If we vote for Brexit what happens

michaels

bugslet wrote: »

AIUI, the complaint is that to make the process revenue neutral to UK hauliers, they dropped the VED by a certain amount shortly before the charge for foreign vehicles began.

And? Still don't see how that gives UK hauliers operating in the UK an unfair advantage over foreign ones?

bugslet

michaels wrote: »

And? Still don't see how that gives UK hauliers operating in the UK an unfair advantage over foreign ones?

Given all the other variables, neither do I. However, that appears to be the Eu's position, that by making the scheme revenue neutral, it's unfair.

Generali

bugslet wrote: »

Given all the other variables, neither do I. However, that appears to be the Eu's position, that by making the scheme revenue neutral, it's unfair.

(Genuine question) is it revenue neutral because it shifts some of the tax burden from UK lorries to foreign lorries in net terms or is it net neutral among the UK lorry firms alone?

Any law that shifts the burden of tax from locals to foreigners is going to be at risk from this sort of thing. I remember in the early 90s the French being very upset about the Brits paying less tax on beer than wine for much the same reason. IIRC, Ken Clarke got the UK out of that one although it might have been Nigel Lawson. The argument was that Britain had a tax tradition based on drinking traditions. As a beer drinking country Britain would be expected to favour beer drinkers through the tax system. As a wine exporting nation the French were likely to be upset about that.

I don't think that people really understand that this is what free trade areas have to look like. Governments are going to try to put through back door changes to their rules to favour locals and it is the job of the free trade umpire to stop that.

bugslet

UK firms alone. Say VED for one of my trucks was £1500.00 in 2013, in 2014 when the levy came in, it became £500.00 + £1000.00 for the road user levy. For about 95% of hauliers there was no change in what was paid. £1000.00 is the maximum annual levy.

I believe the government had been trying for some time to find a way of making foreign trucks pay for wear and tear on UK roads, problem was that UK hauliers would then be up in arms if only because they'd be annoyed by the amount tax paid already. ( Working on 12 mpg and at least 100,000 miles a year produces a lot of revenue, I know of one truck less tba 4 year old that's done 1.3 million k as it's triple shifted. Foreign vehicles rarely if ever buy fuel in the UK.)

As I've said before, it isn't only the UK that's trying to mitigate foreign haulage competition from the East, France, Belgium and Germany have all tried sneaky ways to curb them, but every time they've been knocked back in the same way as this will be, if the report is correct.

BobQ

This is a story in two pro-Brexit papers, referring to a German magazine article that summarises a letter without reproducing it.

According to the article, the EU has asked the UK to explain why it is not discriminating against non-UK drivers. That is hardly a conclusive story that they intend to do anything.

It seems that Germany plans to do the same and the EU will not comment.

BobQ

bugslet wrote: »

UK firms alone. Say VED for one of my trucks was £1500.00 in 2013, in 2014 when the levy came in, it became £500.00 + £1000.00 for the road user levy. For about 95% of hauliers there was no change in what was paid. £1000.00 is the maximum annual levy.

I believe the government had been trying for some time to find a way of making foreign trucks pay for wear and tear on UK roads, problem was that UK hauliers would then be up in arms if only because they'd be annoyed by the amount tax paid already. ( Working on 12 mpg and at least 100,000 miles a year produces a lot of revenue, I know of one truck less tba 4 year old that's done 1.3 million k as it's triple shifted. Foreign vehicles rarely if ever buy fuel in the UK.)

As I've said before, it isn't only the UK that's trying to mitigate foreign haulage competition from the East, France, Belgium and Germany have all tried sneaky ways to curb them, but every time they've been knocked back in the same way as this will be, if the report is correct.

So under this scheme UK lorry owners pay £500 VED plus a daily usage fee capped at £1000. Non-UK drivers pay the same usage related fee. Is that correct? So a a non UK lorry with heavy use would pay £1000? How is that discriminating against non-UK drivers?

The following data explains some of cost issues.

https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/hgv-levys-first-year-of-operation

https://www.dkv-euroservice.com/gb/media/content/documents_1/benefits/toll_9/great_britain/levy_uk_tarife/levy_uk_tarife_en.pdf

Rinoa

BobQ wrote: »

It seems that Germany plans to do the same and the EU will not comment.

No surprise there is no comment from the EU.

In the UK you could ask the govt department responsible and receive a written reply. Or if it was sufficiently important the minister responsible would come to the house and MP's could ask questions.

In the EU there appears to be faceless bureaucrats running the show. No one knows who is responsible for making the decisions, how the decisions are made, who decides if the UK is to be prosecuted, who are the judges.

It's akin to a despot ruler issuing diktats that must be obeyed.

"It's all democratic", the remainers will say. "We have a democratic vote to elect an MEP every 5 years". But in reality individual MEP's have zero influence. Can anyone give an example of a UK MEP ever influencing EU law?

antrobus

Rinoa wrote: »

.... Can anyone give an example of a UK MEP ever influencing EU law?

Does this help?
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/feb/04/do-uk-meps-get-key-positions-of-power-in-europe

It specifically refers to a certain Nick Clegg influencing the EU directive on local loop unbundling. And in reference to the 2009-14 parliament states that "In this term, when it came to key pieces of EU law, UK MEPs author more reports than the MEPs from every other member state except Germany", and concludes that "UK MEPs have captured many powerful agenda-setting positions. They have been vice-presidents, political group leaders, and chairs of important committees. UK MEPs have also won rapporteurships on key legislation, which has enabled them to shape EU law. "

Rinoa

antrobus wrote: »

Does this help?
http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2016/feb/04/do-uk-meps-get-key-positions-of-power-in-europe

It specifically refers to a certain Nick Clegg influencing the EU directive on local loop unbundling. And in reference to the 2009-14 parliament states that "In this term, when it came to key pieces of EU law, UK MEPs author more reports than the MEPs from every other member state except Germany", and concludes that "UK MEPs have captured many powerful agenda-setting positions. They have been vice-presidents, political group leaders, and chairs of important committees. UK MEPs have also won rapporteurships on key legislation, which has enabled them to shape EU law. "

Fair enough, although Nick Clegg ceased to be an MEP in 2004. Examples are clearly few and far between.

The big problem is that MEP's don't set the agenda They can only revise legislation, not make laws themselves. In the UK every person making UK laws is elected by UK voters. In the EU lawmakers are not directly elected by UK voters.

Generali

Rinoa wrote: »

Fair enough, although Nick Clegg ceased to be an MEP in 2004. Examples are clearly few and far between.

The big problem is that MEP's don't set the agenda They can only revise legislation, not make laws themselves. In the UK every person making UK laws is elected by UK voters. In the EU lawmakers are not directly elected by UK voters.

It seems to me that the big problem keeps changing.

The reality in a set-up like the EU, the European Commission holds the power on a day-to-day basis but can only use that power if it doesn't overstep the mark.

If a number of MEPs have concerns about an area of EU law, or a couple of Governments do then they will make representations, formally or informally, and through that process member Governments and MEPs will be able to influence the EC.

The EC has backed away from all sorts of ridiculous bureaucratic positions in the past, for example look at the red tape bonfire in agriculture. Yes, the EC shouldn't have set the red-tape train in progress but at least they had the gumption to address their mistakes. If only more politicians couldn't do the same rather than continuing to hold untenable positions.