Belgium - Is it worth going now?
- Thread starter Captain Haddock
- Start date
PaulGooch
Active member
You paid all of the required duty on the 60% propulsion fuel and all of the required duty on the 40% non propulsion fuel, so all of the fuel onboard is 100% tax paid, surely.
sailorman
Well-known member
Its the colour that is the problem 
not the tax paid
not the tax paid
Last edited:
ditchcrawler
Well-known member
The Dutch Customs seem to be saying that a receipt is required showing that you have paid 100% tax at the full rate,not the reduced amount on the 40% bit.S'man is correct that in Belgium the fact that it is dyed is the problem.
Lucky Duck
Well-known member
The following advice from the RYA legal department has been issued by my club. Make of it what you will;
sailorman
Well-known member
A Dutch translation - might be useful
Er zijn twee belangrijke elementen om het probleem van de rode diesel en de EU-wetgeving: ten eerste, de vraag of de voortdurende beschikbaarheid van gemarkeerde diesel in het Verenigd Koninkrijk voor gebruik in particuliere pleziervaartuigen voldoet aan de EU-richtlijn betreffende energieproducten en de EU-richtlijn markering en, anderzijds, of de Het is geoorloofd voor de lidstaten om individuele zeilers bestraffen voor het hebben van duidelijke diesel in hun jacht 'brandstoftanks.
Op het eerste element, hebben we geprobeerd specialist belastingwetgeving advies en we hebben geadviseerd dat de voortdurende beschikbaarheid van duidelijke diesel in het Verenigd Koninkrijk voor gebruik in particuliere pleziervaart niet in zowel de EU-richtlijn betreffende energieproducten of de EU-markering richtlijn overtreden. Wij begrijpen dat de heer Andrew Duff lid van het EP is van mening dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk is in strijd met de EU-markering richtlijn uitgedrukt, maar hij blijkt te hebben op basis van zijn visie op de correspondentie die hij heeft van de Europese Commissie ontvangen in plaats van het uitvoeren van zijn eigen onafhankelijke analyse van de relevante richtlijnen.
De specifieke kwestie in verband met de EU-markering richtlijn (betreffende de fiscale merken van gasolie en kerosine) draait op artikel 3 van die richtlijn, waarin wordt bepaald dat "de lidstaten de nodige maatregelen nemen om onrechtmatig gebruik van de gemerkte produkten te voorkomen ". Artikel 3 gaat verder met te suggereren dat het gebruik van gemarkeerde brandstof voor "de verbranding in de motor van een straat-gaande motorvoertuig" moet worden beschouwd als "oneigenlijk gebruik", maar geen melding wordt gemaakt van het gebruik in particuliere pleziervaart.
De centrale vraag is daarom of het gebruik van accijns is voldaan gemarkeerd diesel voor het voortbewegen van de particuliere pleziervaart komt neer op "oneigenlijk gebruik" in de zin van de richtlijn. De Britse en de Ierse regering zijn van mening dat het gebruik van de accijns is voldaan gemarkeerd diesel voor het voortbewegen van particuliere pleziervaart niet neerkomt op "oneigenlijk gebruik" (en er is geen jurisprudentie van het tegendeel), terwijl de Belgische regering en individuen binnen de Europese Commissie van mening dat het doet.
Echter, de interpretatie van EU-richtlijnen is de verantwoordelijkheid van het Europese Hof van Justitie, niet de Commissie, en het is zeker niet zo dat het Europese Hof steeds standpunt van de Commissie steunt. Als zodanig heeft de Belgische regering en de Europese Commissie alleen maar herhalen hun ogen niet dienen om dat standpunt geen grotere geldigheid en de enige manier waarop deze vraag afdoende beantwoord kan worden is voor de zaak te worden voorgelegd aan het Europese Hof van Justitie te geven. De Europese Commissie heeft de eerste stappen gezet naar een dergelijke verwijzing door te geven dat zij voornemens is een inbreukprocedure tegen het Verenigd Koninkrijk.
