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

Cookie_Monster

why is it only against Ireland, do Denmark not have an extremely similar VRT. The EC not taking a case against them also under the circumstances?

R P McMurphy

I wonder would the assurances given during Lisbon 2 in relation to Ireland's ability to dictate its own tax affairs also relate to VRT

mondeo

Nice move, so I could live in the south and drive a northern reg car down here legally if Ireland looses?

Eleganza

Good luck on that. Mailed the E.U. Commission looking for feedback on my 15 month old complaint regarding VRT OMSP cut-off at €2000.
E.U. repsond to say they'll reply when they reply.
Don't expect the E.U. to protect the interests of the Irish Citizen.

robtri

Matt Simis wrote: »

Only the used car sales portion and only temporally. VRT is a band aid thats got to be pulled off, better do it now than when we are in a boom and VRT is worth a lot more.
.

if it has to come off, better to do it slowly i think...

yes it will only effect the used car portion of the market but every dealer has used cars and the write down on the stock would be immense.....
especailly for the premium market stock...

iirc the VRT on a a new 320d is around the €6k mark....

if this goes, the used car price will drop by around €5k for one or two year old cars .... having 20 of these types or similiar priced cars on your lot will be a drop in asset value of €100,000 ....
some of the larger premium marquee dealers can have up to 100 cars at a similiar value....not sure if many would survive with such a loss

turbodiesel

Sure they'll only get fined a small percentage of what they take in......like water off a ducks back to revenue.....

Owen

Matt Simis wrote: »

better do it now than when we are in a boom

We're in a boom

Matt Simis

PaintDoctor wrote: »

We're in a boom

I said "than when we are in a boom"?!?
When this was raised 4years ago the amount VRT brought in was staggering and to replace it would have represent largish increases on some other tax. To replace it today will be much "cheaper" as VRT itself is a fraction of what it was.

EPM

Abolition of this has to be gradual. So many dealerships are teethering on the edge right now that having a massive devaluation of stock (again) would surely see a lot go under. Not to mention the amount of people that still have huge car finance out on cars falling into (even more) negative equity over night.

mcwhirter

Will I get the 3600 euros back I paid then?, fooking crooks!!!!

It BeeMee

I fail to see where the case is on a person's movement between countries.

There is nothing stopping a ROI license holder driving a ROI registered car up North, or a NI license holder driving a NI registered car down South.

Or am I missing something?

m.j.w

It BeeMee wrote: »

I fail to see where the case is on a person's movement between countries.

There is nothing stopping a ROI license holder driving a ROI registered car up North, or a NI license holder driving a NI registered car down South.

Or am I missing something?

It doesnt matter what licence you have, its to do with were you are a resident

creedp

m.j.w wrote: »

It doesnt matter what licence you have, its to do with were you are a resident

Actually its more to do with what you can get away with in persuading the Revenue that your main residence is still up North and are just live here temporarily. The amount if NI and UK registered machiney all around the country is extraordinary. I've noticed a Citroen C8 with an 08 UK plate parking in North City Centre for nearly 2 years now. It carries kids to school every day yet still goes around with a UK plate displaying a UK tax disc so no Irish tax and no VRT. Makes you feel like a fool if you import a car and run to VRT centre with you VRT payment doesn't it?

Zubeneschamali

creedp wrote: »

Makes you feel like a fool if you import a car and run to VRT centre with you VRT payment doesn't it?

Well, no.

Some kids snuck into our house onetime and stole a camera and phone, and got away with it. That doesn't make me want to steal other people's stuff, though, and it doesn't make me feel foolish for being honest.

pa990

if VRT is abolished, it'll just be replaced with some other form of motor related tax.

the state needs income,
income comes in the form of taxation
tax isnt gonna go away.
we'll be forever paying VRT in one form or another

Guy:Incognito

Eleganza wrote: »

Good luck on that. Mailed the E.U. Commission looking for feedback on my 15 month old complaint regarding VRT OMSP cut-off at €2000.
E.U. repsond to say they'll reply when they reply.
Don't expect the E.U. to protect the interests of the Irish Citizen.

The reply wont help you at all , should it ever come. I can tell you that already.

The fact the the OMSP has a floor of €2000 is irrelevant. Its a number put there to make the books balance and whther they put €1 in that box or €1000 wont change anything.

The minimum rate for a 36% car is €720. €720 is 36% of €2000. So just so the figures are easy, the €2000 is applied accross the board. If they put the real OMSP of say €1100 in the box, the minimum VRT figure of €720 would still be what you pay.

