This week, the House of Representatives rejected the amendment 'abolition of MRB exemption for old-timers'. The amendment was submitted by the trio Dassen (Volt), Nijboer (PvdA) and Maatoug (Groen Links). They submitted the proposal in the context of the 2023 Tax Plan, but received no response.
The petitioners considered that the old-timer scheme is ineffective and ineffective. To substantiate this claim, the pollution adage was taken off the shelf. “All cars, which were first put into use at least forty years ago, now fall under the old-timer scheme. The property is also attractive because of the exemption. These vehicles are also polluting. The scheme also makes no distinction between mobile heritage and an old car.”
Financial background
Other motives had a financial background. According to the Dassen-Nijboer-Maatoug trio, the proposed abolition led to an expected budgetary yield of €55 million per year. There was also talk of cost savings by abolishing the scheme. “The cost of the scheme for 2023 is estimated at €99 million. The abolition will yield a budgetary benefit.” The trio also suggested that more suspensions of classics would be taken into account if the proposal was adopted.
International age limit not respected
The proposed and rejected abolition of the MRB exemption is at odds with the principles of the international age limit for classic cars, which is set at thirty years. Moreover, cars of thirty years and older are on the heritage list. In the Netherlands, the border (excluding the vehicles that fall under the transitional arrangement) has been officially forty years since 1-1-2014 before a vehicle qualifies for a full exemption. In that sense, owners pay extra for a vehicle that lasts much longer than the average technical life of a car. And on top of that comes the ten years of extra tax liability.
Pollution share
Furthermore, the concept of pollution was of course taken up again. It is the hobby horse that jumps less high than the (green) left lobby would have you believe. The share of nitrogen deposition represented by road traffic in the Dutch total is nowhere near ten percent. And that same road traffic is responsible for about 15% of the total Co2 emissions in the country. There are more than nine million passenger cars on the road in the Netherlands. A while ago it was calculated that this category accounts for 60% of the total road traffic emissions. In other words: passenger car traffic accounts for less than ten percent of total emissions, at least where Co2 and nitrogen deposition are concerned.
Relatively low mileage
Let's mention it again. The average annual mileage of Dutch motorists is 11.000 kilometres. A classic car is driven no more than 1500-2000 kilometers per year. And with a number of approximately 200.000 old-timers, the contribution to air pollution is small. The pollution argument can therefore go straight into the trash. Thanks to their owners, those 200.000 old-timers provide a lot of employment, preservation of heritage, and tax revenue (events, parts, maintenance).
Reject motion no surprise, but realistic
It is no surprise that the House of Representatives rejected the motion. The Netherlands is currently facing bigger challenges, and fortunately most of the members of the House of Representatives have realized that the proposed 'sustainable tax measure' is not going to help. Because the polluting effect is negligibly small (certainly in a relative sense), and because a measure like this can also cost the industry a lot of money. And that automatically means that less tax revenue flows to the state treasury. The youngtimer scheme (add 35% of the economic value and not the new value as an addition percentage to the income) was not discussed.
Good lobbying by industry organizations
The KNAC, FEHAC, ANWB and BOVAG in particular used their influence to get the amendment off the table. They put forward a number of valid arguments. For example, they pointed to the mileage, the damage to the industry, the missed revenues and a disruption of the current and complex tax system in its entirety. In terms of motor vehicle tax, the latter will in any case be overhauled in view of the proposed driving bill. It is to be expected that payment according to use will be accompanied by a vehicle's Co2 emissions, the Euro standard, the energy label and a form of fixed charge for the use of the roads. That would be bad news for many motorists - including old-timer owners. It should be clear: unlike ten years ago, the proposal of the Green Left-PvdA-Volt trio created little support, but beware: the first stone has been thrown into the pond.
Focus on other things
It would be better if all stakeholders (including the industry) focus on a favorable tax treatment of renewable fuels. They make a significant contribution to the reduction of emissions and therefore to the use and preservation of heritage. That is also a task that the four parties mentioned can do well. Because the effects of the use of the fuels mentioned have now been demonstrated.
