VRT Megathread - ALL VRT DISCUSSION IN HERE - Read First Post

Guy:Incognito

ryanstewart wrote: »

It's pretty obvious what he's suggesting here, or can you not see the wood for the trees. Regarding new car sales, lower VAT on lower emission vehicles, higher VAT on higher emission vehicles, no VAT on imports..

So if theres vat at various levels on cars sold in Ireland and none on cars imported, why would anyone buy a car in Ireland ever again?

eoin wrote: »

You want people to "deal in facts", yet your facebook group still has a factually incorrect title.

and an ever increasing number of posts being ignored that are questioning it.

ryanstewart

eoin wrote: »

You want people to "deal in facts", yet your facebook group still has a factually incorrect title.

Try reading the posts on the page - and the previous post on here - this is what we are talking about - and i have no intention of changing the title of the group - for reasons I've mentioned so many times before - double taxation, restriction on freedom of movement on EU citizens, denial of due process, wrongly calculated VRT charges and valuations of vehicles - I could go on all night why this thing is illegal - try reading this stuff before you post - and while you are at it - you may have seen serious concerns from the EU regarding the legality of all this on the most recent post on the page. Just because the govt says "It's the law" does not make it right, and that is why these laws have to be challenged - laws are amended, overturned, abolished every day - cop on - factually incorrect? If it gets overturned does that mean that you are then factually talking rubbish, as that will then become law???

ryanstewart

Stekelly wrote: »

So if theres vat at various levels on cars sold in Ireland and none on cars imported, why would anyone buy a car in Ireland ever again?



and an ever increasing number of posts being ignored that are questioning it.

I'm afraid stekelly that you just keep ignoring the response, in both points you have questioned - why would anyone buy a car in Ireland ever again - because there's no VRT! - cars are cheaper! better value! how many more times do you need this spelled out? see above regarding your other remark.

Guy:Incognito

ryanstewart wrote: »

I'm afraid stekelly that you just keep ignoring the response, in both points you have questioned - why would anyone buy a car in Ireland ever again - because there's no VRT! - cars are cheaper! better value! how many more times do you need this spelled out? see above regarding your other remark.

ryanstewart wrote: »

Regarding new car sales, lower VAT on lower emission vehicles, higher VAT on higher emission vehicles, no VAT on imports..

.

If theres No VRT in Ireland and the UK but we have a sliding scale on VAT, with none applied to imports, then Irish cars would be more expensive. Or am I qouting you in your own words wrongly?

Guy:Incognito

ryanstewart wrote: »

Try reading the posts on the page - and the previous post on here - this is what we are talking about - and i have no intention of changing the title of the group - for reasons I've mentioned so many times before - double taxation, restriction on freedom of movement on EU citizens, denial of due process, wrongly calculated VRT charges and valuations of vehicles - I could go on all night why this thing is illegal - try reading this stuff before you post - and while you are at it - you may have seen serious concerns from the EU regarding the legality of all this on the most recent post on the page. Just because the govt says "It's the law" does not make it right, and that is why these laws have to be challenged - laws are amended, overturned, abolished every day - cop on - factually incorrect? If it gets overturned does that mean that you are then factually talking rubbish, as that will then become law???

You've said yourself you know realise VRT is legal. The letter you link to above says VRT is legal.

If something is due to be made legal tomorrow (not that VRT is about to be gotten rid of) then it's still illegal today. Right now, VRT is legal. The government say so, you say so and the EU say so.

Vertakill

I think what a lot of people who are pro-VRT misunderstand is that... if we had a set date that we knew VRT was going to be removed/reduced, dealers could prepare themselves, and their current stock, so that when the date comes around they would be able to lower their prices due to the fact that they, themselves, no longer have to pass on the VRT bill to the customer. They'd probably take an initial hit on their current stock they they've paid VRT on, but there's no way around that, hence my suggestion about being given a large amount of notice beforehand.

This could also improve our current situation on 'poverty spec' cars that seem to be plague Ireland, but not the UK, due to the VRT implications.

In turn, customers would be able to choose (just like they do now) whether to buy a local car for a now-reduced price, or go to the UK to buy one.
If the prices were able to compete with the UK, why the hell would anyone want to give our money to the UK if we had a comparable choice?

And anyone that's bought cars in the UK will tell you, it's a right pain in the hole and it's not particularly enjoyable, especially if you're booting it across England for 100's of miles trying to make it to your ferry before the last one leaves the port for the night.

Guy:Incognito

Vertakill wrote: »

I think what a lot of people who are pro-VRT misunderstand is that... if we had a set date that we knew VRT was going to be removed/reduced, dealers could prepare themselves, and their current stock, so that when the date comes around they would be able to lower their prices due to the fact that they, themselves, no longer have to pass on the VRT bill to the customer. They'd probably take an initial hit on their current stock they they've paid VRT on, but there's no way around that, hence my suggestion about being given a large amount of notice beforehand..

That "initial hit" will probably put a heap out them out of business. Car dealers income comes from sellign cars. If all their stock is now retailing for less than they paid for it, how can they not fold?

Vertakill

You gotta break eggs to make an omelette !

After it was fully implemented, it WOULD be beneficial to the dealers in the long run though because the money dealers lose to people buying in the UK would be going directly to them instead.

That's why I mentioned a set date and they could prepare themselves accordingly.
They could stop bringing in new stock, try and sell their existing stock and maybe the government could aid them in other areas like removing/reducing businesses VRT amounts before the set date that Joe public could avail of it in order to bring in new stock if my suggestion completely sucked.

I've no idea how that business plan would work but that is the only option I can think of if something were to be done with VRT.

I'm making suggestions rather than just running the same spiel of "If they remove VRT, you'll have to pay for it in X,Y,Z" etc.

You can't say that VRT is beneficial to the public, so why not help suggest ways that it could be removed or reduced without crippling the economy in the process, rather than just saying removing it'll never work.

That same comment could also be aimed at the facebook fanbois who are quite happy protesting against something but have absolutely no productive suggestions that could be used to replace the income of VRT.

That's not entirely aimed at you Ste Kelly, but just to a lot of the people who relay the same things over and over.

