Red Diesel - useage apportionment

[NickCharman]

I have read on the HMRC website that they believe, following consultation, the average split of useage for recreational boaters to be 60% propulsion, 40% domestic. But should this not be segmented between Power Boats and Sailing boats? I should have thought that as engines in Sailing Yachts are only used for manoeuvring in and out of harbour, and part of that useage is incidentally for battery recharging, and water heating, then I should be surprised if as much as 10% of a sailing yachts useage was for propulsion. Of course a Motor Vessel would be less able to claim that they propel themselves much except with the use of fuel, and so a greater proportion of propulsion useage is inevitable.
As each of us is responsible for declaring their future intended useage of the fuel to be purchased, and our intentions must of course be estimates only, depending on conditions, and no audit trail of historic useage is proposed, how can such claims for such intentions on fuel purchase be indefensible?
I do not understand. Any views/wisdom there?

 

[Jock89]

Hi Nick,
I've been thinking about this myself lately, due to long nights with the Eberspacher going.
As I'm living on the boat but not going anywhere for several months I'll be declaring 90% heating & 10% propulsion.!
Jock

 

[NickCharman]

Indeed, if you are living on it, I should have thought 2% for propulsion would be closer. For the rest of us, even not living aboard, one might well have the intention of only using the engine (other than some inevitable manouevring) for battery charging and water heating. Bad luck if it turns out differently - it seems to me. I do not understand.

 

[capsco]

[ QUOTE ]
I have read on the HMRC website that they believe, following consultation, the average split of useage for recreational boaters to be 60% propulsion, 40% domestic. But should this not be segmented between Power Boats and Sailing boats? I should have thought that as engines in Sailing Yachts are only used for manoeuvring in and out of harbour, and part of that useage is incidentally for battery recharging, and water heating, then I should be surprised if as much as 10% of a sailing yachts useage was for propulsion. Of course a Motor Vessel would be less able to claim that they propel themselves much except with the use of fuel, and so a greater proportion of propulsion useage is inevitable.
As each of us is responsible for declaring their future intended useage of the fuel to be purchased, and our intentions must of course be estimates only, depending on conditions, and no audit trail of historic useage is proposed, how can such claims for such intentions on fuel
purchase be indefensible?
I do not understand. Any views/wisdom there?

[/ QUOTE ]


Here we go again.

 

[Babylon]

I topped up tank Sunday afternoon after a weekend's sailing, about six quid's worth. I declared the 'standard' 60/40 split, which I consider to about right: 2 hours or so of motoring to (a) get in/out harbours etc, and (b) charge batts while I was making way, and Webasto heater at full tilt both Fri and Sat evenings.

The interesting thing was that the fuel pontoon bloke asked me to fill in my name and address (but not boat details) on his slip - is this a legal requirement?

 

[dockmaster]

It is your responsibility to decide what percentage you decide to declare and the marina has no responsibility for your decision hense the recording of name addrress etc if you are only using 10 percent for propulsion you are well within your rights but in my opinion you are more likely to get a visit from big brother.

 

[whisper]

I do not understand what you "do not understand".
When you buy your next fuel you simply declare the respective proportions that YOU believe will fit your useage.
It's as easy as that.

 

[damo]

"The interesting thing was that the fuel pontoon bloke asked me to fill in my name and address (but not boat details) on his slip - is this a legal requirement? "

Yes - the purchaser is obliged to complete a declaration.

Loads of info on the web eg RYA, MCA etc and ad nauseam on the forums

 

[NickCharman]

What I do not understand is the intent of the officials who have devised this scheme, since it is so open to variation, abuse, lack of audit trail, unproveable intention at the time of purchase, and as a result does not feel like normal tax "regulation". I find my self wondering if right there is the true intention, ie to allow the taxpayer a reasonable route not to actually pay much tax at all, but still comply with EU regulation. I have not followed other strings on this particular aspect of this well worn topic, so do not know if that view has been aired before. But if so it would not surprise me.

 

[TrueBlue]

Re: Red Diesel - usage apportionment

[ QUOTE ]

The interesting thing was that the fuel pontoon bloke asked me to fill in my name and address (but not boat details) on his slip - is this a legal requirement?

[/ QUOTE ]

The seller is required to provide an "audit trail" for inspection by - um - an Inspector. HMRC have said the sale should be traceable, and have NOT stipulated what constitutes that - leaving the seller in a quandary, it could be the boat name, SSR or Part1 reg No: or, or.
So he asks for a name and address.
Bit of a muddle, so what's new.

