind and turning around further down the line and saying that at the next tax renewal that it will have to be taxed on Co2 .


With this stupid government you can never feel certain about anything ... i just have a underlying feeling that a year down the line they'll turn around and say "ok your CC tax expired ... now at your next tax renewal were gonna tax you under Co2 just so we can screw you make more money from you" :mad:

Your VRT will be as per the current system up until July 1st. (i.e May is your target date so this doesn't affect you). This would be the Same post July except you'd be hit with a €2k road tax bill due to emissions (I'm assuming) being 226g/km or above. So yes, you're better off to import pre July.

astraboy

ninty9er wrote: »

Your VRT will be as per the current system up until July 1st. (i.e May is your target date so this doesn't affect you). This would be the Same post July except you'd be hit with a €2k road tax bill due to emissions (I'm assuming) being 226g/km or above. So yes, you're better off to import pre July.

I believe what he was saying is will the bunch of clowns up in the dail turn around next year and say "o, you imported your car last year, we are moving you to the emission based tax system weather you like it or not, cough up 2000E a year to use our ****ty roads, Thanks and good luck". I would'nt doubt it. I can see a serious market in fake tax disks in the future.

C_Breeze

astraboy wrote: »

I believe what he was saying is will the bunch of clowns up in the dail turn around next year and say "o, you imported your car last year, we are moving you to the emission based tax system weather you like it or not, cough up 2000E a year to use our ****ty roads, Thanks and good luck". I would'nt doubt it. I can see a serious market in fake tax disks in the future.

Spot on astraboy!

I know how the new tax regime works (pre/post july etc) but would just like to gauge how confident people are that it will be definitive and they wont turn around and screw us further down the line as per the example i gave.


I personally wouldn't put it past them ... and the fact that i'm not alone is not a good sign :rolleyes:

....this govt doesn't instill you with the greatest deal of confidence does it.

RoundyMooney

ninty9er wrote: »

Bullsh1t. I've been quiet on this for a few weeks. The amendment to this at committee stage was made after pleas and bitching (and probably after a noted influx of high consuming vehicles in the first 2 months)

Lobbying you mean, perhaps. How would the DoE be aware of what comes into the country anyway, until people apply for VRT?

ninty9er wrote: »

NOBODY who would have gone abroad anyway to buy a car would have done so on the basis of emissions. People who go to the UK generally go to buy diesel Audi, BMW and Merc models due to higher availability. there are savings to be had, but THEY WOULD NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE OF CAR BECAUSE IT'S GREEN, they were buying these cars ANYWAY.

Rubbish. Many chose to import fuel efficient, modern diesels, on the strength of financial concessions from the government, rather than dip a toe in the secondhand market here.

Those who import habitually, for personal use, or to sell on, would presumably continue to do so, or keep their powder dry until July 1.

ninty9er wrote: »

It would be ultimately unfair if Paddy nextdoor bought an A8 Quattro in the UK last year and Paid 30% and I had to pay 36% this year. I would be doing it ANYWAY regardless of emissions.

Not so. If a punter made a conscious decision to bring in a cleaner motor from outside the state, then they should be supported in doing so.

ninty9er wrote: »

Free market my arse...ever heard of Spain, Holland, Sweden.....go and check their VRT equivalents and you'd be praying to keep what we have on the table!!

That's a straw man if ever there was one. I don't live in any of those countries, so how they conduct their affairs is not my business. I do know that they all actually have an infrastructure that leaves ours standing, if you want to make comparisons. Not to mention Health services and the like.

ninty9er wrote: »

Like it or not...VRT is not an import tax....it's (now) an environmental levy and had previously been a registration charge based on displacement. There is already an import tax applied to each car that enters the EU, that cannot be recharged anywhere within the Union, however, if you check your facts (I know I'm one to talk:rolleyes:) before puking on this thread, you would find that VRT is the secondary tax on vehicles that hit Irish ports from Japan and other non EU jurisdictions. They pay import duty to Revenue Customs on entry.