Guy:Incognito

We already have very high car ownership and high new car sales per head. How many extra people do you think are waiting patiently in the wings to buy cars just because VRT is gone? Enough to prop up the motor industry and replace lost revenue to the government with extra VAT?

Thats an awfull lot of silent people your relying on to suddenly mobilise and buy cars , then keep replacing them with reasonable regularity.

Vertakill wrote: »

You can't say that VRT is beneficial to the public, so why not help suggest ways that it could be removed or reduced without crippling the economy in the process, rather than just saying removing it'll never work.
.

It's beneficial to the public in that it's keeping the cost of something else down , be it income tax, VAT, fuel duty or whatever. I'd rather none of those went up. At least if i buy a new car, it's bought. If fuel goes up it's costign you more with every mile travelled. It might be hady if your a low mileage driver but if you do high mileage you'll notice that money going. You can choose to pay higher or lower VRT based on the car you buy. The petrol will cost the same to buy per litre.

Vertakill

Stekelly wrote: »

We already have very high car ownership and high new car sales per head. How many extra people do you think are waiting patiently in the wings to buy cars just because VRT is gone? Enough to prop up the motor industry and replace lost revenue to the government with extra VAT?

Well, it would be higher again. I'm sure that can't be considered a bad thing.

I'm also not counting on anyone to be waiting in the wings for VRT to be gone, since that's a fairly stupid point since it's only a pipedream at the moment.
And again, my suggestion never mentioned VAT being the replacement, so another moot point.

Stekelly wrote: »

Thats an awfull lot of silent people your relying on to suddenly mobilise and buy cars , then keep replacing them with reasonable regularity.

Again, not relying on anyone but have you forgotten about the car industry before the recession? People were replacing their cars with reasonable regularity. Going by the same logic, once we're all back on our feet, wouldn't the sales of cars (doesn't even have to be new btw..) be just as high, if not higher, than pre-recession times if the prices had the potential to be a lot lower and more money would be staying within the country rather than being pi55ed away to the UK?

Stekelly wrote: »

It's beneficial to the public in that it's keeping the cost of something else down , be it income tax, VAT, fuel duty or whatever. I'd rather none of those went up. At least if i buy a new car, it's bought. If fuel goes up it's costign you more with every mile travelled. It might be hady if your a low mileage driver but if you do high mileage you'll notice that money going. You can choose to pay higher or lower VRT based on the car you buy. The petrol will cost the same to buy per litre.

Not everyone does high mileage, and as someone already calculated (price of car with price of fuel taking the avg mileage into account) in one of the threads that was merged into this, having the tax on fuel could work out as a cheaper alternative.


I'd much rather have a wide variety of choices of cars that I could buy with all the extras I could afford, with 1 of those many options being an economical car (or a complete gas guzzler if I so choose) that wouldn't cost me a great deal more even with an increase in fuel prices, rather than being pigeon holed to cars that I may have no interest in whatsoever, but may be the only financially viable option as a result of co2 emissions, engine size or double-taxed skewed OMSP's.

You would also get a lot of money coming INTO the country from tourists who would pay for fuel and so on. The list goes on.

It may be that I'm stuck in a 1 track mind here, but I'm struggling to see a reason why anyone, confronted with better and more thought out points than I've tried to convey here, would be FOR vrt. Especially if you're a car enthusiast... unless you're someone who loves nothing better than going out and squeezing every penny out of your car for MPG.

tiresmokindad

I think VRT is good and awesome. I am researching about it. And I find different advantages of it.

Any One

Vertakill wrote: »

Well, it would be higher again. I'm sure that can't be considered a bad thing.

I'm also not counting on anyone to be waiting in the wings for VRT to be gone, since that's a fairly stupid point since it's only a pipedream at the moment.
And again, my suggestion never mentioned VAT being the replacement, so another moot point.



Again, not relying on anyone but have you forgotten about the car industry before the recession? People were replacing their cars with reasonable regularity. Going by the same logic, once we're all back on our feet, wouldn't the sales of cars (doesn't even have to be new btw..) be just as high, if not higher, than pre-recession times if the prices had the potential to be a lot lower and more money would be staying within the country rather than being pi55ed away to the UK?



Not everyone does high mileage, and as someone already calculated (price of car with price of fuel taking the avg mileage into account) in one of the threads that was merged into this, having the tax on fuel could work out as a cheaper alternative.


I'd much rather have a wide variety of choices of cars that I could buy with all the extras I could afford, with 1 of those many options being an economical car (or a complete gas guzzler if I so choose) that wouldn't cost me a great deal more even with an increase in fuel prices, rather than being pigeon holed to cars that I may have no interest in whatsoever, but may be the only financially viable option as a result of co2 emissions, engine size or double-taxed skewed OMSP's.

You would also get a lot of money coming INTO the country from tourists who would pay for fuel and so on. The list goes on.

It may be that I'm stuck in a 1 track mind here, but I'm struggling to see a reason why anyone, confronted with better and more thought out points than I've tried to convey here, would be FOR vrt. Especially if you're a car enthusiast... unless you're someone who loves nothing better than going out and squeezing every penny out of your car for MPG.

But what about the people who already have no problem paying the VRT and have done so already will they have to pay more for fuel because someone else doesn't want to pay their VRT?

Lets not forgot people who never bought a car in the North and probably never will or the taxi drivers, bus drivers, lorrry drivers and other people who drive for a living. They would also have to pay more for fuel because of a smalll band of people from Northern Ireland and Donegal who have a problem paying VRT.

Vertakill

I've already paid just shy of 6k in VRT and I have no problem with what I'm suggesting at all.

You can't make absolutely everybody happy - it's not possible. However, if you're fair and you make the majority of people happy, whilst rewarding people who leave a small carbon footprint and punishing those who leave a larger one (more miles you do, the more fuel you use, the more you endanger the environment, right?) whilst bringing more money to the nations coffers from within and outside of the country... well I think that can only be a good thing.

Any One wrote: »

Lets not forgot people who never bought a car in the North and probably never will or the taxi drivers, bus drivers, lorrry drivers and other people who drive for a living. They would also have to pay more for fuel because of a smalll band of people from Northern Ireland and Donegal who have a problem paying VRT.

