in

Exemption Motor vehicle tax part 3

The alternatives

By: the editors

The new plans of the Rutte Samson formation keep the minds busy. Heated reactions from enthusiasts who feel caught by the heavy burdens that await them when the MRB exemption expires. Different times also dawn for us classic and old-timer enthusiasts. But are these necessarily worse? Now it seems that way, but the big lobbying is starting. Various organizations that support the preservation of our driving heritage have already taken action. Including of course the KNAC who has placed a petition on her site, the FEHAC who is already in pressure at board level with the KNAC and your own Auto Motor Klassiek. What can we do to represent the classic and old-timer world as a front in The Hague? There must be an alternative.

Relevant links and organizations that also stand up for the classic and old-timer enthusiasts:


KNAC petition

FEHAC

 

The motivate
The coalition agreement is based on the assumption that vintage cars are a major burden on the environment. But only base these findings on emissions. And even here ignores the fact that the emissions of a car with gasoline engine are less harmful than those of a modern diesel engine. Then we are not even talking about a classic with an LPG installation. But emissions are not the only thing that needs to be taken into account. Most classics drive no more than a mile or five thousand a year, many even considerably less. They have to emit five times as many harmful substances as a modern car with 25.000 kilometers per year. Relatively speaking, it is still in line with that environmental burden.

What's going to happen
Another motivation, but not specifically mentioned, is the intended additional income from holding tax. But what will happen if these plans indeed continue? The average hobbyist with at least one classic would rather suspend it. Already a large part of the classic fleet is going abroad, the outflow will only get bigger, because the Dutch classics will be sold for a second. The environment does not benefit, because emissions do not care about national borders. Related companies, which generate their turnover from the classics and vintage cars, are massively pumped, leaving many people on the street. After a while, trade abroad will also come to a halt, causing more traders in classic transport to get into trouble. Now they are talking about an estimated extra income of just over 150 million euros in holding tax. But finally ignores the fact that the income from that classic industry is missed. In addition, the classic car enthusiast who has fitted his car with a gas tank will quickly remove it. Due to the still payable LPG surcharge, it will no longer be worthwhile, despite the fact that the environmentally friendly fuel is cheaper. After all, a classic doesn't drive great distances. Does this benefit the environment?

The alternatives
But what is just? If you use the public highway with your classic car, don't you also have to pay a contribution to it? And if so, to what extent? Must the tax exemption be linked to a maximum mileage to prevent daily use? Just like the insurers already do? And if so, how should that be checked? Would it be fair to allow a classic car only to be withholding tax if it is not the only car in the name of the owner and for which a holding tax is paid? We will be happy to hear from you. Respond below and let us know what you think. One thing is certain, things are going to change.

Action
Auto Motor Klassiek is already talking with various organizations. We want to approach the government as a front with as many parties as possible. And need your help with that. Who or which party you represent. Companies, magazines, organizations. Let us know who you are and what you can do via redactie@amklassiek.nl.

116 Comments

Leave a Reply
  1. Many of the above solutions are susceptible to fraud or cost the state a lot of money to check. There is a much simpler solution. The true old-timer enthusiast does not use his car in bad weather or during the winter months. For example, exempt the months from 1 May to 30 September from road tax for enthusiasts. Any old-timer events that are just outside the scope of this can be adjusted in view of the number of days. Anyone who is on the road outside this period with his old-timer pays full road tax (He also knows very well when 1 may starts and ends Sept.) The check on this can be taken daily by the police on the road. License plate check and ready. Everyday use is thus self-evident.

  2. To begin with, Sjaak and Bas you are right. Who decides what a “real” classic is.
    Because, for example, a BMW or Mercedes of 25 to 26 years old is not yet old enough, in the eyes of many it is not a “real” classic. And in its 10 years it will be…. But if these cars are not neatly stored and maintained now, the future “real” cashiers will no longer be there in 10 years.
    There is no arguing about taste and everyone makes (handy) use of the rules if there are any.

    The fact is that the mrb exemption was once devised for cars that spent years in the Netherlands for tax and maintenance and all the costs that were paid there and therefore could see a reduction in burden after 25 years, and then also call them (call. free) to be able to save. Then, of course, cars are imported en masse, now cars that have never been earned This of course goes wrong once. If you now enter that only imported cars from 2014 no longer become mrb free, then the whole problem is solved anyway.
    And just as honest for anyone who has put a lot of money for a classic that is now only worth half and less. In this way, people are hit extra hard and unreasonably hard in a time of cuts already!
    To say nothing of all traders and people who earn their money in this branch of sport, what a noose or just bankrupt.
    It is clear that the rules of the game will be different and trade less.
    But in this way the stock that traders have is still worth money, this gives a little more air and time for this group not to go bankrupt right away. No one benefits from that, and the private individual does not have a value reduction that soon amounts to 5.000 euros or more.
    The bargain hunters who drive and pollute (relatively) cheaply every day, fall out by themselves and the cars on the demolition. The cars that call now. many are already free on gas and this will continue to be the case, which is also better for the environment.
    If yes then added a rule that entered cars from eg for 1970 do call. becoming free then there still remains a trade in classics but the so-called young timer falls out.

    • Why does everyone think that the exemption existed because these cars have already paid a lot of road tax in their lifetime? Or that they are exempt because they are so much fun, and our heritage must be preserved? That is really nonsense and when you say that you ridicule the whole scheme with people who have nothing to do with old-timers, and it is logical that people come up with stupid bills to end it.

      The real reason for the exemption is that it is ridiculous to tax cars that do not empty a tank in a year as much as a car that drives 25.000 a year. The scheme is always skewed because no one drives exactly as much as another, but they've tried to differentiate it. For example, they assume that most heavier cars will drive more than the very light ones. (shopping car for there, etc). That this is still nonsense in 70% of the cases, unfortunately nothing can be done about it. Subsequently, they also believed that people would drive less with a 25 or 30 year old car. And so little that a total exemption is in order.

      That then there are people who will go wrong / use the scheme, that makes sense. Make a lot of miles in a minute modern car or a very old battleship.

      That the government then wants to do something about it, that is also logical, especially in this time when everything has to be cut.

      Then you also hear people complaining that they are a real old-timer enthusiast because they drive it every day and cherish and use the thing it is intended for. There is no doubt that these are real enthusiasts. As a multiple old-timer owner I know that something like this takes a lot of time and money to keep driving. But if you drive it every day, then there is no reason to be allowed to do that road tax-free. What are you different from the guy with the new astra who also has to pay road tax? Purely because tax has been paid for 25 for years? Well I have news for you, I now pay income tax and I still have to do that in 35 years, that's for sure!

      So let's try to keep the discussion straight: it's just about the mileage. If you meet this requirement, you are entitled to an exemption. If you don't comply, just pay like everyone else. And furthermore: a Mercedes 190d from 1986 can be just as nice a classic as a Rolls from 1935. That's not the point at all. And whether you leave your classic in a garage or drive it every day: that also says nothing about your enthusiast status. kilometers: that's only what matters in the context of exemption or not.

      Of course, in that light, a kilometer charge remains the best, were it not that this becomes reasonably impracticable (read: expensive). 30 / 60 days card is then mi the next best thing.

  3. The damage that our amateur duo Rutte / Samsom has already done to the old-timer industry is enormous. There is a clear link between that one stupid rule in the coalition agreement and the huge drop in turnover and loss of value in the industry. If you also consider that it is an environmental excuse that nobody believes in anymore, there is every reason to present the bill in The Hague. If they still have the guts to bring forward the proceeds for the treasury, then that can also easily be undermined. All in all I think it would be a good idea to send the bill to M Rutte, mailbox 20001, 2500 EA The Hague.

  4. All the solutions that are proposed cost a lot of organization and officials for their implementation. Simply increasing the price of the fuel with an MRB component is better.

    This is better and fairer because of several arguments:

    - New fuel-efficient cars that drive a lot now pay little MRB. But driving a lot pollutes the car a lot.
    - electric cars pay nothing, but the price, which in fact always runs on petrol, does.
    - Old cars pollute a little more than new ones, but if they don't drive much, they pollute and pay little.
    - Holdership tax (MRB) is unfair. Owning a car is a neutral fact. Only when the car is moving does it affect the environment.
    - Civil servants are needed to carry out the MRB. Long-term savings can be booked here by collecting the MRB via fuel.
    - By making fuel more expensive, foreign license plates also pay. They now pollute for free. (to keep the non pollution argument)

    • basically agree with you, but that never works. In the border region (and we have quite a lot in the Netherlands) it goes completely wrong with people who will refuel cheaper VEEEEEEEEEEEEL across the border. Then you should enter European. And that will NEVER succeed, because our mrb is many times higher than Germany or Belgium for example. an EU scheme would mean equally high taxation everywhere, and NL would surrender far too much.
      Wish it could, but that really will never happen.

