Red Diesel - UK Government loses.

[lw395]

Some of us (away from dahn sarf) simply do not have access to anything other than red diesel.

I managed to buy white disease-all for my car in Ullapool. Bit pricey though.
Maybe the Uk will ignore yachties in the badlands using red.
It's not a god-given right to operate a pleasure boat away from legitimate fuel sources conveniently.
When all is said and done, you choose your boat to fit the circumstances. Or move the boat to the facilities.
Fundamentally, I go sailing, not motoring my boat.

 

[BelleSerene]

When all is said and done, you choose your boat to fit the circumstances. Or move the boat to the facilities.
Fundamentally, I go sailing, not motoring my boat.

A joy of sailing is that if we have to use much fuel, we know we're getting something wrong!

 

[Elemental]

Indeed, it would be great to abandon the whole 60/40 complexity with it, reverting to the simpler system where leisure vessels, just as other ones, could use red diesel. The 60/40 fudge or compromise was only introduced to comply with the EU rule that leisure vessels should be excluded from benefiting from duty-free fuel for propulsion.

I, for one, don't see why leisure vessels should benefit at all from using red diesel. It's hardly fair on people who cannot afford boats. The whole 60/40 thing stinks of a nudge and a wink anyway ("psst - tell them you use your diesel heater a lot....."). So my proposal is to get rid of red completely and allow legitimate business users to reclaim the tax in the same way as other business taxes are reclaimed. If it's still felt necessary to mark the diesel as tax reduced to prevent transfer into non-qualifying vehicles/vessels, then simply add the dye after or during delivery.

 

[BelleSerene]

The system can indeed be simplified - particularly if we simply leave the EU - but I wonder if there’s a bit of confusion here...

I, for one, don't see why leisure vessels should benefit at all from using red diesel. It's hardly fair on people who cannot afford boats.

Well yes, like having zero VAT on books is unfair on people who don’t read, or on food is unfair on those who don’t eat a lot. Or on train journeys is unfair on those who can’t afford to travel. That’s silly.

The whole 60/40 thing stinks of a nudge and a wink anyway ("psst - tell them you use your diesel heater a lot.....").

It is a fudge. It was only introduced to comply with a European Commission directive in the first place. The obvious solution is to remove the oddity that if you’re at sea for leisure purposes a different duty should be charged on fuel than if you’re not. The duty was only introduced for road fuels. If there’s any ‘moral’ justification for having such a duty, it’s to do with road congestion. It was never intended to apply to marine use.

So my proposal is to get rid of red completely and allow legitimate business users to reclaim the tax in the same way as other business taxes are reclaimed.

Other business taxes are not reclaimed. They are paid. That’s the point of tax. You deduct your costs from your income and pay tax on the remainder. What you’re thinking of is deducting costs from your revenue, not from your tax bill.

If it's still felt necessary to mark the diesel as tax reduced to prevent transfer into non-qualifying vehicles/vessels, then simply add the dye after or during delivery.

The guy at the pump serves business and pleasure vessels. You suggest he adds dye at the pump to some but not to others. How’s that going to result in the pleasure users all declaring they’re not business users?!

 

[Seven Spades]

I, for one, don't see why leisure vessels should benefit at all from using red diesel. It's hardly fair on people who cannot afford boats. The whole 60/40 thing stinks of a nudge and a wink anyway ("psst - tell them you use your diesel heater a lot....."). So my proposal is to get rid of red completely and allow legitimate business users to reclaim the tax in the same way as other business taxes are reclaimed. If it's still felt necessary to mark the diesel as tax reduced to prevent transfer into non-qualifying vehicles/vessels, then simply add the dye after or during delivery.

What is the logic in farmers and fishermen getting red diesel tax free they are no different to yachtsman? In the past tax was only paid by road users (yes I know it is not ring-fenced). The logic is simple duties on road fuel have to be paid but other uses are exempt. It was not the fault of Tony Blairs government to neglected to renew the exemption we had negotiate that has brought about this problem. We never had any problem before the 60/40 split because selling red to British yachts was legitimate.

 

[LBRodders]

What is the logic in farmers and fishermen getting red diesel tax free they are no different to yachtsman?

If Fisherman and Farmers go bust we all die. If Yachties disappear, those who make mustard cords go out of business..

In a nutshell.

 

[Seven Spades]

That makes no sense on that logic you would exempt food delivery vehicles.

 

[chrishscorp]

but I wonder if there’s a bit of confusion here...

It is a fudge. It was only introduced to comply with a European Commission directive in the first place.

The guy at the pump serves business and pleasure vessels. You suggest he adds dye at the pump to some but not to others. How’s that going to result in the pleasure users all declaring they’re not business users?!

Errrr it doesnt comply with the directive hence this thread

Its fairly easy to discern a fishing boat, barge, tug, freighter or small ferry from a yacht and fairly easy to ask to see the coding certificate from a sea school yacht and record the details for HMRC.

