Rego Fee Change - more for 4wds

Submitted: Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 11:11
ThreadID: 22641 Views:2463 Replies:11 FollowUps:10
This Thread has been Archived
Rego rebate plan to reward small-car owners
By Tim Dick, Urban Affairs Reporter

Registration fees will be reduced for cars with small engines and increased for those with large ones, including most four-wheel-drives, if the State Government adopts recommendations to reduce greenhouse gases.

Members of the Greenhouse Advisory Panel support the idea as part of a strategy to reduce vehicle emissions.

Private car owners pay between $200 and $352 for annual car registration, depending on their car's weight, but under the plan the fee would be based on engine capacity.

Martijn Wilder, the advisory panel's chairman, said he supported financial incentives being used to encourage vehicles that produced less greenhouse gas.

***** North Sydney Council plans to vary residents' street parking fees depending on engine size. ***** (ya gotta love that one)

Under that scheme, the fee for a parking permit will be halved for "very low impact" cars, reduced by a quarter for small cars, kept the same for most family sedans and increased for large four-wheel-drives and cars with eight-cylinder engines.

"The panel supports what the council is doing," Mr Wilder said.

"It's not perfect. You're not going to catch everyone, but you're not going to do that anyway."

The insurance company IAG has previously raised the possibility of reducing premiums for those who drive shorter distances, but Mr Wilder said that could hit poorer people in outer suburbs, while the registration fee method would not.

"I think [it] is a more equitable way of doing it," he said.

The panel's response to the Government's greenhouse strategy discussion paper makes six recommendations, including varying stamp duty on cars based on emissions, introducing incentives for people to use hybrid cars and bicycles and lobbying the Federal Government to do away with subsidies and tax breaks that encourage people to use large cars.

The discussion paper said cars and trucks produced 88 per cent of transport emissions, with half of that coming from private vehicles.

"While private fuel consumption has decreased due to improved technology, this has been offset by increases in new-vehicle weight and power," it said.

In London, cars powered by alternative fuels, such as Toyota's Prius, are exempt from the £5 congestion charge to enter the city centre. China has recently adopted fuel consumption standards for four-wheel-drives that some analysts say are tougher than those in the United States.

The Government is understood to be less than enthusiastic about the registration fee idea, but another of its panellists, Adam Spencer, said more should be done so that people knew the environmental effect of their everyday actions.

"I think fundamentally people aren't aware of the greenhouse impact and the environmental footprint of their day-to-day actions, whether that's zipping around in a car or running the clothes drier," he said. "I support in principle a wide range of actions that would educate people more to [those] impacts."

Michael Salmon, a spokesman for the Premier, Bob Carr, said the greenhouse strategy would go to cabinet soon and would be released for public comment in a couple of months.
Back Expand Un-Read 0 Moderator

Reply By: Sand Man (SA) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 11:27

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 11:27
What a load of typical Government bureaucratic bull bleep .

How many pre-pollution control bleep boxes would still be on the road belching out pollutants regardless of their engine capacity.

How many 4WD owners actually run diesel powered vehicles because they are less pollutant than petrol powered ones.

More greenhouse gases would be pumped out by industrial smokestacks, or even the cows in the paddocks but they target one section only of the motoring public.

Bloody D!ckheads!!!

I'm diagonally parked in a parallel Universe!

My Profile  My Blog  My Position  Send Message

AnswerID: 109595

Follow Up By: Footloose - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 11:50

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 11:50
What's next, a tax on people who's weight and dietry habits make them more susceptable to producing more methane ?
Cans of baked beans at $5 ea ?
Cheese at $2 a slice ?
We have taxes on taxes at the fuel pump. The revenue seems to go mainly towards employing more people to work out new taxes !
Does inventing a new way to tax the taxpayers mean that a public servant is more effecient and productive ? Do they get a tax free salary increase?
Is there a handbook of taxes that could possibly be imposed ?
And we vote their masters into power every 4 years We give them control of the Senate so nobody can even object to a new tax or industrial law..

What a dumb society we must be.
Baaah , Humbug !!
FollowupID: 366195

Reply By: D-Jack - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 13:09

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 13:09
I think they should bring in a scheme where the more hiclones you have fitted, the less registration you pay. anyone with over 10 hiclones get free rego. I must get myself shares in the hiclone business.

AnswerID: 109608

Reply By: Member - B3 (NSW) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 14:19

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 14:19
They should bring in a scheme where they lower or abolish the registration costs for all vehicles. Then use a formula to recoup the registration through a levy on fuel - ie an average size car driving an average distance per year would pay the equivalent of current rego costs. That way people could be encouraged to drive less regardless of their vehicle type and the people who drive the most would pay more - a pay as you use type system. On an average working week I drive about 20km, but I still have to pay $1000 per year for my Hilux with tax/insurance in NSW which equals almost $80/week for a vehicle I only use for holidays! It would also mean 4WD owners could possibly afford to have a secondary car - ie a small economy vehicle around town and not pay through the nose for their fourbies when they're not being used.
Oh...and possibly fixing the mongrel public transport system might help also!
AnswerID: 109615

Follow Up By: Footloose - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 14:53

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 14:53
Err...what public transport system. Doesn't exist outside od capital cities and hardly exists there either.
FollowupID: 366216

Follow Up By: Member - JohnR (Vic) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:00

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:00
yes, what public transport system indeed, so B3, our business would be taxed more on our expenditure. Don't think much of your plan. No public transport to our business centre unless we drag a taxi that way from teh other direction to pick us up. No public transport to pick up the plumbing fittings I did half an hour ago.