SO in summary, that €2000 figure means feck all in reality.

NIMAN

Re: Mr Stewart.

Never really liked him.

He started the campaign cos all the people who moved into RoI from NI for cheaper houses, no rates etc couldn't be bothered to change their car over to an Irish plate, even though it was free if you were taking up residence in the South.

They all kept their Northern addresses for their car insurance, their bank accounts, their credit cards, their doctors, kept their children in NI schools etc. Then however when Customs got to them they all got up in arms and started moaning that they were being victimised. They knew the rules but chose to ignore them. They wanted the advantages of living in RoI but none of the cons.

Mr Stewart and his supporters were constantly on the airwaves crying. Never did I hear them answer the question as to why they did not change their car over to a Southern plate free of charge?

As someone who made the move too, and who has paid VRT twice since my arrival in the State, I don't like it either, but its the law of the country. I accept it. I watched many people I know up here dodge down back lanes avoiding the Customs checkpoints. They said they would never pay.

Mr Stewart got many followers, mostly from the new generation of Facebookers. I think he had 10,000+ 'friends'. He staged a protest once outside a Customs office in Donegal and asked as many people as possible to come out and show their support. I think around 50 of his 10,000 friends showed up.

He ran in the last General Election, and got one of the lowest vote counts in history, 203 votes. From a guy who had 10,000+ supporters.

Obviously when it came to the crunch no-one had any confidence in him.

Having said that, most of those were probably Northerners still registered to vote in NI !!

unkel

Matt Simis wrote: »

better do it now than when we are in a boom and VRT is worth a lot more.

Indeed. If you ever want to get rid of it, now's the time. Sales are only half of what they were during the boom years. And typical VRT is now only 14-16% compared to 25-30% before the switch in '08

VRT revenue in the boom was over €2 billion - now it's only about a quarter of that...

Once they're doing that, they might as well scrap motor tax (many people aren't paying it at the mo) and increase excise on fuel (no way to avoid paying tax when it's on fuel)...

n97 mini

I think switching to a CO2 based system did more damage to VRT than the bust.

Getting rid of it is fine... But how long will it be till the thousands of Civil Servants involved in it retire -- and even then they're still on the payroll? Last time I was in a VRO the ignorant cnut of a young one that was handling my case was only about 25, unwashed, and hung-over.

Mr Stewart. Donegal's answer to Michael Healy Rae, except he didn't get elected.

Eleganza

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The reply wont help you at all , should it ever come. I can tell you that already.

The fact the the OMSP has a floor of €2000 is irrelevant. Its a number put there to make the books balance and whther they put €1 in that box or €1000 wont change anything.

The minimum rate for a 36% car is €720. €720 is 36% of €2000. So just so the figures are easy, the €2000 is applied accross the board. If they put the real OMSP of say €1100 in the box, the minimum VRT figure of €720 would still be what you pay.

SO in summary, that €2000 figure means feck all in reality.

€2000 means a hell of a lot when the car is only worth 1000 on open market and you have to pay 720 euro to register it your car imported from another country. It automatically makes importing a car uneconomic and is a barrier to trade.
chipping away at VRT bit by bit will make the tax too difficult to operate and will hasten it's abolition.
Here is the infringement procedure from EU for Malta which I based my complaint upon. A breach of competiton rules is a breach regardless of whether it is for 10 euro or 2000 euro.
http://europa.eu/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?reference=IP/08/511&format=HTML&aged=0&language=en&guiLanguage=en

The way you make your pronouncement, it's almost like you know something about VRT.

EPM

Eleganza wrote: »

The way you make your pronouncement, it's almost like you know something about VRT.

Attack the post, not the poster.

alias no.9

he Court also decided that registration tax paid on a new vehicle forms a part of its market value and that Member States must take actual car's depreciation value into account when calculating registration tax. (see ECJ cases Nunes Tadeu, C-345/93; Commission v Denmark, C-47/88; and Commission v Hellenic Republic, C-375/95)

Ok there may be something in this

ryanstewart

NIMAN wrote: »

Re: Mr Stewart.

Never really liked him.

He started the campaign cos all the people who moved into RoI from NI for cheaper houses, no rates etc couldn't be bothered to change their car over to an Irish plate, even though it was free if you were taking up residence in the South.