It's a tax on imports. Legal obfuscation does not change that fact. The situation where vehicles enter the country sans airbags, esp etc., in order t keep the book value down, is a bloody disgrace.

ninty9er wrote: »

Therefore VRT is not = import tax. that is the LEGAL POSITION which is why the EU could have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING had the government chosen to leave VRT as it was. Be glad there's some cha nge for the better. It may not affect us now, but we will all benefit in time.

It's not enough, and the parish pump politicians that run this place will never have the courage of their convictions to do what needs to be done.

Noel Browne must be spinning in his grave.

ninty9er wrote: »

Oh and ever heard of 30% base rate income tax and no allowances.....try that and come back to me. As someone who doesn't yet earn enough to pay any sort of tax, I know if my wages were taxed that way I'd be living on less than the price of the cheapest available new car on Irish roads (yes that does include the Chevy Matiz).

Those of us in the higher echelons of the tax net would disagree with you.

I have no major beef with the income tax system in this country or the way it is run. What the hell it has to do with a half hearted and vague emissions based motor taxation system, I don't know.

ninty9er wrote: »

Do as people do in evry other country in the world....it's a concept about 60% of Irish people can't grasp...RATIONALISATION. If you can't afford, then stop bitching, don't buy it and get on with your life.

So everything is rosy in the garden, and we serfs should be happy with our lot?

I speak for myself here, but I can afford whatever the hell I want, in spite of, and not because of the financial mismanagement and weak willed leadership this country is in the throes of. I choose to spend my money on other things. I say this because Gormley's flip flop is yet another symptom of this lamentable government.

ninty9er

C_Breeze wrote: »

Spot on astraboy!

I know how the new tax regime works (pre/post july etc) but would just like to gauge how confident people are that it will be definitive and they wont turn around and screw us further down the line as per the example i gave.


I personally wouldn't put it past them ... and the fact that i'm not alone is not a good sign :rolleyes:

....this govt doesn't instill you with the greatest deal of confidence does it.

Any government; can at any time; change any policy with a majority vote in the Dáil. I don't see why motor tax is any different. Storm in a teacup here. :rolleyes::rolleyes:

ninty9er

RoundyMooney wrote: »

So everything is rosy in the garden, and we serfs should be happy with our lot?

I speak for myself here, but I can afford whatever the hell I want, in spite of, and not because of the financial mismanagement and weak willed leadership this country is in the throes of. I choose to spend my money on other things. I say this because Gormley's flip flop is yet another symptom of this lamentable government.

Nothing is rosy in any garden...the grass is always greener on the other side etc...

The Irish bitch about not being able to afford a house, the majority of Germans can't either so they just don't. Irish people bitch about not being able to afford a car, well tell it to the Somali who can't afford dinner. Everything is relative. Just because you now have to buy a 04 "Green" car instead of a 07 "Green machine" doesn't mean your world is going to end ffs. Get over it. I'd love a Lexus LS600hL, but I can't afford one right now....what am I going to do?? Bitch and moan until the government makes it affordable or go and earn the hard cash it requires to get said car. Option b is a whole lot more realistic as it doesn't affect 4 million other people!

RoundyMooney

You're straying off the point again.

The difference between our German friends and ourselves, is that they had the foresight to set up decent management companies etc., and are arguably far more civic minded generally than the Irish, which means that apartment dwellers there do not have to buy their way out of piss stained communal areas, loud neighbours, and haphazard parking.

The crucial point you appear to be missing, is that there has been a u turn on this issue, driven mainly by lobbyists fearful of the falling trend in new car sales, and the taxmans desire for greater revenues in light of the impending budget deficit at the end of the year.

We are not bitching, we merely want at a minimum, the policy that was promised some months ago.

What's so difficult to comprehend about that?

Starving Somalis are not part of the equation here. Now we should be grateful to the FF/Greens that we don't live in a war torn, famine stricken hell hole?

ninty9er

RoundyMooney wrote: »

We are not bitching, we merely want at a minimum, the policy that was promised some months ago.

What's so difficult to comprehend about that?