The LPG is the highest taxed, but the cleanest fuel. So what's more important? The cleanest driving is taxed the highest, so it should be different. Driving the 'dirtiest' is cheaper. But who knows, may say so. It won't change until the upcoming elections, but I think the VVD will remain the largest. The Dutch allow themselves to be subjected to this misery. Been like this for 4 terms. The chaos… just breaks out late I think and then it's too late because returning to 'the way it was' is no longer feasible. For example, why are there so many vacancies? What is let in here has no appetite. The Netherlands has already been lost…
Finally someone with sense. Don't know the writer but I would exchange him in a bit pinoko Rutte
Mine was once converted and can run on either gas or petrol. So it was not an old 'stink diesel', but at the time it just missed the 30-year scheme and will now miss the 40-year scheme again? Aaahhh
I do not think so.
Thank you very much for your efforts (KNAC, FEHAC, ANWB, etc)
What do we do with pleasure craft on diesel, is this not polluting and water skiing behind such a beautiful rivera, bayliner old-timer speedboat on old-fashioned petrol slurper sailing boats with auxiliary engine
Sloepjes you name it, that is also someone's hobby, there is also a lot of employment opportunity in it
That is quite a cut in the old-timer industry
A lot of skilled people have disappeared from here
So also a lot of historical knowledge, this should be cherished for the next generation
more and more water areas are no longer allowed to be navigated with fossil fuel engines
in the 90s you had a 60 day card for oldtimers. as a true old-timer enthusiast and owner, I don't get to 60 days a year at all. then I remove those people who drive daily because they also pollute a lot. maybe an idea
Maybe you should omit these things. Always that shit about using someone else I pick up my classic car whenever I want and as often as I want, all year round
Have a small diesel for work and daily use and pay enough for it per month with 40dkm per year
If you want to drive 60 days with your oldtimer, you should know, but don't try to screw someone else's ear with your 60 days card
Better a 60-day ticket than the entire old-timer regulation being abolished. That is on average more than 1 day per week and that seems more than enough for an oldtimer. I've had one myself for 15 years and I don't even get to 60 days a year. An old-timer is simply not for daily use. That is precisely the reason why the previous old-timer regulation (25 years) was abolished in 2014. There were too many old smelly diesels driving around that were driven for daily use. It would be a pity if the current old-timer regulation were abolished for the same reason. Then a few individuals ruin it for the vast majority.
Precisely! Just tax the actual use. It does not matter in what type of car, but related to the kilometers you make and the emissions you cause with the car you choose.
I have 3 oldtimer and 1 camper oldtimer
It has become my hobby and I enjoy being able to go away with my family in my old-timer camper
But I can't buy a new camper because I'm totally rejected that's why this hobby
If that is also taken away then I will leave my camper with all insurance and then I will drive it completely flat and then I will get something in return for my old-timers
Otherwise he will go on export then another one will drive in
Unbelievable when I read that last week…
What a bunch of ignorant we have in some places in political The Hague.
The only advantage is that it is becoming increasingly easier to make a choice for the upcoming elections…
But whether that helps is the question…
if they are tough guys there in the hague then the electric cars would also have to pay taxes and not get a subsidy then nobody bought an electric car anymore.
Finally someone with sense. Don't know the writer but I would exchange him in a bit pinoko Rutte
I also have 8 oldtimers of which I pay the quarter rate for 1 and the rest are suspended or tax free. I drive all cars together, so I certainly don't drive more than 2000 km in total, so nothing at all, I like to be busy with it but has nothing to do with driving cheaply, I have a fairly new diesel for which I pay way too much tax and also Carpool, which combines costs and the environment. As always, it's time to pick more under the sick guise of the environment. They also have no real figures about it, it is also impossible to do, but as others have said, there is almost nothing more than daily transport so the few who think it is cheaper is negligible, they pay more in fuel per kilometer driven because an old car is less economical and therefore pay much more excise duty. But destroying the country and depriving people of the little pleasure we have left, they are good at that, I just keep on hobbying and try to think less about this misery.
