Geekzone: technology news, blogs, forums
Guest
Welcome Guest.
You haven't logged in yet. If you don't have an account you can register now.


Scott3

3945 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

#307020 13-Sep-2023 00:13
Send private message

A political party has proposed RUC's to be applied to all vehicles, instead of the current system where Petrol, LPG & CNG light vehicles's pay in their fuel (and EV's are exempt).

 

I want to keep this discussion about policy, not politics, so please ignore who made the proposal.

I am aware that this has been discussed in both the Nissan Leaf & EV thread, but given this in addition to EV's, this will impact the other 98% of light vehicles on our road (admittedly to a lesser extent for Diesel & Hydrogen vehicles that already pay RUC's), I felt it appropriate to create a new thread.

 

 

Road user charges will soon apply to all vehicles, including electric vehicles, according to a new plan by the National Party, provided they win the next election.

 

The party’s transport spokesperson Simeon Brown said as New Zealand moves towards electric vehicles, there needs to be a way to maintain the sustainability of the National Land Transport Fund.

 

“It will be a much fairer way of charging for the number of kilometres people drive rather than the amount of fuel they use,” he told the Herald this afternoon.



https://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/election-2023-national-to-phase-out-fuel-excise-tax-and-make-evs-subject-to-road-user-charges/F54JNN5NHJCKXHN5YZ7ZOMCVA4/

 

 

 

For those unfamiliar with Road User Charges (RUC's):

 

  • All road vehicles over 3500kg GVM (trucks etc), and those under which use a fuel not taxed at source like diesel (and not temporary exempt like EV's) need to pay RUC's
  • You pay online or at a physical location and get a label to display in your windscreen that shows the max Odometer reading (Hubometer for trucks).
  • If you don't keep current with RUC's, you are required to catch up, and can get a substantial fine.
  • RUC rates vairy by weight, but currently are $76/1000km for diesel cars. Rates here
    https://www.nzta.govt.nz/vehicles/road-user-charges/ruc-rates-and-transaction-fees/
  • Note that rates are already banded by weight. Light vehicles do near negligible damage to the roads (note how the rate is hardly any more in the 3501kg -6000kg band), so RUC's for light vehicles are largely paying for space on the roads, rather than damage. as such, a VW Amarok diesel pays the same as a VW polo diesel.
  • Commercial off road users of petrol & anybody who uses petrol in a RUC liable vehicle (i.e. USA sourced petrol powered large RV) can claim back petrol tax. (no refunds for recreational off road users)



Strengths of the policy

 

  • Objectively much fairer than the status quo.

     

    • Currently efficient petrol car's get an incredible deal (which essentially priced small efficient diesel off the roads in NZ, would hate to see the same happen to EV's).
    • Currently petrol vehicles in applications that would consume a lot of fuel (Larger van's, heavy towing etc), get a poor deal (hence why most of these vehicles are diesel).
    • removes unfairness of people having to pay road tax on petrol used in (non commerical) lawnmower, chainsaws, generators, boats, planes etc.
  • Removes market distortions from taxing one fuel per liter, and another per km. (i.e. market is distorted towards petrol for small car's, and towards diesel for utes, vans & larger off road style SUV's).
  • Removes the paperwork of claiming back petrol tax for those eligible to (i.e. commercial petrol powered boats).
  • Avoids the issue of declining tax take as the (non plug in) fleet gets more efficient. i.e. when somebody replaces a old v6 highlander doing 12L/100km with a highlander hybrid doing 6L/100km, government tax take will half.
  • Avoids the regressive taxation issue where those who can only afford an old inefficient vehicle (think a minivan doing 14L/100km), end up paying way more to use the roads than somebody who can afford a modern, efficient equivalent

Weaknesses of the policy

 

  • Breaks the unintended buy nice incentive / market distortion in favor of more efficient petrol car's
  • Politically risky:

     

    • Removing the likes of recreational boating from the tax pool will mean this tax will need to be made up by road vehicles, meaning for the same tax take, on average road vehicle users will need to pay more then they do now)
    • Those who benefit (Recreational boaties, drivers of petrol large SUV's, Petrol Utes, Petrol Vans & Petrol Performance car's) will likely keep quiet, while those disadvantaged will scream murder.
    • Media will latch onto stuff like ranger raptors (petrol v6 twin turbo, cranking out 292g co2/km), getting a massive effective tax cut, while tiny hatchback drivers get a massive hike.
    • Taxi industry is going to scream blue murder as their running costs spike (they mostly run petrol hybrids).
  • Another thing for petrol car users to keep track of.
  • Creates a lot of paperwork - Hopefully they go fully digital, and don't need to print millions more windscreen cards.
  • More fraud prone than petrol tax. (Fairly easy to get tools that change your odometer on many cars), but this issue is hardly new, has existed with diesel cars for decades.
  • Could create a poverty trap. Generally those with limited financial means end up driving petrol car's, as they are cheaper to buy than than diesel or EV's. Having road tax bundled with petrol makes a nice pre-pay system. Can't get behind, and easily can fill in small increments (say add $40 of petrol). In comparison RUC's:

     

    • You can easily go into RUC debt / arrears if you don't keep up.
    • Have to be purchased in 1000km blocks ($76 at current rates), which could be too lumpy for somebody who only has $40 for car running that week.
    • Has admin fees ($4.80 online, $7.80 counter sales), so quite an extra cost if one only buys 1000km blocks.
    • Adds risk of being fined (I think it is $400), if one gets caught in RUC arrears.
  • Potentially a difficult transition. Are they simply going to get everybody to declare their current ODO, or will they wait to their next WOF, potentially forging a year of revenue?
  • Per km charging is still a pritty bad way to charge for space on the roads. a trip across Auckland is far more expensive to provision for at 7am on a tuesday, than at 3am... Full dynamic congestion charging would be more economically efficient.

 

 

 

 

Key questions I have about the policy:

 

  • How broad is "All vehicles"?

     

    • Will it cover light trailers? (assume no)
    • Motorbikes / 50cc style scooters? (Assume yes)
    • E-Bikes / E-scooters? (assume no)
    • Push  bikes (assume no)
  • How exactly will it be phased in? will everybody need to declare their Odometer on a set date?
  • Will RUC's for petrol vehicles and EV's be phased in at the same time. The stuff article implies not, which would be an issue in the intermediate period. I.e. if a MG4 has to pay 3x the road tax of a yaris hybrid we are going to see EV uptake stall.

View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic
 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 70

Bee

Bee
731 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #3126800 13-Sep-2023 06:10
Send private message

Wasnt there already a policy/plan that when EVs get to 30%(insert arbitrary figure here) of the fleet then they will pay RUCs??

 

My biggest arguement against this is that it does disadvantage those with fuel efficient petrol cars...  and the phasing in is a big issue, Im imagining it wont happen all at once so for a while we will pay RUCs AND tax on petrol...

 

To me it just seems a stupid idea and they havent thought thru what the admin cost will be. and the enforcement...  Mind you they arent proposing it for this next government term, so its entirely possible its going to happen at some stage regardless of who is in government...  Phasing out of petrol cars thou seems the better idea.





Doing your best is much more important than being the best.


 
 
 
 

Shop now on Samsung phones, tablets, TVs and more (affiliate link).
SteveXNZ
58 posts

Master Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #3126801 13-Sep-2023 06:18
Send private message

I'm generally in favour of RUCs applying to all registered motor vehicles.  It's a fairer system, it provides a source of revenue for roading infrastructure and maintenance based on usage and weight, and the admin mechanics are already in place.  I'd perhaps revisit the weight bands - given that road damage is proportional to the fourth power of axle weight.  Yes there are some disadvantages but these are relatively minor and can be addressed by other means.

 

The proposal also has the benefit of detaching motive power and energy consumption from the roading equation.  Roading costs becomes a function of distance and weight, while energy costs become more transparent as carbon taxes are factored in.

 

As a motorcycle owner I'd also put in a plug for motorcycle RUCs too, as mileage travelled would be known for each bike.  Costs would be low due to the light weight, but it would then allow ACC to charge the motorcycle levy on distance travelled and rider experience rather than a lump sum depending on a bike's CC rating - a very crude indicator of risk, and one that unfairly hits owners of more than one bike when only one can be ridden at a time.


Dingbatt
6741 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #3126803 13-Sep-2023 06:21
Send private message

Thanks for starting this thread Scott. It deserves its own discussion rather than included in bigger threads.

 

You have produced a pretty comprehensive pros and cons list as well. It will be a contest of what is logical with human nature. I have been told the reason IRD is reluctant to change from the fuel excise on petrol because of its ease of collection and resistance to avoidance. It seems a bit pathetic in the information age but all you need to do is look at the number of vehicles on the road without a current WOF to recognise that avoidance would be a major problem, and just like insurance premiums, will mean the rest of us will need to pay more.

