latest if anyone interested

SolentPhill

New member
Joined
9 Feb 2007
Messages
1,102
Location
Solent
Visit site
Please dont shoot the messenger I was sent a copy of this quote. Its nothing we didnt already know but its official


The BMF, RYA and IWA are pleased to provide an update on how the end of the derogation will be implemented as of 1 November 2008.



Introduction



We have been working closely with HM Revenue & Customs since early 2007 to produce a pragmatic and sensible solution to the implementation of the end of the derogation. Prior to that, from 2003, we successfully lobbied Government to seek the retention of the derogation but this was rejected by the European Commission in favour of its tax harmonisation agenda.



Once it was confirmed that the derogation had to come to an end, our key concerns were to:



· Secure the continued availability of diesel at the waterside

· Minimise the impact on the boater and industry

· Avoid safety and environmental implications of transporting fuel by hand



In February of this year, when HMRC published its outline proposals, we were pleased to see that our efforts had succeeded and that all of these concerns had been taken into account, particularly by allowing recreational boaters to continue to use red diesel. Since then, we have been endeavouring to ensure that the detail of HMRC’s proposals is as simple and as effective as possible.



Successful Co-operation



The BMF, RYA, IWA and HMRC all agree that it was disappointing that the derogation was not renewed by the European Commission, despite what we all considered to be a very strong case. We also all agreed that the end of the derogation presented considerable difficulties in terms of implementation. We are very pleased, however, that the BMF, RYA, IWA and HMRC have been able to work together successfully on behalf of the industry and recreational boaters. HMRC has been very receptive to the concerns of suppliers and users and has managed the consultation process well.



HMRC Conclusions



· HMRC accepted the overwhelming wish of both suppliers and users that red diesel should continue to be available to recreational boaters.

· The loss of the derogation will only affect fuel used for propulsion, which will be subject to the full rate of duty.

· Red diesel at the rebated rate will continue to be available for domestic purposes, such as heating and lighting.



How will it work?



1. When recreational boaters buy diesel for their craft, they will need to make a declaration to the supplier if they intend the fuel to be used for propelling a private pleasure craft.



2. The recreational boater will also declare what percentage of the fuel will be used for propulsion (as opposed to domestic purposes such as heating and lighting).



How will the boater work out what percentage of fuel they intend to use for propulsion?



HMRC has understood our arguments about the potential difficulties for fuel suppliers in calculating duty and VAT – in particular for the smaller operators – when faced with customers claiming different percentages of fuel used for propulsion. HMRC also appreciates the concerns of users about the difficulty of calculating and apportioning their own intended usage accurately and their worries about unintentionally making an inaccurate declaration. However, the EU Energy Products Directive specifically refers to ‘fuel for the purposes of navigation’ (which is reflected in UK law as ‘fuel for propelling’), so there is no legal basis for imposing a single standard apportionment to be applied universally that pays no regard to actual usage for propulsion.



HMRC has therefore confirmed to the BMF, RYA, and IWA that their advice on this issue is as follows:



Q. What will be the allowance for fuel used on boats for heating and lighting?



A. There is no fixed allowance. It is for the purchaser to declare the percentage of fuel used for propulsion. However, analysis by both the industry and HMRC suggests that a split of 60% for propulsion and 40% for domestic use (heating, cooking etc) probably reflects most people’s use and it is therefore likely that many users will declare such an apportionment. This will make it easier for suppliers (known as Registered Dealers in Controlled Oils) to work out additional duty and VAT. However, where a purchaser knows that their propulsion use may be more or less than the above apportionment split or a craft clearly has no domestic use, then they must declare their actual intended usage.



Q. What about residential boat owners where nearly all fuel is for domestic purposes – what can they declare?



A. We have recognised the status of residential boat owners whose primary residence is their boat. Some of these will be at fixed moorings or move just a very short distance along the towpath from permanent moorings. If they live aboard the craft permanently and hold certain documentation, such as a Houseboat Licence, Residential Mooring Licence, Council Tax Bill in respect of the mooring, or other peripheral documentation, invoices or bills which provides proof of permanent residency, they may purchase all their fuel at the rebated rate (as if they were a commercial vessel). They will still be required to make and sign a declaration saying that 0% of the fuel is for propelling purposes. It will be the responsibility of the declarant to ensure that they hold the requisite documentation should HMRC wish to check the validity of the declaration made in these circumstances. Continuous cruisers may not declare 0% under these arrangements, even if they reside permanently on their craft, they must declare their actual intended usage for propulsion.



