Taxing Utes and SUVs

Trying2SaveABuck on 11/03/2024 - 08:36
Last edited 12/03/2024 - 08:42

https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/on-the-road/gree…

https://www.theage.com.au/national/victoria/council-could-sl…

https://www.news.com.au/technology/motoring/on-the-road/pric…

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2024-03-07/car-brands-set-to-fai…

'Australian motorists may be forced to pay as much as $13,000 extra for some of the country’s most popular cars under the Albanese government’s proposed new emissions standards.

The Ford Ranger, the top-selling car in 2023, would incur a penalty of $6150 under the proposed 2025 CO2 target, according to estimates compiled by the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries (FCAI), which has called on Energy Minister Chris Bowen to release the government’s own modelling of the likely impact on prices.

“I don’t understand why they won’t release the modelling,” said FCAI chief executive Tony Weber.

“Good public policy is created when there is transparency about the objectives and the underpinning assumptions about those objectives.

“Obviously we hope there are changes to the proposed standards. If it goes through as formulated the impact on consumers will be enormous, particularly in two ways — the increased purchase cost of the vehicle and the availability of product in market segments.”

The FCAI’s analysis suggests a Toyota LandCruiser — the seventh most popular car last year — would incur the highest penalty out of the top 20 of $13,250, while the sixth-rating Tesla Model Y would incur a carbon credit of $15,390 under the new rules.

The carbon penalty incurred by Australia’s other top five cars, the Toyota HiLux, Isuzu Ute D-Max, Toyota RAV4 and MG ZS, would be $2690, $2030, $2720 and $3880, respectively.

The figures, which assume the same drive-train or engine as 2023 with no improvement, are based on the highest CO2 emitting variant of each model, compared with the 2025 CO2 target at the penalty rate of $100 per gram.

“Consumers have two fundamental options — you can buy the vehicle that you want and if it doesn’t have the drive-train that meets the target as mooted you will pay the penalty,” said Mr Weber.

“The second option is you could substitute where they’re available to a more sophisticated drive-train that provides you with a better fuel efficiency. Typically in the future that will be EVs.”'

TLTR

the government wants to tax larger cars more [ones that are bad for the environment], potentially to subsidise cars that have better emissions standards. The local councils also want to hit larger cars with more expensive parking and fees.

Do you support taxing larger cars more?

For the record I support this tax as long as the money is used to subsidies more economically and environmentally friendly vehicles and sectors

Poll Options

  • 949
    Yes Tax them more
  • 176
    No dont tax them more
  • 5
    im unsure
Automotive Car SUV Ute

Comments

  • R4 on 15/03/2024 - 00:40

    I'm neutral on EVs - there's a place for them but then there's also a place for diesel and petrol and SUVs and big utes. Drive what you like. I found this video interesting:

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=77Yo4LpksWM

    The guy's owned his EV for 3 years so will know what he's talking about. Personally, if I had that kind of candy to drop on a car, I would have gone for the 911 first off. It's an absolutely legendary car that really holds its value, in fact some of them go up in price. That Taycan does look gorgeous though and I'm sure it's an incredible machine - but $100k plus change for a battery is mental!

    • klaw81 on 15/03/2024 - 10:21
      +6

      That MacMaster guy is an absolute muppet, and his commentary around EVs are deeply inaccurate. Plenty of people have called him out for his misinformation, which is clearly aimed to entertain and inflame the audience to increase engagement with his crappy channel.

      • R4 on 15/03/2024 - 11:33
        +1

        I have no opinion on his channel as it's not the kind of thing I normally watch - this video came up on my YT home page. Many channels are like this. Look at that John Cadogen character. He's a shouty, smug muppet but he does sometimes post some good content. Misinformation, vested interests, lies, half truths etc are part and parcel of the internet in 2024 unfortunately. Get your information from as many sources as possible and draw your own conclusions.

        Fair enough on your viewpoint but ultimately, the numbers speak for themselves. As I said before, if I had that kind of money to spend on a car, what he bought would be very low on my list of options.

        • cashews on 15/03/2024 - 12:27

          Misinformation, vested interests, lies, half truths etc are part and parcel of the internet in 2024

          Get your information from as many sources as possible and draw your own conclusions.

          I'd say it's more important to learn how to identify high quality information and check statements for accuracy rather than just taking the author's word for it.

          People thinking that facts no longer exist is 2024, is part of the problem.

        • rumblytangara on 15/03/2024 - 16:45

          Get your information from as many sources as possible and draw your own conclusions.

          That's the rallying cry for what used to be fringe lunatics (who have unfortunately become mainstream) the world over. e.g. Joe Rogan fans and the like.

          this video came up on my YT home page.

          Yes, the YouTube algorithms are famous for promoting extremist, misinformed outrage. Which is why YouTube in general should be considered suspect.

