Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA

Re: Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA - Fines on DEKPA

Why I object strongly is because why should a non Greek pay a tax on a boat they own for visiting Greece . I would have no objection in paying a tourist tax has what happens like some where in Holland and Croatia come to that , when you stay in a hotel or camping ground or a marina , where everyone pays it , unlike this tax where only boat owners have to pay it , I don't see visitors to Greece flying in paying a tax , non the guy driving around in his RV or when your family come to visit you . I don't disagree full time liveaboard staying all the year round should pay some kind of tax because they live in Greece but the rest of us are just visitors .
As I said time and time again , if they want to put some kind of tax on boats then it should be a fair one and add it on to marina or harbour fees .

I do have a lot of sympathy with this view. Although I have no contacts at all in the Greek government I do know that for many years the government here has been trying to impose an existing luxury tax on Greek boat owners. Because of the weaknesses in the Greek systems many (most) Greeks have been able to avoid this tax by various questionable but legal means (registering the boat in Delaware is a common one).

It's my opinion that this 'universal' cruising tax (thought that's not what the Greek government call it) was envisaged originally as the only means of implementing a luxury tax on boats that Greek boat owners could not avoid. For all sorts of reasons, including massive pressure from Greek boat owners, various earlier iterations of this tax have been implemented and later abandoned. The Greek government has clearly been determined to implement a 'boating tax' that Greek boat owners cannot avoid because we've seen several different versions of this tax introduced over the years.

In 2012 the Greek government launched a survey of the foreign boats then in Greek waters (we were interviewed in that survey) and I assume this was to establish the levels of foreign owned boats in Greece and thus the likely impact on them of the introduction of a new universal 'boat tax'. The current tax system with a huge jump at 12m resulted from that.

It's my understanding that originally this new tax would only apply to 12m and over vessels but that later on (probably when they realised how many Greeks own under 12m boats) this was extended downwards. The rumour that I heard was that the finance ministry wasn't prepared to pro rata the over 12m tax monthly rates downwards because of the small monthly amounts that would be involved and the relatively high cost of collecting those, so they came up with the fixed yearly rates we have now - including the gross injustice at the 12m level.

That the Greek government are still pressing ahead with this tax, six years after the 2012 survey, suggests to me that they believe the increased income from Greek boat owners will more than offset any loss caused by some foreign boats leaving. I think that because of this the impact on foreign vessels has been largely ignored in the desire to tax Greeks, the incredible difficulties that Chris Robb has faced in his selfless work with the Greek government on behalf of all foreign boat owners in trying to make this tax workable for foreign boats stems from that.

It's my belief that the Greek government sees the increased revenue from foreign boats as an added bonus to a scheme that will raise considerable revenues from Greek boat owners, and for a country in such debt that's not a bad thing from their point of view.

You might argue that things have changed since 2012 in the way foreign boats use Greek waters, and you might be right, but I think that battle has been fought, investigated, and lost. It may well be that this iteration of the tax is also abandoned in the face of strong internal opposition from Greeks, but they have laboured long and hard over this tax and I don't see any way the Greek government is going to abandon the idea without at least having tried it, and I don't think any amount of opposition from foreign boat owners is going to change that.
 
Last edited:
Your patronising sarcasm is uncalled for. If you think that modern surveillance systems need eyes on radar screens then you are well out-of-date. Croatia is paranoic about illegal migration - every craft approaching their waters will be automatically monitored and any deviation flagged up for investigation with no human intervention - even during the August Italian armada invasion. Not only state-of-the-art radar systems have been implemented, there has been huge investment in patrol vessels. I have experienced some of their draconian behaviour in almost 40 years of cruising there and would not think of not complying with their regulations. You got away with it then but since the new installations of 2016 your chances will be much less.

.

Sorry Barnacle I wasn't trying to be sarcasm and if it sounded like that I sorry .
The point I making is croatia hasn't got the boats to check on every boat entering there water , and even with automatic system which I no doubts they have to keep track of hundreds of boats in any one day forget the Italian invasion, hundreds of charters would be a big task you can imagine what it would take to do that , AIS is much easier to track . If it was a matter of just radar I have a bunch of fines just sitting waiting to be payed . And so would a good amount of other that I know . Some even from here that have done just that this season .

Edit
I have no way sailed the years in Croatia has you have ,
but the times I had once checked in I have never been approached or visted by any officials or ask to see any documentation until I checked out again .
I be interested if any one else here has . I not come across any one so far .

