Does Greece now REALLY need OUR tax money?

[Steve C Cronin]

"Sorry, couldn't help myself, that was painful reading."!

I think your criticism of vic's english is rather bad form. You evidently havn't picked up that english isn't his first language? If my Italian were 50% as good as his english, I'd be very happy and I suspect that you would too.

 

[sailaboutvic]

"Sorry, couldn't help myself, that was painful reading."!

Hi Jock
In the further I will send my posting to you first so you can spell check it for me .
The truth is my grammar and spelling is bad I know , it called dyslexia , but hey one can only do ones best .

 

[sailaboutvic]

I think your criticism of vic's english is rather bad form. You evidently havn't picked up that english isn't his first language? If my Italian were 50% as good as his english, I'd be very happy and I suspect that you would too.

Steve
thanks for watching my back , the whole pontoon having a great laugh including my self ,
born and raised in ear shot of bow bells and now and then my cockey accents do get the better of me , you know what I mean mate .
Keep the posting coming I just love the way you wind some people on here up .

 

[Steve C Cronin]

Steve
thanks for watching my back , the whole pontoon having a great laugh including my self ,
born and raised in ear shot of bow bells and now and then my cockey accents do get the better of me , you know what I mean mate .
Keep the posting coming I just love the way you wind some people on here up .

OOPS! Sorry.

 

[BurnitBlue]

I asked the office in one of the Preveza yards and I was told they had 500 yachts. There are 4 yards plus two marinas so I would guess that over 2000 yachts stay in the area year in year out. Personally I can honestly say that I don't know any Greek flagged boats at all. They are all (in my limited observation non Greek).

Assuming that winter storage fees alone are 3000 euros per year on average plus summer spending of another 2000 euros then the local economy will lose a minimum of 10 million Euro a year in the Preveza area alone. And this from non Greek boats.

This is basic unavoidable minimum for keeping a boat in Greece and does not take into account maintenance and summer moorings.

The Greek boats I do see are 7 meter wooden things that are exempt because they declare themselves fishing boats and below 7 meters.

For anyone to assert that the Greek economy would not notice a Visitor exodus that leaves only small Greek boats behind is being ridiculous. It is a statement to justify their wrong position in just accepting the TAX and rolling over.

There is another factor at play here and it is the agenda of an expanding CA. All Governments are more than happy to deal with a single body that states that they represent the views of 100-thousand yacht-owners. Rather than face the anger of 100,000 size crowd, they realise it is easier to deal with a single representative that they can make deals with. The point I made earlier is that all the CA "officials" on here toe the Greek line on it being justifiable to tax visitors and ask everyone to stop "complaining". And these are our "representatives" at the negotiating table.

Apologies, for any poor grammar.

 

[Tony Cross]

I'll correct you on that too. It wasn't until people with my views and a few others dared to challenge the staid and reluctant hierarchy at "Port Cosyhome-Limehouse" that anything was done. Just check the early posts of one of it's "Council" members on the first thread and you will see terms like "...nothing can be done so we won't try..." After being given a good boot up the backside they eventually got out of their torpor and into some action.

Although I'm only a humble foot soldier and not privy to machinations of the higher echelons of the CA, I do happen to know that your statement is not true. The CA, like most worthy institutions, doesn't do "knee-jerk" reactions, nor do they go off "half-cocked". And if you check the thread on the CA MedNet system (something I know you can do because you're a CA member yourself) you'll see that it appeared on MedNet the day before the long thread first appeared on here, so the CA were already up and running with this tax long before you even thought they might need a "boot up the backside".

You're like a scatter-gun Steve. You're vehemently opposed to the tax (and I well understand that) but it seems that anyone and everyone is to blame; the Greek government for introducing it, the CA for not opposing it out of hand, and those of us who will stay and reluctantly pay up, all seem to be equally in the wrong in your book.

I'd be interested to know what you personally will do when the tax is implemented. Will you leave, or will you go all quite and pay up and stay?

 

[Tony Cross]

I asked the office in one of the Preveza yards and I was told they had 500 yachts. There are 4 yards plus two marinas so I would guess that over 2000 yachts stay in the area year in year out. Personally I can honestly say that I don't know any Greek flagged boats at all. They are all (in my limited observation non Greek).

