Wiebes uses assumptions and remarkable starting points in the evaluation of the old-timer scheme

State Secretary Wiebes has given up his evaluation of the old-timer scheme. A number of things in this can be explained logically. However, the calculation of tax revenues raises questions. Photo: Central government

State Secretary Eric Wiebes announced the evaluation of the old-timer scheme yesterday. In a letter to the House of Representatives, he stated that the MRB rules introduced on January 1 had paid off. “The fleet in the Netherlands has been rejuvenated and the air quality has improved. In addition, the tax revenues are corresponding. ”The way in which the evaluation is formulated, however, arouses surprise and indignation among the supporters. In any case, the State Secretary mirrors the tax revenues rosy. Data not previously mentioned has also been used to make estimates and actual returns accurate.

State Secretary Wiebes has given up his evaluation of the old-timer scheme. A number of things in this can be explained logically. However, the calculation of tax revenues raises questions. Photo: Central government
State Secretary Wiebes has given up his evaluation of the old-timer scheme. A number of things in this can be explained logically. However, the calculation of tax revenues raises questions. Photo: Central government

Large number of taxed vintage cars from the streets
It is now known: Wiebes' predecessor Frans Weekers decided two years ago - in consultation with the oldtimer alliance - to set the age limit for tax-free cars at 26 years. A transitional arrangement was introduced for petrol cars older than 120 years, whereby motorists have to pay a maximum of 38.000 euros per year. Old diesels and LPG cars did not receive this transitional arrangement. This led to their massive disposal. Of the 2013 diesels that were on the road in 30, 27 percent were suspended, 8 percent exported and 151.000 percent scrapped. Of the 1975 passenger cars from the period 1986-1 that used the classic car exemption on 2013 July 60.000, a large part has disappeared from the Dutch street scene. Around 40 cars (XNUMX percent) have been exported, suspended or scrapped.

Amendment by Vliet ignored
The decline in the fleet from the period 1975-1986 is attributed by Wiebes to the fact that the current measures were announced in advance. "The turnaround started in 2012." However, there is no mention of the fact that the Van Vliet Amendment entered into force in January 2012 and that the Coalition Agreement was concluded after the September 2012 elections.

Old-timers replacements suddenly count in the yield calculation
There is another curious aspect in the evaluation of the old-timer scheme. According to the State Secretary, the current regulation also provides "a considerable amount of tax revenue." The way in which the revenue of € 137 million is calculated and presented is of a special nature. The tax revenues related to old-timers after 1 January 2014 are set at € 55 million. It is remarkable, however, that Wiebes also proceeds from the adopted the number of 70.000 vehicles subject to motor vehicle tax - which were purchased to replace a classic car - included in the results. They would account for an estimated amount of € 82 million, an amount arising from a bandwidth used. This has been determined on the basis of a widely varying budgetary effect that lies between € 25 million and € 91 million. This large difference in effects is partly due to the fact that the MinFin cannot make a subdivision by fuel type for these 70.000 vehicles, simply because these data are not available. Besides the fact that the wet finger is used, the number of the aforementioned 70.000 vehicles also indicates a behavioral consequence. And that is precisely why KNAC chairman Peter Staal once got involved Auto Motor Klassiek it turned out that politicians in The Hague did not take this into account. It is therefore striking that the replacement vehicles are precisely mentioned.

Surprised and disappointed reactions from supporters and politicians
Wouter van Embden of Autobelangen was therefore angry. “This is not correct. Wiebes suddenly includes 70.000 owners who have bought a replacement vehicle subject to MRB. But in the original estimate of € 137 million, it was assumed that those revenues would be paid by classic car owners and only for their classic car. We think it is a bad thing that a group of replacement vehicles is now being used to get the numbers correct. Ridiculous. ” CDA Member of Parliament Pieter Omtzigt also expressed his reservations. “The effects of the measure deviate from the estimates in all respects. In addition, the cultural heritage is destroyed. The oldtimer scheme has failed. A good example is the cars on LPG. MRB is paid for only 3.000 LPG oldtimers. Weekers' estimates at the time assumed 32.000 units. ” Van Embden and Omtzigt will not be the only ones to express their concerns. The evaluation of the classic car scheme provides a far-reaching distorted picture that has arisen on the basis of data and assumptions that do not cover the content.



Leave a Reply
  1. Mr. Wiebes,
    You really should get out of your fortress in The Hague and come and see what damage you and your predecessor have caused to the classic car industry. So many personal tragedies from bankruptcies to broken marriages due to the enormous stress among entrepreneurs and their husbands. And all this for a profit of many millions less from your unscrupulous ambition. As the foundation Oldtimerbranche Nederland has written to you in advance, somewhere around 60 million will be collected and all setbacks and costs of, for example, social assistance benefits have yet to be settled. But hey, they are carried by the municipalities and are therefore not visible on your account. Nice piece of deception!

    You play the game so well that you have now also remembered that ex-oldtimer drivers have now started driving new cars. Fie, Mr. de Stas, you really don't know which people you are talking about. You don't have to either, because the Hague rules prescribe that you cannot count on human behavior, because that is too uncertain, just a vague expectation. That is of course correct if you do not know your market. And that is precisely what happens so often with politicians. Especially with the ambitious ones who strive for a 'real' post in politics.

    I understand that you are the Ministry of Finance's Jut Kop van Jut and that the Minister here is actually the culprit behind you. But you have chosen this role yourself, so live with it!

  2. In my case it is also completely wrong. I already had a car that is subject to MRB and I still have it. In addition, I have an oldtimer older than 40 years and one that is now 30 years old. The last one is in the transitional arrangement, 3 does not come out for months. But hey, I probably hadn't done that anyway. I really have not purchased a replacement car. And therefore no extra contribution was made to the MRB.
    Complete nonsense. Many members have done the same to me, they really do not buy a second, third or any other daily means of transport for every old-timer that is suspended, in the transitional arrangement or exported abroad.
    Those 70.000 replacement cars are completely out of the blue, coincidentally perhaps the number that they needed to make the calculation correct ???
    Dirk-Jan Bode
    Chairman of the Mercedes-Benz Club Netherlands
    1.600 members / about 4.000 classics

  3. At least not right with me, I already had 2 diesels (e280CDI 2008 and a Seat Ibiza 1.2 TDI. The Mercedes diesel that I suspended has not driven a meter after 1 January 2014. What irritates me most is that everyone knows that measure does not produce the desired result that tax revenue has yielded, but the government justly fills this in. In short, nothing has changed: THE GOVERNMENT IS AND WILL REMAIN UNRELIABLE and that is a bad thing!

  4. What I miss in this calculation is the lack of excise duties. The cars that have now been stored for three months have not refueled any fuel during this period, more than 91000 cars at 25 liters per week times 13 is 29.575.000 liters of fuel. That is € 0.766 per liter, so I arrive at € 22.654.450 which has flowed less into the state coffers due to the suspension of the vehicles.

  5. Producing a new car costs as much energy and therefore emissions as the car consumes during its average life!
    And according to a Lifetime Cycle Analysis study by the Norwegian University of Science and Technology, the total emission of greenhouse gases during the entire life cycle of an electric car is not or hardly less than that of a car with a combustion engine.

    When powered by electricity from natural gas, we estimate LiNCM EVs offer a reduction in GHG emissions of 12% compared to gasoline ICEVs, and break even with diesel ICEVs. EVs powered by coal electricity are expected to cause an increase in GWP of 17% to 27% compared with diesel and gasoline ICEVs ”

    So that so-called 'dirty' old classic car is just as clean as an EV (electric car) from 150.000 km.

    The environmental story is incorrect, the starting points reprehensible, the 'outcome' dubious and more than 4000 jobs in the oldtimer maintenance and repair industry have been lost.
    Hypocritical lobby of the (r) government so.

    • Prometheus, excellent piece! Compliments.
      Do you know how bad it really is? The government receives car sales data from, among others, the Bovag and RAI association. Organizations that are strong, able to lobby well and do really good work for the importers and dealers of new vehicles. Who therefore also pay huge amounts of membership fees.
      But these two organizations have also ensured that the current government partners have included in their coalition agreement to abolish the old-timer scheme. They have been lobbying strongly for a year with the Ministry of Finance (Tax and Customs Administration) for a firm approach to the old-timer rules. The 'Van Vliet rule', which took effect in 2012, did not go far enough. And these two eventually found a hearing with the PvdA! The VVD negotiators thought “well, we still have a year to design a good, fair new rule ……. it is not too bad if we agree. We have a more important item: health care ”. And so the oldtimers were sold to the PvdA.
      The day that the coalition agreement came out will forever remain the same as the day on which the old-timer murder took place. The day on which tens of thousands of old-timer enthusiasts almost completely valued their valuable, beloved possession, the 25 to 40 year-old classic. A decrease in value from € 25.000 to € 5.000 has turned out to be absolutely no crazy value for these vehicles!
      The day the coalition agreement was concluded, financial plague was poured out on the old-timer industry. Where oldtimer enthusiasts could often throw their oldtimer away, hundreds of companies had to close their doors. Thousands of employees took to the streets, many with no real chance of changing work quickly. Tens of thousands of classics that were suddenly no longer an oldtimer according to Hague insights had to leave the field (demolition, cheap export, long suspension until they are 40). All first contributing to the treasury and now ……… noppes.

      And which hat of course shows that 70.000 new replacement vehicles have suddenly been sold? Yes, Bovag and the RAI association are also very enthusiastic about this.
      Did you know that both these organizations have also started (and led with a strong hand) 'the alliance', the alliance that had to take on the plans of the government for the classic car world, enthusiast owners and proud classic car industry together? Really, it's all already been published and / or on TV. But still good to remember. And Judas trick!
      These organizations have so much butter on their heads that it has long been caught in their eyes: blind to the social result they have produced. I NEVER BUY A NEW CAR! Probably a nice, expensive old-timer, but not with a member of the Bovag. Greetings !

  6. Nonsense, Mr. Wiebes. I have a '85 defender as a hobby vehicle and travel
    every day by train to work. It stands neatly in the greenhouse and stays there. I also have a newer car, which I expect to suspend
    if I remove the defender from the suspension. So it works the other way around.
    Furthermore, confidence in the government has been fundamentally eroded since this scheme. Budget deficit may decline, but ethically the government is bankrupt.

  7. The fleet has been rejuvenated? Far fewer new cars have been sold in recent years. The second-hand market is doing better now. Most of the older cars drive few kilometers per year, especially compared to new lease vehicles. The contribution to air pollution is therefore very small.

    They are lying animals.

  8. Wiebes speaks like the first monkey again. He knows nothing at all about sustainability and that nothing needs to be renewed. New car, meet a consumption figure which is not at all realistic and does not depend on the figures but on a piece of legislation and regulations. Has the State Secretary ever heard of LCA (Life Cycle Analyzes). Just put a newly produced car there by this yardstick. Then it will turn out that a car of 25 years old is many times more durable than a newly produced one. 25-year-old cars yield little to the tax authorities and new ones much more. Still, from a sustainability point of view, this government lie is an example of exceptionally opportunistic government policy. Totally indefensible and unraveling as a government lie. Wiebes stop lies and deceit and reactivate the old scheme. That is just an example of sustainable policy!

    The Netherlands stop cheating on your citizens !!!!

    • Unfortunately you are right Paul, this government is lying faster than a horse can walk, someone from this scam gang from The Hague said that he has the best cabinet since 1950, is correct again, there has been no government that has stolen so much from the Dutch population and in particular those of the 65, who, as everyone knows, have no defense against this sadly chosen harness, only filled their own bags (well, bags, say quietly bags) that flow into their pockets every month , example: from one monthly income of a politician from The Hague, an elderly person must live ONE year and this bastard of a government leader says that one does not miss € 25.- per month, Rutte and co arrogance knows no end, but it is time that it will be ended.

Give a reaction

The email address will not be published. Required fields are marked with *

The maximum upload file size: 8 MB. you can upload: image. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop files here

Wooden wheel spinner REMOVAL tool

A pre-announcement

AMK Tools cutlery