They all kept their Northern addresses for their car insurance, their bank accounts, their credit cards, their doctors, kept their children in NI schools etc. Then however when Customs got to them they all got up in arms and started moaning that they were being victimised. They knew the rules but chose to ignore them. They wanted the advantages of living in RoI but none of the cons.

Mr Stewart and his supporters were constantly on the airwaves crying. Never did I hear them answer the question as to why they did not change their car over to a Southern plate free of charge?

As someone who made the move too, and who has paid VRT twice since my arrival in the State, I don't like it either, but its the law of the country. I accept it. I watched many people I know up here dodge down back lanes avoiding the Customs checkpoints. They said they would never pay.

Mr Stewart got many followers, mostly from the new generation of Facebookers. I think he had 10,000+ 'friends'. He staged a protest once outside a Customs office in Donegal and asked as many people as possible to come out and show their support. I think around 50 of his 10,000 friends showed up.

He ran in the last General Election, and got one of the lowest vote counts in history, 203 votes. From a guy who had 10,000+ supporters.

Obviously when it came to the crunch no-one had any confidence in him.

Having said that, most of those were probably Northerners still registered to vote in NI !!

Do you know me by any chance NIMAN?
1) Not 'free' - only if you qualify for transfer of residence
2) I've also paid VRT several times, just because you pay it you don't have to like it, in the same way that the public sector is up in arms on pension levies, the public don't want water charges, universal social charge etc. Should everyone bend over and take tax after tax being thrown at us, or do we stand up and be counted. Last time I checked, everyone was entitled to their opinion!
3) Protest did it's job, got us a meeting with top brass in Customs, who were completely in the dark about what was going on - has lead to a reduced Customs presence, and more account taken of their own rules, which had been completely disregarded, and an open line to them if there are any serious problems, which they do address.
4) This is not about 'northerners' as you put it, it affects everyone in the state.

I have an admission from the Dept of Finance of price-fixing, where vehicles are being moved to slower depreciation rates, which means the end result is the valuation on a vehicle being way above what would normally be found on an Irish forecourt. It's double-taxation as the VRT is calculated on a value where VRT is already included in the price. Car prices pre-tax are cheaper in the state, NI dealers purchase cars pre-tax in th estate for export, and then they are sold back to us with VRT and VAT applied, and at a profit to dealers in the north, how is this equitable?

The system is completely corrupt, and this is a massive result - we have got through the initial stages, this is real action the EC are taking- they are not waiting for an opinion etc, it has already been concluded, and they agree with the context of the petition I have put forward. The Irish Drivers Assoc had their own motion on VRT rejected at preliminary stages last week. The EC do not take measures like this lightly, and I think it's about time the naysayers took a bite of humble pie at this stage.

ryanstewart

n97 mini wrote: »

I think switching to a CO2 based system did more damage to VRT than the bust.

Getting rid of it is fine... But how long will it be till the thousands of Civil Servants involved in it retire -- and even then they're still on the payroll? Last time I was in a VRO the ignorant cnut of a young one that was handling my case was only about 25, unwashed, and hung-over.

Mr Stewart. Donegal's answer to Michael Healy Rae, except he didn't get elected.

Maybe it's about time that Customs officers were redeployed to chase after drugs, smuggling, counterfeiting, patrolling the coast for dodgy Spanish fishing vessels instead of chasing yellow plates and spending thousands putting cases through the courts for what amounts to very small fines??

Eleganza

EPM wrote: »

Attack the post, not the poster.

That poster dismisses other peoples comments like he knows something about the topic and you see fit to censure me.
Infract and ban me again, why don't ya!
Ban him for adding nothing but noise to the thread and I direct you back to page one of the thread to see he has been doing it for over a year.

Guy:Incognito

Eleganza wrote: »

€2000 means a hell of a lot when the car is only worth 1000 on open market and you have to pay 720 euro to register it your car imported from another country. It automatically makes importing a car uneconomic and is a barrier to trade.

No , it doesnt. The minimum vrt for a car that fits in the 36% rate is €720. Thats whether the car is worth €1 or €1800. The vrt will be €720. So to make the computer show the right figure of €720, any car thats worth less than €2000 automatically shows an OMSP of €2000 so that the €720 figure comes up. IT's quite simple really.

Again to make it very simple. €720 is 36% of €2000. The MINIMUM vrt payable on a car thats liable for the 36% rate is €720. So applying an OMSP of at least €2000 will make sure the computer generates the minimum figure of €720 seeing as it cant be any cheaper than that anyway.