Op de tweede element, heb ik begrepen dat de Belgische regering maakte het illegaal om duidelijke diesel te gebruiken in particuliere pleziervaartuigen in Belgische wateren kort na de Belgische afwijking van de richtlijn betreffende energieproducten liep af in december 2006. Er zijn echter een aantal omstandigheden waaronder de EU-wetgeving (met inbegrip van het Energy Products Directive zelf) en internationaal recht (zoals de 1990 Istanbul Overeenkomst inzake tijdelijke invoer), waarin de belangrijkste brandstof tanks van een particuliere pleziervaartuigen navigeren in de communautaire wateren mag er terecht bevatten gemarkeerd diesel. We hebben weer gezocht specialist juridisch advies en we hebben gewezen dat de strafbaarstelling van individuele zeilers voor de loutere aanwezigheid van gemerkte brandstof in de brandstof een pleziervaartuig de tanks is in strijd met de basisprincipes van de EU-wetgeving. Dit advies is in overeenstemming met de brief van de Europese Commissie beschikbaar op onze website en deze kwestie is niet, voor zover wij weten, het onder
Er zijn twee belangrijke elementen om het probleem van de rode diesel en de EU-wetgeving: ten eerste, de vraag of de voortdurende beschikbaarheid van gemarkeerde diesel in het Verenigd Koninkrijk voor gebruik in particuliere pleziervaartuigen voldoet aan de EU-richtlijn betreffende energieproducten en de EU-richtlijn markering en, anderzijds, of de Het is geoorloofd voor de lidstaten om individuele zeilers bestraffen voor het hebben van duidelijke diesel in hun jacht 'brandstoftanks.
Op het eerste element, hebben we geprobeerd specialist belastingwetgeving advies en we hebben geadviseerd dat de voortdurende beschikbaarheid van duidelijke diesel in het Verenigd Koninkrijk voor gebruik in particuliere pleziervaart niet in zowel de EU-richtlijn betreffende energieproducten of de EU-markering richtlijn overtreden. Wij begrijpen dat de heer Andrew Duff lid van het EP is van mening dat het Verenigd Koninkrijk is in strijd met de EU-markering richtlijn uitgedrukt, maar hij blijkt te hebben op basis van zijn visie op de correspondentie die hij heeft van de Europese Commissie ontvangen in plaats van het uitvoeren van zijn eigen onafhankelijke analyse van de relevante richtlijnen.
De specifieke kwestie in verband met de EU-markering richtlijn (betreffende de fiscale merken van gasolie en kerosine) draait op artikel 3 van die richtlijn, waarin wordt bepaald dat "de lidstaten de nodige maatregelen nemen om onrechtmatig gebruik van de gemerkte produkten te voorkomen ". Artikel 3 gaat verder met te suggereren dat het gebruik van gemarkeerde brandstof voor "de verbranding in de motor van een straat-gaande motorvoertuig" moet worden beschouwd als "oneigenlijk gebruik", maar geen melding wordt gemaakt van het gebruik in particuliere pleziervaart.
De centrale vraag is daarom of het gebruik van accijns is voldaan gemarkeerd diesel voor het voortbewegen van de particuliere pleziervaart komt neer op "oneigenlijk gebruik" in de zin van de richtlijn. De Britse en de Ierse regering zijn van mening dat het gebruik van de accijns is voldaan gemarkeerd diesel voor het voortbewegen van particuliere pleziervaart niet neerkomt op "oneigenlijk gebruik" (en er is geen jurisprudentie van het tegendeel), terwijl de Belgische regering en individuen binnen de Europese Commissie van mening dat het doet.
Echter, de interpretatie van EU-richtlijnen is de verantwoordelijkheid van het Europese Hof van Justitie, niet de Commissie, en het is zeker niet zo dat het Europese Hof steeds standpunt van de Commissie steunt. Als zodanig heeft de Belgische regering en de Europese Commissie alleen maar herhalen hun ogen niet dienen om dat standpunt geen grotere geldigheid en de enige manier waarop deze vraag afdoende beantwoord kan worden is voor de zaak te worden voorgelegd aan het Europese Hof van Justitie te geven. De Europese Commissie heeft de eerste stappen gezet naar een dergelijke verwijzing door te geven dat zij voornemens is een inbreukprocedure tegen het Verenigd Koninkrijk.