  5. I'm retired, my VW van and my 2CV too, as well as my old Jawa motorcycle.
    My income is much lower and I am happy with the exemption from MRB, so I can still enjoy my old vehicles! And if I have to pay for this now, I will run into problems. Now they are nice to stay dry in the garage, then they would have to take to the streets.
    They don't drive much; an occasional ride, when the weather is nice. And with the van we go on holiday, it has now driven 91.000 km in 28 years ...
    I am happy with the letters stating that I no longer have to pay MRB.
    Let this stay that way, as long as the license plates are in my name.
    It will of course be a shame for those who buy a classic car from now on, if they do not receive such a letter and fall under the normal arrangement, but also return to old agreements, is unreasonable!

  6. only cars older than 30 or 35 years free of road tax IN ADDITION to a daily car possibly linked to a maximum number of kilometers to be driven. If you drive more than 3000 or 5000 km, an adjusted rate is conceivable, as is the case with insurance. Apparently some assume that everything can be sabotaged, but most oldtimer enthusiasts will not. I do agree that the heavily polluting import of neglected diesels, which are not often driven by enthusiasts every day, should at least pay the full price. In this computer age it does not seem that difficult for the government to separate them from the real enthusiasts.

  7. The idea of ​​linking the tax exemption for classics to a car for daily use, for which tax is paid, seems nice, but I have no need for a “daily driver” at all, because I go to work by bike, rain or shine. I get the weekly shopping with my 280 Mercedes 1984TE, the youngest of my modest collection of classics, which also consists of two Cadillacs, one from 1967 and one from 1968, a Mercury Colony Park from 1965 and a 1974 Plymouth Fury, which I I have owned it for 28 years (if that doesn't make me a lover, then I don't remember). All cars together do not drive more than 5000 km, so my impact on the environment is negligible. Moreover, they are all (dry) on my own land, so they do not occupy any public parking space either.
    If I have to pay the full price of motor vehicle tax for these cars (which I modestly dare to label as true classics), I simply cannot afford it, unless the driver's salary is increased by about 500%…. would never have bought these cars if I had known that the tax exemption would ever be lifted by a greedy government (with the exception of the Plymouth, which I had before there was even an exemption). Selling is not an option, firstly because I don't want to and secondly because the cars would not bring in half of what I ever paid for them. So that will be suspended and occasionally “secretly” driving around (just like before, when I didn't have a driving license yet). I just hope it doesn't come to that… ..
    And the worst thing is: I still voted for the VVD! Mark Rutte, you have cheated!

  8. Plan Gromsound (already 4 weeks back at Fehac by paper letter + stamp provided):

    only HSB exemption if
    1) owner also has a daily personal car that is subject to HSB registration and in service (easy to check with the RDtW register)
    2) owner of the classic car has a classic car policy with all known limitations regarding use and annual mileage
    (easy to check in the ARN, also in Veendam, and the km at the apekool they already know that)
    3) owner is a member of a FEHAC affiliated classic club, and for longer than 2 years. This could be done via the club registers
    are passed on to the almighty RDtW. Anyone who objects to this will only pay HSB.
    4) sliding age limit of 30 year.

    Cons? No drawbacks. And those who basically drive a classic every day (are there a few diehards of it)
    just pay HSB. Ditto young timer enthusiasts, I also just had to wait until the fat guy was free. I got that
    you just have to pay for it. For tax avoiders in the 87er German taxis, it is then no longer fascinating.

    The above can be freely quoted on other forums under reference "Plan Gromsound."
    Thank you.

    • Still the story rattles. If only because of the possibility to pay more for insurance to drive more miles. Besides, what does membership in a club matter? What does that contribute and why should I be obliged to do so? It's cool to talk about “tax avoiders”. Surely people who receive child benefits are also profiteers? Didn't the government come up with this scheme itself?

  9. Nothing is true of the entire holdership scheme if you look at it. If they invoke environmental reasons all the time, then that doesn't make any sense at all with a holding tax. Then it must become a driving tax.
    Furthermore, the distribution keys are as crooked as anything. I can imagine that the weight of a car has something to do with its pollution, and also with road wear. But the difference can never be as large as the difference in tax.

    For example, I have a Honda CRX 1.6 gasoline, 1988, € 296 tax per year.
    I also have a Ford Galaxy TDi from 2002, tax € 1.836 per year.
    This is more than 6x as much. Is it so much more taxing for the busy road network, or for the environment? It seems very strong to me.
    But then of course you say: with that Ford you naturally also drive much more.
    That's right. Why? Because you have to! I much prefer to drive my CRX, but I would be stupid to do that if the Galaxy is collecting dust on my driveway for a huge amount of tax.
    Why do I buy a Galaxy is your question? Because I have to. I have three children, would you put that in a crx? And why then diesel? I often draw heavy trailers. So I have to have the car anyway, and if I do have it, and pay for it, then I have to use it.

    With the current system, I am forced to burden the environment more heavily, while I could just as easily have driven all my commuting with a much lighter, smaller and more unburdened car. That is why I find the exemption for hybrids so ridiculous and unfair: I cannot buy a hybrid at all because a) I cannot hang a trailer and b) do not have the money for it. And c) those things are always in the news because they are nowhere near reaching their grades ...

    And now comes the oldtimer story. How crooked is that again. They do give a MOT exemption for old-timers from before 1960, because they drive little, but now they say that they are harmful to the environment and therefore have to pay the full load tax? Yes, they will certainly be more taxing per kilometer than a Prius or modern Golf, but not in total per year, right ?! They don't make any miles! Then switch to a kilometer charge, that is the only fair way. But not a fixed amount per year and that regardless of your kilometers.
    For example, I have two Renault Goelettes from 1953. A bus and a pickup, both heavy old army vehicles on LPG. For the bus I would soon have to tax € 3.100 per year. I drive an average of 0 km a year in recent years, but imagine that I will drive 1000 a year (I never get that, but good) That is € 3,10 per kilometer.
    The business driver with his Prius, who probably drives at least 30.000 km a year, and pays nothing. Let's increase that “nothing” for the calculation to € 1 per year. That is then € 0,000033 per kilometer.
    My old Renault is apparently 93.000x as polluting per kilometer as a prius. And I have completed all of that very favorably than from the perspective of the government.

    Did they fall completely on the back of their heads? This really isn't about anything anymore.
    Would you take the calculation with a middle class of 1.350kg on gasoline without a crazy environmental exemption, which then runs 20.000 a year, you will still find that I would have to be so polluting per kilometer of 95x.

    If this continues, then all vintage cars can be brought directly to the old iron, and perhaps a few can be sold abroad for a joke.

    So I can either start paying 7.000 euros a year in tax for my oldtimer fleet, or throw away a 15-year investment in those cars, stock up on parts, etc. in one go.
    Anyway a financial loss that blurs all health insurance premiums in one fell swoop.

    Something really needs to be done about this.

    That my CRX from 1988 may not become road tax-free, I can live with that. That another Honda that I have from 1986 may still have to pay taxes again, even though it was tax-free under every old scheme, I can also live with. But a car from 1953 without heating, where the rain enters through the doors, with a top speed of 80 km per hour, that someone even gets it in his stupid head that I get stuck 20.000 km per year living work there , who should be admitted to a psychiatric institution soon.

    And this problem therefore has 95% of the old-timer drivers. The other 5%, those are smart guys who want to get out of it and still use the old-timer for commuting. Although I don't want to call that abuse, but just use it smart. But that loophole, as far as I'm concerned, may be closed.

    I have various proposals for how to do it better:

    - 60-day ticket (or other number of days) (for old-timers, or perhaps also for young-timers or all cars ... because it is all about the user having to pay and not the idler)
    - stretching the age limit, or fixing it to, for example, 1975 or 1980.
    - introduce kilometer charge for all cars
    - put full load into the fuel
    - changing license plate (1 license plate can be used for several cars, but of course never at the same time)
    - kilometer restriction (for old-timers, or perhaps also allow choice for young-timers / all cars, see above)
    - more extensive restriction (as in Belgium: only club events, not evenings, etc)
    - seasonal badge
    - fixed classic car rate, not linked to fuel or weight
    - free suspension and debarking and that without a minimum term is surely the least they can meet us with. those few times a year I then have a kind of one-day registration in principle.

    As long as there is no real mileage-related tax, you should be able to make a choice per car how much you use, just as is customary in insurance. In tiers, 0-5000km, 5000-15000km, 15000-25000 or more than 250000 km per year. And you could enter that for all cars. But to begin with, you could do that with old-timers. If you want to drive a lot, you can, but then you also pay, rightly so. If you don't want to drive much, you still have that choice. If we do not get the choice, then there is only one solution and that is to end all hobbies and cars on the junkyard. does not yield anything for the government, and certainly not for the environment.