 

[BelleSerene]

Errrr it doesnt comply with the directive hence this thread

It actually did, with the directive as it was written. What the European court of ‘justice’ just did was extend the application of the directive, debarring the UK government from dying fuel on only a proportion of which duty was paid, by asserting that this was in line with the unwritten ‘intention’ of those who had written the directive. That ruling changed what the directive now requires of governments. Hence this thread!

It’s a typical example of how EU law that governs us is (a) not created by people we elect, (b) expanded beyond its initial intent by an unelected body that masquerades under the euphemism of ‘justice’; (c) immune from being rescinded by popular demand at the ballot box.

 

[LBRodders]

That makes no sense on that logic you would exempt food delivery vehicles.

With my tax payer head on, I would say a food lorry is more deserving of a tax break than a 50ft+ Diesel propelled Sunseeker. But happy to disagree..

In the modest world, there is absolutely no reason why a petrol propelled RIB [used for private leisure] should have to pay full duty, where as a small yacht [used for private leisure] shouldn't.

I am pretty sure that shortly 'white' diesel will be available for private pleasure boaters with full duty applied. Where it isn't, that is not the problem of HMRC or the tax payer. Supply will always be dictated by demand.

 

[CCJ]

With my tax payer head on, I would say a food lorry is more deserving of a tax break than a 50ft+ Diesel propelled Sunseeker. But happy to disagree..

In the modest world, there is absolutely no reason why a petrol propelled RIB [used for private leisure] should have to pay full duty, where as a small yacht [used for private leisure] shouldn't.

I am pretty sure that shortly 'white' diesel will be available for private pleasure boaters with full duty applied. Where it isn't, that is not the problem of HMRC or the tax payer. Supply will always be dictated by demand.

The 50ft + Sunseeker "might" be on charter ( i use the term in its loosest sense ) , so no different to the lorry

 

[GTom]

I, for one, don't see why leisure vessels should benefit at all from using red diesel. It's hardly fair on people who cannot afford boats. The whole 60/40 thing stinks of a nudge and a wink anyway ("psst - tell them you use your diesel heater a lot....."). So my proposal is to get rid of red completely and allow legitimate business users to reclaim the tax in the same way as other business taxes are reclaimed. If it's still felt necessary to mark the diesel as tax reduced to prevent transfer into non-qualifying vehicles/vessels, then simply add the dye after or during delivery.

I see it the other way: I don't see why a leisure activity should be additionally taxed? (red is also taxed at 10p/L) Road traffic is fairly taxed at a relatively high rate because maintenance of the road network is expensive and you normally don't pay for most of the infrastructure (roads, bridges, etc). While as a yachtie, you pay VAT on all services and goods, you pay for 90% of the infrastructure (canals, ports & marinas).

And for the practical part: why differentiate marine fuels, if there is no significant revenue? 99% of the consumption is commercial heavy traffic and a significant part of the rest is charter, schools, etc. Don't be fooled by the huge number of private boats, the thousands of boats sitting in marinas or moorings waiting weeks-months to see their owners for a daysail won't consume as much as the few, actively used charter/school boats.

Anyway, the "why's" are not much relevant when dealing with governments, not to mention EU.

 

[LBRodders]

The 50ft + Sunseeker "might" be on charter ( i use the term in its loosest sense ) , so no different to the lorry

Leisure is leisure, whether privately owned or chartered. The cost should be transferred to the customer.

Hugely different in my opinion to a wagon full of fruit and veg.

 

[GTom]

Hugely different in my opinion to a wagon full of fruit and veg.

En route to be delivered to the Sunseeker :eagerness:

 

[LBRodders]

En route to be delivered to the Sunseeker :eagerness:

I probably should have said a wagon full of cucumber, lemon and limes...

 

[Elemental]

What is the logic in farmers and fishermen getting red diesel tax free they are no different to yachtsman?

Because they're using the fuel in the course of their business - not as a leisure activity.

 

[maby]

Because they're using the fuel in the course of their business - not as a leisure activity.

Exactly! I need a new laptop - it will be used for business - I will not have to pay the VAT on it... In general, business expenses are treated favourably for tax purposes.

 

[Elemental]

Other business taxes are not reclaimed. They are paid. That’s the point of tax. You deduct your costs from your income and pay tax on the remainder. What you’re thinking of is deducting costs from your revenue, not from your tax bill.

Well, VAT is reclaimed...

However, I was proposing a system whereby the fuel duty paid by a commercial business would be offset against their tax liability...

The guy at the pump serves business and pleasure vessels. You suggest he adds dye at the pump to some but not to others. How’s that going to result in the pleasure users all declaring they’re not business users?!

It's not. But the then they'll have marked diesel in their tanks (which would be illegal in the UK under my proposal). They'd run the same risk as road users who shove red diesel in their private car.

 

[Elemental]

Leisure is leisure, whether privately owned or chartered. The cost should be transferred to the customer.

Hugely different in my opinion to a wagon full of fruit and veg.

+1

 

[maby]

Well, VAT is reclaimed...

And other business expenses are reclaimed against Corporation Tax - my new laptop will end up costing little more than 50% of the ticket price in PC World.