Registered Dealers in Controlled Oils (RDCO) will need to account to HMRC for the additional duty received from recreational boaters. RDCOs already owe a general duty of care to ensure that they only make supplies of controlled oil for legitimate uses.



Further Information



We will continue to work with HMRC to provide support to suppliers and users over the next few months. RYA and IWA will provide guidance to their members and the BMF will offer an information service for industry. HMRC has confirmed that it will provide supplementary guidance to RDCOs and that its emphasis as the new measures bed in will be to help and advise suppliers and users to get things right.

unquote
 

Chris_d

Well-known member
Joined
15 Jun 2001
Messages
4,677
Location
Oxfordshire
Visit site
Still don't see how this is good news, theres a lot of boats out there with no domestic use whatsoever. I shall probably just go down the local garage and get some quality stuff for a better price anyway.
 

SolentPhill

New member
Joined
9 Feb 2007
Messages
1,102
Location
Solent
Visit site
the main reason is because for every 100 lts you put in you pay £1.20 for 60 lts and 70p for the 40lts overall it works out at £1 a lt. We were expecting to pay £1.20 so its 20p a lt cheaper and not doubled.

I think we should be happy with this considering it could have been worse.

in an ideal world it should be 70p or the 40p it was last yr but sh*t happens
 

Chris_d

Well-known member
Joined
15 Jun 2001
Messages
4,677
Location
Oxfordshire
Visit site
But my domestic consumption is zero, unless you count heating water in the calorifier but there's no way 40% of my consumption is heating that, i'd be surprised if it was 0.5%. So what moraly am I supposed to declare when I fill up? It might be HMCE are trying to do the right thing, but they have put enough clause's in there to say you can't deliberately make a blatantly false declaration, so basicaly it's bollox unless I'm missing something /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif And the last time I filled up it was 86ppl (Shepperton River Thames) so the final price even 60/40 will be close to forecourt prices anyway.
 

Andrew_Fanner

New member
Joined
13 Mar 2002
Messages
8,514
Location
ked into poverty by children
Visit site
Chris_d as I understand it battery charging is domestic. Assuming that you have 2x 55A alternators at 12V then you are capable of making 1.3kW to go back into your batteries. Or look at it as Ah, if you have 2 x 110Ah batteries so a real capacity of about 130Ah you need to top that up. I'd guess that on river speeds you are looking at 2-4 hours engine time to top that up. If you wanted to get very picky then yes, I gather that domestic hot water production is at reduced rate. Now a 100l tank has 100kg of water. from 20deg to 70deg so 50deg temp rise, specific heat of water determines energy input as domestic and so forth.
 

Chris_d

Well-known member
Joined
15 Jun 2001
Messages
4,677
Location
Oxfordshire
Visit site
Yes I know the theory, maybe i'm just being dim but it doesn't say anywhere that "indirect" consumption for domestic use is allowed. The inference is its that only diesel burnt in Eberspachers, Generators or cookers etc... Diesel burnt in the engines is for propulsion even though they charge the batteries and heat the water, but theres still no way you can get anywhere near 40%. Are they really going to allow a diesel powered 20ft sports cuddy to claim 60/40 for his domestic cabin lighting? I must have missed the nudge or the wink.
 

Andrew_Fanner

New member
Joined
13 Mar 2002
Messages
8,514
Location
ked into poverty by children
Visit site
>>>
Yes I know the theory, maybe i'm just being dim but it doesn't say anywhere that "indirect" consumption for domestic use is allowed
>>>

Does it say anywhere that it is forbidden? Some of this has come about by representations from liveaboards who may well run engines while not moving in order to make hot water, electricity etc, even from mains output engine driven alternators.
 

meldrum

New member
Joined
1 May 2008
Messages
81
Visit site
Sounds like the usual mealy mouthed hand wringing rubbish we,ve come to expect from the RYA over EU legislation. Same story with the RCD directive, acceptance of the ICC etc.Beaurocrats to a man. Its bad news for everyone particularly motor boaters. Looks like us raggies will have to go back to the traditional way of doing things along this stretch of coast. Sailing everywere and throwing revenue men off of cliffs or running them out of town.
 