    And if everything does not work and they just want to levy on everything, then I still hope for some reasonableness and connection with the APK rules where it is assumed that everything will never really be used before 1960 and so the exemption should be possible. preserve. So for the really old cars that are really unsuitable for daily transport such as my gulettes, but also the old impalas, bel airs, and so on, which are really not used every day, and are all so heavy that they become super unreasonable loaded, especially with their (clean) LPG tank. Because with all these classics, the pain is many times higher than with the MG's, etc. For them the abolition is also unreasonable, but it is still about significantly less money so that reason is still somewhat in it. But for the larger old-timers, the abolition of the exemption will really hit the mark if there is not at least a special rate in its place.

    Hopefully some people will look at it with a reasonable and equitable look, so that a fair solution can be found.

    Finally: they do not believe there in the hague that this measure really yields 150 million…. there is no person who will pay those ridiculous amounts, because then everything will be suspended until a foreign buyer is found for the car. And then the proceeds for the treasury is nil, in fact, all those cars are no longer maintained or restored in NL, the garages that do it make less profit and profit tax, the 21% VAT has no basis anymore because nothing is paid. purchased, the 21% insurance tax is not levied because cars that are not there also do not have to be insured, in short, it is guaranteed to cost money instead of yielding it.

    Time for reflection!

  10. They are doing terrible capital destruction here, counting an average classic car 5000 euro x 410000 vintage cars is such a 2.050.000.000. Euro, what is this still worth, maybe half? So it costs the citizen a lot of money again, and don't forget that the average Mercedes diesel driver who only does so does not have to pay mrb, this must be because otherwise he cannot drive a car, these are mostly people with a small wallet!

  11. Tax on old and antique cars, well, no, it can't be on old cars imported from Germany in recent years, etc., and the real old cars that really come from the Netherlands and have been released here for more than 25 years that is not a solution.
    gr willem

  12. If the problem is: people wrongly use their old-timer every day. Then the solution is
    fairly simple. raise the age limit for tax-free use to 35 years. Cars of 35 years or older are hardly interesting from a cost point of view to use on a daily basis. After that, add 2 year of construction every 1 years. It will then take 20 years before we return to 1986.
    Keep you such an oldie
    summer and winter still on the road then you are a real enthusiast to me. I do think that the MOT should go back to every year. Those thirty euros for an extra MOT are no problem for me if it compares with the motor vehicle tax that you would have to pay in the future. For cars younger than 35 and older than 25 years, you only have to pay the petrol rate if equipped with a LPI installation with a universal catalytic converter in the exhaust. For example, these cars emit only ± 10% of the harmful exhaust gases. And a diesel is not that harmful! At least not for the environment. Well for people and animals who are behind it. Therefore equip all diesels with a particulate filter.
    Imported cars must have 5 years MRB paid and the car must have been in the name of only 1 owner, in the event of an interim sale, those 5 years will start again.

    Such rules ensure that “bread drivers” are rapidly declining.
    And if you come across old car / oldtimer then you can say hello with confidence, because there is a real enthusiast in it.

  13. All classic motor vehicles up to and including 1980 or up to and including 1985 (I leave this under discussion) free of mrb. Then / after that set the limit on the current regulation (25 years and then phasing out) and then only for motor vehicles with an “original” Netherlands registration. In this way you prevent young imports of “polluting” young timers that are used on a daily basis. These people ruin it for the real enthusiasts / collectors who want to drive a bit on a beautiful summer day.
    Although I also understand that the pollution from these cars in this small country around the globe is nothing.

  14. I think a lot of people do not yet realize how the flag is going. “Everything has to stay the same” or “I drive it every day, but I still love it”. The reality is that of the people who now drive HSB free, most will soon no longer be able / allowed to do this.

    As far as I know, the scheme was primarily set up to preserve historical heritage. And historical heritage is not only a Jaguar but also a 2cv. The scheme is also intended to allow Jan Public to see the cars on the street, so it does not concern showroom cars or only cars in excellent condition (new condition).

    But preserving the historical heritage should not include a daily used car. I think the caninet plans clearly indicate that that will be a thing of the past.

    I think it is a good idea if we just start paying according to use, after all you will achieve nothing if you come up with alternatives that do not benefit the state. Because there will only be a limited number of days for classic car enthusiasts, I think a 60-day card is a great plan. What such a card then costs and how you indicate the days is for later care. Let's first see to what extent the cabinets position leaves room to talk about it.

    Greetings,
    Jan

  15. Hello Oldtimer friends!
    If the exemption does indeed expire I will just drive my Jaguar MK2-3.8 for business
    and my other gray license plate car goes out.
    I.e. that all invoices for parts, garage, gasoline, road tax etc. etc. which I now pay privately will go to my business account.
    So I'm going to make more kilometers with my old-timer which will also include:
    More maintenance, more pollution, more consumption, and for me more deduction.
    SO NOT ANY ADVANTAGE TO GET THE GOVERNMENT!
    Government, just fool around! ! !
    And Gert van Vliet,
    You're right!
    Honesty, reliability and truth are not relevant in the Netherlands.

  16. Here in the Netherlands, they continue to take away until nothing can be taken away. Only the rich among us can still enjoy themselves. the poor man who is just able to pursue his hobby has already surrendered enough and the last things will still be made impossible for him.

  17. It is strange that no enthusiasts with the name Ali, Achmed, Yussuf, Hassan ……………… have reported on this protest site yet

    • That is, Wim, because there are only serious people here who have something to say and who are also interested in classics or old-timers. Moreover, we are not a protest site, although we now feel the need to make ourselves heard as a magazine.

  18. I think most alternatives have already been named, so I will not repeat them. Instead, take a different look at the case:

    In the Netherlands, the MRB or holding tax is extremely high. Then it is not strange that people look for ways to get away with it.

    So my proposal: The exemption for old-timers should simply remain that way or even be extended. The MRB will be lowered for environmental reasons. That way you get people in a new (er) car with a smile.

  19. Hello everyone, what are we doing, destroying each other? meaningless, it's about bringing in money, that's what they want, forget about the environmental nonsense, so many old-timers don't drive ... where is this data? just stand by the road for a day and count them, can only suggest one thing, let's all not pay for at least 3 months or rather a year, they try to grab us by the balls, do it back, don't pay!

  20. I'm almost 17 now, and I was planning to drive an old-timer after getting my driver's license. Just every day, those things were not built to stand still in the past either. That aside. What should the future enthusiasts like me start now? The advantage is gone, so I might as well go riding in a dinky toy, many will think. Not me, I just do what I feel like and if, annoyingly enough, I have to pay for my hobby then so be it.

  21. I have THE solution: we install a hydrogen generator in the car. The cell produces hydrogen gas that you let suck in through the air inlet of the engine. The emission of soot is reduced with 80%, the CO2 with 30%, as well as the NOx. Thanks to the incredibly clean combustion, the capacity of your Oldtimer increases with 10% and the fuel consumption decreases with approx. 30%! Really very easy to install and transfer when selling the car on the other. Can be used on gasoline, diesel and often also on LPG and natural gas. 0653.838.064 information. With motor guarantee.

  22. Age limit accelerated to 30 years and extended to 35. Solves the environmental problem, because the diesel and LPG for everyday use will disappear, but the 150 million will not arrive…. It will probably not come in anyway, because many old-timers will be suspended. As long as they don't revoke the suspension option!

  23. Best

    The simple facts:
    - Exemption for the oldtimer will be confirmed by letter after registration and this is personal for the car in question, they cannot take this away from you. It says in black and white that it is legally binding.
    - there are 2 types of oldtimer owners, bread drivers and hobbiester / enthusiast.
    - bread drivers who use their oldtimer as tax-free, almost insurance-free and maintenance only if there is no other way to ruin the image of the oldtimer. In short, use it as a means of transport and throw it away after use.

    Solutions to get rid of the rider faster:
    - Classic car, just like in Australia, also visually inspected by the MOT. That is to say, reject for example a dent in the bumper, damage to the paintwork, missing emblem or decorative strip, broken upholstery, rust bubbles in the painted parts.
    - no longer grant exemptions for cars under 30 years old, such as Germany.

    This creates more employment because the real hobbiest / enthusiast is obliged to keep his car in top condition.
    Also within 2 years (due to MOT duty) we get rid of most old timers kicked off by bread riders who have seriously damaged the image.

    Thanks to this simple measure, the cultural mobile heritage is preserved and the bread riders who make the many kilometers start looking for a suitable means of transport, ie a younger, economical environmentally friendly car which then provides cheap kilometers.

    Then the dutch roads and parking places become much nicer again.

    • I decide myself if I want to drive around with a dent in my bumper. We don't need another can of civil servants for that

  24. The measure to also make owners of classics and old-timers pay MRB was caused by the generous import of 'German diesel Mercedes' that are used every day. So those cars take the place of more recent and cleaner cars. It seems sensible to me to make a distinction between cars for daily use and enthusiasts of old cars who have one or more of those cars in addition to a car for daily use for which MRB is already paid. The hobby cars are then spared. If the limit is also raised to 40 years before there are any MRB-free cars at all, then we will come a long way.