Have you thought you may be better to hire a car or ute for your holidays? I already have a lighter car for some trips, but the 4by is all important as are the others here. 'loosie is spot on......
FollowupID: 366228

Follow Up By: GOB & denny vic member - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:49

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:49
dunno b3 i think your on the wrong planet my nissans on the road 6 days a weeek for work pulling a trailer with my tools and materials so when i come to your place and charge you $2000 to install a power point and you start crying all i can say is some dill had this perfect plan that user pays so pay up

FollowupID: 366254

Follow Up By: Member - B3 (NSW) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 19:53

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 19:53
I'm just suggesting we need a whole new perspective rather than just targeting the type of vehicle that people own - why should someone who drives hundreds of kilometres per week in their Toyota Echo be taxed less than someone who is a light user of a 4WD or family size sedan? This is exactly the sort of argument and debates that government should be initiating rather than just bending to some draconian organisation that might be currently in fashion.
FollowupID: 366272

Follow Up By: Member - JohnR (Vic) - Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 08:57

Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 08:57
B3 they already taxed heaps extra as such a large proportion of what we pay for fuel is tax to the federal government. It goes to consilidated revenue. That is why we have not suffered a doubling of the fuel price like the crude oil price has.

The suggestion that business pays extra for vehicles are bought to do a job as you have suggested is draconian, just so some can buy an extra car you suggested earlier. My car is already smaller than a "family sized" car because I seldom carry rear seat passengers. The 4by isn't though.
FollowupID: 366336

Reply By: lindsay - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 15:27

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 15:27
What about people that live in the rural areas that don't have access to public transport and live miles from their regional centres. Once again a city centric thought that does not have much guts.
AnswerID: 109626

Reply By: 98Jack - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:42

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:42
Hi folks,

for what its worth, have a look at Dr Jon Jenkins MLC is the sitting member for the Outdoor Recreation Party and is a strong supporter of the 4WD community. He is very passionate when it comes to the "Green" element pushing "policys" through parliment that adversley effect users of National Parks, Beaches, State Forests etc etc.

Maybe if we sent Dr Jenkins enough messages he could look into these proposals and fight on our behalf.

AnswerID: 109642

Reply By: Member - Jeff M (WA) - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:50

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 16:50
"The discussion paper said cars and trucks produced 88 per cent of transport emissions"

They had to spend money to work this out?? Did we as tax payers pay for this "discussion paper" tripe?

Man, I've got to start avoiding paying taxes, it just seems to go towards nonsense, free overseas trips for polies and funding organisations that I detest....

Might be time to go back to the barter system and folding cash....

AnswerID: 109645

Reply By: Exploder - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:29

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:29
Gday all.

All right now purely hypothetical. So let’s say we all by small low emission or hybrid car’s and because of this we all use less fuel and thus the government gets less tax money because we are all buying less of the product.

So how is the government going to make up all those lost funds?

It would be pretty had explaining why they are rasing licensing cost’s and jacking up the fuel tax when we r all driving around in invro friendly car’s wouldn’t it.
AnswerID: 109663

Reply By: Peter 2 - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:55

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 18:55
It's just like the NSW govt bringing in water resttrictions because they haven't put any additional infrastructure into increasing water storage to keep up with demand/drought. they plead with us to save water, great we have done better than expected, really great.
Then we hear that water rates are to be increased because sydney water has a shortfall in income due to us not using as much water and therefore water rates are down, we can't bloody win!
AnswerID: 109668

Follow Up By: Exploder - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 19:55

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 19:55
Over in WA, after Geoff Galop boasted about how he was going to build this fantastic desalinisation plant which would of done stuff all anyway as the amount of water it produced is what we pump up to Kalgoorlie every year anyway, not to mention the wast produced by it.

Now the new plan is to cut down trees around the dam’s to get more water flow into them or tow water down from the north with tugboats. What the shi* is that about.

Who thinks this stuff up.

FollowupID: 366273

Reply By: Richard - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 21:10

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 21:10
So what about Bio-diesel?
AnswerID: 109696

Reply By: raazorj - Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 22:21

Wednesday, May 04, 2005 at 22:21
so we use less fuel with a smaller vehicle that won't tow our trade trailer so they wack the fuel price up more to keep the tax flow happening, is this still oz? or are we a clone of some other #$@*+* up country
AnswerID: 109715

Reply By: old-plodder - Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 08:36

Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 08:36
In Qld we pay rego based upon the number of cylinders, 4 , 6 or 8 & more.

My 4 cyl diesel pajero is the same rego as a 4 cyl 1000cc small car.

Could always go back to the old SAE hp system.
AnswerID: 109765

Follow Up By: joc45 - Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 13:57

Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 13:57
How do they tax Mazda rotaries? hee hee....

Years ago, the public service, in special circumstances, used to pay staff for use of their vehicles, the formula based first on RAC HP; that was a antiquated joke, so then they changed it to the number of cyls, till Mazda rotaries came along. Then they had to do something again, so they went to capacity (the Mazda was calculated at about 4 litres, I recall - dunno how they worked that out).
FollowupID: 366390

Follow Up By: Toy_Hilux - Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 19:36

Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 19:36
It's true! We do pay by the cylinder. Look at your rego papers. The rego in fact is not that expensive, it is the so call CTP insurance and the GST factor that the gov. makes us pay is what puts the costs up. Blame it on the so call litigations that come with us becoming Americanised. Every-one wants to become rich without having to work for it.
FollowupID: 366455

Follow Up By: joc45 - Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 22:46

Thursday, May 05, 2005 at 22:46
So what do the authorities do with Mazda rotaries? are they 2 cyl? Hefty fuel consumption for 2 cyls!
FollowupID: 366508

Sponsored Links

Popular Products (11)