 

But for the sake of the discussion (without politics) how about RUCs not being used for subsidising public transport? If there is a public good from public transport then that will come from pollution tax or congestion charging. Or heaven forbid, user pays.

 

If I have to pay fuel excise on boat petrol (and I do), I would like to see that money go to SaR and Coastgaurd.

 

 

 

Edit: In reply to the post of reclaiming excise for PHEVs (EV thread). If a family has multiple vehicles that include a PHEV and a HEV, then I can see the PHEV buying a lot of petrol and getting the excise back and then running on electricity (ie the fuel actually goes into the HEV).





“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996




Qazzy03
455 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #3126806 13-Sep-2023 06:56
Send private message

Up front with type of user i am:

 

Car owner here but walk to work everyday, unless pissing down so hard I am willing to drive 5 minutes and pay for parking. 

 

I have only read what u/Scott3 has written, thank you by the way, I often avoid the news to keep my sanity. 

 

My biggest concern isn't for myself, the cost would be minimal for me and I have the budget to cover additional expenses. 

 

My concern is about the poverty trap this will impact on anyone that is low income. Hitting anyone ranging from WINZ, Students, part-time / min wage full-time. 

 

People that try to do uber, uber eats or any food delivery to make an extra buck or two. 

 

If the choice is between food and rent or budgeting for RUC.... I hope we are all adult enough to know what people will choose to cut from their household budget.

 

Also the administration and enforcement end, NZTA already struggle to enforce and recover RUC in its currrent format (I know previous employees), unless NZTA gets a boost to administration and a large one I don't know how this could be enforced / recovered. 


SirHumphreyAppleby
2838 posts

Uber Geek


  #3126809 13-Sep-2023 07:03
Send private message

I'm in support of this approach, but I don't like the idea of putting more things on the windscreen obstructing vision. I also don't consider it useful, as the only way to enforce that in the wild is to peer in the windscreen, and I'm going to assume anyone doing that is up to no good.

 

My preferred approach would be to just be billed by NZTA after the WoF is issued or when vehicles are sold. They could collect this in one lump sum (cheaper), or allow people to pay over 6/12 months, depending on how long it is until their next WoF. As an incentive to move to more efficient vehicles, the government could forgive the debt (up to a limit) for the previous usage period.

 

Cold turkey approach. Trying to do some sort of phased introduction would be expensive, so just cut your losses and go for it IMO.


tdgeek
29631 posts

Uber Geek

Trusted
Lifetime subscriber

  #3126810 13-Sep-2023 07:14
Send private message

If RUC measurement was at WOF and Rego time, and if WOF, Rego are online (which they are) and assume RUC is online , then at the Post Office or wherever you pay for Rego, or at the garage, VTNZ, dealer, when you get the WOF, you get measured then. Not up to date? No WOF no Rego

 

Broadly, you save as excise comes off fuel, you pay at the other end (not equally as Scott posted) those with budget constraints can setup an A/P to add the fuel saving each trip to the garage into a bank account to build up to buy RUC. Pay for fuel at the garage? Pay by card? Get $x cash when paying and stick it in the glovebox.

 

It will soon become a habit, nothing to see here. 


Qazzy03
455 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #3126812 13-Sep-2023 07:27
Send private message

tdgeek:

 

Those with budget constraints can setup an A/P to add the fuel saving each trip to the garage into a bank account to build up to buy RUC.

 

Pay for fuel at the garage? Pay by card? Get $x cash when paying and stick it in the glovebox.

 

It will soon become a habit, nothing to see here. 

 

 

As someone that does work in public service and with people that are low to even middle income, I personally do not think it will play out this way, 

 

However I want to be respectful and not go off on a tangent from the purposed RUC policy change. It is interesting that the responses are mostly postive, so maybe I am out of touch. 

 

All I have been hearing is cost of living impacts and to me a once or twice a year RUC bill will hurt Kiwi's as I don't think budgeting is as easy as tdgeek indicates. 




Dingbatt
6741 posts

Uber Geek

Lifetime subscriber

  #3126815 13-Sep-2023 07:45
Send private message

Qazzy03:

 

My concern is about the poverty trap this will impact on anyone that is low income. Hitting anyone ranging from WINZ, Students, part-time / min wage full-time. 

 



 

I have difficulty with this logic. People on a low income that will struggle with RUCs, will struggle to put petrol in their tanks at the moment. It may depend on how small the chunks of kms you can purchase are. If it’s available online, then I don’t see why  the amount needs to have a minimum.