  25. I suggest cars from 25 to 30 years 100e per year. cars from 30 to 35
    75th cars from 35 to 40 years old 50th per year cars from 40 to 45 years old 25th.
    cars over 45 years no mrb.that is my opinion, if it has to be.but if it is a mercedes on diesel it does not matter how old you have to dock.

  26. Why not again something of an 50-day card on an annual basis, but then digitally or by telephone. This way the enthusiasts stay tax free and the people (I admit, like me) who use a Mercedes 190 or the like from years 80 every day just pay taxes.
    Of course I think it is a shame to miss the tax benefit but I am not complaining about it. I keep driving a nice car that I enjoy more than a new hybrid or other characterless car.
    It could have been a bit more gradual, for example now a stop on the import of these cars. Obviously, the reason for these cars is to avoid the tax.

  27. I have a 27 year old BMW imported from Germany. Yes, I am such an asshole who ruins it for the 'real' enthusiast.

    No, I don't have an 2 car, I don't have any 2 incomes either. This is indeed the only car that I own.
    But I certainly did not choose that BMW to save a few tens a month on MRB, my local garage always likes to see me come by.

    If I do drive a car, I prefer not to go in a Korean cookie jar. I want to drive around in something that makes me happy and, above all, that I already dreamed of as a child.

    I think my car is stunning. You may not be able to imagine that as a 'real' enthusiast, but I am 40 and when you consider that you like the cars from your youth then that is a car from the mid 80s for me.

    My BMW is a luxury for me. I enjoy every kilometer of the 4500 that I drive every year. Also from the one time in the month that I unexpectedly still take it to work because the trains are not running again.

    500 euros per year MRB is a lot of money. I'll say half an exhaust. But you don't think I'm going to get rid of the car I've been dreaming of 25 for years?

    Let all those 'real' enthusiasts here who shave all young-timer drivers over the same tooth scratch their heads before handing out black pete. Where do you get the arrogance to judge someone like that? How do you determine what a 'real' enthusiast is?

    You have old-timer enthusiasts in all shapes and sizes. And from 2014 they are all the Sjaak.

  28. Alternatively Euro 100 per year because we also use the roads. Exclude diesel cars because they are usually used to avoid road tax. Raise the age to 30 years. Don't get angry it's just an idea.

  29. I have an alternative proposal. Give old-timer owners the right to suspend their car (for free). When people start driving the old-timer, first register online with RDW.
    Advantage is only paid if it is driven. The daily (diesel, LPG,) old-timer users then quickly quit. The enthusiast can occasionally continue to ride at affordable costs.

  30. I am very motivated to take part in a protest against this with old-timers to The Hague to show that this affects a lot of old-timer enthusiasts.
    I hope that someone or an organization takes the initiative for this.

    • I fully agree with this, with everyone going to the hague and arriving there en masse
      let us hear and see that we are not going to pick this up

  31. The problems have come by setting the age limit on 25 year and so you now no longer get real enthusiasts. But merceders riders who ride it every day and that can never be the intention.

    • Nonsense, except that the current regulation goes to 30 years, there are also restrictive measures for cars that fall between 25 and 30 years. Moreover, there are enough enthusiasts for, for example, a Mercedes 500 SEL from 1986? There is nothing wrong with that

      • Once!! I also have a completely original 560 SEL (W126) from 1986. And no, I don't drive it on LPG and no I don't drive it daily. I find it absurd that I have to apologize for my classic!

        I have never received a negative response from anyone on the street. People rush to tell me how beautiful he is. Only yesterday, by someone in a current S-class. He called my 560 SEL the most beautiful S-class. And I agree with him.

        The only negative comments I read come from these kinds of discussions !! The 'so-called' oldtimer enthusiasts. Who call me a tax evader, fraudster etc.

  32. It is about meeting everyone, even those who are not fond of the oldtimers, otherwise you will only run into a wall.
    There are 2 types of classic car owners: 1. the collector who drives relatively little and probably owns a normal car and 2. The daily driver, who usually diesel or runs on LPG.

    Where did it go wrong: cars from the mid-80s are “too modern” and therefore too suitable for daily transport. But of course there are also real classics among them.

    Proposal: cars before 1980 are usually not used on a daily basis, a full exemption could continue to exist without any problems.

    Cars after 1980 that are 30 years and older (within the current transitional arrangement) would have to pay the fuel surcharge. This immediately makes it less interesting to drive a (large) LPG or Diesel car, but the blow is not yet enormous for those who “already drive it”. New purchase / import is discouraged. The petrol drivers will not drive much and they are therefore just the "collectors / few drivers" with exemption.

    After 2 year, conduct an evaluation (to keep opponents away) with a shift in control (but no total abolition).

  33. Only exemption for a classic car if you also own another (modern) car and pay MRB for it. A maximum in the number of kilometers makes little sense. With classics it is so simple to manipulate, counter cable loose, counter reverse etc.

    • The only “fair” change to the existing regulation would indeed be: Every owner of an old-timer must always own an MRB-compulsory car for daily use. I think this obligation was totally FORGOTTEN when introducing the exemption. With the classic car insurance this obligation has always been the same.! In this way you prove to be a real enthusiast, because in this way you can protect your dream car for the harsh climate in our country and only brighten up the street scene among the gray masses with good weather. !!! Minimum age anyway 30 years.! Oldtimers are no longer born …… .. they exist ..

      • The idea of ​​linking a tax-free classic to a newer car on the 1 name for which mrb must be paid also makes no sense. There is always a family member,
        friend or acquaintance with a newer car that will put your young timer in your name, (a kind of surrogate mother) so that you can still nicely chug around daily without having to pay mrb. Driving a car that you do not have in your name is not punishable.

        Jan.

        • I think it's a good plan. You have a point that you get that kind of frills, but you can counter that. In England, for example, you may not just get into any car that you feel like, only in one that you are registered with. I thought 🙂

  34. Why not just abolish the MRB for the most part for everyone! in other countries it is also possible !! Link the MRB to the fuel price, whoever drives a lot pays a lot (then you immediately pick up all those Dutch trucks that have been put on a Polish license plate for tax reasons.If necessary, link a compensation scheme for (in the Netherlands) bus, taxi and transport companies. and the POLLUTER PAID !! When it really comes to the environment !!! This concept is just another common grabbing where it is easy to get, namely the (classic) cash cow. That the use of “classic” mercedes 250D or BMW 524TD with which more than 20.000 km per year is driven, I agree, but do not take the real enthusiast who with his Fiat 500 (or Austin Healey etc etc) drives less than 1000 km per year.

    danté

    • That will not work because the current tax (excise duty, provincial surcharges, VAT) on gasoline is already so high. If that becomes even more, more people will refuel abroad and the government will lose that income. In total, an increase will yield less and less.
      In the Netherlands, all car taxes are simply higher than in neighboring countries (BPM, motor vehicle tax, gas tax, etc.).

    • Dear Dante, that option will never materialize because it would be fair and just, but the robbers that make up our government, this costs money! It is no longer a question of whether something is "fair", "just" or "better", it is just about getting more and more money. That this is all over the backs of the working Netherlands, "she" does not care, as long as it does get in! Your idea is of course great and a real government, one that is there for the people, would immediately say yes to it. The longer and the louder we make our voices heard, the closer it gets to an uprising breaking out, I think that's the only solution! We must continue to work for our rights!

  35. Keep it simple: The RDW can easily enter the following: a classic is only MRB-free if there is a modern car in the same name for which MRB is paid. After all, you can only drive one car at a time and only burden the environment with one car.

    • Making another first car mandatory and then having your classic MRB exemption is a bad thing for me. You assume that you need a daily car. Those who do a lot with bicycle and public transportation (and do not need a daily car) would suddenly have to pay MRB for their classic car, while their neighbors would not have to. That's not fair, because they use their classic in the same way.

  36. Last year, 14 billion liters of fuel were sold to the pump in the Netherlands.
    If the government raises 1 cents per liter of extra, it will generate 140 million.
    Almost the same amount, only much fairer. Whoever pours the most pays the most.

  37. Doesn't have to be all that difficult.
    Indeed. real enthusiasts who only make 'a few' kilometers per year should not suffer.
    The following scheme can be introduced quickly (and administratively quickly and cheaply):

    If a classic (of a certain) age minimak X years is in someone's name, then the MRB exemption applies. As an example I mention 3 years by name at least here. In order not to 'touch' the real enthusiasts who have just purchased a classic, you could consider a kind of transitional arrangement / 'sliding scale' As of January 1, 2013 at least 1 year in name, from 1 January 2014 at least 2 years in name and per January 1, 2015 and later at least 3 years by name.

    In this way you prevent abuse and everyone is satisfied! Trade there repairs for enthusiasts can continue. The only drawback is that when you buy a classic, you have to wait 'a little'. The 'exploiters / benefactors' really don't wait, true enthusiasts do!