Assuming that winter storage fees alone are 3000 euros per year on average plus summer spending of another 2000 euros then the local economy will lose a minimum of 10 million Euro a year in the Preveza area alone. And this from non Greek boats.

This is basic unavoidable minimum for keeping a boat in Greece and does not take into account maintenance and summer moorings.

The Greek boats I do see are 7 meter wooden things that are exempt because they declare themselves fishing boats and below 7 meters.

For anyone to assert that the Greek economy would not notice a Visitor exodus that leaves only small Greek boats behind is being ridiculous. It is a statement to justify their wrong position in just accepting the TAX and rolling over.

There is another factor at play here and it is the agenda of an expanding CA. All Governments are more than happy to deal with a single body that states that they represent the views of 100-thousand yacht-owners. Rather than face the anger of 100,000 size crowd, they realise it is easier to deal with a single representative that they can make deals with. The point I made earlier is that all the CA "officials" on here toe the Greek line on it being justifiable to tax visitors and ask everyone to stop "complaining". And these are our "representatives" at the negotiating table.

Apologies, for any poor grammar.

Three points.

1. I suspect that the Preveza area, and probably including Lefkas, is one of the most densely populated areas of visiting boats, especially in the winter. You mention 2000 boats there, so lets say there are 5000 visiting boats in all of Greece pretty much full-time. Fair? The Greek government have stated that they estimate that there are over 30,000 boats in Greek waters that are eligible to pay this tax, so whilst 5000 is a sizeable number it's simply not big enough to cause them to abandon the tax, even if all of them left (which they won't) and no other boats arrived (which they will, especially from non-EU countries).

2. The CA membership is nowhere near 100,000. It actually has less than 5000 members worldwide, but you will note that it's making all of it's negotiations with the Greek government public via it's website and available to all. The CA has never asked anyone to stop complaining, I have done that but I have absolutely no authority to act on behalf of the CA any more than any other ordinary member does. You also use emotive phrases like "toe the line" when I am quite certain that the CA would have opposed the tax outright had they felt that they had even a remote chance of succeeding. By going down that road and failing they would have not been in any position to then try to negotiate concessions because the Greek government would simply not be prepared to talk to them any more. By accepting that outright abolition is a battle they stood zero chance of winning they have made it possible for them to negotiate concessions on the tax.

3. The CA are not "your" representatives at the negotiating table (unless you are a CA member). The CA are representing the CA membership. As far as I know you don't have any representatives at the negotiating table. What the CA are doing, as I have mentioned already, is publicising what is being negotiated so that everyone knows what the current position is.

 

[jimbaerselman]

I'll correct you on that too. It wasn't until people with my views and a few others dared to challenge the staid and reluctant hierarchy at "Port Cosyhome-Limehouse" that anything was done. Just check the early posts of one of it's "Council" members on the first thread and you will see terms like "...nothing can be done so we won't try..." After being given a good boot up the backside they eventually got out of their torpor and into some action.

I think you're referring to this:

So, personally, I find it difficult to make a sound case for putting high effort into modifying the Greek proposals. My view is that affected individuals should make representations to their marinas and boat yards. This will probably be more effective than RYA or CA representation.

The reason for that post was to persuade as many people as possible to contact their boat yards and marinas. If I'd said "we're on the case", very few would have bothered. So I told the story of my personal previous experience (which wasn't the CA view). This machiavellian approach worked a treat. Lots of people from this forum and the CA poked their suppliers, most of whom were in denial. That was very helpful. They reacted to Ministry of Maritime, who then started to listen to us.

The CA has been "on the case" since the previous two attempts at introducing a similar tax failed, and it had became obvious that a third attempt was being carefully researched in 2012 to avoid another failure.

Our view then was to take the following approach, which the Ministry is aware of. This is the wording we sent some time back. It's posted on our web site:

We have further proposals, many of which have been published earlier. These are, in order of priority:

8. Current Port Police Fees.
Very few visitors bother to pay the current port police fees (fewer than 2% in the Ionian). This is because the collection system is deeply un-popular, and therefore avoided. Visitors prefer to spend €20 in tavernas, rather than spending an hour finding a port police office, then standing in queues, and sometimes paying a taxi, all in order to pay €8 in one office, then €0.88 in a tax office, which is often closed. Greece is the only EU country which puts leisure sailors to this daily inconvenience. Recommendation: The large majority of our correspondents tell us that if the monthly/yearly tax replaced the current port police reporting routines, they would accept the new tax as a great improvement in the total Greek cruising experiences. This should also release Port Police and give them more time to monitor collection of the new tax.