Op de tweede element, heb ik begrepen dat de Belgische regering maakte het illegaal om duidelijke diesel te gebruiken in particuliere pleziervaartuigen in Belgische wateren kort na de Belgische afwijking van de richtlijn betreffende energieproducten liep af in december 2006. Er zijn echter een aantal omstandigheden waaronder de EU-wetgeving (met inbegrip van het Energy Products Directive zelf) en internationaal recht (zoals de 1990 Istanbul Overeenkomst inzake tijdelijke invoer), waarin de belangrijkste brandstof tanks van een particuliere pleziervaartuigen navigeren in de communautaire wateren mag er terecht bevatten gemarkeerd diesel. We hebben weer gezocht specialist juridisch advies en we hebben gewezen dat de strafbaarstelling van individuele zeilers voor de loutere aanwezigheid van gemerkte brandstof in de brandstof een pleziervaartuig de tanks is in strijd met de basisprincipes van de EU-wetgeving. Dit advies is in overeenstemming met de brief van de Europese Commissie beschikbaar op onze website en deze kwestie is niet, voor zover wij weten, het onder
Koeketiene
Well-known member
Google translate is not always your friend.
Close, but no cigar.
Close, but no cigar.
sailorman
Well-known member
Koeketiene
Well-known member
Wunja
Active member
An English translation of a Dutch translation
Always worth translating back to see what you get.
There are two key elements to the problem of red diesel and EU law: first, whether the continued availability of marked diesel fuel in the UK for use in private pleasure craft complies with the EU Energy Products Directive and the EU Marking Directive and, secondly, whether it is lawful for the States to punish individual sailors to have clear diesel in their hunt 'fuel tanks.
The first element, we attempted specialist tax advice and we have advised that the continued availability of clear diesel in the UK for use in private pleasure craft not in both the EU Energy Products Directive or the EU-infringing mark. We understand that Mr Andrew Duff MEP believes that the UK is in breach of the EU directive expressed marker, but he appears to have based his view of the correspondence he has received from the European Commission instead of performing its own independent analysis of the relevant directives.
The specific issue for the EU Marking Directive (on fiscal marking of gas oil and kerosene) runs on Article 3 of that Directive, which stipulates that "Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that improper use of the marked product to avoid" . Article 3 goes on to suggest that the use of marked fuel "combustion in the engine of a road-going vehicle" should be considered "improper use" but no mention of the use in private pleasure craft.
The central question is whether the use of duty-paid marked diesel fuel for propelling private pleasure craft amounts to "misuse" within the meaning of the Directive. The British and Irish Governments believe that the use of duty-paid marked diesel fuel for propelling private pleasure craft does not amount to "misuse" (and there is no case law to the contrary), while the Belgian government and individuals within The European Commission considers that it does.
However, the interpretation of EU directives is the responsibility of the European Court of Justice, not the Commission, and it's certainly not true that the European Court has consistently supported the Commission's position. As such, the Belgian Government and the European Commission can only reiterate their eyes do not serve that point no greater validity and the only way this question can be answered satisfactorily for the case to be presented to the European Court of Justice to give. The European Commission has put the first steps towards such a reference by indicating that it intends to initiate infringement proceedings against the UK.
On the second element, I understand that the Belgian government made it illegal to clear diesel use in private pleasure craft in Belgian waters shortly after the departure of Belgian Energy Products Directive expired in December 2006. There are some circumstances under EU legislation (including the Energy Products Directive itself) and international law (such as the 1990 Istanbul Convention on Temporary Admission), where the main fuel tank of a private pleasure craft navigation in Community waters rightly highlighted include diesel. Again we have sought specialist legal advice and we have noted that the criminalization of individual sailors to the mere presence of marked fuel in the fuel tanks a pleasure contradicts the basic principles of EU law. This advice is consistent with the letter from the European Commission is available on our website and this issue is not, to our knowledge, the subject
The first element, we attempted specialist tax advice and we have advised that the continued availability of clear diesel in the UK for use in private pleasure craft not in both the EU Energy Products Directive or the EU-infringing mark. We understand that Mr Andrew Duff MEP believes that the UK is in breach of the EU directive expressed marker, but he appears to have based his view of the correspondence he has received from the European Commission instead of performing its own independent analysis of the relevant directives.