    • it seems to me not so difficult, until the yellow license plate everything tax free. 1978.
      Then simply pay taxes. The true classic enthusiast who can continue to experience his hobby. And the cheap driving types in large diesels and or LPG cars that have to pay.
      or do I think very briefly through the corner?
      I think that is a rule that is clear to everyone blue license plate is tax-free, and the yellow has to pay tax. (if necessary with a construction year discount percentage)

      grtzz rob

    • Look, this is the problem. We are going to think along with the government for a solution. The solutions are already there and signed by the government and umbrella automobile associations (FEHAC, etc.). signed in 2011. All with their full mind. Now, less than a year later, those signatures mean nothing. That's the point. Unreliability of the government. You talk to each other for years, come out. and then after one year there is a unilateral cancellation of the agreement concluded.
      Now the best deal was 31 December 1986 and after that nothing becomes old-timer. so 1 January 1987 has had bad luck. Then people will not look for loopholes in the law either. And that's what's going on now. People complain about those old diesels from Germany.
      They are right. But look who and what drives it. Just the best mesh finders out there. That too is a flaw, the indiscriminate issue of license plates on an ex-EU car that comes here for a license plate at the RDW. All there before you get a license plate are MOT worthy.
      Even then it stops all those old diesels. We have seen them with TUV from Germany of 10 years old, stolen car without locks and rear window without purchase papers from Fr. Go back on the road without inspection or MOT. MOT at the "reliable" cousin around the corner, and just drive.
      The RDW should become a much more important axis in the whole, they have the knowledge to separate good and evil from each other. And with every subsequent MOT fixed sample SAMPLE. But now I do it too, think along.
      There is a covenant and it must be and remain that way. They have put a signature under it with all their might.

  38. I have not read all the responses, so perhaps someone has already posted my idea.

    My proposal: Completely abolish the MRB and levy taxes via the fuel.

    Explanation: If you drive little, or if you make little use of the infrastructure, you pay little and many drivers pay more. Moreover, the government does not have to collect X-million times a month and remind X-thousand times defaulters. Instead, they only have to collect the tax money from the fuel providers and there are considerably fewer than motor vehicle payers. A mountain of civil servants from the MRBincasso service department can be deployed for better things.

    All this can be implemented budget-neutral for the government. The real oldtimer enthusiast will hardly notice it, because, for example, a quarter on the fuel, an oldtimer enthusiast who has such a car for a few journeys per year costs only a few tens and that seems more fair than a few hundred for a car. which stands still under a sheet for most of the year.

    For the greens among us: it also encourages choosing an economical model for your daily (commuting, children to school, shopping) traffic

    (I will also indicate the disadvantage: Pump owners along national borders are losing competitiveness. And as an entrepreneur (in another industry) I find that seriously annoying)

  39. I think introducing a 60-day ticket applicable to multiple cars is the most reasonable, which means that driving an old-timer every day is paid and that you can change cars, which clearly separates hobby and business use. This also means that the age of the cars can be lower, eg 15 years.

    • I was thinking about a 100 day card. Then you can tour every weekend. If you do a rally, you “pay” with 1 or 2 weekends not to drive.

    • That motor vehicle tax exemption was set up for the hobbyist at the time. In very many cases, 500km is the max that is driven with such cars. I can imagine that people who use 25 year-old cars for daily use with an LPG installation or diesel engine do this for personal gain. We are therefore no longer talking about hobby use, so a different approach is desirable. A car that is used as a hobby has a limit of 5000km per year. If you drive more, you pay motor vehicle tax. If you drive demonstrably less (the APK point of departure), then exemption applies. How to maintain this? A seal of the km counter and the associated components. Performed by an APK master with enamel paint if necessary. As owner you are, of course, responsible that the seal is complete
      For any repairs to these parts, it is necessary to have an APK master break the seal and to have the seal applied again after repair. Of course this is a rough diamond but such a solution makes it possible to distinguish the true hobbyist.

  40. determine the load based on the driven km and region where one drives this one also does with certain insurance me. Hobby does not have to be paid that expensive. Daily commuting is normal for people to pay taxes for it. There was also a lot of storm about abolishing many gray license plates and it turned out to be a storm in a large glass of water. Now a lot of noise.

  41. It is logical that measures will also follow here. my proposal: all cars that are currently 30 years and older and have a Dutch registration, will be subject to an imposition of motor vehicle tax of, for example, 4 months per year. Import is only allowed at immigration of the owner of the car. If you do want to import, just pay mrb.

  42. The MRB is not fair in itself, because I personally do not drive more than 7000 km per year, but I do not have to dock as much as someone who drives a tonne per year and therefore contributes much more to wear and tear or environmental pollution.

    Furthermore, the old-timer scheme is just as abused as the gray license plate at the time. Then an Alfa Spider was put on a gray license plate.
    With the old-timer, people see a classic whole stripping and rebuilding modern under the skin. That should be prevented. A BMW 2002 with an M5 block is not a classic in my eyes. I could accept changes that promote safety. In my opinion, the German System can be introduced in broad terms, based on the purity of the classic as a basis.

  43. The scheme can best be extended from 25 to 30 year as the current scheme is now, then we are again in step with the surrounding countries.
    Instead of the MRB, enter a fixed annual fee of, for example, 200 Euro per car, but that is also money to be paid and you prevent all kinds of suspension and transfer antics from the owners.
    That immediately generates 65 million euros.

    If the scheme is abolished, then I believe that ALL (water) road users except cyclists and rowing boats will have to pay MRB.

  44. I have 4 old cars, a classic from 1962 and three young timers from the eighties because I just think they are technically beautiful and nice to tinker with. I think I drive less than 1500 km a year in all cars together, so this will mean the end of my hobby in such a way. A ridiculous plan, therefore, which certainly will never yield the intended amount as far as I am concerned and which I also feel the pain of all entrepreneurs who have to earn their income with this.

  45. PS: in this forum please can we not classify the person with a youngtimer as a fraudster, tax evader or something similar. Our government has adopted this regulation itself. People act accordingly. No rule is violated.

    Will we also classify those who drive 130 on the highway today as antisocial, environmental consumers and the like? Or someone with a diesel? Or with a lease car? For the environment, please address the latter group. Unlimited mileage for a fixed amount per month !! That would be different if they also had to pay per kilometer.

    Hopefully made my point!

  46. It seems that here a lot of people are posting their comments regarding their own interests. Anyone who owns a car from 1976 thinks that the scheme should apply to cars aged 35 and older. Those who have an old-timer for daily transport think that nothing should be changed and those who occasionally drive their young-timer think that a limited number of kilometers should be driven. And there are many more shapes to discover.

    I am 30 years old myself and bought a young timer. A car that I drive about 6.000 km and have a lot of fun with. I have been saving up for this car for a long time and enjoy it every time I see / drive it. It's really not cheap to drive. I lost about 50 cents per kilometer (petrol and maintenance). I'm talking about it because I enjoy the car! At the moment I cannot afford to pay EUR 1.200 per year. My car will also halve in value, which costs me about 6.000 euros !!

    Compare it with the housing market. Nobody would accept it if everyone abolished the mortgage interest deduction in one go for everyone !! People can no longer pay their mortgages, have to sell their houses and are left with a residual debt !! That also happens here. People make balanced and long-term choices. As a government, you have to consider that! Don't make people the victim of your own regulations.

    I therefore think that the current old-timer owners should not be the victims. New cases can make new choices. If you want to keep the trade in certain vintage cars, you can set an age limit on that!

  47. Has the government ever wondered how much capital goes through the well in this way? I myself have 3 vintage cars of which 2 from before 1960 and a (sorry) Mercedes 280 sl. from 1984.
    This has recently been appraised of this amount, I can easily debit 10.000 euros.
    If there is no arrangement for the true enthusiast, I see a huge potential of labor (read jobs) being lost.
    Every old-timer enthusiast, VVD there and PVDA there, with a sense of cultural heritage, should really sound the alarm in The Hague.

  48. In principle, the tax rates in the Netherlands are much higher than the neighboring countries, excessively high, but I think it is not so much the MRB that I have difficulty with, but with intervening under false pretenses in the lifestyle of many people where it is almost it is made impossible to keep a nice collection, after all the naming of the retention tax says something about its definition and in fact this is contrary to the principle: “the user pays”. That said, it is reasonable in my opinion for a user to pay proportionately for the use of public utilities. It is obvious that the current regulation does not provide for this. As far as I am concerned, this should be considered.

    By levying MRB on old and young timers, enthusiasts and collectors are burdened far too heavily. It doesn't matter to me how out of a car it is. As long as you use it daily, it is reasonable that MRB is paid for it, but these rates are far too high for occasional use. With my E28 M5 from 1985, hardly any 2000-3000km is driven per year. According to many advocates against the abolition of the MRB here, it does not have an MRB exemption due to age, but it is fair to say that I think this is a bit of preaching for my own parish. I would much rather see an integral discussion that binds lovers of old and young timers and sets off for The Hague as a front.

