How much longer can we keep low tax fuel?

[superheat6k]

How does it work here regarding this 60/ 40 split between propulsion and heating?

Is there a formal declaration ( tax return) to be made? If I buy a diesel engine boat with no heating, would I have to declare the fuel is all for propulsion ?

I don't really agree that fishing boats and farmers vehicles ( not just in the UK, but across Europe) should get fuel for propulsion uses that is taxed at a much lower rate than for any other use . They use that fuel to run a profitable business after all, almost all other businesses (I'm not sure about airlines though) have to buy fuel for propulsion taxed at the full rate. I know in theory farmers only use red diesel off road, but just go to any country market ( e.g. Beeston near Tarporley) and watch almost all the new 4x4s disappear rapidly when the rumour starts that Customs & Excise ( HMRC) are about to raid the site to dip tanks !

The derogation includes power generation, and that means your alternator. So any engine on any boat can claim at least some amount if duty / vat offset fir thus, but the whole thing is an un-enforceable nonsense, by a Communist regime that is the EU.

 

[GrahamHR]

The derogation includes power generation, and that means your alternator. So any engine on any boat can claim at least some amount if duty / vat offset fir thus, but the whole thing is an un-enforceable nonsense, by a Communist regime that is the EU.

What, are you stating thaI can claim duty/ VAT back as some of my boat petrol engines consumption is used to drive an alternator ?
t

 

[prv]

What, are you stating thaI can claim duty/ VAT back as some of my boat petrol engines consumption is used to drive an alternator ?
t

No, because it only applies to diesel, not petrol. No, that doesn't make any sense.

I've heard of massive RIBs with diesel inboards but clearly no heaters or significant electrical loads filling up at 60/40. HMRC aren't bothered, it was just a fudge to placate the EU.

Pete

 

[GrahamHR]

Any logical / fair reason why it should only apply to diesel ?

 

[Tranona]

Any logical / fair reason why it should only apply to diesel ?

Because the regulations only apply to diesel because of its multiple uses. No marked petrol - everything is sold at the same price and taxed the same.

 

[[2068]]

Any logical / fair reason why it should only apply to diesel ?

You've got this a bit the wrong way around.

There never was, and never will be, any demand for "red petrol" for commercial use.

Red diesel exists because fishing boats, ferries, etc. use it at commercial rates, and leisure boats are just piggy-backing off this same infrastructure but paying higher duty.

 

[grumpy_o_g]

How does it work here regarding this 60/ 40 split between propulsion and heating?

Is there a formal declaration ( tax return) to be made? If I buy a diesel engine boat with no heating, would I have to declare the fuel is all for propulsion ?

I don't really agree that fishing boats and farmers vehicles ( not just in the UK, but across Europe) should get fuel for propulsion uses that is taxed at a much lower rate than for any other use . They use that fuel to run a profitable business after all, almost all other businesses (I'm not sure about airlines though) have to buy fuel for propulsion taxed at the full rate. I know in theory farmers only use red diesel off road, but just go to any country market ( e.g. Beeston near Tarporley) and watch almost all the new 4x4s disappear rapidly when the rumour starts that Customs & Excise ( HMRC) are about to raid the site to dip tanks !

All businesses can claim back tax for fuel I thought - airlines pay less than anyone (partly because of quantities). Even if you put petrol in your car and use it for a business journey you can claim back tax on the fuel used for that journey surely. The expense will also be a business expense so you won't pay Corporation tax on it??

I believe fuel duty is a different matter though.

 

[rbcoomer]

All businesses can claim back tax for fuel I thought - airlines pay less than anyone (partly because of quantities). Even if you put petrol in your car and use it for a business journey you can claim back tax on the fuel used for that journey surely. The expense will also be a business expense so you won't pay Corporation tax on it??

I believe fuel duty is a different matter though.

You hit the nail on the head there - airlines largely pay no duty or VAT across Europe. I personally think they should harmonise this and in doing so reduce the duty/tax paid by the rest of us. Why should airlines be exempt? They are arguably some of the damaging forms of pollution. Tax/duty should also be combined and a % reclaimable by businesses - that way haulage and public transport costs would come down and a major inflationary pressure removed. As a society we are excessively over-taxed on energy - largely because those who determine the policy are excessively overpaid and out of touch with the effects of their policies... Cheap flights encourage spending overseas when excruciatingly high fuel costs, parking and business taxation is systematically destroying home-grown tourism and leisure. How can it cost more to get to the capital by train than fly to Spain?

 

[webby]

Short answer is "Indefinitely" (But once we've left that bureaucratic, undemocratic quagmire referred to as the EU... )

Do you seriously think, that if we left the EU, our powers that be would then reduce the fuel duty for us hard pressed private boat owners.....hang on just seen a squadron of pigs looping the loop!

 

[webby]

All businesses can claim back tax for fuel I thought - airlines pay less than anyone (partly because of quantities). Even if you put petrol in your car and use it for a business journey you can claim back tax on the fuel used for that journey surely. The expense will also be a business expense so you won't pay Corporation tax on it??

I believe fuel duty is a different matter though.

Quite right, businesses can only claim vat back not Duty.

 

[rbcoomer]

Do you seriously think, that if we left the EU, our powers that be would then reduce the fuel duty for us hard pressed private boat owners.....hang on just seen a squadron of pigs looping the loop!

Reduce no, retain the status quo - yes!