About 26 boats visit Croatia last year from the marina in Sicily , not going to say what one , all entered in different ports in other words not all when into the first port of entry , we been in contact one way or another some tho Marina FB page other tho emails and other we met up since , no one have had any problem or have said they know of the other boats had any .
Believe me people are very quick to say they had as I sure you know .
 
Last edited:
Sorry Barnacle I want trying to be sarcasm and if it sounded like that I sorry .
The point I making is croatia hasn't got the boats to check on every boat entering there water , and even with automatic system which I no doubts they have to keep track of hundreds of boats would be a big task you can imagine what it would take to do that , AIS is much easier to track . If it was a matter of just radar I have a bunch of fines just sitting waiting to be payed . And so would a good amount of other that I know . Some even from here that have done just that this season .
No problem, Vic.

We both have had different experiences. My reports have been for the northern area that is very stringently controlled, which is why some German sailors, two separate craft on two separate occasions, both without AIS, were expected and told so in the Umag harbourmaster's office.

One had deviated to Piran in Slovenia and the Croatians were aware of it but they also knew they had departed Italy before that and did not possess the Italian exit crew list, which they did not need if they could legitimately claim to have arrived from Slovenia.

You, however, were much more to the south where radar coverage may be less stringent ... and probably prior to the new surveillance chain being fully operational in 2017.

So I thought it opportune to warn of the new system and that it may not be enough to turn off one's AIS system in an area where I think it most useful and where I have twice been close to being run down by the cowboy fast-ferry drivers.
 
No problem, Vic.

We both have had different experiences. My reports have been for the northern area that is very stringently controlled, which is why some German sailors, two separate craft on two separate occasions, both without AIS, were expected and told so in the Umag harbourmaster's office.

One had deviated to Piran in Slovenia and the Croatians were aware of it but they also knew they had departed Italy before that and did not possess the Italian exit crew list, which they did not need if they could legitimately claim to have arrived from Slovenia.

You, however, were much more to the south where radar coverage may be less stringent ... and probably prior to the new surveillance chain being fully operational in 2017.

So I thought it opportune to warn of the new system and that it may not be enough to turn off one's AIS system in an area where I think it most useful and where I have twice been close to being run down by the cowboy fast-ferry drivers.
Anyway on behalf of everyone thanks for bring us the notice of their new system.
 
Re: Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA - Fines on DEKPA

I do have a lot of sympathy with this view. Although I have no contacts at all in the Greek government I do know that for many years the government here has been trying to impose an existing luxury tax on Greek boat owners. Because of the weaknesses in the Greek systems many (most) Greeks have been able to avoid this tax by various questionable but legal means (registering the boat in Delaware is a common one).

It's my opinion that this 'universal' cruising tax (thought that's not what the Greek government call it) was envisaged originally as the only means of implementing a luxury tax on boats that Greek boat owners could not avoid. For all sorts of reasons, including massive pressure from Greek boat owners, various earlier iterations of this tax have been implemented and later abandoned. The Greek government has clearly been determined to implement a 'boating tax' that Greek boat owners cannot avoid because we've seen several different versions of this tax introduced over the years.

In 2012 the Greek government launched a survey of the foreign boats then in Greek waters (we were interviewed in that survey) and I assume this was to establish the levels of foreign owned boats in Greece and thus the likely impact on them of the introduction of a new universal 'boat tax'. The current tax system with a huge jump at 12m resulted from that.

It's my understanding that originally this new tax would only apply to 12m and over vessels but that later on (probably when they realised how many Greeks own under 12m boats) this was extended downwards. The rumour that I heard was that the finance ministry wasn't prepared to pro rata the over 12m tax monthly rates downwards because of the small monthly amounts that would be involved and the relatively high cost of collecting those, so they came up with the fixed yearly rates we have now - including the gross injustice at the 12m level.

That the Greek government are still pressing ahead with this tax, six years after the 2012 survey, suggests to me that they believe the increased income from Greek boat owners will more than offset any loss caused by some foreign boats leaving. I think that because of this the impact on foreign vessels has been largely ignored in the desire to tax Greeks, the incredible difficulties that Chris Robb has faced in his selfless work with the Greek government on behalf of all foreign boat owners in trying to make this tax workable for foreign boats stems from that.

It's my belief that the Greek government sees the increased revenue from foreign boats as an added bonus to a scheme that will raise considerable revenues from Greek boat owners, and for a country in such debt that's not a bad thing from their point of view.