    Personally, I sent an email to the VVD group in the 2e room in which I expressed my indignation at the abolition of the MRB exemption. I also asked them how they thought to spare the enthusiast.

    Actually, that also applies to my other car, an E34 M5 from 1990. I only use this one a few times a year and bark it in the winter months. It should be clear that this car has historically much more value than many a much older classic; after all, younger cars can also fall under historical heritage.

    In addition, I find it unreasonable that campers only have to pay MRB for a small period per year, but can still hit the road all year. Here, in my opinion, the principle of equality is violated, certainly because many classic and young cars are used much less.

    In my opinion, the solution lies in limiting the use in combination with a low rate. Do you want to use a classic or young timer every day; excellent, but also at the full MRB rate. Are you a fan and take part in meetings and events, you may fall in a lower rate, exemption for my part to keep it reasonable. A special license plate as they have with our Eastern neighbors is a workable compromise in that regard.

  49. for the Mercedes, Volkswagen and other cars with diesel engines from Eastern Block countries that are ripe for the scrap mountain and that are nevertheless registered, after which they are massively revised (donor a 190d and w124, golf 2 mercedes g class of 1992 and 1993 or younger) that are in better condition for little buys and thus daily driving a “classic” I think it is right that measures are taken or license plates are taken.
    I myself have countless examples where this conversion happened with the sole purpose of driving a road tax free with an old stink diesel, also happens a lot with other brands including land rover, vw, volvo.
    recently seen an audi a6 (first a6 from 1994) where an audi 100 was made by transferring a vin number.
    for the true enthusiast this is very acidic and there should be a fuel surcharge on all vehicles other than petrol on all vehicles, the 25 year limit freeze at eg 1986

    Because in the Netherlands a license plate number belongs to a chassis no it will be a problem to make a change of number plate.
    I also cannot perform a km registration.
    it will come down to the fact that I will have to suspend or clean up some classics, where I will drive 1500 km on average by car

  50. The only fair thing is to levy taxes on kilometers driven, in other words, the one who drives a lot pays a lot, but then the gasoline price must remain at the European level. And that is where the bottleneck The Hague is receiving so much mrb that they do not want it, they only want more because their billions of spending policy has become unmanageable (especially Brussels).

    I would like to be informed where the gentlemen civil servants can make savings, they have to get rid of the working method, if I come up short then we will levy some extra ...

    It is legal theft to have to pay € 166 per 2.4 months road tax for an Alfa Romeo 413 3 JTD and that is one of the 3 cars for which I pay motor vehicle tax. (They actually have to thank me for that extra cents ....)

    Incidentally, I have 2 vintage cars for which I do not pay mrb, but they barely drive 750 km per year.

    In summary The Hague needs money so they raise taxes, in Greece protests are massive, in NL we keep talking and paying.

  51. Hello, they have to stay away from the vintage cars, and let the farmers pay 1000 euros per year with the track tower and cranes, why are they allowed to ride freely where we suffer most on the roads, and the hobby cyclists can have 100 euros paid per bike so I mention more things.

    Have the cabinet crash again. they are bandits.

  52. I think the digital 60-day vintage car card is the fairest solution. The age limit could be set at 50 years. The LPG / diesel surcharge as it is now is not that bad at all, enter it for cars between 30 and 50 years, for example. Cars under the age of 30 would then have to pay the normal road tax. Taking the annual mileage as a starting point is asking for fraud. So don't.
    What do people think of a different idea: exempt real old-timers (older than 50 years), as well as cars for which road tax has been paid in the Netherlands for 25 years. Prevents misuse of import cars.
    I myself have a Mercedes from '76 that is not on LPG and has been in the Netherlands for 2 years and with which I drive 5000 km / year.

  53. If both parties are so upset about the environment (which I tend to doubt because the main objective seems to me to be raking in even more money), then the tax exemption could best be linked to the installation of a LPG installation. Good for the LPG sector, needs of the class industry, good for enthusiasts and good for the environment.
    A maximum mileage could apply to diesels, whereby the inspection task could be outsourced to the insurer. Imports could also be limited by levying an allowance on cars over 25 years old

  54. Everyone is just running around and sick about others being ruined for them.
    It is only the government that thinks ultra short-sighted. What do you think they miss out on because 400 oldtimer companies might fall over, a lot of benefits are paid, minde ring revenues come from excise duties etc etc ..
    Those people in the hague, they really don't think.

    in the north many people have vintage cars, but they really do not drive to work with it.
    Almost everyone has a fairly recent car for commuting or long distances.
    It is crazy that you pay for possibly 4 cars but can drive in 1 at a time.
    The whole idea of ​​road taxation in the Netherlands has become so outdated and stupid that it makes no sense at all. It's supposed to be about how many miles you travel and how much you pollute.
    But the only parameters are fuel type and weight.

    I've been amazed for 20 years now that the government is putting people in danger citroen ax, suzuki alto and related ultra-light carts hunt because everyone who is thrifty drives such piggy banks.
    Road tax goes on weight !!

    They are really not safe for young families with children, but the government is also not good at all for people, the government is only there for itself and to collect ever larger and more and more money .... everyone sees that except the government itself .

    • Sorry but a lot of people see that too, most of them even like it!

      I am against the 60-day card and all those awkward alternatives of 50 or 30! A line has already been drawn last year and they should stick to it. Due to the mrb scheme, many people will also drive light but also economical cars, which means that there will be less refueling and of course the government will increase fuel prices ...

      As a citizen, we must not accept and play along but put it against! protest! Has been enough !!!!

  55. If you have a car for daily use, you don't have to pay an MRB for your classic car.
    The classic car insurance also has such a rule, you need the license plate of your daily car
    give up. With the government it is even easier everything is in the MRB system.
    As an extra rule you can still think that your classic MOT free, therefore, is no MRB, is also in
    the system at the RDW.All simple solutions.
    There are many more arguments, but yes, the gentlemen who devised the measures
    no hobbies themselves.Greetings Wim.

    • I have three old Maico motorcycles and a Honda that are tax-free, in addition I also have a Honda for which I just pay taxes, which I use the most.
      of the Maico's I use one a few times a year to participate in a Maico or oldtimer meeting, that often comes a year at a joint 500 to 600 kilometers
      they would then come to me converted to 3 euros per kilometer, which is very much for that little use. Also the Honda that is tax-free is used no more than 1000 a 1500 kilometers per year so converted at least one euro per kilometer.
      So I make the most kilometers with the engine for which I do pay taxes.
      So the system of a daily vehicle whether this is a car or motorcycle and in addition some old-timer vehicles for the hobby must remain affordable.
      if I have to pay taxes for my hobby bikes, I will have to sell something, but then they will not pay any more because who wants to buy bikes if they already have to pay a large amount of taxes for it.
      So agree with the statement that you need a vehicle for daily use in addition to the old-timer.

  56. This was to be expected. The number of profiteers has become so large that it had to be noticed by the government and therefore measures had to be taken. The Knac, ANWB, Fehac and other interest groups must be careful not to exaggerate and therefore not to stand up for the profiteers. They too must make a distinction between the profiteers and the real enthusiasts. For the true enthusiast it is of course sad but with all the costs that a hobby oldtimer already costs that tax can still be added. Then the chaff is separated from the corn.
    To propose a simple measure, the age limit could be postponed to 35 year, then 90% of the profiters will be dropped anyway.

    • This was also promoted by the government itself… Profiteers are people who live on someone else's pocket… I wouldn't call them that… Rather smart people who use what the law offers them …… .And we all don't do this , by saving stamps, whining about discounts, keeping receipts and other such nonsense.

  57. The FEHAC has made great efforts in the past year for a new scheme that came into effect 1-1-2012. In the first 5 months of this year, imports fell by 39% as a result of the new arrangement. So this one seems to work for the youngtimer diesels
    The argument of the environment does not make sense because the share of the old-timers to the total emission is 0,33% The measure that increased the speed to 130kpu has the consequence that there is 2,5% more CO2 emissions and that one can accept that 0,33% no argument to be.

    The current rule that paid off must therefore continue to exist.

    The true old-timer enthusiasts maintain their car for days on end, the profit-makers only want to drive cheaply and they will disappear in a few years due to lack of maintenance due to daily use.
    If something needs to be done then for new cases, so years of construction after 1987, The real old-timer owner should not be the victim of the fact that he preserves the cultural heritage.
    An enguete in Belgium shows that 91% of the owners drive less than 5000Km. Moreover, the majority of the owners are a modal earner and they will refrain from driving by car with rising costs.
    People forget the revenues generated by, purchase of VAT, by parts and repairs, visit fairs, tour drives with hotel visits, books and magazines, you name it.
    Look how many people come if an old-timer festival is organized somewhere and how much non-owners enjoy this spectacle.
    The fact that 9 months after a new regulation has come into effect, it is threatened to be changed again shows an unreliable government. There are people who have waited for this new legislation and only then decided to act and who are in trouble, not to mention the total loss of value of the old-timer fleet. There will certainly be cars that you can no longer lose on the pavement. A disaster for traders who have their site full.
    The old scheme must in any case be maintained for the existing cases.
    The calculation for the expected yield of 153 million. certainly does not apply. The oldtimer owner has an average of 3 cars. My cars are stored in the winter and that is the case at 90%. Then they will no longer drive all the cars, so the proceeds may still be a fifth. Added to this is loss of income and a lot of unemployment in the industry

    I have a normal car for which I pay taxes and when I drive my oldtimer I don't drive it. The distances that I have driven this year with my 3 oldies are 26Km, 1600Km and 2200Km Two of them are already in winter storage until April 2013.