9. Non EU Boats
Non-EU boats have to pay 3 monthly fees already, and many have asked us if this tax will be in addition to the old fee, or if it is a replacement. For this small number of boats, and for simple enforcement, we would expect the same system of collection to be used, with the same fees as EU boats.

Pause now to consider how much in fees vessels should have been paying to the port police to spend 120 days cruising around Greek harbours and anchorages - before paying for electricity, water or laid lines. The amount is remarkably similar to the proposed new tax; for some boats, quite a lot less. For some, more. Not everyone will win in cash terms. But, if we're successful, everyone will win the convenience of reduced bureaucracy.

that's the line the CA has taken since day one of course....

Tony has been helping in his role as a CA local representative. We're all hoping that these requests will be accepted, together with several others we've made. let's wait and see.

 

[BurnitBlue]

Three points.

1. I suspect that the Preveza area, and probably including Lefkas, is one of the most densely populated areas of visiting boats, especially in the winter. You mention 2000 boats there, so lets say there are 5000 visiting boats in all of Greece pretty much full-time. Fair? The Greek government have stated that they estimate that there are over 30,000 boats in Greek waters that are eligible to pay this tax, so whilst 5000 is a sizeable number it's simply not big enough to cause them to abandon the tax, even if all of them left (which they won't) and no other boats arrived (which they will, especially from non-EU countries).

2. The CA membership is nowhere near 100,000. It actually has less than 5000 members worldwide, but you will note that it's making all of it's negotiations with the Greek government public via it's website and available to all. The CA has never asked anyone to stop complaining, I have done that but I have absolutely no authority to act on behalf of the CA any more than any other ordinary member does. You also use emotive phrases like "toe the line" when I am quite certain that the CA would have opposed the tax outright had they felt that they had even a remote chance of succeeding. By going down that road and failing they would have not been in any position to then try to negotiate concessions because the Greek government would simply not be prepared to talk to them any more. By accepting that outright abolition is a battle they stood zero chance of winning they have made it possible for them to negotiate concessions on the tax.

3. The CA are not "your" representatives at the negotiating table (unless you are a CA member). The CA are representing the CA membership. As far as I know you don't have any representatives at the negotiating table. What the CA are doing, as I have mentioned already, is publicising what is being negotiated so that everyone knows what the current position is.

The 100,000 was my guess at the number of cruising skippers and crew in the Med who would suffer if this TAX became law as it would spread throughout the EU. It was not a guess at the membership of the CA. The point is that the CA are attending negotiations or passing on concerns of a lot more cruising folk than they are qualified to represent. I Don't care one way or the other. What I do care about is that you are carrying a message that a Government can feel comfortable with, and that message is that the TAX is justifiable on Visitors and we accept it but would like an efficient way to pay it. That is bull-****. You seem to be telling people that to resist is pointless so the whole cruising community should accept it and stop complaining.

There is something the cruising community can do about it and that is to leave. All the CA "officials" (like you) are saying is that leaving will not effect the outcome as we are a total insignificant part of the boating numbers so stay where you are and stop complaining.

If we are so insignificant why don't the Government stop including visitors in their money grab. Their roll is to ensure that Greek citizens and residents pay taxes.

Anyway I have work to do if I am to leave Greece. I hope that my insignificant protest will make other Governments think twice before adopting this ridiculous Greek TAX on holiday makers and their assets. At least I will sleep easy knowing I did my insignificant bit.

 

[miyagimoon]

Is this tax not discriminative. It does not affect Motor Vessels below 12 metre yet ANY sailing vessel of 7 metre or more will be taxed.

Surely, this tax will have little if any affect on the average Greek. The average Greek owns a Motor Vessel (not a sailing vessel) which is less than 12 metre. Hence they will not pay anything and consequently will not be complaining to their own government.

Those who it will affect are:

1.The well off Greeks who own large Motor Vessels (12 metre or more) or Sailing Yachts (7 metre or more).