Eleganza wrote: »

That poster dismisses other peoples comments like he knows something about the topic and you see fit to censure me.
Infract and ban me again, why don't ya!.

The poster does know somethign about the subject. He looked at the VRT calculator and used some basic cop on to deduct why they use the €2000 figure.

Guy:Incognito

ryanstewart wrote: »

Maybe it's about time that Customs officers were redeployed to chase after drugs, smuggling, counterfeiting, patrolling the coast for dodgy Spanish fishing vessels instead of chasing yellow plates and spending thousands putting cases through the courts for what amounts to very small fines??

The would be free to do that if peopel obeyed the law.

Maybe the Gards should ignore all law breaking below a certain level so they can focus on bigger fish too?

ryanstewart

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The would be free to do that if peopel obeyed the law.

Maybe the Gards should ignore all law breaking below a certain level so they can focus on bigger fish too?

And you don't think they do that already?

n97 mini

ryanstewart wrote: »

Maybe it's about time that Customs officers were redeployed to chase after drugs, smuggling, counterfeiting, patrolling the coast for dodgy Spanish fishing vessels instead of chasing yellow plates and spending thousands putting cases through the courts for what amounts to very small fines??

That'd be an issue for the Croke Park Agreement, which makes it a far bigger challenge.

Eleganza

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

No , it doesnt. The minimum vrt for a car that fits in the 36% rate is €720. Thats whether the car is worth €1 or €1800. The vrt will be €720. So to make the computer show the right figure of €720, any car thats worth less than €2000 automatically shows an OMSP of €2000 so that the €720 figure comes up. IT's quite simple really.

Again to make it very simple. €720 is 36% of €2000. The MINIMUM vrt payable on a car thats liable for the 36% rate is €720. So applying an OMSP of at least €2000 will make sure the computer generates the minimum figure of €720 seeing as it cant be any cheaper than that anyway.




The poster does know somethign about the subject. He looked at the VRT calculator and used some basic cop on to deduct why they use the €2000 figure.

You haven't grasped what that infringement procedure was about.
If it makes it more expensive to source a product from another E.U. country than it is to source identical product locally then the registration tax is illegal.
If a car can be purchased abroad for 1500 euro market rate but 720 VRT is payable to register it here and a similar car costs 2000 euro market rate here then that VRT tax is illegal because they charged 220 euro more than they were entitled to charge.
There is an onus on Revenue Commissioners to establish local market rate and charge no more in VRT than would make the cost of importation higher than sourcing the car locally.
Revenue Commissioners don't do this and decide that the minimum local market rate of a car is 2000 euro. It's lazy and it's illegal and if the Commissioners would get their finger out they'd issue infringement proceedings against Irish Govt.

EPM

Eleganza wrote: »

That poster dismisses other peoples comments like he knows something about the topic and you see fit to censure me.
Infract and ban me again, why don't ya!

Right so, banned for a day for arguing with a mod on thread.

As outlined with the last ban you can make your point without attacking other posters.

Fair play to Ryan for keeping at the EC about the case he brought to them and it's nice to see for once that someone thinks and argees that there are problems here with the VRT system, and it's not just the ones that Ryan highlighted.

If you really want to see how much of a farce the VRT system is read the following thread about my brothers dealings with Revenue:

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056266184

• First he was told he would have to pay €5900 VRT on a shell, he was later told he couldn't VRT a shell.

• The car he has currently has an Irish OMSP of €10k - €18k, Revenue first told him they couldn't find examples of them for sale here, nor would they contact a dealership for a valuation. Instead the head of Revenue gave him two UK OMSP's to calculate VRT, one at £22,000 sterling and the other at £27,000 sterling. So based on them figures he would be looking at a VRT rate of €9000 - €11,000

• The VRT amount then change to €15,000+ as the guy in Revenue that deals with these types of car (who doesn't like to deal with members of the general public) put a value of €40,000+ on the car.

• Both himself and myself have been trying to get straight and honest answers, what is the value of the car? what is the VRT? why all the messing etc... We have contacted Revenue, the Minister for Transport and the Minister for Finance, to date they have been no help what so ever and just keep passing you from "pillar to post" or saying "it's nothing to do with them".

• Now the Revenue will not tell him the VRT rate for the car nor will they tell him the OMSP of the car.