You mean the minimum that caused threads upon threads of discontent on this very forum leading into Budget 2008 and in the subsequent weeks?

RoundyMooney wrote: »

Starving Somalis are not part of the equation here. Now we should be grateful to the FF/Greens that we don't live in a war torn, famine stricken hell hole?

Of course not. My point is that you can't have your cake and eat it unless you're willing to pay for it. The announcement this week makes the system more equitable if anything. It places everyone on a level playing field.

If I bought a 04 Audi A4 Quattro in the UK in 2006 and paid 30% VRT, then the person who brings in a 04 Audi A4 Quattro from the UK in 2009 should and will pay 30% VRT. What's so unfair and difficut to understand about that.

Can't please all of the people all of the time. Cars didn't become environmentally friendly overnight. Buy an older one of the same model if your ACTUAL concern is the environment. THAT is my point.

Bee

ninty9er wrote: »

Bullsh1t. I've been quiet on this for a few weeks. The amendment to this at committee stage was made after pleas and bitching (and probably after a noted influx of high consuming vehicles in the first 2 months)

NOBODY who would have gone abroad anyway to buy a car would have done so on the basis of emissions. People who go to the UK generally go to buy diesel Audi, BMW and Merc models due to higher availability. there are savings to be had, but THEY WOULD NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE OF CAR BECAUSE IT'S GREEN, they were buying these cars ANYWAY.

It would be ultimately unfair if Paddy nextdoor bought an A8 Quattro in the UK last year and Paid 30% and I had to pay 36% this year. I would be doing it ANYWAY regardless of emissions.

Free market my arse...ever heard of Spain, Holland, Sweden.....go and check their VRT equivalents and you'd be praying to keep what we have on the table!!

Like it or not...VRT is not an import tax....it's (now) an environmental levy and had previously been a registration charge based on displacement. There is already an import tax applied to each car that enters the EU, that cannot be recharged anywhere within the Union, however, if you check your facts (I know I'm one to talk:rolleyes:) before puking on this thread, you would find that VRT is the secondary tax on vehicles that hit Irish ports from Japan and other non EU jurisdictions. They pay import duty to Revenue Customs on entry.

Therefore VRT is not = import tax. that is the LEGAL POSITION which is why the EU could have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING had the government chosen to leave VRT as it was. Be glad there's some cha nge for the better. It may not affect us now, but we will all benefit in time.

Oh and ever heard of 30% base rate income tax and no allowances.....try that and come back to me. As someone who doesn't yet earn enough to pay any sort of tax, I know if my wages were taxed that way I'd be living on less than the price of the cheapest available new car on Irish roads (yes that does include the Chevy Matiz).

Do as people do in evry other country in the world....it's a concept about 60% of Irish people can't grasp...RATIONALISATION. If you can't afford, then stop bitching, don't buy it and get on with your life.

You have made many good and fair points in support of Fianna Fail and the Green Party's latest screw up in taxes with 90% of them wrong.:rolleyes:

I look forward to the next election local, countrywide or any at all so myself and friends can chuck out the idiots responsible for the latest VRT rip-off regime.:p

Sad thing is... there is a growing NO vote to the Lisbon treaty being created by John Gormless and his buddies in FF because they want a yes vote, but won't allow the eurozone, free market to apply to car buyers due to Irish VRT:)

neilc78

ninty9er wrote: »

Bullsh1t. I've been quiet on this for a few weeks. The amendment to this at committee stage was made after pleas and bitching (and probably after a noted influx of high consuming vehicles in the first 2 months)

NOBODY who would have gone abroad anyway to buy a car would have done so on the basis of emissions. People who go to the UK generally go to buy diesel Audi, BMW and Merc models due to higher availability. there are savings to be had, but THEY WOULD NOT MAKE A DIFFERENT CHOICE OF CAR BECAUSE IT'S GREEN, they were buying these cars ANYWAY.

It would be ultimately unfair if Paddy nextdoor bought an A8 Quattro in the UK last year and Paid 30% and I had to pay 36% this year. I would be doing it ANYWAY regardless of emissions.