You might argue that things have changed since 2012 in the way foreign boats use Greek waters, and you might be right, but I think that battle has been fought, investigated, and lost. It may well be that this iteration of the tax is also abandoned in the face of strong internal opposition from Greeks, but they have laboured long and hard over this tax and I don't see any way the Greek government is going to abandon the idea without at least having tried it, and I don't think any amount of opposition from foreign boat owners is going to change that.
Good post from a man who clearly has a good grasp of the situation. Personally I have no issues with this tax. I might of course take a different view if my boat was over 12M and I was paying for a full year while only getting 2/3 months use.
Thanks to Chris for keeping us all up to date as well.
 
This may have been a very unusual incident but anchored in a bay on Patmos this year a coastguard boat came in and inspected the DEKPA of every anchored boat, around six or seven in all.
Vyv - not unusual at all this year. Infact everywhere we went in Northern Greece was checking yachts in anchorages. We just waved as they came along side - hi there , we were checked yesterday - and off they went.

The Port Police see the DEKPA as nothing but a bloody nuisance - its not used for anything. (their words). I still think there is evry chance this tax will fail to be implemented, as the Port Police refused last time due to the amount of work. We have submitted our working document to the authorities in Greece - this is the third time, so its got a lot better as we have learnt!

If they involve the port police rather than following a full E-tax, the tax will not happen IMHO
 
Re: Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA - Fines on DEKPA

Good post from a man who clearly has a good grasp of the situation. Personally I have no issues with this tax. I might of course take a different view if my boat was over 12M and I was paying for a full year while only getting 2/3 months use.
Thanks to Chris for keeping us all up to date as well.
I bet your really over 12 meters - it's ok we wont shop you....
 
Re: Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA - Fines on DEKPA

I bet your really over 12 meters - it's ok we wont shop you....
I wish, but it does amuse me the number of posters slating the Greeks for tax evasion while seeing nothing wrong with understating their LOA. I'm in Turkey where people routinely avoid taxes whenever possible and leave other taxes unpaid for years and wait for the Government to declare an amnesty under which the slate can be cleaned for a portion of the original value of the unpaid taxes. I don't participate fully in the local customs but, I have to admit, I have my moments.
 
Re: Greek Cruising Tax update from the CA - Fines on DEKPA

I wish, but it does amuse me the number of posters slating the Greeks for tax evasion while seeing nothing wrong with understating their LOA. I'm in Turkey where people routinely avoid taxes whenever possible and leave other taxes unpaid for years and wait for the Government to declare an amnesty under which the slate can be cleaned for a portion of the original value of the unpaid taxes. I don't participate fully in the local customs but, I have to admit, I have my moments.
I think most people participate in avoiding paying taxes one way or another , we have a very good friend and he forever going on about people who don't pay there taxes and what should happen to them , last year I watch as he agreed to pay cash for a set of electronic so he wasn't charged the vat .
The fact is some of us are ok with saying we do it , other want to look as if they are clearer then clear but still do it .
 
I think it is a bit dodgy under-stating a boats overall length especially (maybe only) for those over 12 metres as at that length different conditions and number and size of mandatory equipment exist. Navigation lights etc. I don't know specifically what the legal differences are as my boat is under 12m but I do recall that over 12m different "maritime" conditions are in force. I would think the biggest risk would be an insurance claim for a boat over 12 metres but registered less than that to avoid the extra conditions. Perhaps the posh brigade with 12m boats can answer what gives at that length.
 
Istill think there is evry chance this tax will fail to be implemented, as the Port Police refused last time due to the amount of work. We have submitted our working document to the authorities in Greece - this is the third time, so its got a lot better as we have learnt!

If they involve the port police rather than following a full E-tax, the tax will not happen IMHO
I hope your right Chris , it's the poor guy who trying to make a living who going to suffer other wise .
Personally I had enough of it , every year its on , it's off ,
we got our DEKPA stamp in late Oct , Believe me it wasn't easy it took me four PP guy before they would do it and I had to get to the guy in white with his gold pins before they did it .
All the other said it's not possible until the last few weeks before your stamp is due , of cause we all know that not true.
So we see how things pan out , if come April things not looking good , it's no big deal for us to go North the southern France and Sardinia For a season .
 
I think it is a bit dodgy under-stating a boats overall length especially (maybe only) for those over 12 metres as at that length different conditions and number and size of mandatory equipment exist. Navigation lights etc. I don't know specifically what the legal differences are as my boat is under 12m but I do recall that over 12m different "maritime" conditions are in force. I would think the biggest risk would be an insurance claim for a boat over 12 metres but registered less than that to avoid the extra conditions. Perhaps the posh brigade with 12m boats can answer what gives at that length.
I can't remember now without looking it up but private British boat under 15 mts or is it 14 mts there isn't any . ofcause it advisable to have the normal safety stuff .
 