Remember which parties, pay in March E d
I am no longer allowed to enter the environmental zone with my Peugeot Partner from 2003. Neste biodiesel reduces the particulate matter by 30%. TNO even indicates that the effects of the environmental zone cannot be determined. The Municipality of The Hague causes disproportionate damage that is not compensated. There is only 1 measuring point in the environmental zone for which I still do not have the data. Haskoning engineering firm that wrote a report does not want to explain anything and refers to the municipality, the municipality refers again to the report. It's a big sham.
There is nothing more in this country. Everything is going to lightning, including the globe. Get rid of this cabinet Rutte. Can only make mistakes
The parties voting for this are not part of the coalition, so they have nothing to do with Rutte.
Such a shame that there are 3 people who begrudge thousands of people a nice hobby. Everything revolves around the environment now. (Where did they drive themselves in the past !!?) The electric car is currently the most environmentally harmful vehicle, only those green guys don't want to see what damage the manufacturing and dismantling causes the earth.
38 votes in favour, 110 against, 1 abstention
They're screwing up the whole country just to house those asia-empty seekers and the Dutch can fall to pieces and pay
Another thing: In Eindhoven, politicians are calling for fossil fuel filling stations to be banned from the city within the ring.
Why can't political people see relationships or do they live in a different world? There are only 6% electric passenger cars in the Netherlands (approx. 500.000 of the total 9 million passenger cars). If all those fuel cars have to drive further to a petrol station, this will result in extra emissions and costs.
https://www.ed.nl/eindhoven/br-traditionele-benzinepomp-komt-in-eindhoven-in-de-verdrukking~a5d8613a/
https://www.cbs.nl/nl-nl/visualisaties/verkeer-en-vervoer/vervoermiddelen-en-infrastructuur/personenautos
https://www.rvo.nl/onderwerpen/elektrisch-rijden/cijfers
https://www.tweedekamer.nl/kamerstukken/detail?id=2022Z21484&did=2022D46418
Do many more cars with Polish or other foreign license plates drive around, just go there and have a look….
The world won't get any better with this kind of minks. Deprive people of their freedom and we will soon fall into dullness.
a good example of hypocrisy: that fat Timmermans with his nice expensive paid job, and his droning on about co-goals/demands at the Euro Commission, who drives a big range rover !!!!!!!!
Completely agree with you
Glad to read that the topic is alive and well.
In NL, the government is about trivial things. Widening the gap between rich and poor and the unbridled collection of money. Everything is taken out of the closet for this. It is no coincidence that energy in NL is more expensive than in any other country. Our climate and energy minister even used the war in Ukraine to force people to go green at a rapid pace. As the Germans would say: „Alle Schläge sind erlaubt“. And that is no different with the old-timers. Coming up with things from the comfort of your chair in BOT sessions (Legs On Table) is different from managing a country well. History doesn't count. We are pinched for our old-timers, but ministers themselves do not allow themselves to be driven around in an electric car, but in large CO2 emitters such as a BMW745. Impossible, but unfortunately a fact. Or the leader of GL who drove a large Volvo station for years while he wanted everyone out of the fuel car. The government has a lot of butter on its head. The old-timer may be there, and with great right!
You're talking about Jesse Clover? He defended his choice for a Volvo V2017 in 70 by saying that it was the most economical car in its class. That a family with its composition (at the time) could also easily fit in a Honda Jazz (speaking from experience, I myself have a family with three adolescent children and a dog) and is a very safe, spacious and comfortable companion…. Clover had missed that for a while. It also counts for GL leaders: status is more important than sustainability.
