I am not convinced that this tax on emissions is going to solve any issues with actual emissions. 

Take me for example: Don't have a utility vehicle. Have an old, high mileage 5cyl turbo petrol 4wd station wagon that is about as efficient as a Boeing 747. 

I have it because it now owes me more than I'd get for it as a trade in or if I sold it. 

Will I pay for the emissions my old, high-mileage, inefficient car spews out? Philosophically and metaphorically yes. Tax-wise? No. 

A new ute or SUV will be more clean-burning and fuel efficient than my old heap. I can't afford a brand new vehicle. My next one will be a second hand one. It'll end up like my current one. Old, inefficient and high mileage. 

I'd like a Ute. It would serve my purposes nicely. I mountain Bike. I haul stuff around. I am not a farmer or a builder or a tradie of any sort. If I had one, it would be my do-all vehicle, so would be a DC ute and would often be seen in the suburbs or at the supermarket or mall or other such places where apparently they don't belong. 

Utes are desirable and in high demand, so therefore expensive. For that reason I won't have one in the short term. 

In the  longer term, they may become more plentiful on the used market and if they end up cheaper and less desirable, I could end up with one - without any real penalties, for my gas guzzling and destruction of the ozone layer. 

It's just a tax. Plain and simple. It's been dressed up as environmental policy, but it's just tax. 

Handsomedan:

 

I am not convinced that this tax on emissions is going to solve any issues with actual emissions. 

 

 

 

Take me for example: Don't have a utility vehicle. Have an old, high mileage 5cyl turbo petrol 4wd station wagon that is about as efficient as a Boeing 747. 

 

I have it because it now owes me more than I'd get for it as a trade in or if I sold it. 

 

Will I pay for the emissions my old, high-mileage, inefficient car spews out? Philosophically and metaphorically yes. Tax-wise? No. 

 

A new ute or SUV will be more clean-burning and fuel efficient than my old heap. I can't afford a brand new vehicle. My next one will be a second hand one. It'll end up like my current one. Old, inefficient and high mileage. 

 

I'd like a Ute. It would serve my purposes nicely. I mountain Bike. I haul stuff around. I am not a farmer or a builder or a tradie of any sort. If I had one, it would be my do-all vehicle, so would be a DC ute and would often be seen in the suburbs or at the supermarket or mall or other such places where apparently they don't belong. 

 

Utes are desirable and in high demand, so therefore expensive. For that reason I won't have one in the short term. 

 

In the  longer term, they may become more plentiful on the used market and if they end up cheaper and less desirable, I could end up with one - without any real penalties, for my gas guzzling and destruction of the ozone layer. 

 

 

 

 

 

It's just a tax. Plain and simple. It's been dressed up as environmental policy, but it's just tax. 

 

Firstly, just because it's an ICE vehicle doesn't mean it's going to incur the fee. It has to emit above 190g/km CO2 to incur a fee. There are a few new utes that fall under that.

The point of the fee is to reduce the number of high emitting vehicles coming into the country and increase the number of zero emission vehicles. 

Linux:

 

Most not all Ford Ranger drivers are the biggest pricks on the road!

 

Ha ha. I hadn't been aware of this truism ... until today that is! Now I am tending to agree with you.

Linux:

Most not all Ford Ranger drivers are the biggest pricks on the road!

cshwone:

Linux:

Most not all Ford Ranger drivers are the biggest pricks on the road!

Surely that accolade belongs to BMW drivers !

cshwone:

Linux:

 

Most not all Ford Ranger drivers are the biggest pricks on the road!

 

Surely that accolade belongs to BMW drivers !

Audi and Merc

Obraik:

 

Firstly, just because it's an ICE vehicle doesn't mean it's going to incur the tax. It has to emit above 190g/km CO2 to incur a tax. There are a few new utes that fall under that.

 

The point of the tax is to Introduce taxes after promising “no new taxes”…

 

 

Fixed that for you. 

Handsomedan:

 

Obraik:

 

Firstly, just because it's an ICE vehicle doesn't mean it's going to incur the tax. It has to emit above 190g/km CO2 to incur a tax. There are a few new utes that fall under that.

 

The point of the tax is to Introduce taxes after promising “no new taxes”…

 

 

 

 

 

Fixed that for you. 

 

 

 

 

 

Since the fee is paid to those receiving the subsidy, and after $300m the scheme ends, how can this be considered a tax?

BlinkyBill:

 

Since the fee is paid to those receiving the subsidy, and after $300m the scheme ends, how can this be considered a tax?

 

Are you talking about pre or post 1 Jan 2022?

My understanding was there is $300M of seed funding (from the taxpayer) to get the rebate part of the scheme going and then after 1 Jan the tax (fee) kicks in to fund the rebate. Are you suggesting that after $300M is collected from higher emitting vehicle purchases that the scheme ends?

Dingbatt:

 

BlinkyBill:

 

Since the fee is paid to those receiving the subsidy, and after $300m the scheme ends, how can this be considered a tax?