The specific issue for the EU Marking Directive (on fiscal marking of gas oil and kerosene) runs on Article 3 of that Directive, which stipulates that "Member States shall take the necessary measures to ensure that improper use of the marked product to avoid" . Article 3 goes on to suggest that the use of marked fuel "combustion in the engine of a road-going vehicle" should be considered "improper use" but no mention of the use in private pleasure craft.
The central question is whether the use of duty-paid marked diesel fuel for propelling private pleasure craft amounts to "misuse" within the meaning of the Directive. The British and Irish Governments believe that the use of duty-paid marked diesel fuel for propelling private pleasure craft does not amount to "misuse" (and there is no case law to the contrary), while the Belgian government and individuals within The European Commission considers that it does.
However, the interpretation of EU directives is the responsibility of the European Court of Justice, not the Commission, and it's certainly not true that the European Court has consistently supported the Commission's position. As such, the Belgian Government and the European Commission can only reiterate their eyes do not serve that point no greater validity and the only way this question can be answered satisfactorily for the case to be presented to the European Court of Justice to give. The European Commission has put the first steps towards such a reference by indicating that it intends to initiate infringement proceedings against the UK.
On the second element, I understand that the Belgian government made it illegal to clear diesel use in private pleasure craft in Belgian waters shortly after the departure of Belgian Energy Products Directive expired in December 2006. There are some circumstances under EU legislation (including the Energy Products Directive itself) and international law (such as the 1990 Istanbul Convention on Temporary Admission), where the main fuel tank of a private pleasure craft navigation in Community waters rightly highlighted include diesel. Again we have sought specialist legal advice and we have noted that the criminalization of individual sailors to the mere presence of marked fuel in the fuel tanks a pleasure contradicts the basic principles of EU law. This advice is consistent with the letter from the European Commission is available on our website and this issue is not, to our knowledge, the subject
Always worth translating back to see what you get.
Last edited:
Stork_III
Well-known member
The following is advice from the Netherland Embassy In London, which reconfirms their earlier advice.
"Dear Mr Loughlin,
As promised in my email from 10 January I would come back to you as I had heard from the National Office of the Customs Administration of the Netherlands. They have send us an answer to our questions and I can now give you the following information.
The Information I have given you in my email of the 4th of January is the correct one! I hereby send you again the policy according to Red Diesel, as I wrote to you then:
You can fill up your tanks with red diesel, but not take more fuel with you then the amount of your tanks. You have to be able to show the receipt, which can’t be older than 1 year old. On the receipt should be written that “the difference in tax between white and red diesel is paid by the UK Government (the 60/40 notice)”. According to the Dutch Customs this should be on the receipt automatically.
If you keep to these points and can show the above mentioned papers and notes the Dutch Customs can’t fine you. The National Office is aware that the Regional Custom Offices are not always dealing in according to this policy and have made the National Policy clear, once again, to all the Regional Offices.
The National Office has made it clear to us that if you still would get a Fine, they only can investigate this on an individual basis and advise that in that case you keep all the paperwork.
I really hope this information will help you further.
With kind regards,
Lieke Conijn
Office Manager
........................................................................
Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Economic Section
38 Hyde Park Gate | SW7 5DP | London"
Seems to be definite, Red ok with receipt showing 60/40 split, Duty Paid. If, in the unlikely event,you get some Jobsworth fining you, I suspect in the south, keep all paperwork, contact HQ and you'll get it back.
"Dear Mr Loughlin,
As promised in my email from 10 January I would come back to you as I had heard from the National Office of the Customs Administration of the Netherlands. They have send us an answer to our questions and I can now give you the following information.
The Information I have given you in my email of the 4th of January is the correct one! I hereby send you again the policy according to Red Diesel, as I wrote to you then:
You can fill up your tanks with red diesel, but not take more fuel with you then the amount of your tanks. You have to be able to show the receipt, which can’t be older than 1 year old. On the receipt should be written that “the difference in tax between white and red diesel is paid by the UK Government (the 60/40 notice)”. According to the Dutch Customs this should be on the receipt automatically.
If you keep to these points and can show the above mentioned papers and notes the Dutch Customs can’t fine you. The National Office is aware that the Regional Custom Offices are not always dealing in according to this policy and have made the National Policy clear, once again, to all the Regional Offices.