          • R4 on 15/03/2024 - 17:21

            @rumblytangara: 'I'd say it's more important to learn how to identify high quality information and check statements for accuracy rather than just taking the author's word for it.'

            I'm no JR fan (or those like him). I've seen a bit of his stuff on YT, some good, some bad, but wouldn't take anything he says as gospel. Saying that, it's no worse than, say, The Young Turks. Just get your information from as many sources as possible. I'm super right-wing and conservative but do read output from left-wing outfits like The Guardian, CNN, BBC, Fairfax etc. Just read, think, digest and draw your own conclusion.

    • witheredcouch on 15/03/2024 - 10:51

      That is the most heinous Youtube thumbnail I have ever seen, and I have seen some horrible ones over the years. Might watch the video at some point but that was searing my eyes out.

      • R4 on 15/03/2024 - 11:26

        Agree!

  • Rickysupertramp on 15/03/2024 - 02:11
    +4

    Doesn't surprise me that so many muppets on here would poll the way they have. Same crew that was screaming for lockdowns.

  • seabombs on 15/03/2024 - 10:41
    +2

    Might lead to a resurgence of smaller utes on the market. As a city-dwelling Triton-owner who does the odd bit of camping, landscaping, etc I'd definitely consider one of these.

    https://www.carsguide.com.au/car-news/mini-toyota-hilux-ford…

    https://www.carexpert.com.au/car-news/small-utes-in-australi…

  • netjock on 15/03/2024 - 10:53

    You know people can't have good things because they have too much of it and ruin it for everyone else. Applies to everything in a capitalist free market system (not that communism is any better considering the idea is great but people are corrupt by nature).

    About utes. They are FBT free but then for non work non agricultural use (diesel rebate scheme) you actually need to find make $60k to buy the ute then the tax office to say no tax on 25% (company tax rate) which is $15k. Then all your expenses are tax deductible. Problem is when you are doing 10L/100km vs say 6L/100km and your insurance is $2k rather than $1k (ute vs small car). Even after tax deduction you actually might end up going backwards.

    I've managed billions in revenue and billions in capex / opex and the amount of overlap and pretending something works due for tax reasons is actually an acute problem. It is like those forestry scheme people invested to get a tax deduction and ultimately went bust because there wasn't really a business there.

  • Sendthegoods on 15/03/2024 - 12:06
    +1

    I'm about to buy a ute because I need it for my property, so I'll get penalised? Sounds like classic half baked plan.

    • klaw81 on 15/03/2024 - 13:23
      +2

      If you could buy a different ute that used way less fuel, would you consider buying that instead? Because that's what this policy is aiming to achieve - making manufacturer's take some responsibility for the emissions of their vehicles.

      Australia gets shafted with older tec, low-efficiency engines, because unlike most other markets, we don't have any emissions regulations.

      • Sendthegoods on 15/03/2024 - 23:48

        100%. I couldn't care less on manufacturer loyalty if it means I get a cheaper car. I just need to haul and tow. Fuel efficiency is a large factor to my purchase consideration now. I'm only going for a 4 cylinder for instance because it will use less fuel. It's also inherently cheaper too..

        • klaw81 on 16/03/2024 - 16:53

          Modern utes with high-efficiency engines are unlikely to have their prices significantly affected. It's the ones with old, dirty low-tech V8's that will see the biggest impact of this legislation.

    • Euphemistic on 15/03/2024 - 18:47
      +1

      Sounds like a classic "only heard the bit of the argument i didnt like and dont understand the rest anyway"

  • NevC on 15/03/2024 - 19:54
    -1

    This is fact. My Toyota Surf allows me much better vision, all around the vehicle than ninety percent of the smaller cars they make now.

    • Euphemistic on 16/03/2024 - 08:46
      +2

      Veing avle to see put is great, but your toyota surf will handle and brake worse than 90% of thw cars they make now, not to mention have significanlty less inbuilt safety.

  • whatgift on 16/03/2024 - 15:29
    +1

    This is not a tax, and also that "study" and conclusion is highly questionable.

  • Guerilla89 on 17/03/2024 - 09:00

    Yes they should be taxed. Only after the government stops the concessions for mining and taxes them fairly. Why would we be looking to disadvantage working Australians while still propping up the actual polluters?

  • Ramrunner on 18/03/2024 - 19:10

    I have no problem someone owning one of these if they are towing heavy loads. For example my brother has a 4 kart racing trailer and you simply cannot tow that properly unless you have a Landcruiser or other big vehicle with loads of torque.

    But I have no problem taxing people owning these monsters for no real reason other than they like big cars.

  • hippyhippy on 24/03/2024 - 22:52
    -1

    The environment can definitely be saved if we just taxed everyone 100%

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join