Luxury Car Tax is back before the Senate

[MikeVictor]

Originally Posted by SimonB

I'll be interested in seeing how this is dealt with. I have a copy of the "Offer to Purchase/Invoice" in my hot little hands, dated the 13th of May - it will be very interesting to see how this is dealt with, considering that I resubmitted another when I decided to upgrade to the Nav. Does the first one stand, as it was the one that caused the vehicle to be ordered?

I reckon they could either say 1) no increased LCT on the order as it was before the delivery of the budget, or if 2) you'll have to pay the increased LCT on the Nav, not the full order.

So many grey areas though you could end up paying LCT on a completely arbitrary figure and be obligated to also provide 3 good milking goats and your first-born.

[takahashi]

So we are talking 8% in price after $50 odd K. Right... I think I am up for a coupe rather than vert now

[Binstar]

I reckon you scrap the price threshold completely and use a system based on emissions and number of seats.

That way it works to tax those going for higher polluting cars but factors in families needing bigger vehicles.

Using the 7l/100 km and 4 seats as the baseline (7/4=1.75).
More seats lowers the value and more emissions increases it.
This lets people from all price brackets have a choice on whether they want to pay the tax or go lower emission. Whats wrong with some richie rich spending $200K on a car if it is ultra low emission?

[MikeVictor]

Originally Posted by Binstar

I reckon you scrap the price threshold completely and use a system based on emissions and number of seats.

That way it works to tax those going for higher polluting cars but factors in families needing bigger vehicles.

Using the 7l/100 km and 4 seats as the baseline (7/4=1.75).
More seats lowers the value and more emissions increases it.
This lets people from all price brackets have a choice on whether they want to pay the tax or go lower emission. Whats wrong with some richie rich spending $200K on a car if it is ultra low emission?

That's not fair on working families/farmers/wombats.

[Binstar]

Seems fair for families, they just need to select low emission cars if they don't want to pay the tax. If they need a bigger capacity car it allows higher emission.

As for farmers no it doesn't, although you could use the highway usage for farmer 4wds and there are <7L choices.

You can see the usage up to 03 models here: http://www.environment.gov.au/settle...ort/fuelguide/

[ExMX5]

Originally Posted by Binstar

Whats wrong with some richie rich spending $200K on a car if it is ultra low emission?

Don't you remember your lessons? We here in the Grand Labor Junket hate anyone earning money, let alone spending it.

The only people that deserve money are those who think that the world's biggest toenail clipping is something to look up to.

[Guran]

Originally Posted by pacman

"Twenty five imported car models - including the Audi A4, BMW 3 series and Jaguar X-type - would be exempted from the tax altogether as a result of the change. "

What are the 25 models???

I suspect this exemption only applies to the individual models that meet the 7.0L/100km combined fuel consumption criteria. As such, they're probably only talking about diesel models ... for BMW that's 320d (6.0L/100km), 520d (6.1L/100km), and maybe X3 2.0d (7.0 L/100km).

[professor]

any chance we can buy a fisker in australia??

[Wraith]

Originally Posted by takahashi

So we are talking 8% in price after $50 odd K. Right... I think I am up for a coupe rather than vert now

That would be a shame takahashi !

You should stick to your original choice and if required wait longer to achieve the required funds and go from there, afterall if the vert is what you really desire, that's the only way you'll be totally happy and have no second negative thoughts down track about your purchase :smile:

[takahashi]

Originally Posted by Wraith

That would be a shame takahashi !

You should stick to your original choice and if required wait longer to achieve the required funds and go from there, afterall if the vert is what you really desire, that's the only way you'll be totally happy and have no second negative thoughts down track about your purchase :smile:

You are not wrong there. I prob buy a bulk of instant noodle for lunch. :iono::biggrin:

[shauno]

Im willing to put up the first $10,000 to a class action law suit to the high court if any one thinks its viable. Based on idea that why should we as Australians have to be disadvantaged compared to the majority of the planet in regards to car prices. Where we now have to fork out 33% + 10% tax on which is close enough to 50% tax on cars over $57k making our cars some of the most expensive in the world.

Just what reason does the Govt give and exactly why do we have to be disavanted like this. The bloody labour govt first introducd this tax in 1986 and admitadly the libs could have got rid of it when the GST came in abolishing most sales tax of which some like the LCT remained. But that being said I call for interested partys to put your money up front and lets go for the jugular. If its not viable we really have to lobby the libs and get this tax thrown out just on principal we dont need it and its un Australian and we dont need any Rudd apologists to say otherwhise.

[TimMc]

This is the kind of attitude we need Shauno! I love the sentiment though I'm not sure what chance we'd have of getting the tax &/or increase overturned. Yeah, who thinks this could be viable? We could probably lobby many other groups, companies or individuals to get on board if there's a reasonable chance here.

You pay extra tax if you earn more & you pay extra tax if you spend more. Where's the incentive?

BTW I think Malaysia has ~300% sales tax on imported cars, but this is across the board to protect the local Protons etc, not just "luxury" cars.

[The Voice of Reason]

When it comes to politics, I'm generally apolitical - in the sense that I think either party is going to screw us over in the long-run.

The issue here is that they do it to us because we are willing to bend over and take it up the a$$!

A lawsuit is not the solution in my view - I think the issue is a greater one:

• Firstly, they increase the tax, because they know people will pay it;
• Secondly, the hype by the media that anyone who earns over $50K per year is rich and deserves to be taxed
• Thirdly, the tall poppy syndrome that is typical of Australians (before I get flamed for this comment, I am an Australian) - why should you have something flash, just because you work for it? This f***ing communist attitude, quite frankly, gives me the shits. When most people are at the pub or enjoying leisure time, I am working. If I have a few extra dollars, it is because I have bloodywell earned it. If I choose to buy a nice car or flush it down the toilet, who is anyone to begrudge me my choice, as long as I am not injuring anyone else?

As you can tell, I am more than unimpressed about having to pay thru the nose for something that in many other countries I could get for half price. I pay enough tax as it is, so I don't support the notion that I should be giving more of my hard-earned away simply because I have it.

Solutions?

• Military coup? Hardly... although daydreaming is nice... :biggrin:
• Stop buying any cars that have LCT - hardly realistic for those of us who really want them
• Make it an offence (capital punishment) for any journalist to proclaim that anyone who earns over $50K is rich and that people who work hard have no right to be well off.
• Lobbying is really going to be the most effective way practically.

Now that I've got that off my chest, I'm going to go back to reading my paper and have a relaxing Sunday...

[lindenberger]

+1 for the voice of reason!!