The National Office has made it clear to us that if you still would get a Fine, they only can investigate this on an individual basis and advise that in that case you keep all the paperwork.
I really hope this information will help you further.
With kind regards,
Lieke Conijn
Office Manager
........................................................................
Embassy of the Kingdom of the Netherlands
Economic Section
38 Hyde Park Gate | SW7 5DP | London"
Seems to be definite, Red ok with receipt showing 60/40 split, Duty Paid. If, in the unlikely event,you get some Jobsworth fining you, I suspect in the south, keep all paperwork, contact HQ and you'll get it back.
Wunja
Active member
Stork_III
Well-known member
We'll be there, but unfortunately not in your home marina with that entrance depth.
, but unfortunately not in your home marina with that entrance depth.
Tradewinds
Well-known member
Dilemma
Well I don't know the latest info from the Dutch really helps me if they were to get snotty.
Red diesel purchased in quantity at SYH in 2007 - on account therefore no proper receipt (& before 60/40 split business).
Top ups since in Holland up to summer 2010 - cash no receipts.
Top ups from garages around Ipswich - just normal garage receipts - probably will be older than a year when I do go.
Diesel is 'pale pink' when viewed in volume (25 litre plastic translucent container) so definitely chemical tracers in the fuel.
Don't think it will stop me going though.
PS Thanks Stork for your efforts.
Well I don't know the latest info from the Dutch really helps me if they were to get snotty
.Red diesel purchased in quantity at SYH in 2007 - on account therefore no proper receipt (& before 60/40 split business).
Top ups since in Holland up to summer 2010 - cash no receipts.
Top ups from garages around Ipswich - just normal garage receipts - probably will be older than a year when I do go.
Diesel is 'pale pink' when viewed in volume (25 litre plastic translucent container) so definitely chemical tracers in the fuel.
Don't think it will stop me going though
.PS Thanks Stork for your efforts.
sailorman
Well-known member
Thanks Stork
maby
Well-known member
Well I don't know the latest info from the Dutch really helps me if they were to get snotty
Red diesel purchased in quantity at SYH in 2007 - on account therefore no proper receipt (& before 60/40 split business).
Top ups since in Holland up to summer 2010 - cash no receipts.
Top ups from garages around Ipswich - just normal garage receipts - probably will be older than a year when I do go.
Diesel is 'pale pink' when viewed in volume (25 litre plastic translucent container) so definitely chemical tracers in the fuel.
Don't think it will stop me going though
PS Thanks Stork for your efforts.
They only say that the receipt must be less than a year old, and they have no way of knowing if the receipt you present actually relates to the fuel in the tank. Equally, boats do not carry any legally enforceable number plate and my fuel receipts do not carry the boat name or SSR number... So, either run your tank down fairly low and get a fill up from a pump that will issue you with a proper receipt, or make friends with a local MoBo owner and get him to give you one of his recent receipts - they seem to always be filling up!
Stork_III
Well-known member
Sailorman's post 77 may help?Well I don't know the latest info from the Dutch really helps me if they were to get snotty
Red diesel purchased in quantity at SYH in 2007 - on account therefore no proper receipt (& before 60/40 split business).
Top ups since in Holland up to summer 2010 - cash no receipts.
Top ups from garages around Ipswich - just normal garage receipts - probably will be older than a year when I do go.
Diesel is 'pale pink' when viewed in volume (25 litre plastic translucent container) so definitely chemical tracers in the fuel.
Don't think it will stop me going though
PS Thanks Stork for your efforts.
Tradewinds
Well-known member
Tanks got 180+ litres in so nearly full. I'm not going to empty it that quickly - unless I'm on holiday (in Holland!)
Don't want to be bothered with the red stuff.
I'll take my chances & make sure I get a proper receipt when I top up abroad.
Good suggestions tho.
Don't want to be bothered with the red stuff.
I'll take my chances & make sure I get a proper receipt when I top up abroad.
Good suggestions tho.
maby
Well-known member
You obviously don't live aboard! Our Webasto makes a decent hole in that much fuel in a month this time of year! :-(
Tradewinds
Well-known member
Do you want to buy some cheap pink fuel