STOP talking about the North and Donegal. People from the south buy cars from England, Scotland and Wales too! Everytime you mention, solely, Donegal and N.Ireland it makes it look like you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

It's already been mentioned in this thread by a few people, including myself, that if you were to cover the VRT's current income by increased fuel prices, that you could fully or partially subsidise the difference in fuel costs for businesses the same way VAT is worked out.

Any One wrote: »

Lets not forgot people who never bought a car in the North and probably never will

Unsurprisingly, you're missing the point again.
Said people would be able to buy their next car for cheaper in the Rep. of Ireland if dealers scale their prices down once they no longer have to deal with paying VRT themselves (or adding the VRT costs into the sale price of the car). So, these people would benefit as well.

There would be none of this 'VRT dodging' bs that's headline news because it wouldn't be possibly anymore. Customs and AGS could dedicate their resources and man hours (6 hour stalemate in a parking lot? c'mon...) to something worth while and we could make more money from tourists and visitors.

And they're also the people that don't stand to lose a chunk of change if they haven't, and never planned to, buy anything from the UK unlike some (including myself).

They would also be contributing to these benefits on how much mileage they do, or how uneconomical their car is, which would aid the environment.... unlike currently where a select few are crucified based on how 'ungreen' they are (co2 emissions, engine size etc) which is a complete farce if compared to taxing fuel.

It's not really fair that the owner of the big gas guzzling weekend car (that does 2-3k miles p/year) that should be left to foot the bill of the VRT when there are vans doing 60k+ miles a year that only cost 50 euro to VRT which are leaving a cataclysmic hole in the environment in comparison to the car enthusiasts gas guzzler.

furtzy

O.K ryan see if you can convert me to your cause.

I've just bought a new car for €27,000 and €7500 of that was VRT. If you got your way and magically the government decide they don't need the €400 odd million and get rid of VRT. How to do you propose I am compensated?

Do you think the government will offer me a rebate at a time when they are borrowing €500 million a week to run the country

I want you to provide a fully costed reply with actual figures provided and not just guesstimates. These are the type of questions you will face on your campaign

Any One

Vertakill wrote: »

I've already paid just shy of 6k in VRT and I have no problem with what I'm suggesting at all.

You can't make absolutely everybody happy - it's not possible. However, if you're fair and you make the majority of people happy, whilst rewarding people who leave a small carbon footprint and punishing those who leave a larger one (more miles you do, the more fuel you use, the more you endanger the environment, right?) whilst bringing more money to the nations coffers from within and outside of the country... well I think that can only be a good thing.




STOP talking about the North and Donegal. People from the south buy cars from England, Scotland and Wales too! Everytime you mention, solely, Donegal and N.Ireland it makes it look like you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

It's already been mentioned in this thread by a few people, including myself, that if you were to cover the VRT's current income by increased fuel prices, that you could fully or partially subsidise the difference in fuel costs for businesses the same way VAT is worked out.



Unsurprisingly, you're missing the point again.
Said people would be able to buy their next car for cheaper in the Rep. of Ireland if dealers scale their prices down once they no longer have to deal with paying VRT themselves (or adding the VRT costs into the sale price of the car). So, these people would benefit as well.

There would be none of this 'VRT dodging' bs that's headline news because it wouldn't be possibly anymore. Customs and AGS could dedicate their resources and man hours (6 hour stalemate in a parking lot? c'mon...) to something worth while and we could make more money from tourists and visitors.

And they're also the people that don't stand to lose a chunk of change if they haven't, and never planned to, buy anything from the UK unlike some (including myself).

They would also be contributing to these benefits on how much mileage they do, or how uneconomical their car is, which would aid the environment.... unlike currently where a select few are crucified based on how 'ungreen' they are (co2 emissions, engine size etc) which is a complete farce if compared to taxing fuel.

It's not really fair that the owner of the big gas guzzling weekend car (that does 2-3k miles p/year) that should be left to foot the bill of the VRT when there are vans doing 60k+ miles a year that only cost 50 euro to VRT which are leaving a cataclysmic hole in the environment in comparison to the car enthusiasts gas guzzler.

But your talking about buying a "New Car" when you say people would be able to buy their next car for cheaper in the Republic.

What about people who can't afford a new car and buy can only afford a second hand one? Will they have to pay more for fuel because some man who doesn't want to pay his VRT can afford a new car?

Again its penalizing the person who mightn't be able to afford a new car so therefore has to pay more for fuel because VRT would be added to the price of the fuel which is very unfar.

The system thats in at the minute is the better one and i hope it stays that way. If you can afford to buy a new car in the North then you can afford to pay the VRT on said car. If not don't buy it.

Theres no point crying on about it and saying you "Could have this car" or "I could have this car" if there was no VRT.

But as i said all that would be accomplished is that the rich would get to buy their "New" cars while the less well of would have to pay more for fuel to keep the rich who don't want to pay VRT happy.

And how could you make more money from tourists and visitors if the price of fuel were to go up? Its over 1.34 a litre in places for petrol at the minute so what your saying is that if a VRT tax was added to fuel we would get more tourists and visitors? I don't think so some how!!!!

Any One

furtzy wrote: »

O.K ryan see if you can convert me to your cause.

I've just bought a new car for €27,000 and €7500 of that was VRT. If you got your way and magically the government decide they don't need the €400 odd million and get rid of VRT. How to do you propose I am compensated?

Do you think the government will offer me a rebate at a time when they are borrowing €500 million a week to run the country

I want you to provide a fully costed reply with actual figures provided and not just guesstimates. These are the type of questions you will face on your campaign

If people can afford to spend €27,000 on a new car then they can afford to pay the VRT which i see you did so fair play to you.

If only the rest of them would pay the VRT they would have no bother then with Customs and Excise as they would no longer be breaking the law.

furtzy

Any One wrote: »

If people can afford to spend €27,000 on a new car then they can afford to pay the VRT which i see you did so fair play to you.

If only the rest of them would pay the VRT they would have no bother then with Customs and Excise as they would no longer be breaking the law.