• Last week he was speaking to someone within Revenue that told him, firstly that the letter he received from Revenue was a more than adequate answer to all his questions (it answered none), secondly he should not have contacted the Minister for Transport and should have contacted the Minister for Finance (which he did on the 12/05/2011 and to date he has heard anything), and also that anything the European Commission has told him does not apply to Ireland and they have no say what so ever with the way Revenue run here in Ireland :rolleyes:

Because of the said above carry-on and a lot more he has brought this whole matter to the attention of the European Commission for Customs and Taxations. It's currently still been looked into by them but they are saying that the way his case is been dealt with and what is been asked of him to do and pay is wrong.

I know some people here are saying "if you get rid of VRT it will be a different tax on something else and it should just be left alone", that's a fair comment to make, but's it's also fair to say that when you read into my brothers case there are some very serious problems within Revenue/VRT and they do need to be address.

n97 mini

^ That's not a problem with VRT. That's a problem with the implementation by muppets in the Revenue.

MidlandsM

Ahhhhhhh, I'm looking forward to the RIP of VRT!

galwaytt

sollar wrote: »

If they try to claw it all back on that people wil be paying about a grand per car in motor tax.

Well, that's a €293 deduction per year for me then - where do I sign ?

Matt Simis wrote: »

VRT has already died in monetary terms.

Indeed, from 1.something million, down to 300-something million. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of people. Except for one thing: new car buyers are being subsidised by the rest of us, not only in terms of VRT, but also terms of Motor Tax. If a new 320d has a 6k VRT content, how can anyone justify my 18 year old car having a 2800 VRT content ??

R P McMurphy wrote: »

I wonder would the assurances given during Lisbon 2 in relation to Ireland's ability to dictate its own tax affairs also relate to VRT

indeed: add that to the Corporation Tax issue as well.

btw, noticing the news report on the end of the scrappage scheme, it should a perfect (to me..) 01 reg Yaris going to the crusher, as well as a 98 A6. Disgraceful.

unkel

galwaytt wrote: »

Indeed, from 1.something million, down to 300-something million.

I don't want to be pedantic, but iirc, it was well over €2 billion in 2007

Matt Simis

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

The would be free to do that if peopel obeyed the law.

Come on now, where does such a simplistic view on the world stem from? If everyone promptly paid VRT, there would be absolutely no legs on the anti-VRT campaign. Laws can and do get changed around the world based on dissent. The Law is there to serve society, if we decide we dont want that law by for example breaking it in masse, then it needs to be changed.

Look back at our own history (or that of any country really) the first steps of getting some unfair/inequitable law changed is a small but growing wave of people flat out breaking it. They arent heros at the time.. and people like you condemn them, but we all reap the rewards later. This is par for the course. This is happening.

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

Maybe the Gards should ignore all law breaking below a certain level so they can focus on bigger fish too?

I thought you were a Garda at one point, but no Garda would say this. This is probably 1st week in Templemore, they absolutely prioritize real crime over fluff like this. And rightly so. I think you should try talking to the Gardai, they can explain a day in the life without any perceived bias you might think I have here.

galwaytt

LOLOL, there's always one.....(billion) ....:rolleyes:

ryanstewart

unkel wrote: »

I don't want to be pedantic, but iirc, it was well over €2 billion in 2007

Was probably a typo, and not being pedantic again, but 1.4 billion in 2007, 1.1 billion in 2008, 375 million in 2009, 350 million in 2010. End of scrappage scheme this month - who knows for 2011, but forecasts are on par with 350 million again because of a rush to get in on the action before the scheme ended. There wont be many cars sold between now and 31st December!

Scrappage scheme proves my point entirely, that if you get rid of VRT, car sales go up. You'll also notice that SIMI are now quoting the benefits of the scrappage scheme including both VAT AND VRT as a combined figure nnow to show the benefit to the exchequer. Previously they only quoted VRT. This is because, again, more car sales contributes a lot of revenue in VAT to the exchequer.

It's as simple as this, if you give a waiver of €1500 on VRT ie Scrappage scheme, car sales have proven to go up, hence more revenue by way of VAT. So, as I have argued, if you get rid of it completely, car sales will be much stronger. The reason the revenue take from VRT has declined so badly is for two reasons.

1) Back in the good old days, credit fuelled the new car sales boom. Credit is no longer as freely available, and we will NEVER see 1.4billion in VRT receipts again - this is part of the reason the country is in the mess it's in - credit was the answer to everything

2) The scrappage scheme waived a huge amount of VRT on each vehicle purchased - that, accompanied by the fact that road tax on low-emission vehicles is very low, meant that they jumped the gun and did not foresee that there was nothing to replace the lost revenue!