Free market my arse...ever heard of Spain, Holland, Sweden.....go and check their VRT equivalents and you'd be praying to keep what we have on the table!!

Like it or not...VRT is not an import tax....it's (now) an environmental levy and had previously been a registration charge based on displacement. There is already an import tax applied to each car that enters the EU, that cannot be recharged anywhere within the Union, however, if you check your facts (I know I'm one to talk:rolleyes:) before puking on this thread, you would find that VRT is the secondary tax on vehicles that hit Irish ports from Japan and other non EU jurisdictions. They pay import duty to Revenue Customs on entry.

Therefore VRT is not = import tax. that is the LEGAL POSITION which is why the EU could have done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING had the government chosen to leave VRT as it was. Be glad there's some cha nge for the better. It may not affect us now, but we will all benefit in time.

Oh and ever heard of 30% base rate income tax and no allowances.....try that and come back to me. As someone who doesn't yet earn enough to pay any sort of tax, I know if my wages were taxed that way I'd be living on less than the price of the cheapest available new car on Irish roads (yes that does include the Chevy Matiz).

Do as people do in evry other country in the world....it's a concept about 60% of Irish people can't grasp...RATIONALISATION. If you can't afford, then stop bitching, don't buy it and get on with your life.

Ogra Fine Fail!! Why would anyone in their right mind pay any attention to anything you bunch of liars ever say. Your leader is a tax cheat, your TDs all support a tax cheat and try to discredit the institute put in place to get to the bottom of your dirty deeds. I see the greedy hands of FF and their business pressure groups all over Gormleys U turn. Am I expected to take a lecture from a little gob****e like you? When gormley made his initial justifications on this reform I knew that my old 2 litre avensis would cost me more to keep than a new one after July. I also knew that its 2nd value would drop big time as the market would have access to uk cars of the same age. I looked in the UK for a diesel with low emissions so that it would qualify for the cheaper tax bracket. The BMW 320d was too expensive even though it is the cleanest Diesel on the market. I went for a 2.2 litr accord and guess what - now I have to pay €790 per annum tax. This is a complete joke but then everything this governemnt comes up with is a complete joke Health, education you name they have f*cked it up. I am starting to think it is time to get out of this country.

RoundyMooney

ninty9er wrote: »

You mean the minimum that caused threads upon threads of discontent on this very forum leading into Budget 2008 and in the subsequent weeks?

The only discontent I recall was that such emissions based policies were, and are inequitable on the basis that, for one thing, usage wasn't taken into consideration.

There are other issues of course, but that's a discussion in itself, and quite a lengthy one at that.

The welfare of the man in the street was, I fear, the last thing on Gormley's mind when he climbed down.

What I'd love to see myself is taxation costs built into the cost of the fuel. Some would suggest that insurance costs be factored in as well, which I would consider inequitable. Such a setup would truly be a form of taxation where "the polluter pays". The only folk shortchanged would be those who visit here with their cars from another jurisdiction.

VRT to remain, as a percentage relating to co2 emissions, in order to stimulate the influx of greener vehicles.

ninty9er wrote: »

Of course not. My point is that you can't have your cake and eat it unless you're willing to pay for it. The announcement this week makes the system more equitable if anything. It places everyone on a level playing field.

I disagree. If a level playing field was the ideal, then why change at all?

ninty9er wrote: »

If I bought a 04 Audi A4 Quattro in the UK in 2006 and paid 30% VRT, then the person who brings in a 04 Audi A4 Quattro from the UK in 2009 should and will pay 30% VRT. What's so unfair and difficut to understand about that.

Because the system as outlined after the budget, encourages the importation of greener vehicles. All this woolgathering is going to do, is put off the inevitable for the next few years.

ninty9er wrote: »

Can't please all of the people all of the time. Cars didn't become environmentally friendly overnight. Buy an older one of the same model if your ACTUAL concern is the environment. THAT is my point.