It was a new 10 reg here so didn't have much choice with the VRT

Guy:Incognito

Vertakill wrote: »

Again, not relying on anyone but have you forgotten about the car industry before the recession? People were replacing their cars with reasonable regularity. Going by the same logic, once we're all back on our feet, wouldn't the sales of cars (doesn't even have to be new btw..) be just as high, if not higher, than pre-recession times if the prices had the potential to be a lot lower and more money would be staying within the country rather than being pi55ed away to the UK?

.

I havnt forgotten and it's those sales that need to be repeated , not replace the revenue from the lower sales we're getting now.That's where Ryan is being slightly misleadign going on about making up €3-400m. Thats not the case, it's €1b+ that needs to be raised from elsewhere if VRT was to go.

So assumeing the peopel go back to more or less the same level of car buying post recession, we still need to raise another €1.4b (iirc) on top of those sales to make up for not having any VRT (if it were gotten rid of) and I dont think there are enough extra people in the country that are going to buy cars to make up €1.4b aswell as the Vat thats been raised on the cars . We'd need new car sales to be somethign like 2-3 times higher than it ever was and unless cars are goign to be free, thats never happening.

Then we need 2nd hand sales to be multiples of what they were.

Vertakill wrote: »

It's already been mentioned in this thread by a few people, including myself, that if you were to cover the VRT's current income by increased fuel prices, that you could fully or partially subsidise the difference in fuel costs for businesses the same way VAT is worked out.

.

As I 'm saying, it's not the current VRT take that needs replacing. The country is not geting enough money, we need tax take to be much closer to 2006 ish levels than 2010 levels.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

So what your saying is that people in Ireland should pay a tax and people bringing in a cars should not have to pay it?


When a new car is registered here it as VRT applied. At no other stage in its life, no matter how many times it's sold on, is it subject to VRT again so I dotn see what your point is here.

Stekelly wrote: »

So if theres vat at various levels on cars sold in Ireland and none on cars imported, why would anyone buy a car in Ireland ever again?



and an ever increasing number of posts being ignored that are questioning it.

Stekelly wrote: »

.

If theres No VRT in Ireland and the UK but we have a sliding scale on VAT, with none applied to imports, then Irish cars would be more expensive. Or am I qouting you in your own words wrongly?

Are you being intentionally obtuse ? I never said there would not be VAT on imports. THere would be VAT on NEW CARS - as the law is currently - whether imported or not.

Jesus its increasingly obvious that those of you defending VRt don't undertsand the tax laws on all this. Currently if you buy a second hand car aborad you don't pay VAT, just as you don't pay VAt here. Yet its cheaper to buy a second hand car abroad. Why ? Because the value of second hand cars in Ireland is artifically inflated by them having both VAT and VRT on them when they were new. This make sit attractive to buy a second hand car abroad. The most cost effective way to buy a car abro ad is to buy a 6 month old one with more than 6000km on it thus defining it as second hand and not paying VAT. If there were no VRT then you could buy a new car at home and pay the VAT on it.

Buying a new car abroad it is subject to both VAT and VRT. Which is why most imports ARE second hand. If you abolished VRT, yes you would not have to pay it on a second hand import, but it would also reduce the cost of Irish imports. In short, less people would go abroad to buy second hand cars because the irish ones would be more competetively priced. You might even get Northeners coming South to buy cars which would be good for our economy.


Honestly this argument is ludicrous. If oyu are pro VRT you are in favour of a government interference int he free market. VRT is basically equaivalent to fixing the price of milk excepting that government are taking the profits. VRT is nothing but bad for the irish consumer and porbably bad for the industry too. But no go on ahead there Turkeys - keep voting for Christmas

opinion guy

Any One wrote: »

If people can afford to spend €27,000 on a new car then they can afford to pay the VRT which i see you did so fair play to you.

If only the rest of them would pay the VRT they would have no bother then with Customs and Excise as they would no longer be breaking the law.

You seem to be under the illusion that there are hoards of people not paying VRT. There aren't. There are a handful. Most people who importa a car happily pay the VRT because they are STILL saving money.

R.O.R

opinion guy wrote: »

Are you being intentionally obtuse ? I never said there would not be VAT on imports. THere would be VAT on NEW CARS - as the law is currently - whether imported or not.

Jesus its increasingly obvious that those of you defending VRt don't undertsand the tax laws on all this. Currently if you buy a second hand car aborad you don't pay VAT, just as you don't pay VAt here. Yet its cheaper to buy a second hand car abroad. Why ? Because the value of second hand cars in Ireland is artifically inflated by them having both VAT and VRT on them when they were new. This make sit attractive to buy a second hand car abroad. The most cost effective way to buy a car abro ad is to buy a 6 month old one with more than 6000km on it thus defining it as second hand and not paying VAT. If there were no VRT then you could buy a new car at home and pay the VAT on it.

Buying a new car abroad it is subject to both VAT and VRT. Which is why most imports ARE second hand. If you abolished VRT, yes you would not have to pay it on a second hand import, but it would also reduce the cost of Irish imports. In short, less people would go abroad to buy second hand cars because the irish ones would be more competetively priced. You might even get Northeners coming South to buy cars which would be good for our economy.


Honestly this argument is ludicrous. If oyu are pro VRT you are in favour of a government interference int he free market. VRT is basically equaivalent to fixing the price of milk excepting that government are taking the profits. VRT is nothing but bad for the irish consumer and porbably bad for the industry too. But no go on ahead there Turkeys - keep voting for Christmas

Sorry if I'm not following properly, but are you suggesting the application of VAT to used imports which have already had VAT applied in their native countries?

That really would contravene the free movement of goods within the EU.

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

Are you being intentionally obtuse ? I never said there would not be VAT on imports. THere would be VAT on NEW CARS - as the law is currently - whether imported or not.

You increase VAt on a new car, this puts the new car at a level relative to the current price which has VRT.

If the car still starts cheaper in the UK it's most likely goign to stay cheaper through its first few years, meaning without 2nd hand tax of any sort on imports, it means people will go to the uk.
I'm not being obtuse but from the first time you posted that it read like thats what was being suggested.


The bottom line is that a VRT reduction/obolition means prices go up on other things. At the moment you can more or less choose how much VRT to pay by the car you drive. If VRT is gone and fuel goes up, the cost of motoring for EVERYONE goes up. The government tax take will take a hit too because all the border counties will start buying most of their fuel in the north. The people in the North that have been nipping over the border to buy their fuel woll stop doing that.

opinion guy

R.O.R wrote: »

Sorry if I'm not following properly, but are you suggesting the application of VAT to used imports which have already had VAT applied in their native countries?