Lotus_John

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2007
Messages
41
Visit site
Thanks for the update. This is disappointing as MBM mag just dropped through my door with an article ”Red Diesel Reprieve?” Suggesting that HMRC would charge a flat rate of 60/40 as a self-declaration scheme would be “costly and open to abuse and raises the prospect of on water inspections of fuel receipts by customs agents.”
When I leave the Thames to cruise to the Solent I will fill up in Ramsgate and 3 days later I will fill up again at Port Solent. The paper trail and my receipt will indicate that 80 gallons of the 200 I took on in Ramsgate would have been used for heating my boat in August in just 3 days……Penny dropped?
There is nothing here for the motor boater that goes somewhere in his boat, it is a bit late foe the RYA to realize this. Good for the IWA to fight for its member, many of whom live on board, good for the aviation lobby getting a minimum increase for its members good for the BMF fighting to keep red diesel for its members but the RYA have not looked after my interest.
Just as a footnote 398 gallons to go from Thames to Solent and back in my old semi-displacement trawler yacht at about 10 knots next years fuel bill for same trip £2400
We have all been let down by the RYA.
 

StewartC

New member
Joined
14 Dec 2005
Messages
358
Location
London
www.mby.com
I think there is very much something here for the motorboater that goes places. The article in October's MBM was written a week before the news broke that HMRC accepts that 60/40 is representative of most people's diesel use. This word is critical.

To apply a flat 60/40 split across the board and make it uniform would contravene EU law. However, what HMRC have done is give a nod to the vendors and suppliers to charge a flat 60/40 rate at the pump.

The off the record chat from the boat show is this: for such an insignificant revenue gain, HMRC are extremely unlikely to enforce this, meaning more or less everyone with a diesel boat, no matter its actual split of domestic and propulsion diesel, will be able to fill up with 60/40. They accept that there is a vast number of boats out there, all using diesel for different things that is almost impossible to quantify.

The vendor will be well within his rights to only charge two rates at the pump, as any more than that and the paperwork will become overly burdensome (as if it's not already!). So theoretically, he will be able to supply commercial users at the rebated rate and leisure users at the 60/40 rate - and that is it.

The hope is that this 60/40 split will become so presumptive that it's not even asked at the pump. It will be a flat rate, just not according to the law.

It's not ideal, as the price will still jump. But it's a thousand times better than you having to keep a log of your exact fuel usage, then going to the pump and making a unique declaration, only for the vendor to have to do the maths, and then present HMRC with thousands of declarations stating different apportionments. A complete headache for all concerned.

This is simply the path of least resistance. We'll be following this up at length in the November issue.
 

Lotus_John

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2007
Messages
41
Visit site
Stuart , Well that is certainly a bit of a u-turn. A week ago, a fixed 60/40 flat allowance was described in MBM as “far better than the self declaration scheme” as such a system “would be costly and open to abuse and raises the prospect of on-water inspections of fuel receipts by Customs agents”. I agree with those sentiments and would have welcomed a fixed allowance, as I would not be required to commit fraud every time I fuel up. I expect you will have to fuel ‘Blue Fin’ every 2 or 3 days when on the cruises, how do you propose to declare your usage?
You state EU law stops us having a fixed rate applied, was this not apparent a week ago? I was told 3 months ago by the ATYC that HMRC were not prepared to accept self-declaration and were working towards a fixed proportion.
It seems to me that quoting EU law always provides an excuse not to do something. I do know that EU law required us to apply a minimum of 21 ppl tax to our marine fuel. This quickly became a non-starter, why? Because the law states, “we cannot charge a different tax on the same fuel” where does it state that? In addition, why then are we proposing to charge two different rates of tax on red diesel? Then the law states, “We cannot charge a different fuel tax than that which we charge on the road.” Where does it state this? MBM published a table of fuel charges for EU members and three countries charged at least 25ppl less for their marine fuel than they did for road fuel. Perhaps MBM could use its resources to verify that some of these convenient laws exist and if they do, could they be interpreted differently.
If the HMRC really wanted to help the boater, all they had to do was accept that red diesel is sufficiently different to white diesel to justify taxing it at the minimum EU rate, they could have used the facts published by MBM to this end. As you know this is what they did for the leisure aviators. Whether it is more different or less different should not matter if there is, as you suggest, a will to bend the rules to find a compliant solution. .The compliant solution is (and always was) to add 11ppl to the tax that we currently charge. No paperwork, no fraud, no additional work for HMRC. Perhaps if the RYA had fought for this instead of deferring to its members who wrote saying that the RYA should not campaign to keep a reduced tax, we could be instigating a sensible solution on the 1st November instead of well meaning but flawed legislation that may leave the boater vulnerable to prosecution. The Dutch authorities expect to revert to fining UK boats carrying red diesel after 1 Nov. Hopefully UK government will remember to inform the EU that this remains legal, but I do not think much of our chances of convincing then that it is legal that 40% of the fuel onboard has been taxed at less than the EU minimum.
After November 1st, our fuel tax will forever be linked to road fuel and the automatic fuel escalator designed to limit road use. This administration may be prepared to turn a blind eye to some creative declarations, but will the next?
 

