Greens Luxury Car Tax amendments already working!

Blog Post | Blog of Christine Milne
Thursday 9th October 2008, 10:38am

In excellent news this morning, The Age reports that Christine Milne's amendments to the Luxury Car Tax, exempting fuel efficient vehicles from the levy, are already having an impact!

Ian Porter writes:

"THE changes made to luxury car tax have already started to influence the design of premium cars, with Audi announcing plans to install smaller diesel engines in some of its models so they consume less than seven litres per 100 kilometres - and become exempt from the tax."

Audi Chief Joerg Hofmann is quoted as saying:

"Since the legislation passed with the seven-litre exemption, we have had to look at our whole range again."

He said the company had two diesel engines, both four-cylinder units, which would both consume less than seven litres in the A6.

"It was not the original plan because we were not focused very much on the diesel side for the A6. Now with the new legislation, why not bring in a four-cylinder turbo-diesel engine?"

Mr Hofmann said the exemption for cars which consume less than seven litres per 100 kilometres was the only good part of the tax and that Audi was already planning to release smaller engines in some of its models so that they were priced below the $75,000 threshold for fuel-efficient cars.

Aside from the lovely (if sadly iimplicit) praise for the Greens in singling out our amendment as the only good part of the legislation, this is exactly the point - the tax is supposed to encourage more fuel efficient vehicles onto the marketand discourage gas guzzlers. We agree with Hoffman that it would have been amuch better outcome if the Government had agreed to our original proposal and replaced the tax with a tax on vehicle fuel consumption and greenhouse emissions, dealing with equity through the income tax system where it belongs, but at least that has been referred to the Henry Review and is still under consideration.

Australian car manufacturers would do well to follow Audi's example and increase the efficiency of their cars to take advantage of the tax break, to shift their focus in line with a market that is increasingly conscious of climate change and peak oil, and simply to do what is right!

In particular, the Federal Chamber of Automotive Industries should stop whingeing about the tax and about the Greens' amendments which delivered them a substantial benefit, and get cracking convincing their membership to take advantage of the tax break for efficient vehicles. If they don't, their members should get with the program, move with the times, and ditch the old guard who do their lobbying in favour of some who understand the world we are all now operating in.

Those who are dragging us back into the past need to get out of the way of those who are building the future.

Bookmark, email and share

Comments

Diesel Fuels

I do worry about the use of diesel. There is a much higher energy density in diesel fuels which is one of the reasons why they can get better volumetric efficiency. But diesel tends have more large particulate carbon emissions (whist many times better for health than the small particular emissions many cars now have) it can leave soot around cities and have a variety of other concerns.

Once again, a complex issue. The best overall strategy is to reduce demand for transportation (and hence volume of transport) by building cities and the infrastructure between them much much smarter. There are plenty of possibilities here.

by Austin on Thursday 9th October 2008 at 11:03am

complex issues

It is indeed a complex issue, Austin. Certainly, diesel is not the best solution. In the face of peak oil, it's a very short-term solution, too. However, Audi's decision is confirmation that this kind of legislative direction actually works.

This just makes us more determined to improve it, and to work harder towards all the other solutions you rightly point out are vital and which we've been campaigning for for years.

by TimHollo on Thursday 9th October 2008 at 11:28am

Heresy!

"If they don't, their members should get with the program, move with the times, and ditch the old guard who do their lobbying in favour of some who understand the world we are all now operating in."

But smaller engines are heresy! If you can't do it with 8 cylinders and a lot of push-rods then you shouldn't do it at all! *waves Holden flag*

by PaulD on Thursday 9th October 2008 at 11:17am

Green cars.

Audi is leading the way and it needs to be congratulated it seems. Lets see Holden and Ford go down the same road. Will they I wonder?

The French cars are very good on fuel and Citroen fuel figures are very close to the Toyots Prius and on some models nearly better. These will be the Green cars of the future I think.

by Daniel Taylor on Thursday 9th October 2008 at 2:06pm

Green cars

It appears to be a catch 22. Small cars are good around the city, but anybody who needs to drive a long distance on a highway is nearly a flaming looney after 10-12 hours driving in a small car.

I need to travel Melbourne to Brisbane around 2 times a year, and once tried driving a small car. Talk about a brain numbing experience. You are just about dead when you complete the 1,800km.

People who live in the country, and need to tow anything, also need a large more powerful car, or 4WD, but generally they are prepared to pay the extra costs for the same (actually we pay the extra costs as the farmers etc, just add the costs onto the prices we pay for food).

I have attempted a compromise, trading in my Falcon for a 2 litre diesel mid sized station wagon. Although a little more tiring than the larger vehicle, at least I am not brain dead when arriving in Brisbane.

Sorry people, the Australian Car Industry needs to build vehicles for all sectors of the community, and not just for city people.

Actually many Australians must also agree with large vehicles, as the largest selling car in Australia last month was the Holden Commodore (ref Vacts), again. Probably due to fleet buyers, remembering that fleet buyers purchase vehicles based on whole of life (around 3 years) costs, and small cars usually cannot match the cost structure of Commodores.

by Grant on Friday 10th October 2008 at 2:29pm

Greener Cars

Simplistic, I know, but there would be a lot of benefit if a sizable portion of the existing excise on automotive fuel was specifically allocated to Universities, and other bodies independent of industry and government, for research into alternative fuels and transport systems.
We desperately need to distance such studies from political and industrial imperatives.

by rolly on Thursday 9th October 2008 at 6:34pm

Rolly?

Your right and this money could be pumped into education in Universities so then Tertiary education could be free for all Australians. its another No brainer.

by Daniel Taylor on Friday 10th October 2008 at 8:28am

Possible future problem with 7 litre threshold

Assume I have a car (in the future) which can be plugged in to recharge the onboard batteries.

Around town I can get a low mileage because I can plug in after 30-40kms. hardly use fuel at all.

However on the highways things may be different and 7liters / 100km could not be achieved.

Which figure will be used ?

Should the fuel consumption standards be changed so that cars have a city driving / country driving fuel figures which would allow legislation to easily be changed to refer to the standards.

by Scott George on Tuesday 21st October 2008 at 11:50pm

taken into account

Thanks for the comments, Scott.

The 7L limit is based on the official standard rating, which is based on a weighted average of the two figures.

It does raise questions as to how the weight is arrived at, and whether it is adjusted for metro / regional car sales. Have been meaning to check that out. Will do so.

Tim

by TimHollo on Wednesday 22nd October 2008 at 7:49am

Standards adjusted for metro / regional areas - probably not.

Hi Tim,

Around about July where a friend of mine bought a new Golf Polo, I went to the car dealerships and asked each of them whether they had plans for a Hybrid. Most went "a what?".

I also collected pamphlets about various fuel efficient cars and noted that there was only one standard mentioned for fuel efficiency. I dont think they'll change their pamphlets in metro/regional areas. Surely someone would complain "my car said it had XX fuel efficiency".

That's why I like two seperate figures (three if you want to include off road 4wd), you can see for yourself.

Also can the greens push for Comcar to have hybrid/plug-in/electric cars ?

by Scott George on Thursday 23rd October 2008 at 12:29pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.