That really would contravene the free movement of goods within the EU.

No - only on new's. I'm saying no tax on second hands as with any other goods.

Ok. Currently if you buy a new car in Britain. You pay VAT in Britain AND VAT in Ireland and you claw back the UK VAT (so far as I know) AND VRT on registering in Ireland. So buying a new car abroad is actually more of an outlay initially even if you get some of it back. (I'm not sure if you need to be VAT registered in UK to do this).

Buying a second hand car in UK or here you don't pay VAT (cause you never pay VAT on used goods).

The big saving on buying in the UK, so far as I can see, is to buy a 6 month old car with >6000km on it. Say a demo model. Due to it being second hand the price is cheaper than the list price in UK. Then you still pay VRT, but you don't pay VAT in either jurisdiction. Given that Irish VAt is 21% this is a helluva a saving.

Of course you don't pay VAT on a second hand car brought in Ireland either. But the previous owner did along with VRT, and this translates into a higher second hand price. THIS is why people go abroad to buy.

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

No - only on new's.
Ok. Currently if you buy a new car in Britain. You pay VAT in Britain AND VAT in Ireland and you claw back the UK VAT (so far as I know) AND VRT on registering in Ireland. So buying a new car abroad is actually more of an outlay initially even if you get some of it back. (I'm not sure if you need to be VAT registered in UK to do this).
.

Thats because of the dealer in the UK though. If you go to one thats clued up they can sell you the car unregistered, but at the end of the day it's going to cost much the same when you get it back for most new cars, so theres not much point bothering.

opinion guy

OK an example of how things are currently and you all might start to understand. I took prices from autotrader uk and autortrader irl for simialr model

Second hand 2010 audi a3 1.6l diesel in ireland - 28000EUR.

Second hand 2010 audi a3 2l diesel in uk - £15,500

Todays exchange rate = 1.19

so uk price = 15500 * 1.19 = 18445 EUR

Importing costs (transport etc) say 1000 EUR

VRT on this car - tax band A (for 1.6 and 2l) - VRT is approx 3,200

Total cost of uk import = 22645 EUR

Saving - approx 5355 EUR.

So you can save 5000 on a 2010 car even whilst paying your VRT. You even got a bigger engine and higher spec


This is why people buy abroad. Its nothing to do with dodging VRT as many of you seem to be under the illusion Christ when you are still saving so much money most are gleefully paying the VRT. Now the reason the second hand cars are so much more expensive here is because as new cars they were double taxed. If you remove that double tax there would be less incentive to buy abroad and more incentive to buy here keeping the money in our economy, keeping jobs in our motor industry. You would also sell more new cars here.


Edit: Incidentally the garages do this too. Most 2009 second hands the garages have here currently seem to be uk imports (because there simply aren't many Irish 09 cars for sale). Thou they are selling them at Irish second hand prices.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

Thats because of the dealer in the UK though. If you go to one thats clued up they can sell you the car unregistered, but at the end of the day it's going to cost much the same when you get it back for most new cars, so theres not much point bothering.

Agreed. There is not much point in buying a new car abroad. There is alot of point in buying a newish second hand abroad as shown in my example above.

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

This is why people buy abroad. Its nothing to do with dodging VRT as many of you seem to be under the illusion..

But along with not having to pay Motor Tax and nct the car it very much is. Nobody has any issue with people going to the UK and buying a car as long as they pay their dues. It's the people that are keeping the car on UK plates and not payign their way thats the problem.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

But along with not having to pay Motor Tax and nct the car it very much is. Nobody has any issue with people going to the UK and buying a car as long as they pay their dues. It's the people that are keeping the car on UK plates and not payign their way thats the problem.

But then why are you arguing in favour of VRT, since tax evasion is an entirely seperate issue ?

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

But then why are you arguing in favour of VRT, since tax evasion is an entirely seperate issue ?

Because I dotn want to have to pay anymore in any other area of tax to make up the shortfall. I did outline all of that in my last lengthy post. No 520 and 524

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

Because I dotn want to have to pay anymore in any other area of tax to make up the shortfall. I did outline all of that in my last lengthy post. No 520 and 524

But you're assumption that becuase you scrap VRT there will be a shortfall is not valid. If you scrap VRT many of the people buying newish second hands abroad will now buy new cars at home - contributing to VAT. Those who don't will be more likely to buy second hands at home instead of the UK thus increases trade in the motor industry, creating jobs (which is better than tax income), subsequently increasing tax income from the sector and generally being good for the community. Furthermore, border garages would be more in a position to compete cross border. Northeners might start buying southern cars second hand and new further boosting the economy (indeed - this would be especially true if you make the VAT changes I suggested. UK VAT is 17.5%. they could buy here and pay VAT there saving themselves ****loads of money but pumping money into the industry here creating jobs etc etc) The VAT changes I've suggested were also partly to increase VAT income, whilst maintaining the incentive to buy efficient cars

Of course all of this depends on numbers. But your simplicstic - it must be replaced elsewhere does not reflect the true complexity of the situation.

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

But you're assumption that becuase you scrap VRT there will be a shortfall is not valid. If you scrap VRT many of the people buying newish second hands abroad will now buy new cars at home - contributing to VAT. Those who don't will be more likely to buy second hands at home instead of the UK thus increases trade in the motor industry, creating jobs (which is better than tax income), subsequently increasing tax income from the sector and generally being good for the community. Furthermore, border garages would be more in a position to compete cross border. Northeners might start buying southern cars second hand and new further boosting the economy. The VAT changes I've suggested were also partly to increase VAT income, whilst maintaining the incentive to buy efficient cars

Of course all of this depends on numbers. But your simplicstic - it must be replaced elsewhere does not reflect the true complexity of the situation.

Do you really think theres €1.4B in tax revenue going abroad every year? and that that will now suddenly be spent here?

The figures dont even come close to backing that up. There would have to be probably 10-15 times as many people as are curremtly importing each year, that are not currently buying a car at all, that now start buying in the VRTless Ireland.