 

 

Are you talking about pre or post 1 Jan 2022?

 

My understanding was there is $300M of seed funding (from the taxpayer) to get the rebate part of the scheme going and then after 1 Jan the tax (fee) kicks in to fund the rebate. Are you suggesting that after $300M is collected from higher emitting vehicle purchases that the scheme ends?

 

Yes my post was clumsy; as you note the subsidy from the taxpayer ends after $300m (this also includes establishment costs as well as the subsidy) or 31 Dec 2021. From 1 Jan 2022 its an extra fee on non-clean and rebate on clean under $80k.

After Jan 1st the Feebate scheme is meant to be neutral in terms of costs/benefits; but the legislation is not in place and the scheme is subject to change.

I was speaking to my dealer last week, who reckons the post Jan 1st scheme will be different than it is now, and in particular the $80k limit might be upped, and trade vehicles might be excluded. But that’s a Porsche dealer so who knows!

Irrespective, it’s not a tax.

Obraik:

 

The point of the fee is to reduce the number of high emitting vehicles coming into the country and increase the number of zero emission vehicles. 

 

The people who come up with these schemes are either on a high salary, or get a govt supplied car
ie : not in touch with the reality of being on low/med wages & struggling with rent/mortgage .

Thats why NZ's fleet still has so many old cars. Thats all most of us can afford . My car is 20 years old.
We buy Japans used fleet , because we arnt really a rich country .

Want to get rid of old polluting cars, then dont increase the cost of (used) replacements.
Taxing imports just means less can afford them, so we keep our old cars for longer.
Increasing petrol tax just makes it harder to save for a newer car and Im sure more petrol taxes are coming , as another 'incentive' to move away from petrol.

In balance, a NEW Suzuki Swift (Petrol) would get $2300 rebate.
While thats good for new car buyers , I dont see the point of giving rebates to petrol powered cars . In 15-20 years time they will be wanting them off the road .
https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/climate-news/300332848/car-taxes-and-rebates--who-wins-and-who-loses

1101:

 

The people who come up with these schemes are either on a high salary, or get a govt supplied car
ie : not in touch with the reality of being on low/med wages & struggling with rent/mortgage .

 

Thats why NZ's fleet still has so many old cars. Thats all most of us can afford . My car is 20 years old.
We buy Japans used fleet , because we arnt really a rich country .

Want to get rid of old polluting cars, then dont increase the cost of (used) replacements.
Taxing imports just means less can afford them, so we keep our old cars for longer.
Increasing petrol tax just makes it harder to save for a newer car and Im sure more petrol taxes are coming , as another 'incentive' to move away from petrol.

 

 

 

We don't agree on some things but I do agree on this. I also have an old car, a 2003 Diamante. It is horrible for the environment but I make up by almost never using it. I am elderly, rural, and I depend on a car for shopping trips into town, which average less than once a week. That is now my only use. I chose this car for the same reason I would have to choose another like it if it died: I need 4WD to get up my driveway and I don't want an SUV under any circumstances. The engine is much too big (couldn't find one smaller that I could afford) but again, I hardly ever use it. My income is my pension and an electric will forever be beyond my reach.

1101:

 

The people who come up with these schemes are either on a high salary, or get a govt supplied car
ie : not in touch with the reality of being on low/med wages & struggling with rent/mortgage .

 

Thats why NZ's fleet still has so many old cars. Thats all most of us can afford . My car is 20 years old.
We buy Japans used fleet , because we arnt really a rich country .

Want to get rid of old polluting cars, then dont increase the cost of (used) replacements.
Taxing imports just means less can afford them, so we keep our old cars for longer.
Increasing petrol tax just makes it harder to save for a newer car and Im sure more petrol taxes are coming , as another 'incentive' to move away from petrol.

 

 

 

What will probably happen is that utes and older cars will happily circulate for a long long time. Anyone who's pondering a new/import ICE or ute will do so before the scheme kicks in. Sorted. There are many in this thread that have a solid use case for a ute, so use it and enjoy it. No one will sell their older 10k or newer 25k Ranger for a 150k EV that can do the same thing. As you suggest the fleet will probably age more as its less viable to import an ICE/ute, so given the modern day reliability and long life, aging vehicles will be popular for a long long time. This isn't a pro or anti Ute or EV comment, its reality

tdgeek:

 

What will probably happen is that utes and older cars will happily circulate for a long long time. Anyone who's pondering a new/import ICE or ute will do so before the scheme kicks in. Sorted. There are many in this thread that have a solid use case for a ute, so use it and enjoy it. No one will sell their older 10k or newer 25k Ranger for a 150k EV that can do the same thing. As you suggest the fleet will probably age more as its less viable to import an ICE/ute, so given the modern day reliability and long life, aging vehicles will be popular for a long long time. This isn't a pro or anti Ute or EV comment, its reality

 

And thus, the scheme does not work. Assuming, of course that it's meant to reduce emissions and not simply raise a new tax.