Vehicle Excise Tax News

[kevinp]

Yung presyong 980k ng CR-V ngayon is 891k + 89k Vat. Under the new price based tax-scheme, the price would be:

891k + 89k Vat + (12k + 20% of 290) = approx 1,050k

If it were to be taxed based on the current displacement-based tax scheme, and bagong price would be:

891k + 89k Vat + (35% of 891k) = approx 1,292k


OT: alam nyo ba na ang defiinition ng BIR ng AUV is a Philippine-made and designed vehicle with predominantly locally-manufactured content. Labo nga kasi we all know that the Revo, and Adventure was designed in Indonesia and the Crosswind in Thailand. The CR-V obviously wasn't designed in the Philippines.

Labo talaga ng gobyerno!

[RedHorse]

There are two versions for the excise tax, senate the other house. Dati, pareho sila, until malacanang called recto, kaya nagkahitohito na tayo:

since, magkaiba sila, they will form a bicameral comm., tapos ipapasa na kay GMA of EDSA 2 fame, for signature -- law, lo and behold.


from malaya:


The Senate version pegs the base value at P600,000 to enjoy the minimum 3 percent tax and the top tax rate being pegged to 150 percent, for the high-end vehicles. Vehicles valued at P600,000 to P1million will be taxed P12,000 plus 12 percent of the value of the vehicle in excess of P600,000; those which are worth P1 million to P2 million, P92,000 plus 100 percent in excess of P1 million and those priced at P2 million and above will carry a tax of P1.092 million plus 150 percent in excess of P2 million.

The House version pegs a 3 percent tax rate on vehicles worth P500,000 and below; P15,000 plus 15 percent of value in excess of P500,000 for those valued at P500,000 to P1 million; P90,000 plus 30 percent of the value in excess of P1 million for vehicles priced at over P1 million to P2 million and P390,000 plus 50 percent of value in excess of P2 million for those with sticker price of over P2 million.

[RedHorse]

balik tayo sa nakaraan.

noon pa man, madaya, maingay na yang honda. To gain entry sa Phil market, naglabas sila ng people's car. Eto yong plantsa.

Until, nobody was making noise, meron nang civic, of course sa specs pa lang hindi na sya people's car.

1996/97 nagkaroon ng bagong tax based on engine displacement, car sales were hardly hit, sumikat naman ang mga FX ng toyota. Honda that time, did not make any noise, kasi yong civic nila eh parang hotcake.

Then, naglabas sila ng CRV, and they point accusing finger on pajero. Bakit daw pareho sila ng tax eh, sila daw eh locally manufactured, at samantala ang pajero ay imported.

So, to accomodate Honda, AGAIN, nagkaroon ng tax ang mga 4x4 na may engine displacement 2.8 and above. Tinamaan dito yong Toyota LCs, pero ok lang daw buhay pa sila sa FX, that was Feb 2000. Pajero's, Patrols and Troopers ay naging 4x2 na lang, pero bumebenta pa rin.

Now came the new CRV, and honda realized, na based on body/no of seats, eh talo pa rin sila ng mga Pajero, Patrol and Trooper, and the hated Revo. Kasi kung internals lang ang pagbabasihan, at present halos pare-pareho na lang. Now, to circumvent the rule they had created, they declared the new Honda as an AUV.

[green]

New excise tax on cars
approved by Senate
Posted: 0:28 AM (Manila Time) | Aug. 06, 2003
By Michael Lim Ubac
Inquirer News Service

THE EXCISE tax on automobiles, approved by the Senate Monday night, would drastically bring down the price of private cars worth 1 million pesos and below, Senator Ralph Recto said Tuesday.

Recto, principal author of Senate Bill No. 2517, known as an Act Rationalizing the Excise Tax on Automobiles, announced that the new excise tax system would make "entry-level" cars affordable to Filipinos. But he admitted that the price of Sports Utility Vehicles (SUVs) -- currently exempt from excise taxes along with other vehicles with 10 or more seats -- would increase.


Recto predicted that, if enacted, the new tax measure would generate a minimum incremental revenue of 740 million pesos from locally assembled vehicles alone, assuming that vehicle sales in 2003 would remain flat at 72,832 units.

Under the Senate's proposed tax rate, automobiles worth 600,000 pesos and below will carry a two-percent ad valorem tax; while those exceeding 600,000 pesos up to 1 million pesos, will be taxed 12,000 pesos plus 20 percent of their value.

A car worth over 1 million pesos up to 2 million pesos, will be taxed 92,000 pesos plus 100 percent of its value, while an automobile worth 2 million pesos and above will be taxed 1.09 million pesos plus 150 percent of its value.

Thus, under the proposed scheme, a Toyota Revo, with an SRP (suggested retail price) of 598,560 pesos, would now cost 610,531 pesos, a difference of 11,971 pesos. The Kia CD 5, with an SRP of 234,667 pesos, would cost 208,114 pesos, a difference of 26,000 pesos.