 

[jfm]

You hit the nail on the head there - airlines largely pay no duty or VAT across Europe. I personally think they should harmonise this and in doing so reduce the duty/tax paid by the rest of us. Why should airlines be exempt? They are arguably some of the damaging forms of pollution. Tax/duty should also be combined and a % reclaimable by businesses - that way haulage and public transport costs would come down and a major inflationary pressure removed. As a society we are excessively over-taxed on energy - largely because those who determine the policy are excessively overpaid and out of touch with the effects of their policies... Cheap flights encourage spending overseas when excruciatingly high fuel costs, parking and business taxation is systematically destroying home-grown tourism and leisure. How can it cost more to get to the capital by train than fly to Spain?

Your logic is a bit flawed. Travel is VAT exempt (with credit) throughout the EU. If you impose a fuel tax on airline fuel do you think airlines will buy fuel in the UK any more, or just fill up overseas? You cannot tax stuff that can move

As for it costing more to get to the capital by train than go further by plane, that has nothing to do with fuel tax. There is no tax on the airline fuel or VAT on the ticket, and there is no tax on the train fuel (however far you go back in the supply chain, as far as the coal fired power station if you want) nor any VAT on the train ticket. So the price difference has nothing to do with tax. (Road haulage is a different matter but not relevant to the plane vs trian comparison)

And just in the microeconomic world of boating, think carefully before saying cheap flights cause money to be spent abroad, There is a whole stack of folks who have bought Princess/Sunseekers/Fairlines/Sealines thus injecting money into UK economy, but they only do so IF they can sail their boats in the Med and get there on sensibly priced flights I accept of course that boating is a tiny sliver of the economy nationally, though not in Oundle, Poole and Plymouth

 

[maby]

The complaint is nothing to do with taxation - it is about the sale of "marked fuel" to consumers who are not legally allowed to buy it under the circumstances that we do. Under EU rules, private consumers (that's us, amongst others) are not allowed to use marked fuel for propulsion. HMRC, under presure from the RYA, came up with this bodge about buying marked fuel but paying full levels of tax - it still does not truely comply with the EU directives, but we might have managed to swing it if it were not for the "60/40 split" - that has put EU backs up since it is not possible to police it. If people are claiming 60/40 in the summer months, they must have their boats like saunas. Southern Ireland has also continued to allow private boat owners to purchase marked fuel but has not come under the same pressure from the EU - why? 'cos they are expected to pay the full tax rate on all the fuel they purchase.

 

[Talulah]

Your logic is a bit flawed. Travel is VAT exempt (with credit) throughout the EU. If you impose a fuel tax on airline fuel do you think airlines will buy fuel in the UK any more, or just fill up overseas? You cannot tax stuff that can move

I can't really see planes flying around with tanks of fuel filled up elsewhere to save money. Surely it would just be too heavy to justify the price difference?
On another note I always wonder if air passenger duty has been imposed as way to charge the equivalent in fuel duty. Air passenger duty is based upon how far you are flying and ipso facto is equivalent to a fuel tax.

 

[Latestarter1]

You've got this a bit the wrong way around.

There never was, and never will be, any demand for "red petrol" for commercial use.

Red diesel exists because fishing boats, ferries, etc. use it at commercial rates, and leisure boats are just piggy-backing off this same infrastructure but paying higher duty.

Thank you! At least somebody gets it.

It is not really about cost it is all about potential elimination of large part of the re-fuelling infrastructre which leisure boating relies upon.......

 

[maby]

Thank you! At least somebody gets it.

It is not really about cost it is all about potential elimination of large part of the re-fuelling infrastructre which leisure boating relies upon.......

Indeed, though I still maintain that we would have been a lot more successful in defending it if it were not for the 60/40...

 

[colingr]

As I understand it, and I'm probably wrong, you can only use the lower duty part of the fuel fro heating and cooking. As such the 60/40 split is aimed at raggies? Surely then and mobo claiming 60/40 is making an incorrect declaration and so is liable to prosecution since there's no way they are using 40% of the fuel for heating.

Or am I way off the mark?

 

[EME]

I can't really see planes flying around with tanks of fuel filled up elsewhere to save money. Surely it would just be too heavy to justify the price difference?
On another note I always wonder if air passenger duty has been imposed as way to charge the equivalent in fuel duty. Air passenger duty is based upon how far you are flying and ipso facto is equivalent to a fuel tax.

Planes use (give or take) the same amount of fuel wherever they pick it up. Not beyond the brains of an airline (whose major single cost is fuel) to schedule planes through (say) Geneva and Zurich for the shorthaul fleet and just not fuel in the UK for long-haul.

 

[maby]

As I understand it, and I'm probably wrong, you can only use the lower duty part of the fuel fro heating and cooking. As such the 60/40 split is aimed at raggies? Surely then and mobo claiming 60/40 is making an incorrect declaration and so is liable to prosecution since there's no way they are using 40% of the fuel for heating.

Or am I way off the mark?

I think you are 100% on the mark and this is why we have not managed to convince Brussels to turn a blind eye. The same considerations apply to raggies in the summer, really. I had a fuel berth operator in one marina look at me in disbelief when I tried to purchase at 100% propulsion taxation rate. I pointed out that the boat in question had no heater fitted, but they still insisted that I could claim 60/40.

 

[colingr]

I think you are 100% on the mark and this is why we have not managed to convince Brussels to turn a blind eye. The same considerations apply to raggies in the summer, really. I had a fuel berth operator in one marina look at me in disbelief when I tried to purchase at 100% propulsion taxation rate. I pointed out that the boat in question had no heater fitted, but they still insisted that I could claim 60/40.

So would the supplier also be done in being complicit in you attempting to avoid paying duty?

At least I don't have that problem, petrol only for me.