 

Windscreen certificates would seem pointless as a lot of vehicles don’t display odometer readings when powered off.

 

I understand that there are commercial pay-as-you-go systems for RUCs that businesses use. While it may take a while to institute and extra equipment required, it may be the way to fairly charge for road use (ie removing the requirement for lump sums). My car “phones home” to Tesla on a regular basis. How easy would it be for them to keep track of kms and add RUCs to my account? Similarly anyone who has an OEM connection with Ford, Mercedes, BMW, etc could be provided with the same service. The problem being, how much would these organisations charge to “clip the ticket” on the way through (a subscription for heated seats anyone?)





“We’ve arranged a society based on science and technology, in which nobody understands anything about science technology. Carl Sagan 1996


SirHumphreyAppleby
2838 posts

Uber Geek


  #3126817 13-Sep-2023 07:48
Send private message

Qazzy03:

 

However I want to be respectful and not go off on a tangent from the purposed RUC policy change. It is interesting that the responses are mostly postive, so maybe I am out of touch. 

 

All I have been hearing is cost of living impacts and to me a once or twice a year RUC bill will hurt Kiwi's as I don't think budgeting is as easy as tdgeek indicates. 

 

 

Take the difference between two numbers, divide by 1000 and multiply by $76. Compared to Council rates, this one is child's play.

 

The variance in weekly budgeting would be less, assuming your usage is consistent, as you're not paying petrol taxes for time stuck in traffic.


shrub
773 posts

Ultimate Geek

ID Verified

  #3126818 13-Sep-2023 07:56
Send private message

As a Diesel user who pays RUC its just something you get used to. Do it online not as instore is a punishing process.

 

Low income people that put $20 petrol in at a time will be the ones that struggle to fork out for 5-10000km RUC. That will be around $35-$700 if you were to be doing it every 1000km $75 then you get punished even more with the cost of admin and postage slapped on to each transaction.

 

The only way I can see its going to work is if there was a more convenient way of purchasing like every Z BP Caltex could sell and print a label quickly from a kiosk.


empacher48
367 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #3126819 13-Sep-2023 07:59
Send private message

Having used RUC for my old diesel car before I upgraded to an EV.

I’m all in favour for RUC to be made for all vehicles.

For ease of budgeting, more than anything, I would just buy RUC every month, I travel an average of 1,500km a month so would buy 2,000km each month, eventually I’d have a month that didn’t need me to buy any.

Buying them online was very easy and within 10 minutes an email arrived with a temporary RUC label to print until the real one arrived in the mail.

To make it more accessible to people whose money is tight, perhaps reducing the minimum amount of distance to less than 1000km may help. $76 maybe too much for some people, so either 500km or even 250km amounts may be more affordable.

Down the track going away from a paper based system to a device installed in the car that can’t be removed or tampered with will make it easier, but that will be sometime in the future.

Stu1
1724 posts

Uber Geek

ID Verified
Subscriber

  #3126825 13-Sep-2023 08:20
Send private message

Dingbatt:

Thanks for starting this thread Scott. It deserves its own discussion rather than included in bigger threads.


You have produced a pretty comprehensive pros and cons list as well. It will be a contest of what is logical with human nature. I have been told the reason IRD is reluctant to change from the fuel excise on petrol because of its ease of collection and resistance to avoidance. It seems a bit pathetic in the information age but all you need to do is look at the number of vehicles on the road without a current WOF to recognise that avoidance would be a major problem, and just like insurance premiums, will mean the rest of us will need to pay more.


But for the sake of the discussion (without politics) how about RUCs not being used for subsidising public transport? If there is a public good from public transport then that will come from pollution tax or congestion charging. Or heaven forbid, user pays.


If I have to pay fuel excise on boat petrol (and I do), I would like to see that money go to SaR and Coastgaurd.


 


Edit: In reply to the post of reclaiming excise for PHEVs (EV thread). If a family has multiple vehicles that include a PHEV and a HEV, then I can see the PHEV buying a lot of petrol and getting the excise back and then running on electricity (ie the fuel actually goes into the HEV).



I can see IRs view ,compliance and enforcement will be a nightmare

johno1234
2733 posts

Uber Geek


  #3126826 13-Sep-2023 08:21
Send private message

We have one petrol and one diesel car in the family. The work involved in maintaining the RUC for the diesel is negligible. About once every 4 months I go online and by some Ks. So I'm not fazed by having to do the same for the petrol car. Assuming this is revenue neutral I see no problem. It is an opportunity to charge vehicles more fairly for their road use. If they are heavy and chew up roads they should pay more.