If there were 200,000 cars registered new here in 2005 (I picked a number, didnt check actual figures) and 10,000 used imports totalling €1.4b in VRT, we would now need multiples of those numbers buyign each year to make up the difference with increased VAT or else raise other taxes.

How many people do you think live in the country? and I again I really doubt theres 3-400,000 people sitting waiting to buy cars when VRT is gone.

R.O.R

opinion guy wrote: »

But you're assumption that becuase you scrap VRT there will be a shortfall is not valid. If you scrap VRT many of the people buying newish second hands abroad will now buy new cars at home - contributing to VAT. Those who don't will be more likely to buy second hands at home instead of the UK thus increases trade in the motor industry, creating jobs (which is better than tax income), subsequently increasing tax income from the sector and generally being good for the community. Furthermore, border garages would be more in a position to compete cross border. Northeners might start buying southern cars second hand and new further boosting the economy. The VAT changes I've suggested were also partly to increase VAT income, whilst maintaining the incentive to buy efficient cars

Of course all of this depends on numbers. But your simplicstic - it must be replaced elsewhere does not reflect the true complexity of the situation.

Have you any idea of the number of imported vehicles versus the number bought in Ireland? It's a low percentage and pretty negliable in the grand scheme of things.

If VRT is abolished, there will be a significant shortfall and a large number of Motor dealers who are still struggling after the VRT decreases in 08 will go out of business.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

Do you really think theres €1.4B in tax revenue going abroad every year? and that that will now suddenly be spent here?

The figures dont even come close to backing that up. There would have to be probably 10-15 times as many people as are curremtly importing each year, that are not currently buying a car at all, that now start buying in the VRTless Ireland.

R.O.R wrote: »

Have you any idea of the number of imported vehicles versus the number bought in Ireland? It's a low percentage and pretty negliable in the grand scheme of things.

If VRT is abolished, there will be a significant shortfall and a large number of Motor dealers who are still struggling after the VRT decreases in 08 will go out of business.

You both missed my point about selling cars to the North that I just edited in. Stekelly - I AM saying to increase VAT differenentially as per efficicency

opinion guy

R.O.R wrote: »

Have you any idea of the number of imported vehicles versus the number bought in Ireland? It's a low percentage and pretty negliable in the grand scheme of things.

If VRT is abolished, there will be a significant shortfall and a large number of Motor dealers who are still struggling after the VRT decreases in 08 will go out of business.

No I don't know the numbers.

How will it affect dealers ??? THat makes no sense. THey don't keep the VRT for themselves. IT will help them by sellign more cars. They weren't sruggling from VRT decreases they were srtuggling from the recession. In fact the VRt decreases is porbably whats saving them now

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

You both missed my point about selling cars to the North that I just edited in. Stekelly - I AM saying to increase VAT differenentially as per efficicency

Yes fine, increase vat, that puts the prices higher still than the UK. Assuming the same pre tax price as the UK, we already have higher VAT than them. Any further VAT increase will widen the gap so cars will still be more expensive here.

By my rough calculations of €1.4b VRT divided by 200,000 new cars, each car would have to cost €700 more to make the difference.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

Yes fine, increase vat, that puts the prices higher still than the UK. Assuming the same pre tax price as the UK, we already have higher VAT than them. Any further VAT increase will widen the gap so cars will still be more expensive here.

No its still a reduction in price - its just not a hard drop. First thing is pre tax prices are not the same here as the UK.
But you forget VRT is a percentage ON a percentage. 40% VAT is cheaper than 20% VAT + 20% VRT (since that is cost*1.2*1.2). The VAT figures I gave are still a reduction overall. But they would also make it far more attractive for a UK buyer to come here since they could buy here and pay Vat at 17% there

Guy:Incognito

opinion guy wrote: »

No its still a reduction. First thing is pre tax prices are not the same here as the UK. .

They are cheaper here because the importers have it lower to try keep the retail cost down. If there was no VRT the pre tax price woudl rise to al least the same as the UK.

opinion guy

Stekelly wrote: »

They are cheaper here because the importers have it lower to try keep the retail cost down. If there was no VRT the pre tax price woudl rise to al leats the same as the UK.

But so would the basic specification. No more banger spec. You'd get more for your buck. And banger spec is a big motivation for some people to buy abroad

R.O.R

opinion guy wrote: »

No I don't know the numbers.

How will it affect dealers ??? THat makes no sense. THey don't keep the VRT for themselves. IT will help them by sellign more cars. They weren't sruggling from VRT decreases they were srtuggling from the recession. In fact the VRt decreases is porbably whats saving them now

Nope - you really don't have a clue about what's going on in the industry.

The VRT changes are what are still killing us (I use us because I work in the motor industry).

There has been no benefit to the majority of the car buying public, infact the cost to change has actually increased since the start of 2008, because the trade in value of cars has dropped further than the price of new cars.

With retail prices having to be dropped to compete with the UK, the margins dealers (and importers) are making is now smaller than ever before, and with less cars being sold, less money is being made.

The margin on used cars has also dropped to compete against the UK.

Factor in the large number of vehicles which are underwritten for a huge amount more than they are now worth (due to the VRT changes and comepetition from the UK), and dealers are still struggling to turn a small profit.

Drop prices again (by removing VRT) and you drop the value of the used vehicles currently in stock. There are maybe one or two of the very biggest motor groups in Ireland who could afford to continue to sell cars at a loss, but the majority can't so you'd see further closures.

opinion guy

R.O.R wrote: »

Nope - you really don't have a clue about what's going on in the industry.

The VRT changes are what are still killing us (I use us because I work in the motor industry).

There has been no benefit to the majority of the car buying public, infact the cost to change has actually increased since the start of 2008, because the trade in value of cars has dropped further than the price of new cars.

With retail prices having to be dropped to compete with the UK, the margins dealers (and importers) are making is now smaller than ever before, and with less cars being sold, less money is being made.

The margin on used cars has also dropped to compete against the UK.

Factor in the large number of vehicles which are underwritten for a huge amount more than they are now worth (due to the VRT changes and comepetition from the UK), and dealers are still struggling to turn a small profit.