Typical lack of joined up thinking. The proposal put I put forward to replace VRT as a usage based system was to stabilise the tax base, so that it would not have been so exposed to the volatility of the economy, and it made sense.

Call it what you will, but when the European Commission agrees with you on point of law, ladybird did not publish that book, and as EU law supercedes Irish law, I'm more than confident that a change is on the way.

creedp

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Well, no.

Some kids snuck into our house onetime and stole a camera and phone, and got away with it. That doesn't make me want to steal other people's stuff, though, and it doesn't make me feel foolish for being honest.

Well bully for you for being so understanding:) The difference the kids who stole your camera and phone is that they didn't go around parading their booty in front of everyone, guards, customs etc. No they made off with it end it end of. My problem is that the lack of enforcement of the VRT for people driving around in foreign registered cars while obviously residing in this country is bringing the whole thing into disrepute. Btw I agree that the tax is completely unfair and obviously a very 'Irish' underhand to avoid removing what is certaintly an anti free movement of goods tax. The problem is is that its there forthe majority so therefore it sholdbe there for all.. I mean why should people with NI/UK/Rom/Es/etc registered cars pay income tax in this country that's completely unfair also!!

sollar

ryanstewart wrote: »

Was probably a typo, and not being pedantic again, but 1.4 billion in 2007, 1.1 billion in 2008, 375 million in 2009, 350 million in 2010. End of scrappage scheme this month - who knows for 2011, but forecasts are on par with 350 million again because of a rush to get in on the action before the scheme ended. There wont be many cars sold between now and 31st December!

Scrappage scheme proves my point entirely, that if you get rid of VRT, car sales go up. You'll also notice that SIMI are now quoting the benefits of the scrappage scheme including both VAT AND VRT as a combined figure nnow to show the benefit to the exchequer. Previously they only quoted VRT. This is because, again, more car sales contributes a lot of revenue in VAT to the exchequer.

It's as simple as this, if you give a waiver of €1500 on VRT ie Scrappage scheme, car sales have proven to go up, hence more revenue by way of VAT. So, as I have argued, if you get rid of it completely, car sales will be much stronger. The reason the revenue take from VRT has declined so badly is for two reasons.

1) Back in the good old days, credit fuelled the new car sales boom. Credit is no longer as freely available, and we will NEVER see 1.4billion in VRT receipts again - this is part of the reason the country is in the mess it's in - credit was the answer to everything

2) The scrappage scheme waived a huge amount of VRT on each vehicle purchased - that, accompanied by the fact that road tax on low-emission vehicles is very low, meant that they jumped the gun and did not foresee that there was nothing to replace the lost revenue!

Typical lack of joined up thinking. The proposal put I put forward to replace VRT as a usage based system was to stabilise the tax base, so that it would not have been so exposed to the volatility of the economy, and it made sense.

Call it what you will, but when the European Commission agrees with you on point of law, ladybird did not publish that book, and as EU law supercedes Irish law, I'm more than confident that a change is on the way.

True, and there is €134 billion in irish owned accounts. If the VRT was scrapped the psychological effect of seeing cars come down in price could see a lot of cars sold in 2012. They would make more than the 300 million (VRT) in VAT.

Guy:Incognito

Matt Simis wrote: »

Come on now, where does such a simplistic view on the world stem from? .

From a post that clearly has a mocking tone to it.

smash

ryanstewart wrote: »

It's as simple as this, if you give a waiver of €1500 on VRT ie Scrappage scheme, car sales have proven to go up, hence more revenue by way of VAT. So, as I have argued, if you get rid of it completely, car sales will be much stronger. The reason the revenue take from VRT has declined so badly is for two reasons.

You must be incredibly naive to think that €1,500 government scrappage allowance is what made car sales rise slightly.... The government offer was matched by the distributors and then again by dealers in some cases. Ffs Peugeot had up to 6k off some models.

And even at this, it only benefited people who probably would have bought a new car anyway because there's not a lot of finance available out there and most people don't have big chunks of cash sitting in their accounts.

Read this http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/motors/2011/0629/1224299725103.html

Matt Simis

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

From a post that clearly has a mocking tone to it.