  58. Unreliable government that changes rules during the game. That first.
    And then about the alleged abuse of the regulations in this country, as suggested by some. Rules are well thought out in advance by clever heads of government who take everything into account. These rules are therefore as they are and anyone who wants to can make use of the scheme, in this case the exemption from the holding tax. So there is no abuse, just use. The people who are annoyed by those 'polluting old battleships' make a different choice themselves. They too can (or possibly could in a year's time) make use of the exemption. Freedom of choice is important. Nor do I get annoyed by people who organize their lives differently than I would. As long as they stick to the applicable rules!

    If something does have to change, then in my opinion the following should happen from January 1, 2014: anyone who puts a classic in his name from that date will automatically pay tax. In this way, holders who already own a car in their name are spared with an exemption, and the rules regarding these people are not changed. In this way, the government can show that it still wants to appear somewhat reliable. Anyone who would like to purchase a classic after that date therefore knows in advance what to start. This way, all tinkerers who lie under their toys every week can continue with their hobby. Moreover, in this way companies that specialize in classics can take into account other circumstances in good time. There are still automobiles for this industry that need to be serviced. Finally, the import of old cars is discouraged because the tax advantage is no longer there. Ultimately, after a few years, the real classics remain and no injustice is done to the proud owners of those beautiful cars.

  59. I am afraid full reversal will no longer be possible, but why is there not just a proposal to grant the exemption for a vehicle of 30 years and older only if the license plate holder / user has at least 1 vehicle in his / her name? on which motor vehicle tax MRB is paid. Then we separate the daily users from the enthusiasts, just as it was the intention of this measure, and the Dutch state still has some extra income and the classic industry continues to exist.

  60. the government should have intervened earlier
    now they are conquering the real hobbyite
    I own 4 dafjes with which I ride 2500 km at most
    so we are the cigar again
    willy

  61. Don't be complicated and come up with all kinds of exceptions for certain groups.
    Abolish the holder's tax and bpm on all cars.
    Appoint a chief in Europe and ensure that a fuel price policy is implemented in Europe from which each member state receives its tax revenues.
    If you drive a lot or consume a lot, you also pay a lot.
    The possession must not be punished.

  62. Not surprising that the scheme is being overhauled because it is being abused on a large scale by using young timers for daily transport. The true enthusiast is now being punished for that abuse.
    The objective of the scheme was to encourage the conservation of heritage. In practice, however, the scheme was used to avoid taxation.
    Completely abolishing it is unreasonable, but it seems to me that change to combat the abuse is appropriate.
    The first thought is to record a year of construction and to keep it that way. Then link that to the APK scheme, so for example complete exemption up to year 1960 and quarterly rate up to year 1980.
    The second thought is to establish a list of cars that qualify for exemption.

  63. I would like to put the year on 1975 and leave it this way.
    Everything older is tax-free and so you only keep the real old-timers, which the scheme was intended for at the time. These cars are used very little and the environmental argument is also rejected.
    Everything younger is young timers and therefore unfortunately fall outside the scheme.

  64. The website arrives somewhat garbled, so that I cannot read the other responses. So it may be that I am suggesting something that the others have already mentioned. I do think that the current regulation should change. You now see far too many old cars driving around with new license plates, just to evade the tax. The scheme was never intended for that. I therefore think that the regulation should be again as it was originally intended, namely an exemption for old-timers and classics. You could do this by linking the tax for this category to the number of kilometers driven per year, assuming that classics and oldtimer drive something between 5000 and 15000 km per year. You would then not be able to lift anything up to 5000 km, from 5000 - 10000 25%, to 15000 50% and above 100%.

  65. Have the pleasure to have a number of classics / old-timers in the shed that I make limited use of. Of course, I also prefer to see the current scheme continued. Let that be clear. If the intention is to catch more motor vehicle tax or avoid dirty daily cars, paying motor vehicle tax for those days when driving seems to be the best solution. If I add up all the rides with my six classics then I am somewhere between 20-30 days pj. Since there are also a few heavier cars in between and two with LPG, I think about 100 Euro. You have to. Previously, the possibility was already mentioned to report your driving day digitally in advance. Seems like a good option. I don't believe in measuring miles. It is possible to commit fraud and presumably requires the purchase of an expensive device for all my cars. If such a thing is technically possible at all (think of 6 volts etc.) It would be quite a drama to install catalytic converters compulsory. Moreover, I already know for sure that it will simply never be available for half of my cars. This is apart from the costs. Has anyone else thought of those beautiful heavy classic trucks? These were once affordable through the corporate rate, but are now in the hands of private individuals. So that will not work.
    In short. Rather leave everything that way and otherwise only tax actual use per day.

    Sincerely,

    Wim

  66. I would prefer not to change anything. If you have to.
    In Austria you can use 3 cars with one license plate. If you don't use one, you can put it on the other and drive it. This includes the cars that can be used daily. And we pay for that anyway.
    I myself have 3 Steyr Puch Haflingers. Fortunately, they do not weigh very much, but that will cost me 700.- euros per year, and that for no 1000 km (collectively)

  67. You could just wait for this. As soon as more people use (or abuse) a scheme, the government kills the scheme again. Just think of the gray license plates from a few years ago. As soon as the HSB (holder tax instead of MRB) exemption is abolished, I will completely suspend my collection of classics. Among them are cars over fifty years old that drive less than 1000 km a year on petrol. I do daily transport with a public transport card (not a student) and I also have a car that I already pay for. So I'm afraid the arrangement will have little effect. A kilometer charge with exemption for the first 2500 km seems like a smart solution to me.

  68. Thinking along, NIKS thinking along is exactly what they want. That citizens go looking for an alternative, and then the year is changed year after year until they have what they wanted. It must remain as it is now. We have a Toyota Corolla KE 70 4drs from 1979 that 1 drives with every year. and that is a maximum of 100Km. It is true that if road tax has to be paid for that, we will suspend the car and go the same way as before without road tax. Gambling that you would not encounter control along the way. Nice and old-fashioned.

  69. I don't need an alternative, the arrangement was as it was, the admission requirement for old-timers had already been tightened, and everything that comes after 86 is personally not that interesting to me anyway.
    everyone is pissed about the bread riders who drive around with smoky diesels, who fill the greenhouse every time they refuel, not unimportantly.
    however, the category of cars used by this small group is noticeably shrinking, and those who do not carry out structural maintenance must also bring their barrel to the scrapyard sooner or later ...
    this solves this problem automatically.
    the import regulation that currently applies is also counterproductive, a motorcycle / scooter must run at the inspection, brakes, lighting and horn must function, a car does not even have to enter the RDW on its own, license plate is only issued after a administrative act provided, after that you just have to find a flexible MOT farmer and you can drive fast.
    if stricter requirements are imposed on the “oldtimers” during import, all the wheat is separated from the chaff.
    in germany you don't get a H license plate on a barrel if the car has reached the age of 30 years.
    the government barks and the average Dutchman is already willing to surrender, hands off acquired rights !!!

    • This gentleman gets it. We have paid a lot of attention to it together with Jhim van Bemmel (ex PVV). It has even been a one item today Oct 2011. Answer from the Minister that Brussels is not allowed. That cars from the EU should not be checked. Our US car Mercedes 300SDL 1986 WITH CATALIZER and PARTICULATE FILTER (still to be inspected) is cleaner than most cars driving here in the Netherlands, New or not. So when I start paying road tax, that smoldering diesel is suddenly not dirty anymore.
      No excuse about using the roads, all those electric cars that don't pay road tax sometimes fly them, and where does the electricity come from. At coal plants where lignite and coal is used. And how come here in Amsterdam, with dirty old ships that run on fuel oil, and when they hit the accelerator once, the entire harbor looks black. The entire Netherlands can drive it for a year with its old cars.
      Owner of Toyota Corolla KE 70 4drs 1979, Mercedes 450 SL 1976, Mercedes 280 SE 1980 Mercedes 300SDL 1986, Mercedes 300TDT 1985. All in New condition and MOT approved.

  70. let the kilometer charge simply pay per driven km old or new car then everything is a rate but think my oldtimer can find it,
    since the hobby are miles and there is a fee to pay is not so bad.
    This is not only a good arrangement for the oldies, but also for the people who rarely use their "young" car

  71. A measure that is easy to implement and easy to check: lift a diesel and LPG surcharge on all cars, including those from before 1 Jan 1987. Possibly supplemented with the immediate transition to 30 years for exemption from the basic motor vehicle tax .