Don't get paranoid over it though, I mean don't worry.

 

[TrueBlue]

[ QUOTE ]
What I do not understand is the intent of the officials who have devised this scheme, since it is so open to variation, abuse, lack of audit trail, unprovable intention at the time of purchase, and as a result does not feel like normal tax "regulation".

[/ QUOTE ]

[ QUOTE ]
I find my self wondering if right there is the true intention, ie to allow the taxpayer a reasonable route not to actually pay much tax at all, but still comply with EU regulation.

[/ QUOTE ]

<span style="color:blue"> Got it in one</span>

[ QUOTE ]
I have not followed other strings on this particular aspect of this well worn topic, so do not know if that view has been aired before. But if so it would not surprise me.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes it has many times, but I blame it on the search feature shortcomings, rather than members'


"The Lord Giveth and the Lord Taketh Away". The Lord in this case is Mammon, the first is HMRC, the second is Brown-Darling......

 

[Babylon]

Re: Red Diesel - usage apportionment

Not paranoid about giving my details for HM inspectors to pursue, as I've got nothing to hide. The only thought that crossed my mind is the fact that Premier (or MDL, I forget which) Marinas who operate this particular fuel pontoon are busy building a significant mailing list - so I look forward to recycling a load of unsolicited junk mail about marinas I'm not interested in!

 

[neale]

[ QUOTE ]
should have thought that as engines in Sailing Yachts are only used for manoeuvring in and out of harbour, and part of that useage is incidentally for battery recharging, and water heating, then I should be surprised if as much as 10% of a sailing yachts useage was for propulsion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are confusing fuel usage with engine usage. If you only use your engine for close quarters maneuvering then you are always using it for propulsion and therefore you can hardly claim 10% is used for propulsion.

The only time I can see a sail boat using less than 60% for propulsion is if they regularly, and I mean alot, run the engine while sailing but without it being in gear. Then you can claim a greater split but you will need to keep very good records cos I bet anyone declaring a bigger split than 60/40 will be the ones who get a close inspection some time in the future.

 

[flaming]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
should have thought that as engines in Sailing Yachts are only used for manoeuvring in and out of harbour, and part of that useage is incidentally for battery recharging, and water heating, then I should be surprised if as much as 10% of a sailing yachts useage was for propulsion.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think you are confusing fuel usage with engine usage. If you only use your engine for close quarters maneuvering then you are always using it for propulsion and therefore you can hardly claim 10% is used for propulsion.

The only time I can see a sail boat using less than 60% for propulsion is if they regularly, and I mean alot, run the engine while sailing but without it being in gear. Then you can claim a greater split but you will need to keep very good records cos I bet anyone declaring a bigger split than 60/40 will be the ones who get a close inspection some time in the future.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree, which makes the spectre of large MOBOs filling up at 60/40 even more absurd, no running the engine out of gear here!

 

[neale]

No but many of them do have generators larger than an average yacht's engine. Plus water heaters, plus cabin heaters.

When the engine is running, how much of the fuel being passed through the engine is used to turn the propellor and how much is used to charge the batteries via the alternator, heat the water through the calorifier?

The answer is: I have no idea and I doubt anyone else does, including HMRC

Also I remember once being told a figure that related to engine efficiency. Some very very low percentage of the fuel used by an engine is turned into power at the crankshaft output. The rest is used to produce heat. So in theory, 60% is probably way too high. /forums/images/graemlins/grin.gif

 

[Grumpybear]

you may be very close to the truth, so it may be worth dropping the subject before somebody (a crusading journalist with a phobia for rich yacht owners, for example) tries pressuring HMRC into collecting more tax and employing yet more pen-pushers by being hard-nosed about this

 

[Sneds]

Declare what you like but be prepared to prove it!

 

[sailorman]

Re: Red Diesel - usage apportionment

i thought in England one was Innocent Until Proven Guilty

 

[damo]

Spot on Sneds. I've just spoken to another local BC sailor who was making his declaration (100%) propulsion. I asked did he have batteries, nav lights, instruments etc? Oh yeah, he replied, I never thought I could have less than 100% propulsion use. So he changed his declaration to something a bit fairer.

 

[damo]

Re: Red Diesel - usage apportionment

"i thought in England one was Innocent Until Proven Guilty "

Hang on, isn't it HMRC we are talking about here? They make an assessment - you have to prove otherwise. Ask any self-employed who have been inspected /forums/images/graemlins/frown.gif