The current old-timer measure has only been introduced for financial reasons. Wouter van Embden told several journalists from Business News Radio on Friday 16 January. The face of Stichting Autobelangen indicated that the environment was never a real starting point for applying the current MRB exemption scheme for motor vehicles.
A spokesperson for the Ministry of Finance recently told journalist Quinten Stroop that "there is a balance between revenue and the preservation of mobile heritage". Nothing was said about serving the environment. In an interview with Jigal Krant of BNR, Van Embden elaborated on the imperfections of the measure. “It has not been demonstrated at all that the old-timers have highly polluting effects. In fact: an old-timer drives an average of 2.000 kilometers per year. New cars drive a lot more kilometers. On balance, the new cars in total emit far more pollutants. "
Van Embden unveiled more to Krant and in the National Auto Show of BNR. “The estimated revenue of 120 million will not be achieved. We did not only calculate this ourselves. We also had research done by APE, an agency that also regularly makes calculations for our government. They have reached the same conclusion as us: the income from the measure is nowhere near being achieved. The environmental effects cannot or hardly be demonstrated. And bottom line, the measure only costs money because considerable financial damage has occurred in the sector and among owners of the currently taxed cars. It's an ill-considered measure. ”
The fact that the Ministry of Finance no longer talks about the environment in relation to old-timers has a deeper background. The total Dutch car market is experiencing the consequences of years of government funding for "clean" driving. It forces politicians to shift the communication expressions to financial reasons that underlie the current old-timer scheme, also because no substantiated substantiation can be submitted with regard to the share of environmental pollution caused by vintage cars. Now that it has been demonstrated that the measure has caused a great deal of damage, the department of Minister Dijsselbloem and State Secretary Wiebes still tries to present "a balance between money and the preservation of automobile heritage" as an argument. But the Ministry is actually stuck between undetected environmental impact and pecunia.
Lady Justice must play an important role in the test processes initiated by the Autobelangen Foundation against the State in terms of the usefulness, the financial returns and the false argument about the environment. When that happens, it cannot be ruled out that the owners of currently taxed old and young timers will get what they actually deserve: an arrangement that is acceptable to everyone. A scheme that moreover does not have to be redesigned. Because this was already there: the Amendment van Vliet, which Wouter van Embden quoted for good reason before the BNR journalists. A scheme that moreover realized step-by-step alignment with the desirable adjustment of the scheme to the international age standard for vintage cars: 30 year.
Listen here to the interview by Wouter van Embden in the National Auto Show of BNR
Listen here to Wouter van Embden's interview with BNR journalist Jigal Krant
Unfortunately my beautiful Oldtimer has been rusting in the driveway for a year now. With a lot of pain and effort I have realized a childhood dream on 54 age. Barely a year later, the government decides that the car, for which I received an exemption from the MRB obligation in black and white, is no longer an Oldtimer and I have to pay the full price for road tax. I already paid that MRB for a small car that I use for normal commuting. Because it is an American Oldtimer that is heavy and takes a lot of gas, I have to pay 5x as much mrb for the hobby car in which I only drive in the summer and therefore not even more than 2000 km, than for my other car.
According to the government, the solution was a transitional arrangement for all vintage cars from 25 to 39 years old. Condition: only gasoline as fuel. My car runs on LPG otherwise you cannot use it in NL due to high fuel consumption. I chose to sell the car again but only there was nobody interested because everyone got stuck with the same problem. With LPG the MRB cannot be raised and is in no relation to the few km you drive with it every year. Without LPG the gasoline costs cannot be paid because it concerns an American car. I have opted for the transitional arrangement in which I pay € 120,00 per year (- / - 3 months in the winter). I had to have the LPG installation removed. Touring for half an hour only costs € 35 on average. That is really no pleasure ride anymore.
I also participate in the test processes from the article. I just don't know what it can mean for me. If I no longer have to pay MRB, as promised at the time of purchase, who will compensate for the financial damage caused by re-purchasing the LPG installation? The old man has already cost enough to have him removed and put in again is prohibited because of the inspection by the RDW.
In short, too expensive to just bring to demolition, too expensive to drive.
What kind of cabinet is this so deceiving and dropping people?
Just get tyd that the dutch stand up for his hobby and not be suppressed by the government .. because of this picking behavior many have gone to demolition
Simply abolishing the entire scheme has shown that it is of no use only costs !!!
Come on dutch don't let your hobby take over from rutte and zn friends