Lima
Vorsprung durch technik
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
V
Take 2: Luxury Car Tax passed through Senate
- Thread starter Lima
- Start date
aussiegti
VW pumping thru my veins
- Location
- The real capital of Australia
Any details of what is a "fuel efficient car".
As relevance of this thread on a Golf forum is whether the replacement R (2.0L 4CYL turbo a.k.a. GTI-R) fits that description, since we're being told the R32is getting phased out.
But how many current R owners actually got slugged with the LCT, in the first place?
Assuming not everyone ticked all the boxes on the options list and didn't pay the RRP, in the first place.
As relevance of this thread on a Golf forum is whether the replacement R (2.0L 4CYL turbo a.k.a. GTI-R) fits that description, since we're being told the R32is getting phased out.
But how many current R owners actually got slugged with the LCT, in the first place?
Assuming not everyone ticked all the boxes on the options list and didn't pay the RRP, in the first place.
aussiegti
VW pumping thru my veins
- Location
- The real capital of Australia
Why not at least bump up the price of what constitutes a "luxury car"?
I believe that's because that limit also defines what is a "luxury car" for other tax reasons, like FBT and depreciation.
Under 7l/100kms?
Dingah
Crusty Aviator
- Location
- Canberra Airport
- Car(s)
- Audi SQ5
It would need to come with a free cardigan for the owners that consistently achieve those figures!!
Dingah
Lima
Vorsprung durch technik
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
Just as an aside, the new MINI John Cooper Works has an official fuel consumption of 6.9l/100km. :w00t:
Is that achieved with or without the added weight of a knitted cardigan with corduroy elbow protectors? :biggrin:
I'm sure that diesel turbos will be out but if you buy one of those environmental nightmares like the Prius you will get a cut.
Probably have to buy a $150,000 4WD with an 8L V10 diesel turbo (to get around the farm) to get a tax cut. And a $200,000 hybrid Lexus will probably get the tax cut.
Meanwhile if you buy a GTI-R diesel which uses less fuel in a 100km then they use starting you will have to pay full price with no concession.
Yes another wanky group of concession to get through a half arsed poorly thought out idea so that these fringe groups can make it look like they are doing something and have some power.
aussiegti
VW pumping thru my veins
- Location
- The real capital of Australia
Hear! Hear! Couldn't agree with you more Mav!
All bunch of fcukwits, if you ask me!
And like I really wanted to vote for some fcuker that I don't even know as Mayor in the local council elections!
I say get rid of the lot of them ... local, state and federal, I'd say!
Don't need crappy ideas implemented as policies that were formulated out of knee jerk reactions, and to win the populists' votes.
vwgtimkv
Out of love for the car
- Location
- Brisbane, Australia
This is a return to old-school class warfare.
For every dollar over the LCT threshold that you spend on a vehicle (which is so low that could hardly be seen as the point where luxury cars begin) you will now be forced to pay an additional 33c on top of GST and stamp duty. It's an absurd joke and has no rationale on economic grounds.
This is kind of crazy, but if you were to hypothetically purchase a car with an RRP of $1,000,000, you would have to stump up GST of ~$100,000, stamp duty of ~$20,000-~$50,000, plus a luxury car tax of ~$320,000. That adds up to a total tax take of around ~$450,000-$500,000. Which is essentially an effective marginal tax rate of 50%. So you buy a car and for every $1 you spend you have to give 50c to the government? And that's on top of the income tax you've already paid out of the income that you will use to buy the car? This is just craziness.
I have no problem with taxes; at the end of the day the Government needs to attract revenue somehow. But if you're going to tax people, at least do it in a way that does the most good. There's no justification for raising taxes in a period of record government revenues and a record surplus, but if you have to do so there are simply many better ways. But this is the ALP we're talking about, so I don't know why I'm surprised.
The simplest way of gaining a similar amount of revenues, but one that might actually change people's behaviour for the better would be a carbon tax applied to all new vehicle sales. Tax cars based on their CO^2 output; you'd soon find people switching out of gas guzzlers and into more fuel efficient vehicles, with a subsequent large reduction in the CO^2 output of the national vehicle fleet going forwards. Around 5-10% of Australia's emissions currently come from private transport. Taxes can be a force for good if they're devised with a little bit of economics, common sense and creativity thrown in the mix. Without these things you get a bunch of politicians sitting around thinking of methods with the least political fallout; "wait a second, how about we rob the rich, it worked pretty well for Robin Hood". Give me a break.