Both sides lost my sympathy long ago. When I go to vote I always take the automotive point of view of a party with me. You should all do and let us know 😉
A maximum of say 3000 km is reasonable, that selects the real enthusiast of the cheap driver.
And fair is fair, it's not crazy to contribute something, is it?
It would have been better if the subject of suspensions had been held up to the light.
Carry out a new action every year, which is not or will not become cheaper if you wish to extend for several years.
That can be done differently.
This proposal was only rejected before the Bühne. The government (read the EU) has something else in mind that generates much more money. Companies with 100 employees and more are or are already dealing with this. Every kilometer driven must be accounted for in terms of type of vehicle and fuel/propulsion. A system is being set up whereby the government wants to gain total control over our emissions and will levy taxes on it. Our 'old-timers' will automatically fall under this, so please pay again.
is that what you mean by 2030? In any case, the rules of the game are constantly changing on all fronts. As a result, it is not at all attractive to make a large investment. Whether it concerns an old-timer or a company car, EV or heat pump. I love every kilometer we can make with our oldtimer in the summer! And try to run on premium fuel where possible.
Unfortunately, these political parties are getting further and further away from me.
No, road pricing pays everyone for using the road, regardless of the type of vehicle. Electric vehicles also simply pay. This is about the CO2 footprint, but of course much more is emitted. Just look at nitrogen emissions and the associated problems with farmers. I am not a conspiracy theorist, far from it, but the EU knows very well where it wants to go with Europe. And it's about money money and money again, don't forget that. NL is a small country with a dense population. Great country for a testing ground to try out certain sensitive matters. Digitally also well equipped, so the government can look behind everything and we can't hide anything. And we are not 'hotheads' like the southern countries, so the repression from the population is low.
Let the electric car pay some road tax first. They simply drive the roads with their heavy weight to hell rather than that single old-timer that you rarely encounter. So no more PVDA and Groenllinks votes for the time being.
And vote for that party that is there for old-timer enthusiasts! Ra ra which party is that then? And who knows, may say…..
You must vote for a person (representative) who is a fan. Ultimately, people make policy.
PVV SP
Repair roads? The MRB is used for everything except road repair. It's just another form of tax. Provinces come over it again with their 'surcharges'.
Another nice one of us knows us:
Jan met de cap is no longer allowed to buy a new diesel or petrol car from 2035
For themselves, the politicians have made an exception: Via the Ferrari amendment, cars of which less than 10.000 units are produced annually may still be sold with a fuel engine after 2035 (read exotics al la Lamborghini that are inaccessible to the normal taxpayer).
Do these idiots have nothing else to do or think of???? We, as avid old-timer enthusiasts, make sure that our cars are in perfect condition on the road. It has even been decided that old-timers of 50 years and older no longer need an MOT as they are convinced that these vehicles are in top condition. If they want to tackle something, take those rascals who barely get through the MOT and who pose a daily danger on the road.
And that is also (almost…) to the sharks
remember their names, the next elections are coming up…
The PvdA, the party that once championed the sharing of knowledge, power and income, now doesn't even allow small hobbyists to have their old car. After all, that hobbyist can better spend his time on his vegetable garden.
Again and again from this angle an attempt is made to make the Netherlands resemble the old gray Soviet Union .
All hobbies have to believe it under the guise of the environment, all property is increasingly coming under state control, the population is becoming more and more colorless because every initiative is discouraged.
Fortunately, their symbol-political proposal did not make it.
I have 5 oldtimers myself, of which the 2 youngest are from 1988. On one of the last 2 I have been paying full road tax for 34 years, furthermore I drive with everything together barely 6000 km per year.
Besides my vintage cars, I haven't seen anything really old driving on the road for a long time.
Dear Peter,
I actually have too many myself and pay more and for 3 MRB while I drive less than the average 11000 km with all cars together. I have often pointed this out to the government, but usually don't even get an answer to my objection to the umpteenth fine, etc.!
Could go on for hours on this.
Greetings from Friesland.