2. Visiting sailors. Probably 99% being sailing vessels over 7 metre.


So in reality this tax affects a small number of rich Greeks and a hell of a lot of visiting non Greek boats.

Now I know I'm "not a CA Member and they do not represent me". But surely they should be claiming discrimination. Or get the law changed / amended so that it is fair for all. Either tax all vessels of 7 metre or more or or all vessels of xx metre or more.

Please tell me who this tax is aimed at. It's certainly not your averaged Spiros.

 

[nickf]

. It does not affect Motor Vessels below 12 metre yet ANY sailing vessel of 7 metre or more will be taxed.

Where does this statement come from? I thought it was all leisure boats above 7m afloat. See copy of translation of relevant
Greek Government Gazette pasted below. PARA 1b brings motor boats of 7-12m into the scope of the tax.

"Article Thirteen Residency (Staying) and Operation Fee of recreational boats and small vessels.

1. A special charge has been established for the benefit of the State and is called "Residence and Operation Fee” (T.Π.Π or T.P.P) and is to be charged upon:
a) all the recreational boats/ private and commercial,
b) the small motorized boats of total length seven (7) metres and over and
c) the commercial day-ships for tourists of total length seven (7) meters and over.
The Τ.P.P is applied to all the above mentioned boats and small vessels, regardless of flag, that are sailing, docking or mooring and anchor in the Greek territorial waters."

 

[Tony Cross]

The 100,000 was my guess at the number of cruising skippers and crew in the Med who would suffer if this TAX became law as it would spread throughout the EU. It was not a guess at the membership of the CA.

Apologies for my misunderstanding

The point is that the CA are attending negotiations or passing on concerns of a lot more cruising folk than they are qualified to represent.

The CA has a mandate to represent it's membership, it is true however that any deal that they do for us, the members, will equally benefit non members. It is clearly impossible for the CA to negotiate just for the few hundred members they have in Greece. Note also that they are cooperating with other national sailing associations so they're hardly "going it alone".

I Don't care one way or the other. What I do care about is that you are carrying a message that a Government can feel comfortable with, and that message is that the TAX is justifiable on Visitors and we accept it but would like an efficient way to pay it. That is bull-****. You seem to be telling people that to resist is pointless so the whole cruising community should accept it and stop complaining.

Not at all. The CA is "complaining" but in a constructive way that is likely to yield some useful concessions.

There is something the cruising community can do about it and that is to leave. All the CA "officials" (like you) are saying is that leaving will not effect the outcome as we are a total insignificant part of the boating numbers so stay where you are and stop complaining.

Then leave. I've said before, that's the choice we all have.

If we are so insignificant why don't the Government stop including visitors in their money grab. Their roll is to ensure that Greek citizens and residents pay taxes.

Sigh. Because this is the only way to ensure that Greek citizens have no way of escaping the tax by registering their yachts abroad.

Anyway I have work to do if I am to leave Greece. I hope that my insignificant protest will make other Governments think twice before adopting this ridiculous Greek TAX on holiday makers and their assets. At least I will sleep easy knowing I did my insignificant bit.

Excellent. I support your right to choose.

 

[miyagimoon]

Where does this statement come from?."

http://perivolos.gr/img/e84848120190a8d0e696fbeb15647a74PSIFISTHEN_EAS.pdf Google translated http://translate.google.com/transla...8120190a8d0e696fbeb15647a74PSIFISTHEN_EAS.pdf.

Not perfect translation but the principle and meaning is there:

Ratified by the Legislative Act of 11/09/2013
Article 13 (at end of Page 5), Para 1.
"A specific charge was to name "End Eve and Operate '(T.P.P.), o- who bears: a) all recreational vessels / private and e- KILLS, b) small motor vessel of length seven (7) meters or more and c) professional tourist imeroploia overall length seven (7) meters and more."