Drop prices again (by removing VRT) and you drop the value of the used vehicles currently in stock. There are maybe one or two of the very biggest motor groups in Ireland who could afford to continue to sell cars at a loss, but the majority can't so you'd see further closures.

so you are having to drop prices to compete with the uk then ? So there ARE appreciable numbers going to the UK that implies that removing there incentive to go there would be good for you - does it not ?

Honeslty most of that stuff on second hand prices is to do with market conditions as anythin else. For exmaple 2009 second hands do well cause there are so few of them versus the glut of 2007 and 2008 ones. sales in 2010 are already higher thatn all of 2009 - that is due to VRT reduction- its saving you guys in terms of new car sales

Frankly your post does not make sense -you are saying there has been no benefit to consumers but then saying prices are having to be dropped. Which is it ?

samsemtex

Any One wrote: »

Modnote: Pro and anti-VRT Facebook threads merged - Chris

---

Hi everyone i'm new on here. I hope this page will be allowed to stay up as i'm sure not everyone is against and i feel its only fair that people in that frame of mind be allowed to have their say.

Theres a new facebook page called For VRT so please join if you want.

http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/For-VRT-Vehicle-Registration-Tax/124353794256290

I would also like to point out to anyone before they say it, i am not a customs man. I wish i was as i would soon take the car of the people who haven't paid their VRT as they are breaking the law.

You can read more views on the facebook page.

As i said at the start of my post it should only be fair that people with the same view as me should be allowed to express their views.

Thanks

Well that has to be one of the most catastrophic fails i have ever seen on facebook. 3 people are fans...ha ha.......ha

R.O.R

opinion guy wrote: »

so you are having to drop prices to compete with the uk then ? So there ARE appreciable numbers going to the UK that implies that removing there incentive to go there would be good for you - does it not ?

Honeslty most of that stuff on second hand prices is to do with market conditions as anythin else. For exmaple 2009 second hands do well cause there are so few of them versus the glut of 2007 and 2008 ones. sales in 2010 are already higher thatn all of 2009 - that is due to VRT reduction- its saving you guys in terms of new car sales

Frankly your post does not make sense -you are saying there has been no benefit to consumers but then saying prices are having to be dropped. Which is it ?

Prices have dropped, but as a majority of people still have a car that has also dropped, the net effect is of no benefit - do you get that?

Sales in 2010 are higher than 2009 because it's now more socially acceptable to buy a new car, thanks in part to the scrappage scheme and a return (to an extent) of consumer confidence. In my opionion, it's not to do with lower prices as it's costing people more to change car from used to new, than it was in 2007 / early 2008.

Sales of new cars are not what are keeping dealers going.

There are still few cars being imported, mainly due to the fact that prices have dropped to similar to UK levels - except Audi for some reason (nice find on that 2010 A3 btw - all the others around that price are 57 or 08 plates)

opinion guy

R.O.R wrote: »

Prices have dropped, but as a majority of people still have a car that has also dropped, the net effect is of no benefit - do you get that?

Yeah I do get that. But in the long term it benefits consumers. Second hands were/are overvalued here. And having a highly depreciable asset theat overvalued is not good. Over time they will be better off.

Sales in 2010 are higher than 2009 because it's now more socially acceptable to buy a new car, thanks in part to the scrappage scheme and a return (to an extent) of consumer confidence. In my opionion, it's not to do with lower prices as it's costing people more to change car from used to new, than it was in 2007 / early 2008.

I don't believe its anytihng to do with socially acceptable. Actually to be honest what I relaly think is behind this is the collapse int he housing market. People are terrififed to buy property, a new car is the net biggest outlay for most people who happened to have any money to spend.

Sales of new cars are not what are keeping dealers going.

Can't hurt if they go up thou, no ?

There are still few cars being imported, mainly due to the fact that prices have dropped to similar to UK levels - except Audi for some reason (nice find on that 2010 A3 btw - all the others around that price are 57 or 08 plates)

Every 2009 audi i've seen ont he forecourts is a uk import. I suspect irish people with 09 audis are just not selling them. hahah cheers. But it was just a quick scan of autotrader, not something I was looking at. Here - enjoy
http://atsearch.autotrader.co.uk/ni/cars_popup.jsp?searchform=&modelexact=1&lid=search_used_cars_full&photo=1&state=none&sort=3&hassearched=Y&make=AUDI&min_pr=75&source=0&model=A3&max_pr=&miles=60&agerange=6&mileage=&postcode=cm22+7dw&variant=&bodyid=0&trim=&fuelid=0&colour=&transmissionid=0&keywords=&ukcarsearch_full.x=35&ukcarsearch_full.y=3&ukcarsearch_full=SEARCH&start=4&distance=42&adcategory=CARS&channel=CARS&id=201017357910636

Honestly thou - doesn't seem that unusual from what i can see ! (Edit: Just noticed there are 16000 miles on it. On a 2010 !!!!!! Holy crap). THere are plenty of 1.6's with normal mileage for around this price thou

Vertakill

furtzy wrote: »

O.K ryan see if you can convert me to your cause.

I've just bought a new car for €27,000 and €7500 of that was VRT. If you got your way and magically the government decide they don't need the €400 odd million and get rid of VRT. How to do you propose I am compensated?

Do you think the government will offer me a rebate at a time when they are borrowing €500 million a week to run the country

I want you to provide a fully costed reply with actual figures provided and not just guesstimates. These are the type of questions you will face on your campaign

Why in gods name would you get a rebate? There are plenty of people in the same boat as you. Where would you draw the line as far as giving rebates?

Oh sure, Joe Bloggs down the road there bought a TDiddlyI Passat 8 years ago in the UK and he wants his VRT money back?

C'mon, get fking real. If governments pass a law or whatever, they don't run back and reimburse the few that got a raw deal prior to it.

furtzy

Vertakill wrote: »

Why in gods name would you get a rebate? There are plenty of people in the same boat as you. Where would you draw the line as far as giving rebates?

Oh sure, Joe Bloggs down the road there bought a TDiddlyI Passat 8 years ago in the UK and he wants his VRT money back?

C'mon, get fking real. If governments pass a law or whatever, they don't run back and reimburse the few that got a raw deal prior to it.