Oh well, we tried to reach you.

steve06 wrote: »

You must be incredibly naive to think that €1,500 government scrappage allowance is what made car sales rise slightly.... The government offer was matched by the distributors and then again by dealers in some cases. Ffs Peugeot had up to 6k off some models.
And even at this, it only benefited people who probably would have bought a new car anyway because there's not a lot of finance available out there and most people don't have big chunks of cash sitting in their accounts.

Is this not largely irrelevant to the "what to do with VRT question"?

smash

Matt Simis wrote: »

Is this not largely irrelevant to the "what to do with VRT question"?

Not really, Ryan brought it up.... Dealers and distributors made sales but no real profit from the scheme. If VRT was abolished it would more than likely end up as an extra tax on fuel which would hit every person in the country and make the costs of motoring worse. Maybe Donegal would be ok because they could hop across the border for cheaper fuel so Ryan would be happy. :rolleyes:

At the moment VRT is manageable and realistically it's a tax that you elect to pay based on the car you purchase. You want a nice car, you work for it and buy it. You don't buy it, forget the tax and then cry when it's confiscated.

Matt Simis

steve06 wrote: »

Not really, Ryan brought it up.... Dealers and distributors made sales but no real profit from the scheme. If VRT was abolished it would more than likely end up as an extra tax on fuel which would hit every person in the country and make the costs of motoring worse. Maybe Donegal would be ok because they could hop across the border for cheaper fuel so Ryan would be happy. :rolleyes:

At the moment VRT is manageable and realistically it's a tax that you elect to pay based on the car you purchase. You want a nice car, you work for it and buy it. You don't buy it, forget the tax and then cry when it's confiscated.

VRT is not a elected tax. VRT is on every car, new and old, its just amalgamated into the price. Short term yes, maybe some pain to some people (who hadnt planned a car change), but over a 10-20year span everyone would benefit from no VRT and a truely free Euro Market.

There is also the argument that even short term when new car prices drop 20 to 30% we could see a large uptake in (new) car sales.

Your doom and gloom predictions are too narrowly focused and far too short term. Its not a great change for absolutely everyone tomorrow, but such a solution does not exist.

smash

Matt Simis wrote: »

VRT is not a elected tax. VRT is on every car, new and old, its just amalgamated into the price. Short term yes, maybe some pain to some people (who hadnt planned a car change), but over a 10-20year span everyone would benefit from no VRT and a truely free Euro Market.

VRT might not be an elected tax, but the amount you pay is an elected tax based on the car you chose. you buy a car to suite your budget.

And yes VRT may be on every car, but lets face it that these days it's actually cheaper to by a car in Ireland than in the UK even without considering VRT. Look at the prices of cars like an M3. It's no longer cheaper to import so VRT is really only affecting new car prices.

And over a 10-2 0year span everyone would not benefit because while a purchase price might be reduced, the running costs will be a lot higher. A one-off hit is a much easier option no matter how much we don't like it.

Matt Simis wrote: »

Your doom and gloom predictions are too narrowly focused and far too short term. Its not a great change for absolutely everyone tomorrow, but such a solution does not exist.

It has already been agreed that VRT is to be phased out. But you know as well as anyone that it will end up in another guise. I don't have doom and gloom predictions, it's just how it is.

mcwhirter

Guy:Incognito wrote: »

No , it doesnt. The minimum vrt for a car that fits in the 36% rate is €720. Thats whether the car is worth €1 or €1800. The vrt will be €720. So to make the computer show the right figure of €720, any car thats worth less than €2000 automatically shows an OMSP of €2000 so that the €720 figure comes up. IT's quite simple really.

Again to make it very simple. €720 is 36% of €2000. The MINIMUM vrt payable on a car thats liable for the 36% rate is €720. So applying an OMSP of at least €2000 will make sure the computer generates the minimum figure of €720 seeing as it cant be any cheaper than that anyway.




The poster does know somethign about the subject. He looked at the VRT calculator and used some basic cop on to deduct why they use the €2000 figure.

720 euros is a lot for some people you know. as well as car tax related to engine size.

-Chris-

mcwhirter wrote: »

720 euros is a lot for some people you know. as well as car tax related to engine size.

Well then don't buy a car that attracts €720 VRT and high motor tax...

johnos1984

Quick question:

I asked in the classics section but got no definitive answer.

How many cars can one import per year before they run into trouble with revenue?

I'm not trading but I have brought in a Passat last Nov, a classic in June and possibly another one in July.