 

My main concern is that this is fair user pays. RUC revenue needs to be ringfenced for roading. Not cycleways, not public transport. If those things are are a public good then they should be funded by the public, i.e. general taxation. 

 

I do see one problem with wider use of RUCs and that is compliance. There's a sector of the public that isn't too interested in it. Whether it is warrants of fitness, vehicle licenses, dog licenses or drivers licenses or RUC licenses they just don't care and don't bother. 


Qazzy03
455 posts

Ultimate Geek


  #3126828 13-Sep-2023 08:23
Send private message

Dingbatt:

 


I have difficulty with this logic. People on a low income that will struggle with RUCs, will struggle to put petrol in their tanks at the moment. It may depend on how small the chunks of kms you can purchase are. If it’s available online, then I don’t see why  the amount needs to have a minimum.

 

 

Very fair point, the people I am thinking of and referring to are usually getting some form of government assistance.

 

Yes, they currently do struggle to put fuel in the tank, often it is only $20-$30 per week and they stop using the vehicle when the fuel is red lining until the next pay cycle. 

 

The RUC change *could* mean they are able to put more in the tank, it will last longer or go further. This 'extra' savings with petrol tax gone will not be put into A/P bank accounts and any physical cash will easily go. 

 

The ones that do try to compile with the RUC change will often be only going for the minimum amount of RUC they can get, meaning they will get stung admin fees ($4.80 online, $7.80 counter sales). 

 

As other users pointed out $76 isn't a lot of budget for, however imo it will not be budgeted for an will need to come out of whatever pay cycle they are in, say if it is tied to WoF.

 

They will now need to use the current pay cycle to pay for food, rent, fuel, WoF, RUC etc. 

 

NZTA is often following up on people that are $100's and sometimes even $1000's behind in RUC, what I was often told was their admin staff were trying to get payment arrangements set up, rather than fines. 

 

I worry for those workers now having to cover so much extra work and put in the position of having to fine people as well, which can led to another poverty cycle. 

 

This is only one point in the RUC change and I am not trying to stay there will not be positives, I am just concerned about how some Kiwi's will struggle and what that will mean for communities and the country.  

 

 


cddt
1495 posts

Uber Geek


  #3126829 13-Sep-2023 08:24
Send private message

Dingbatt:

 

I have difficulty with this logic. People on a low income that will struggle with RUCs, will struggle to put petrol in their tanks at the moment. 

 

 

If they are struggling to put petrol in to their tanks at the moment, they will just not pay the RUC. 

 

 


 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | ... | 70
View this topic in a long page with up to 500 replies per page Create new topic





News and reviews »

Bolt Launches in New Zealand
Posted 11-Jun-2025 00:00


Suunto Run Review
Posted 10-Jun-2025 10:44


Freeview Satellite TV Brings HD Viewing to More New Zealanders
Posted 5-Jun-2025 11:50


HP OmniBook Ultra Flip 14-inch Review
Posted 3-Jun-2025 14:40


Flip Phones Are Back as HMD Reimagines an Iconic Style
Posted 30-May-2025 17:06


Hundreds of School Students Receive Laptops Through Spark Partnership With Quadrent's Green Lease
Posted 30-May-2025 16:57


AI Report Reveals Trust Is Key to Unlocking Its Potential in Aotearoa
Posted 30-May-2025 16:55


Galaxy Tab S10 FE Series Brings Intelligent Experiences to the Forefront with Premium, Versatile Design
Posted 30-May-2025 16:14


New OPPO Watch X2 Launches in New Zealand
Posted 29-May-2025 16:08


Synology Premiers a New Lineup of Advanced Data Management Solutions
Posted 29-May-2025 16:04


Dyson Launches Its Slimmest Vaccum Cleaner PencilVac
Posted 29-May-2025 15:50


OPPO Reno13 Pro 5G Review 
Posted 29-May-2025 15:33


Logitech Introduces New G522 Gaming Headset
Posted 21-May-2025 19:01


LG Announces New Ultragear OLED Range for 2025
Posted 20-May-2025 16:35


Sandisk Raises the Bar With WD_BLACK SN8100 NVME SSD
Posted 20-May-2025 16:29









Geekzone Live »

Try automatic live updates from Geekzone directly in your browser, without refreshing the page, with Geekzone Live now.



Are you subscribed to our RSS feed? You can download the latest headlines and summaries from our stories directly to your computer or smartphone by using a feed reader.







Backblaze unlimited backup