I can't remember now without looking it up but private British boat under 15 mts or is it 14 mts there isn't any . ofcause it advisable to have the normal safety stuff .

Just looked it up on Google and I was wrong. 13.7 meters is the cut off. There is another at 25 meters. So, I was wrong again. 12m is no change to the regs. Sorry. I should really start distrusting my memory before posting.
 
Just looked it up on Google and I was wrong. 13.7 meters is the cut off. There is another at 25 meters. So, I was wrong again. 12m is no change to the regs. Sorry. I should really start distrusting my memory before posting.

The 13.7m is specific to the UK and only relates to a limited range of compulsory equipment. Other states have their own break points which are sometimes size and sometimes (as in France) categories of their own construction. 25m is a more common break point particularly related to skipper and crewing requirements.
 
Talking last week with the Master sergeant on the 510 Greek Coastguard boat in Porto Rafti , they have no information on this new tax ,or any extra staff to implement its collection/ monitoring.
 
I think it is a bit dodgy under-stating a boats overall length especially (maybe only) for those over 12 metres as at that length different conditions and number and size of mandatory equipment exist. Navigation lights etc. I don't know specifically what the legal differences are as my boat is under 12m but I do recall that over 12m different "maritime" conditions are in force. I would think the biggest risk would be an insurance claim for a boat over 12 metres but registered less than that to avoid the extra conditions. Perhaps the posh brigade with 12m boats can answer what gives at that length.

We had a Danish boat in the marina some years ago now, he was over 13m but, clever boy that he thought he was, his registration document falsely claimed he was just over 11m. He told people how this ruse had saved him a lot of money on marina fees in the past.

The marina put him in an 11m berth, which meant his bowlines ran almost vertically into the water and in the first blow his stern hit the pontoon. He didn't do much damage but stomped into the marina office claiming the berth wasn't suitable for his boat. They pointed out that he was in a berth suitable for his stated length!

He eventually 'fessed up, paid the extra marina fees and was moved to a berth that really was suitable for his length....
 
We had a Danish boat in the marina some years ago now, he was over 13m but, clever boy that he thought he was, his registration document falsely claimed he was just over 11m. He told people how this ruse had saved him a lot of money on marina fees in the past.

The marina put him in an 11m berth, which meant his bowlines ran almost vertically into the water and in the first blow his stern hit the pontoon. He didn't do much damage but stomped into the marina office claiming the berth wasn't suitable for his boat. They pointed out that he was in a berth suitable for his stated length!

He eventually 'fessed up, paid the extra marina fees and was moved to a berth that really was suitable for his length....
My concern is the insurance aspect. When I insured my boat with the Bishop Skinner people they took all the details from the SSR register including the contact address to the annoyance of my Brother. The actual physical details of the boat were from the previous owner of the boat which I did not change as the OAL put me a few centimetres under the 10m need for a DEPKA. This was once the case but no more. I assume there are quite a few people in the same situation with the SSR address and OAL. I often wonder if an insurance company would use these details to wiggle out of a claim. Not heard anyone else with problems due to this though. Once I am clear of Greece and UK passed Brexit I will fess up and change the SSR record.
 
Once I am clear of Greece and UK passed Brexit I will fess up and change the SSR record.

The SSR is not a "record". The details are not recorded anywhere but on the piece of paper and nobody has access to that except you. Absolutely no point in changing it. Insurance company insure you and I cannot think of any situation where the length of the boat shown on the SSR would have any influence over a claim. You claim under the insurance contract and nowhere will it say that the length of the boat is a condition of insurance.
 
There's every likelihood that an owner would put the same LOA details as the SSR on his insurance application in which case the insurance company could certainly take issue with the size of the insured boat being understated.
 
There's every likelihood that an owner would put the same LOA details as the SSR on his insurance application in which case the insurance company could certainly take issue with the size of the insured boat being understated.

Why would it do that? How does a minor difference between the length on one piece of paper and the length on another have any effect on the risk. No dimensions on paper are absolute for two reasons. First you have to define what the measurement is and second most are simply wrong when compared with the actual physical measurement on the boat.

On the other hand there is an ISO standard that is used for published lengths but it is very closely defined and is not the overall length of the boat. There is nothing in the insurance contract which defines which measurement should be used, nor an exclusion clause on the subject.

This is really trying to make something out of nothing.
 
Top