Pare 8

" For the purposes of this Article terms used have the following meaning: a recreational vessel means any vessel length overall more than seven (7) meters in order for sailing and more than twelve (12) meters in order for A POWER- NHTO, which has the possibility of a general v- manufacture to use to carry travel recreation. b recreational vessel means the vessel re- soul capacity up to forty-nine (49) passengers, which has sufficient and appropriate- Luce accommodation spaces especially for passengers on exploitation of whom a contract oligonucleotide- ment charter. c Private recreational vessel means the pleasure boat not professional in accordance with the provisions B case this paragraph. D. Small vessel means any vessel overall length up seven (7) meters in order for sailboat and up twelve (12) meters to a motor, the used for recreation"

 

[Glyka]

I asked the office in one of the Preveza yards and I was told they had 500 yachts. There are 4 yards plus two marinas so I would guess that over 2000 yachts stay in the area year in year out. Personally I can honestly say that I don't know any Greek flagged boats at all. They are all (in my limited observation non Greek).

Are you saying that there are 2000 liveaboards' boats in the Ionian? Not very likely. I believe that these (rather roughly calculated) 2000 boats consist mainly of chartered ones.

 

[sailaboutvic]

Hang on , the way I under stand it is the Germany France and Dutch are fighting tooth and nail to have the tax remove , I understanding from members of the Germany S A , that their are threading to take Greece to the EU courts , it seen to me it only the CA who agreeing to the tax , and as far as what ever the CA negotiate will befit everyone including non CA member , What are they negotiating for ? Because so far the only thing that have change is , the date the tax will come into force and that still unknown and that boat are now allowed to sail thought Greek waters without being tax ,and the truth is the German are the once who knocked that on the head not the CA .
All the CA seen to be doing it trying to get info on how this tax is going to work . So please don't make it sound that the CA is doing anything for non CA member .
Sorry for the spelling mistakes and grammar

 

[nickf]

Miyagimoon,

Better translation on CA website but even your translation indicates that all small vessels above 7 meters are included see Para 1b. of your translation.

I believe you are mistaken in your view that motor boats from 7-12m are exempt from the tax.

 

[miyagimoon]

Miyagimoon,

Better translation on CA website but even your translation indicates that all small vessels above 7 meters are included see Para 1b. of your translation.

I believe you are mistaken in your view that motor boats from 7-12m are exempt from the tax.

Hi nickf,

Para 8 D clearly defines a small vessel as "any vessel overall length up seven (7) meters in order for sailboat and up twelve (12) meters to a motor, the used for recreation"

Is that not discriminative?

 

[nickf]

Hi nickf,

Para 8 D clearly defines a small vessel as "any vessel overall length up seven (7) meters in order for sailboat and up twelve (12) meters to a motor, the used for recreation"

Is that not discriminative?

The point I am trying to make is that the way the legislation is worded makes no difference to whether you have a motor or sail boat - if you are above 7m you are liable for the tax.

 

[miyagimoon]

The major problem here is no one knows exactly what this tax involves.

Is it sailing boats over 7m & motor over 12, can boats over 12m pay for only 1 month, or is it as I suspect a yearly tax 100Euro/m of which you can pay by monthly installments.

Why should a boat less than 12m have to pay more for 1 , 2 or 3 month of sailing than a 12m if the 12m is allowed to pay per month. That too is discrimination.

My yacht (13.2m) is at present on land. due back in the water around 1st May. Will I have to pay to be able to sail out of Greece and if so how much 132 Euro or 1320 Euro?

Under Innocent Passage can I sail out via Corinth Canal?

These are the questions that need answering.

 

[miyagimoon]

Sorry but even the CA Translation clearly states:



8. For the implementation of the present article, the
terms used have the following meaning:

a. Recreational boat: every boat with total length over
seven (7) metres for sailing boat and
more than twelve (12) meters for a motorized one, which
is capable from its general construction to be used for
leisure travel.

b. Commercial recreational boat: the recreational vessel
with capacity up to forty-nine (49) passengers, which has
adequate and appropriate accommodation specifically
for passengers, and for which to take advantage of, you
need to pay a fare.

c. Private recreational boat: the recreational boat that is
not commercial according to what is outlined in the case
b of the present paragraph.

d. Small vessel: every boat with total length up to seven
(7) metres for sailing boat and up to twelve (12) metres
for a motorized boat and it is used for recreational
purposes.


So are we saying that those small Greek owned vessels that we all see and love are not "used for recreational purposes" and cannot be "used for leisure travel".

http://www.ancasta.com/boats-for-sale/fairline-sedan-36-28880/

Its 11m long, a motor boat, it's recreational and can be used for leisure travel. It is not a sailing boat and is under 12m. Therefore NO tax.