StewartC

New member
Joined
14 Dec 2005
Messages
358
Location
London
www.mby.com
While we haven't got an official 60/40 split, we have the next best thing - an understanding from HMRC that they won't chase down people declaring such a proportion.

This is as close to official as you can get without breaking EU law. We didn't quite appreciate the legal implications when we wrote the story as it was done at the last possible moment after various sources gave us the nod that 60/40 was on the cards.

So in the end, the story hasn't really changed. 60/40 is the result, albeit unofficially, and we should be chuffed. There's be no annoying paperwork for the boater, and no-one will be committing fraud as the Govt accepts that most people's use is 60/40.

All the things you mention about private aviators, minimum EU duty and harmonisation with road fuel is all stuff I've been emailing, phoning, meeting, harassing HMRC staff about for three years. I could go into it here, but I'd be writing for the next hour, and it's the weekend and I don't fancy it. Email me at stewart_campbell@ipcmedia.com on Monday if you want.

We're not sure what we're going to do about Blue Fin just yet. It's still being discussed.

The Holland angle is one we're pursuing. We're hoping to get some confirmation from HMRC that they've informed their Dutch counterparts of this news.
 

whisper

New member
Joined
31 Aug 2002
Messages
5,165
Location
Stratford upon Avon & S.Devon
Visit site
Congratulations on your "this is how it is " post - I couldn't agree more.
How people with any regard for powerboating can conclude that this is a good deal is beyond me.
All that the gov't needed to do to comply with the EU, was charge the 21p minimum tax. However, our pseudo representatives sold us out by not fighting on this basis.
I've left the RYA because of it and hope many others do the same - their performance on this matter has been abject.
 

Andrew_Fanner

New member
Joined
13 Mar 2002
Messages
8,514
Location
ked into poverty by children
Visit site
>>>
This administration may be prepared to turn a blind eye to some creative declarations, but will the next?
>>>

I would hope that the next adminsitration will be far less driven by the blind politics of envy that drives this lot to squeeze every penny out of anyone who has any money not given by The State. Maybe even with the cojones to say to Brussels "this is how it works here, put up or shut up".
 

Lotus_John

Member
Joined
17 Nov 2007
Messages
41
Visit site
Andrew don't hold your breath.

My MP said "he recognises the the contribution the boating industry makes to the UK economy and to the quality of life of his constituants but the energy products directive states that we cannot charge a different amount of tax on the same fuel so we will have to charge the full road fuel tax"
He is the Conservative party treasury spokesman!
 

halcyon

Well-known member
Joined
20 Apr 2002
Messages
10,767
Location
Cornwall
Visit site
[ QUOTE ]
Andrew don't hold your breath.

My MP said "he recognises the the contribution the boating industry makes to the UK economy and to the quality of life of his constituants but the energy products directive states that we cannot charge a different amount of tax on the same fuel so we will have to charge the full road fuel tax"
He is the Conservative party treasury spokesman!

[/ QUOTE ]

Can you legally use red diesel in your car?

No.

So how can it be the same fuel ? /forums/images/graemlins/confused.gif

Brian
 

Other threads that may be of interest

Top