FFS exactly. I don't expect one nor do I expect his VRT dodging mates to get away with paying nothing. This is the point I'm trying to get ryanstewart to grasp thats why the question is directed at him.

I want him to cost out using real figures not imaginary ones his great plan to overnight devalue all the cars in this country.

For people who borrowed or financed cars they would be overnight put in a position of owing far more than the book value of their cars so couldn't change and so ****ing up the entire motor trade once again

opinion guy

furtzy wrote: »

FFS exactly. I don't expect one nor do I expect his VRT dodging mates to get away with paying nothing. This is the point I'm trying to get ryanstewart to grasp thats why the question is directed at him.

I want him to cost out using real figures not imaginary ones his great plan to overnight devalue all the cars in this country.

For people who borrowed or financed cars they would be overnight put in a position of owing far more than the book value of their cars so couldn't change and so ****ing up the entire motor trade once again

But that "value" on a car is meaningless and subject to market forces anyway. As ROR said above - dealers are ALREADY lowering prices to compete with UK imports. If you scrap VRT values adjust here you actually have a more competitive market which is good for consumers and dealers alike. The value of your second hand car has got far more to do with prevailing market forces such in Ireland, in the UK and exchange rates than it does with VRT. Dealers make money by turing over stock - by selling more cars, not by hoarding them for their value. Not unless they are made out of gold at least. Furthermoe you scrap VRT and our dealers can start exporting cars to the north /europe

To give you an example. A dealer told me of a guy trying to trade in a car he paid 100,000 for in 2008. Most he can get now is 30,000 cause of the recession, petrol prices and the annual tax bands. It has jack **** to do with VRT. Except without VRT he would not have paid so much out in the first place. This 'value' you speak of is artifically inflated.

furtzy

opinion guy wrote: »

But that "value" on a car is meaningless and subject to market forces anyway. As ROR said above - dealers are ALREADY lowering prices to compete with UK imports. If you scrap VRT values adjust here you actually have a more competitive market which is good for consumers and dealers alike. The value of your second hand car has got far more to do with prevailing market forces such in Ireland, in the UK and exchange rates than it does with VRT. Dealers make money by turing over stock - by selling more cars, not by hoarding them for their value. Not unless they are made out of gold at least.

I'll give you an example from my friend garage

Woman came in to trade her 2007 5 series for a new model. She got her finance settlement figure and was ready to buy. However due to the VRT band changes the price of the new 5 series had dropped considerable and subsequently her trade in value had dropped considerably too. Now her settlement figure is way more than her trade -in value so no sale for the garage

To give you an example. A dealer told me of a guy trying to trade in a car he paid 100,000 for in 2008. Most he can get now is 30,000 cause of the recession, petrol prices and the annual tax bands. It has jack **** to do with VRT. Except without VRT he would not have paid so much out in the first place. This 'value' you speak of is artifically inflated.

The trade-in value of a car is determined by its book value then taking into account condition and mileage. The book value is based on the current new price of your model.

Take my example which would be common to 100's of thousands of people in this country

Car bought new for 26,950
Car bought on finance
VRT was approx 7500

VRT abolished the new price of my car would be 19,450
Trade-in value of my car would decrease by 7500 meaning i would suddenly be hugely over financed and not able to trade-in my car until finance is fully paid off. Even if i did wait and pay it off it would worth a lot less as a trade in

This has already happened to a lesser degree with the VRT band adjustments and led to the huge drop off in sales post this change

The only reason sales are up this year is both due to the scrappage scheme and also the comparison to such a bad year last year.

Ask any of the people on here in the motor trade and they will tel you the same

I'll give you an example from my friends dealership

Woman came in to trade in her 2007 5 series. Sat down with the dealer and got her finance settlement figure and was ready to buy.

because of the recent VRT band changes the new 5 series had dropped considerably in price but subsequently so had her trade in value which now didn't cover her settlement figure so no sale for the garage

opinion guy

furtzy wrote: »

The trade-in value of a car is determined by its book value then taking into account condition and mileage. The book value is based on the current new price of your model.

So don't trade in your car. Sell it privately for a price you see fit. Keep it. You are under no obligation to trade in your car. You think the garage is selling your car according to this formula ? Hell no.

Take my example which would be common to 100's of thousands of people in this country

Car bought new for 26,950
Car bought on finance
VRT was approx 7500

VRT abolished the new price of my car would be 19,450
Trade-in value of my car would decrease by 7500 meaning i would suddenly be hugely over financed and not able to trade-in my car until finance is fully paid off. Even if i did wait and pay it off it would worth a lot less as a trade in

NO. It would not be devalued by 7500. it would devalue by a percentage of that.
Also what I've have said earlier is to increase VAT, thus softening this blow.

This has already happened to a lesser degree with the VRT band adjustments and led to the huge drop off in sales post this change

Rubbish. The recession did this.

The only reason sales are up this year is both due to the scrappage scheme and also the comparison to such a bad year last year.

Ask any of the people on here in the motor trade and they will tel you the same

Also rubbish. Its partly the scrappage scheme, partly (the biggest part in my opinion) the collapse of the housing market, partly the VRT changes (let me ask you a quesiton - which cars do you think are selling - VRT band A, B, C or the higher bands ??)

furtzy

opinion guy wrote: »

So don't trade in your car. Sell it privately for a price you see fit. Keep it. You are under no obligation to trade in your car. You think the garage is selling your car according to this formula ? Hell no.

It would have still devalued if I sell it privately :rolleyes: Of course I'm under no obligation but your suggestion has removed that choice from me thus depriving any dealership my custom

opinion guy wrote: »

NO. It would not be devalued by 7500. it would devalue by a percentage of that.
Also what I've have said earlier is to increase VAT, thus softening this blow.

It would still have devalued along with all of the trade in stock on garage forecourts

opinion guy wrote: »

Rubbish. The recession did this.

I will let the car dealing members on here correct you on that

opinion guy wrote: »

Also rubbish. Its partly the scrappage scheme, partly (the biggest part in my opinion) the collapse of the housing market, partly the VRT changes (let me ask you a quesiton - which cars do you think are selling - VRT band A, B, C or the higher bands ??)

Mine is band E. Once again I will let the car dealing members correct you on that

opinion guy

.