Anyway, rant over!
Cheers
For every dollar over the LCT threshold that you spend on a vehicle (which is so low that could hardly be seen as the point where luxury cars begin) you will now be forced to pay an additional 33c on top of GST and stamp duty. It's an absurd joke and has no rationale on economic grounds.
This is kind of crazy, but if you were to hypothetically purchase a car with an RRP of $1,000,000, you would have to stump up GST of ~$100,000, stamp duty of ~$20,000-~$50,000, plus a luxury car tax of ~$320,000. That adds up to a total tax take of around ~$450,000-$500,000. Which is essentially an effective marginal tax rate of 50%. So you buy a car and for every $1 you spend you have to give 50c to the government? And that's on top of the income tax you've already paid out of the income that you will use to buy the car? This is just craziness.
I have no problem with taxes; at the end of the day the Government needs to attract revenue somehow. But if you're going to tax people, at least do it in a way that does the most good. There's no justification for raising taxes in a period of record government revenues and a record surplus, but if you have to do so there are simply many better ways. But this is the ALP we're talking about, so I don't know why I'm surprised.
The simplest way of gaining a similar amount of revenues, but one that might actually change people's behaviour for the better would be a carbon tax applied to all new vehicle sales. Tax cars based on their CO^2 output; you'd soon find people switching out of gas guzzlers and into more fuel efficient vehicles, with a subsequent large reduction in the CO^2 output of the national vehicle fleet going forwards. Around 5-10% of Australia's emissions currently come from private transport. Taxes can be a force for good if they're devised with a little bit of economics, common sense and creativity thrown in the mix. Without these things you get a bunch of politicians sitting around thinking of methods with the least political fallout; "wait a second, how about we rob the rich, it worked pretty well for Robin Hood". Give me a break.
Anyway, rant over!
Cheers
Capercat
It's a chuck-about
- Location
- Location :)
Australia the lucky country :drinking:
Lima
Vorsprung durch technik
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
When Howard introduced the Luxury Car Tax a few years back did it get even half the attention that Rudd's amendments to the existing tax have?
Howard introduced the tax and set it at 25%. All Rudd has done is increase the rate, he hasn't altered the threshold at which it kicks in.
Okay, I agree that the tax itself may have some serious flaws, but the ones kicking and screaming the loudest about this tax on various forums probably all voted for the last government that introduced the tax in the first place.
Forgive me if I'm finding the irony slightly amusing, haha.
Howard introduced the tax and set it at 25%. All Rudd has done is increase the rate, he hasn't altered the threshold at which it kicks in.
Okay, I agree that the tax itself may have some serious flaws, but the ones kicking and screaming the loudest about this tax on various forums probably all voted for the last government that introduced the tax in the first place.
Forgive me if I'm finding the irony slightly amusing, haha.
Lima
Vorsprung durch technik
- Location
- Canberra, Australia
Yeah, dunno. With careful city driving I can get my modded R53 MINI around town at about 8.5-9l/100kms and the new turbo engines are supposedly much more frugal, so the claims are probably achievable I reckon. But, you're right, there's not a hell of a lot of right foot fun in reaching those consumption figures.
IIRC, the diesel MINI, not yet available in Australia, has both lower fuel consumption AND emissions figures than a Prius. Haha, stick that up your arse Toyota. I've probably got that wrong, but it sounds good.
vwgtimkv
Out of love for the car
- Location
- Brisbane, Australia
Howard did not "introduce" this tax. It existed before the LCT under a different name; the wholesale sales tax that applied to vehicles and was something like 40-45%. Howard scrapped the old tax and replaced with the LCT at a lower tax of 25%. The ALP is seeking to reverse this move.
When Howard changed the wholesale sales tax to the luxury car tax the Australian Government was facing $90b in debt and an unfunded future superannuation liability of over $100b. Both problems have since been solved.
Cheers