The Honda City four-door MT, with an SRP of 554,621 pesos, would cost 491,925 pesos, a difference of 62,000 pesos. On the other hand, the Nissan Patrol, an SUV with an SRP of 1.95 million pesos, would cost 2.75 million pesos. A Ford Expedition, with an SRP of 2 million pesos, would cost 3 million pesos.

CR-V MT, with an SRP of 896,313 pesos, would cost 948,958 pesos, while CR-V AT (automatic), with an SRP of 961,389 pesos, would cost 1.039 million pesos.

But other luxury cars, such as BMW, are expected to benefit from the lower excise tax rates. The BMW 316i, with an SRP of 928,000 pesos, would cost 823,499 pesos; while BMW 323 AT, with an SRP of 1.45 million pesos, would cost 1,047,092 pesos


Totoo ba 'to? sub-million peso bimmer?
parang di kapanipaniwala...

[OTEP]

Parati na lang kaming mga four wheelers ang kawawa...

Bad trip talaga...

[kevinp]

san kaya nakuha nung writer yung SRP details ng 316? Ang alam ko ang selling price ngayon ng 316 is around 1.75M na. yung 323 nasa 2M na.

Yung 740 Million na sinasabi ni Recto, tingin ko mga 500 Million dyan ibubulsa lang ng mga taga-BIR at iba pang mga nangungurakot.

Ewan!

[tebs]

totoo bang naipasa na itong law na to (pertaining to green's post)?

paki-confirm naman. thanks

[green]

tebs,

I just got the post from the inquirer...

pero matagal-tagal pa 'to kasi papasok pa ito sa bicameral committee... may sariling version kasi yung congress.

remember the anti-money laundering law na pumasok din sa bi-cam? Matagal-tagal pa nga ito mapipirmahan ni GMA... haaaayy...

[C24]

pati E-150 bagsak? mas maluwag naman kesa suburban...

ayan, nagkulang kasi ang lagay, este lobby fund ng manufacturers! ;)

[wowiesy]

we have to be vigilant... the senate version even if already passed isn't final.. dadaan nga sa bicameral committe (which in itself is like another chamber of congress).. sigurado akong marami pang gagapang dyan sa bicameral committee para maihabol yung gusto nilang i lobby... either way.. the BIR will get its way since regardless if pres GMA signs a new law or not, the current IRR of the BIR would take effect starting sept 8... kung baga, lesser evil na lang ang version ng congress... compared to what the BIR would want na talagang grabe...

ang di ko lang maintindihan at nakaka inggit din minsan.. ang dali daling ipasa ng mga car importers/manufacturers ang mga costs na ito sa mga buyers... eh ako sa negosyo namin.. ang hirap ipasa sa customers ang mga dagdag na expenses at baka hindi na sila bumili!!! grrrr

[kiper]

dapat ang gumagawa ng 10-seater law na yan eh ung mga mismong galing sa automotive industry..alam nila kung ano ang tama at ano ang dapat gawen..sheez..!!

[mbt]

i don't understand all the ruckus about Honda's "unfair" strategy with the CR-V for the following reasons:

1) Honda attempted a radical move with the 10-seater CR-V, however, it was the government itself that approved it! if the committee that evaluated it in the first place were less negligent to begin with, then none of this would happen and no one would be crying foul

2) it is actually the consumer who wins with Honda's move. the price of the CR-V dropped from ~1.3M to 900+K, putting it within greater reach of the mainstream market. whatever you say about Honda's "greed", i don't think putting a vehicle with a great engine, great safety, and great engineering into the hands of more people qualifies as a devilish act.

3) the move of Honda was indeed a shrewd one, however, Honda should not be blamed, because it only proves that there is indeed a great problem with existing tax laws. it's not too hard to see that it's not the CR-V at fault, but the law itself that encourages such creative interpretations!

4) the goverment's accusations of losing billions in foregone tax revenues is absolutely hogwash. if the CR-V were still sold at 1.3M as before, then so few units would be sold as a result, and ultimately, the low volume would make total tax collections much smaller.

as for this new tax law, well, i wonder what the extreme discrimination towards SUVs and 4x4s is all about. in a country (or at least capital) where the inefficient government utterly fails to provide adequate flood control and decent roads, it is easy to see why high-riding SUVs and trucks can be a necessity. it's all about choice: the consumer should be able to choose a vehicle that suits his needs (or wants, within reason).

about luxury (the government's basis for taxing the hell out of trucks), how in the world can an SUV be more luxurious than a sedan just by virtue of being an SUV or truck? if the jeep wrangler were available here, it would be slapped with an exorbitant luxury tax (read: excise tax)... who would agree that a Nissan Exalta is more luxurious than a Wrangler? if a Nissan Patrol variant were available locally as it is equipped in other markets, with manual window operation, manual transmission, no wood trim, black bumpers, cloth seats, etc etc... it would still be considered a luxury vehicle when it is in fact, a very basic vehicle more suited to the rural boondocks than to the city elite!! the military uses humvees and (i suppose) defenders and similar vehicles... abolish the armed forces for indulging in such LUXURIES!

the new tax laws lowers the price of sedans, which is good, but at the cost of the ENTIRE SUV and truck market. what will you do with a sedan when there is a two-feet deep puddle every two blocks? better stay home and miss school, work (or better stay in school or at work and forget about going home). what will you do with a car that shakes itself loose after a few years of trundling down beaten city streets? what if you don't like the fuel costs of a gasoline-powered sedan?

wouldn't a diesel-fed truck be a much more practical choice in these conditions? obviously, but sorry, the Filipino is out of luck.