No, but you can introduce imaginative and far reaching policies that actually make a difference, instead of being frogmarched into a half hearted approach by the EU, after the fact, and then lacking the balls to stick to that policy as outlined.

I don't understand your last point. Are you saying that we should drive older, less economical cars, instead of newer, more fuel efficient ones?

Human nature being what it is, people will vote with their wallets, more so now as times get leaner. Economic incentives are required to instigate real change.

E92

What we really need is a tax on emissions - i.e. a tax on fuel.

A good way to start is by leaving the current CO2 emissions alone for good, i.e. don't start changing them down so that there will be more and more cars getting into 36% VRT next year etc.

The difference between VRT losses from this system and what was made from the old system could be made up by increasing the tax on fuel.

And why, given that every litre of diesel burned produces 13% more CO2 than every litre of petrol, does the Government collect 6 cents less per litre for something that pollutes more per litre than petrol(not to mention all the particulates, massive public health risks and the significant deterioration in local air quality that are part and parcel of diesel engines)? I thought we were supposed to be doing our bit for the environment?

ninty9er

Bee wrote: »

You have made many good and fair points in support of Fianna Fail and the Green Party's latest screw up in taxes with 90% of them wrong.:rolleyes:

I look forward to the next election local, countrywide or any at all so myself and friends can chuck out the idiots responsible for the latest VRT rip-off regime.:p

Sad thing is... there is a growing NO vote to the Lisbon treaty being created by John Gormless and his buddies in FF because they want a yes vote, but won't allow the eurozone, free market to apply to car buyers due to Irish VRT:)

It's pure ignorance to suggest that VRT is a measure to circumvent the free market. If the EU Commission could prove that, it would have forced the Irish State to scrap VRT once it had done so. Simple fact is; if the Government wanted it could apply VRT as we currently have it and add an emissions charge.

It is also sheer ignorant of anyone to vote no to Lisbon because of discontent with a government. They must also be discontent with all opposition parties except Sinn Féin too. Does a no result for Lisbon mean SF will get an overall majority in 2012?? does it fu<k!!

Lisbon is a totally different argument, and while I had bone fide concerns, I've researched and am now satisfied that a yes vote is right for us. A no vote and we might as well leave the EU table altogether.

I made about 4-5 points so which 4.5 points were wrong??

Mitch Connor

ninty9er wrote: »

It's pure ignorance to suggest that VRT is a measure to circumvent the free market. If the EU Commission could prove that, it would have forced the Irish State to scrap VRT once it had done so. Simple fact is; if the Government wanted it could apply VRT as we currently have it and add an emissions charge.

It is also sheer ignorant of anyone to vote no to Lisbon because of discontent with a government. They must also be discontent with all opposition parties except Sinn Féin too. Does a no result for Lisbon mean SF will get an overall majority in 2012?? does it fu<k!!

Lisbon is a totally different argument, and while I had bone fide concerns, I've researched and am now satisfied that a yes vote is right for us. A no vote and we might as well leave the EU table altogether.

I made about 4-5 points so which 4.5 points were wrong??

Ireland had an import tax - the EU told them to get rid of it cause it was illegal and the day after the import tax was removed, VRT arrived, despite the Irish Government being told the import tax should NOT be simply replaced with a different tax. Funny, eh.

ninty9er

RoundyMooney wrote: »

I don't understand your last point. Are you saying that we should drive older, less economical cars, instead of newer, more fuel efficient ones?

Human nature being what it is, people will vote with their wallets, more so now as times get leaner. Economic incentives are required to instigate real change.

My last point was that people who were going to buy a 06 Audi A4 TDI for its "environmental" prowess, could just as easily import a 04/03 one which would be no less economical. It's the fact that people's wallets (as you've said) can't keep up with the 06 Audi the neighbour's wallet can is at the core of this. There is a niche out there who will buy a car for environmental reasons primarily, but none of those frequent boards like this as they have, in general, very little interest in cars and probably drive a 1.6 Avensis because they think it's more environmentally friendly than driving a 1.8 because the engine displacement is lower; which in the overall scheme of things is actually perverse to their original goal.

While I wouldn't have an objection to 10/15cent on fuel right now, when oil prices rocket it'll be a different story. It's also politically unpallatable to the masses; which believe it or not; the changes to VRT as they stand aren't.

I value anyone's opinion on this, but meaning no offence to anyone on this thread: being on a motoring forum you're a skewed sample, and I do agree that the reform doesn't go far enough and I'd love to make the road tax change retrospective for ALL CARS as it would be revenue superflous not even neutral. BUT that's only possible for cars with rated CO2 emissions on their VLC. My car is a 01 and it doesn't have a CO2 rating, but what if the equivalent car in 03 had, should it's owner pay more/less tax because its VLC shows a CO2 rating??

While the "sense" in applying it backwards isn't a concern of mine, the logistics of doing it are. Logistically it would be a nightmare and would end up costing more in software development for a system that would only be of any use until Revenue had a CO2 rating for every car in the state, which knowing their efficiencies could take decades:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Change is good, but it also has to practically applicable. This is why it makes much more sense to put all cars registered before July within or outside the State on the old system, with all cars whether first registered within or outside the State on the new system.

While an "opt-in" change over system for road tax would be a good idea for those whose VLCs have a CO2 rating, it would have to be designed with a consumer onus, which could cause problems in itself, though I see no harm in trying.

What I do have a problem with however is people bashing the government for doing x,y or z; when faced with most of the other decisions facing a government you as motoring minded citizens would have no clue what to do. There is nothing wrong with making a mistake in a system and then later putting it right. Even better it was done now than post July when some people woudl already have registered cars from outside the state and ended up forking out a fortune more/less than after a change was made.

And why do people think this has anything to do with John Gormley. It was in Budget 2007, discussed at lenght on this board before the election and explicitly within Fianna Fáil's election manifesto. Please have a go at us. We're not putting a greenwash on this...we take full responsibility for this measure. Whether a person regards it as a fu<k up or not is their own choice, but overall it's a change for the better and I won't be lectured by anyone who fails to ahve the balls to get involved in the political process or calls 70,000 people "a bunch of liars" based on the actions of very few. And you must remember; to cheat; you must have intent; and none has been proven; nor has a motive to do so.

So nielc78 consider yourself reported for personal abuse. I won't take being called a little gob****e from anyone other than family members who can know what they're talking about;)

ninty9er

Tauren wrote: »

Ireland had an import tax - the EU told them to get rid of it cause it was illegal and the day after the import tax was removed, VRT arrived, despite the Irish Government being told the import tax should NOT be simply replaced with a different tax. Funny, eh.

Yes, but overwhelmingly more palatable than closing the Coombe or Crumlin hospitals;)

I'm in the unpopular (income) tax and spend wing of the party, however I'm still convincing TDs it's a good idea to screw every penny (well at least 45-50%) above €150k out of people....I've come across about 3 who agree and 7or 8 who don't, surprisingly 3-4 (can't remember) of the latter were of a non government persuasion.

unkel

neilc78 wrote: »

Am I expected to take a lecture from a little gob****e like you?

That's the best you can do with your first post on boards.ie? Not good enough I'm afraid. Banned for personal abuse.

Seth Brundle

neilc78 wrote: »

I am starting to think it is time to get out of this country.

I have given you a bit of motivation for leaving by banning you from motors for insulting behaviour.

Seth Brundle

I banned him before you did unkel!

Mitch Connor

ninty9er wrote: »

Yes, but overwhelmingly more palatable than closing the Coombe or Crumlin hospitals;)

I'm in the unpopular (income) tax and spend wing of the party, however I'm still convincing TDs it's a good idea to screw every penny (well at least 45-50%) above €150k out of people....I've come across about 3 who agree and 7or 8 who don't, surprisingly 3-4 (can't remember) of the latter were of a non government persuasion.

Funny how hospitals are still crap, under-funded, poorly designed and closing.

I don't think i understand your second paragraph. are trying to use the fact the government would rather screw an average earner than a high earner as some kind of positive argument?