    Advantage: the true hobby rider is largely left out of the picture. No additional regulatory burden. The tax-free frequent riders / bulk polluters, especially Mercedes-Benz with construction years 1982 to 1986, are unfavorable and will look for a more economical, cleaner and cheaper alternative.

    • I don't mind about this gentleman that he shaves all Mercedes driving together. I have 1 Old Mercedes as the gentleman claims that I drive daily. I also pay more than 800 Euro for insurance at the KNAC. all my other cars are in winter storage and they mainly ride with the rides of the VIA-nh. Like last Sunday's Kool ride. Coincidentally, not with one of the 1-day cars but with the 300 TDT because we knew that we would drive through the head of North Holland through the blubber of the farmers and rain. And I do not risk my beautiful cars. So sacrificed the old station wagon. So I don't want to be compared to any other Moroccan who has brought an old wreck from Germany and goes along the road for cheap with a WA of 60 Euro. My cars are in excellent condition and they are Mercedes because I have been driving Mercedes since 1975. She then bought new but the American versions are better than the EU versions. Have done a trip to Toyota for a period from very small to the very largest that were available. But still back to the “old” nest which is called Mercedes.
      And not for the cheap. Because maintenance and purchase in the US is expensive if you don't go for a demolition car.

  72. If the environment was the real reason, which I could agree with, there is technically much more possible.
    Why not require a catalyst as is customary in Germany. The industry provides work, which adds value from a technical point of view. Optimize the situation with electronically controlled advances in ignition, use the technology of today.
    In my 1973 Chevrolet I connected a broadband lambda sensor to the fuel supply and my air-fuel ratio meter reads how the engine is doing. My Iridium spark plugs spark better than those in the Panda of the Green Left alderman ...

    To measure is to know, just calling out populist perhaps jealousy-driven ideas is not a reason for unrestricting legislative changes.
    The PvdA will still receive some unexpected response from the immigrant supporters. On Friday afternoon around the mosque, the tax-free Mercedes has long since replaced the former gray-numbered van.

    In times of crisis, turning a thriving industry in one fell swoop is not really wise .. you will have bought a nice Suburban last month ..

    Anyway, just have ALL vehicles undergo a soot test and four-gas measurement, and the irritation about stink diesels is a thing of the past.

  73. 60-days card or other limited and determined use (for example, via NAP mandatory determination of mileage to certain maximum agreement within exemption and / or logging in digitally with the tax authorities (we already do) for registering driving day via account. Reporting high fines for absence.
    Maintain a transitional arrangement from 25 to 30 years (for cars from 31-12-1986) with the previously agreed fuel surcharge for LPG and Diesel. Import restriction from 1-1-2014 on cars with unwanted emissions, or younger than 30 years.
    No environmental zones in cities, unless European decision is made.

  74. The pollution of the imported diesel-merces has already been largely eliminated with the new regulation. Cars up to 30 years running on diesel or LPG simply have to pay a surcharge for that fuel, which makes the old Mercedes as a daily car less interesting at all. In fact, the abolition is therefore an unnecessary measure. With that 150 million extra income, the government is calculating itself much too rich, that argument has already been dismissed by Fehac, Knac and Anwb with valid arguments.

    Another solution could be that, in order to be eligible for MRB exemption, you simply need a modern car that you paid MRB for. If you don't have one, just pay MRB on your first old-timer. This way, recreational users and people with several old-timers can continue to practice their hobby while the abuse of the scheme comes to an end.

  75. If classics have to pay MRB again, the suspension arrangement will probably remain. But suspending a classic car is inconvenient, because if you want to use it again, you immediately pay for three months. So in practice you hardly use it, or you pay for about 6 to 7 months in the fair weather months, while you only make a few rides. If I look at my own use, I only ride my classics for about 15 days a year, so I pay a lot. I think the former 60-day card could be a good solution, the amount could then be the amount for a quarter, for example. With the modern internet options that would be easy to realize, just log in to the RDW and indicate that you are going to drive the car on that day, or for a few days. Even better is a separate personal license plate that you could use for your own classics, for example in combination with the 60-day ticket. The original license plate will remain with the car, but you will receive a private number that you can use on different old cars. Incidentally, I thought that a new policy had just been introduced whereby cars only got an exemption at 30 years, except for the diesel or LPG part. That wasn't such a bad idea, was it?

  76. Unfortunately I am not a representative of a party, despite the fact that as a fan of Japanese Classics (often a forgotten category within the classic world) and as the owner of a classic Mitsubishi, I will also be severely affected by the abolition of this exemption. At the moment I spend almost all my money on my HBO study and the necessities for it (including the rent of my room and a cheap car for daily transport), most of the remaining money I have to put in my old-timer with love. I will stop selling my classic at all costs. If the MRB exemption for old-timers is actually abolished, I am afraid that I can only retain the old-timer by suspending it, so that I am unable to carry out part of my hobby (the tour drives and old-timer meetings) much less.

    I largely agree with your message, but there is one point I would like to point out: There are also old-timer owners / enthusiasts who do not have a car for daily traffic, simply because they use daily public transport, walking or with do another means of transport (for example a motorcycle, bicycle, etc.).

    Until recently I only had an old-timer (and not a car for daily use), because as a student I did almost all my daily journeys with public transport and my parents' car. Because I am currently studying in Rotterdam and I come from the Achterhoek, public transport was not a good alternative and I purchased a car for daily use (largely financed by my mother because I spent most of my money on my studies) to not to mistreat the old-timer with daily use and (even worse) winter use.

    In addition, I fully believe that the tax exemption for vintage cars should continue to exist. Although I do agree that the people who use their old-timer for daily transport must be tackled. I think that the average old-timer makes so little use of the road network that those 25 years that have already been paid in taxes are enough. In proportion, 25 years MRB have been paid for that old-timer, while for a young car only a fraction of that MRB has been paid. In addition, a large part of the cost of the road network is in the construction of new / more asphalt to better handle peak traffic, a classic makes almost no use of all those new and wider highways. Why would I have to pay for my old-timer, while I (with my old-timer) hardly use it?

    As you can read I don't make a difference between an old-timer or a classic, in my opinion these terms have almost the same meaning. I must add that I think that you do not use an old-timer for daily transport (a few times a year with good weather is allowed, but not daily).

  77. Well, that was to be expected with the boom in the import of old Mercedes, Volvos and Volkswagens.
    Your own fault, and now the real enthusiasts have to sit on the blisters and pay the bill.
    I already pay road tax for my daily car, and if I drive in the old-timer, I cannot drive the daily car at the same time.
    Also for people with a collection of cars it becomes so priceless! ~
    Entering a number plate per person just like in Belgium or Germany would be a solution, taxing and insuring the most expensive / heaviest car.

    • There is something to be said for that, but it will not happen. The fuel then becomes so expensive that people are going to refuel en masse across the border. Talk about that. In Germany, a large part of the MRB is already included in fuel prices. The actual MRB is less than a quarter of what people pay here in the Netherlands. Nevertheless, the fuel price is still a lot lower (around € 1,60 for a liter of E95) than in the Netherlands. This is due to the high excise duty that is levied on the fuel here.

  78. Dear,

    If it can be changed, the fairest question is; oldtimer or is it a classic, so 2 categories. then you link this to the number of km driven. p / yr. with a maximum and you're done !!
    I am sure that classics, for example, are no more than 2500 km p / yr. driving and vintage cars up to 15.000 km !!!

    gr Alex

      • Economically it has become quite an important part.
        , Maintenance of the parts, Oldtimer fairs, club meetings, they often end with a good dinner to name a few things.
        So a good contribution to our economy. I think the regulation will no longer have the effect of significantly eliminating the above mentioned activities.
        Apart from our historical heritage which will suffer a lot of damage as a result.
        The argument of environmental polluters makes no sense. The number of kilometers driven with an Oldtimer is very little, and those few who abuse the exemption that you can check.
        Because most settle on the costs of an old car for daily use.
        There are cheaper alternatives for that.
        Now the abolition, the true enthusiast and collector, and auto clubs are being duped
        So my conclusion is to leave the arrangement as it was intended.

Give an answer

The email address will not be published.

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

Now in store

View the 40-page preview via or a click on the cover.

The October issue, containing:

  • Citroën CX 25 Prestige Turbo 2
  • Frame construction in the Netherlands
  • Frisian Firebird lovers
  • Lancia Fulvia
  • Toyota Corona RT40
  • BMW R90S
  • Classic Days Duesseldorf
  • Duplicate type designations - Part XVIII
cover 10 2022 300

The perfect reading material for an evening or more of undisturbed dreaming. It is now in stores. A subscription is of course better, because then you will no longer miss a number and you are also € 27 cheaper. Not bad in these expensive times.

Exemption Motor vehicle tax part 2

KNAC petition for MRB exemption a great success