[OTEP]

mbt,

Amen to that! Now take your heart medications. hehehe.

[pissword]

hahaha galing naman mbt.... haayyyy

san nanggaling ung 938T na BMW 316??? 1.7M + Un dapat ahh yun nga un q ko ehhh meron kasing nilabas ang BMW na 250T downpayment tapos 31T/month 48Months wala interest... anu sa tingin nyo?? ndi pa to nasama dyan noh??kasi d pa tumaas eh tas kaya pa nila mag bigay ng ala interest o

[artpogi]

Originally posted by wowiesy
either way.. the BIR will get its way since regardless if pres GMA signs a new law or not, the current IRR of the BIR would take effect starting sept 8... kung baga, lesser evil na lang ang version ng congress... compared to what the BIR would want na talagang grabe...

Question lang

If GMA signs the Congress version of the Vehicle Excise Tax Law, di ba mapapa-walang bisa na yung BIR version ng Vehicle Excise Tax?

Parang mas okay yung Congress version eh.

Oh, Boss MBT

Well Said!

[kevinp]

artpogi, tama yan. taas talaga ng presyo ng mga sasakyan kung BIR tax law yung maiimplement. pag naayos kaagad yung congress/senate version, we'll end up with cheaper sedans and more expensive AUVs.

MBT, malaki lang naman ang magiging tax ng mga SUV's (under the BIR tax scheme) kung malaki ang engine displacement. if you had a patrol wil a 2.0L diesel engine, 15% excise tax lang ang babayaran. Kaya nga the senate/congress decided to shift the basis for taxation from engine displacement to the actual value of the vehicle. If, as you mentioned, Nissan were to introduce a Patrol (like the ones found in Australia) na bare model, black bumpers, no fog lamps, tingga mags, manual windows, no a/c, no stereo, etc. I'm sure its selling price would be less than a million pesos and it would be taxed a relatively small amount compared to the Patrol that Nissan is selling today.

IMO, the auto manufacturers should go back to the basics to lower the selling costs of their vehicles and offer 'packages' to the customer (i.e. performance package, luxury package, etc.). I think that this will be the next loophole that the auto manufacturers will exploit unless there is a bigger tax (bigger than the excise tax on a new automobile) on auto accessories that we do not know of.

[kevinp]

dagdag ko lang:

The government makes laws for the people to follow the laws, not for people to find loopholes and exploit them. True, the 10-seater rule was open to "creative" interpretations and mejo bobo rin ang BIR to make the manufacturer's brochure the basis of an automobile's seating capacity. But if Honda Philippines had any sense of social responsibility they shouldn't have claimed that the CR-V can seat 10 people. IMO, the 10 seater law was put in place because the Gov't wanted to promote vehicles with more carrying capacity.

Lagi ko nakikita yung mga tsikot people complaining about the corruption in the Government and that politicians are selfish bastards, but isn't what Honda did just another form of corruption? You applaud Honda for making the CR-V more affordable for the consumers, but by not paying excise tax on the purchase of the CR-V, isn't the consumer also robbing the government of its own revenues?

If we, the people, turn a blind eye or even encourage such moves as the one made by Honda on the CR-V, how can we expect the Government to change? We often demand righteousness from our politicians, but if the private sector and the consumers are not righteous as well, wala talagang mangyayari.

Obviously the culture of the people in government is not gonna change in the near future so I say it is up to us, the consumers/the private sector to initiate the change so that others wil follow suit.

[mazdamazda]

Originally posted by mbt
i don't understand all the ruckus about Honda's "unfair" strategy with the CR-V for the following reasons:

how come...

toyota rav4 sv sells for only 990K
ford escape xls sells for only 1.15M
suzuki vitara (4x4!) sells for only 1.13M

that's just a tad above the retail price of the honda and yet they do not enjoy the benefits of the 10 seater tax exemption before. this just means that honda (and all AUV manufacturers) is putting a large mark-up on their vehicles.

[Suzuki-san]

Originally posted by mazdamazda
how come...

toyota rav4 sv sells for only 990K
ford escape xls sells for only 1.15M
suzuki vitara (4x4!) sells for only 1.13M

that's just a tad above the retail price of the honda and yet they do not enjoy the benefits of the 10 seater tax exemption before. this just means that honda (and all AUV manufacturers) is putting a large mark-up on their vehicles.

Is this in line with the term "Value Engineering"?

[mazdamazda]

Originally posted by Suzuki-san
Is this in line with the term "Value Engineering"?

just take a look at the interior of the rav4 vs the crv and i'll let you decide on value engineering...

RAV4:




CRV: