Red Diesel Rules Rumble On

[Alan de Enfield]

3 minutes ago, MartynG said:

Despite what the Belgians have said I understand fines have since been imposed

I believe that all the cases date from before September, the main ones are from June & July and these have been put into abeyance until the EU make a final decision.

HMRC & the RYA have a letter confirming this from the Belgium Government.

[Horace42]

My cynical view is that whatever our relationship with the EU will be,  there are enough smart alec lawyers and accountants in the UK to exploit the situation to the full either way, for their own personal benefit, that will result in us paying full tax on fuel up-front, but relaxed with a form of rebate, on the heating bit, if we qualify, and if we take the trouble to make a retrospective claim - that will be linked to all sorts of complex form filling supported by evidence and costly independent surveyors reports and the like. 

Not forgetting the bad press for diesel engines - where the polluter pays - so when the roads have been purged of diesel vehicles boaters will be in such a minority that it won't matter politically whether we like it or not.

 

[b0atman]

i filled up my Narrowboat in Liverpool Marina same price and declaration deal as red but was white diesel.I was told because sea going boats are main customer .

[X Alan W]

11 hours ago, b0atman said:

what does a litre of white diesel cost for example in france ?

 

Today AM in our area( Midi Pyrenees) Super MKT 1Euro 13 cents Total filling Stn 1euro 28 cents    95 Ron petrol 1;33 & 1;47  pound ex rate 1;12

[Alan de Enfield]

23 minutes ago, b0atman said:

i filled up my Narrowboat in Liverpool Marina same price and declaration deal as red but was white diesel.I was told because sea going boats are main customer .

That is interesting, and makes sense (in a certain sort of way), I don’t understand why it cannot all be ‘white’ with the 40% sold at the rebated price.

What I do not understand is why Liverpool would only sell ‘white’, as all commercial vessels can (EU regulations) use ‘Red’ and there must be a large number of commercial boats operating there.

I recently refuelled in both Hull and Lowestoft – both of which are major departure points for the ‘continent’, and, in both places I received ‘Red’.

When we refuelled in Spain it was ‘blueish’ diesel.

Spain has 3 classes of diesel:

Gasóleo A = Road

Gasóleo B = Agriculural

Gasóleo C = Marine

[Naughty Cal]

10 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

I think that you will find that any leisure boat that turns up in EU ports with red diesel in their tanks are penalised. The guy I regularly sail with, who often crosses the Channel, had his tanks flushed to ensure that no red diesel is present in them. The EU rules are that red diesel is for commercial use not leisure. That is the point really, we want special exemption from the general rule (again). If your guy from Turkey turns up with white diesel that has been subjected to normal duty in Turkey there is no way that any customs officer will be able to prove that it isn't EU fuel. If he has red diesel in his tank it rather highlights that it hasn't had duty paid on it and he would be subject to penalty.

Yet a friend of ours who took his boat from Lincoln to Holland, through Belgium, Through France and now into Spain has never been queried about the fuel in his tanks. It was red diesel when he set off and red diesel when he arrived in Holland.

Since then it has all been white diesel of course as that is all that they can buy over there.

[furnessvale]

14 hours ago, Jerra said:

If the same rules are kept as the EU has (in your opinion) forced on us then they are still dictating to us what to do.   That is if our government doesn't repeal the regs which have us making a declaration the regs are there because of the EU.  Ergo we are still "being dictated to" by the EU, otherwise we wouldn't have the regulation.

 

You are well aware that the tentacles of the EU are so entwined into the UK that we will have to have the "Great Repeal Bill" or whatever it will be called to incorporate all EXISTING EU regs into UK law.  We will then have years to unpick those bits of EU regs we do not want.

Crucially, no more EU law will come our way after Brexit, including a requirement to use white diesel for heating if we don't have a separate tank, which is a minor matter compared to bank regulation, EU finance minister, compulsory use of the euro etc, which is in the EU pipeline.

Before you say it, if we wish to export to the EU, exported goods will have to comply to EU requirements, just as goods we send to any other country in the world have to meet that country's requirements.  We will no more be subservient to the EU than to any other country to which we export.

George

[Jerra]

23 minutes ago, furnessvale said:

You are well aware that the tentacles of the EU are so entwined into the UK that we will have to have the "Great Repeal Bill" or whatever it will be called to incorporate all EXISTING EU regs into UK law.  We will then have years to unpick those bits of EU regs we do not want.

Crucially, no more EU law will come our way after Brexit, including a requirement to use white diesel for heating if we don't have a separate tank, which is a minor matter compared to bank regulation, EU finance minister, compulsory use of the euro etc, which is in the EU pipeline.

Before you say it, if we wish to export to the EU, exported goods will have to comply to EU requirements, just as goods we send to any other country in the world have to meet that country's requirements.  We will no more be subservient to the EU than to any other country to which we export.

George

If you call working to the regulations being subservient then we will be forever subservient to somebody so that isn't much of a reason for leaving the EU.  Whoever we trade with will set the rules and using your own definition we will be subservient, couple that with the fact EU countries are likely to be our main exports.  So we have tried to escape being subservient to the EU and only succeeded in making ourselves subservient to rules and regs we have no control over.

 

Result!

[artleknock]

2 minutes ago, Jerra said:

If you call working to the regulations being subservient then we will be forever subservient to somebody so that isn't much of a reason for leaving the EU.  Whoever we trade with will set the rules and using your own definition we will be subservient, couple that with the fact EU countries are likely to be our main exports.  So we have tried to escape being subservient to the EU and only succeeded in making ourselves subservient to rules and regs we have no control over.

 

Result!

But they will be World Trade regs, agreed by all countries, not regs dictated by unelected bureaucrats.

[Jerra]

1 minute ago, artleknock said:

But they will be World Trade regs, agreed by all countries, not regs dictated by unelected bureaucrats.

A bit of an assumption there, that we will be trading with the EU on world trade regs.  The EU regs to which we will have to conform for our exports will still have been made by the same people even under World Trade regs.   So no change there we will be "subservient" and have no input.

What a cracking idea.

[Machpoint005]

In my opinion, the red diesel question related to leisure boating is such a side-issue of a minor point of EU legislation that at the current rate of progress there might be a decision after 30-40 years.

Note that even when we could use 'red' for propulsion it was a derogation from EU law: the 60/40 guide has only been in place for about 9 years. I think it is very unlikely that the exemption will ever be reinstated -- it affects so few people that there are no votes in it.

[Momac]

8 hours ago, Alan de Enfield said:

 I don’t understand why it cannot all be ‘white’ with the 40% sold at the rebated price.

White diesel is not sold at the reduced duty rate

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/excise-notice-554-fuel-used-in-private-pleasure-craft-and-for-private-pleasure-flying/excise-notice-554-fuel-used-in-private-pleasure-craft-and-for-private-pleasure-flying

People might be tempted to  pump out the cheaper white diesel from the fuel tank on their boat  for use in their car.

 

My mistake on the dates of the fines imposed by the Belgians - but I still think their past behaviour has been unacceptable and Belgium should be considered  no go zone by UK boaters.

[furnessvale]

7 hours ago, Jerra said:

A bit of an assumption there, that we will be trading with the EU on world trade regs.  The EU regs to which we will have to conform for our exports will still have been made by the same people even under World Trade regs.   So no change there we will be "subservient" and have no input.

What a cracking idea.

Utter nonsense of course, but I'm out.

George

[Jerra]

49 minutes ago, furnessvale said:

Utter nonsense of course, but I'm out.

George

It wasn't me who said having to abide by/be controlled by EU rules and regs was subservience.   How are we going to trade with the EU unless our goods conform to their regs?  Answer we can't even Brexiteers admit this.  So we will by Brexiteers standards (after all it was a Brexiteer who described it as subservience) we will still be subservient to the EU.

You can't have it both ways either we are getting out from EU subservience that is being controlled by EU and therefor unable to trade with the EU.  The alternative is we are producing/doing things to EU regulations and standards so we can trade with them, in  which case by the definitions given above by a pro brexit poster we are subservient.

I realise "utter nonsense" is what is used when there is no argument against the facts.

[furnessvale]

10 minutes ago, Jerra said:

It wasn't me who said having to abide by/be controlled by EU rules and regs was subservience.   How are we going to trade with the EU unless our goods conform to their regs?  Answer we can't even Brexiteers admit this.  So we will by Brexiteers standards (after all it was a Brexiteer who described it as subservience) we will still be subservient to the EU.

You can't have it both ways either we are getting out from EU subservience that is being controlled by EU and therefor unable to trade with the EU.  The alternative is we are producing/doing things to EU regulations and standards so we can trade with them, in  which case by the definitions given above by a pro brexit poster we are subservient.

I realise "utter nonsense" is what is used when there is no argument against the facts.

How can we trade with ANY country if the products/services we export do not meet the requirements of the purchaser?  Are we "controlled" or "subservient" to any of the other dozens of countries with which we trade when we comply with their requirements?

Of course not, which is why your argument is still utter nonsense.

George

[Jerra]

3 minutes ago, furnessvale said:

How can we trade with ANY country if the products/services we export do not meet the requirements of the purchaser?  Are we "controlled" or "subservient" to any of the other dozens of countries with which we trade when we comply with their requirements?

Of course not, which is why your argument is still utter nonsense.

George

We can't trade unless we conform.  However I will repeat it wasn't me who described having to follow EU regs as being subservient it was a pro brexit poster.  I am merely pointing out that if leaving the EU was supposed to break the "subservience" it hasn't achieved its aim.  We will still have to conform.

Incidentally I thought you were "out".

[Mike Todd]

On 25/10/2017 at 19:01, MartynG said:

I do not understand the why the EU have a problem . 

Surely the system of taxes is not the same in every EU country?

Yes and no. It is a requirement that member states use VAT but the details and raters do vary.

The main aim of much EU rules and regulations is fair and equal rules for everyone regardless of where they are. Hence the 'common market' which has been at least as good for us as for others. At least in principle the aim is that the openness encourages greater economic activity which should offset any possible disadvantages to particular niche situations.

As I understand it, and someone may well correct me if I mis-state, the origins of this dispute lie in complaints from continental road hauliers who saw reduced fuel duties for the large barges that compete with them as being unfair competition. The UK canal situation is very different but any regulatory regime has hard cases unless their is some cleverness in devising rules that achieve both sets of intended consequences fairly.

[Horace42]

On balance I prefer to live in an environment within a framework of voluntary standards that are acceptable to us. Most of the standards are technical so that industry can function efficiently and hopefully at a profit.  

The original idea of a trading base  'Common Market' appealed to most of us, and having joined up to the EU for this reason, when not looking, found it had quietly turned itself into 'common government' giving unelected bureaucrats powers needed to enforce compliance of standards (needed for trading) - with an open chequebook to spend what they like (largely on themselves - it seems) and send us the bill - and now we find they have lots of standards convenient for their own benefit that we have supposedly agreed or signed up to.

And we don't like it.

And on the face of it being unable to change those we object to, because our threat to leave the EU did not have a mandate to do so.

Now we have got one. Which to my mind is a powerful weapon to use to negotiate a better deal all round to stay in - not to leave at all costs.

But having decided to leave, the best the EU can do is come up with an acceptable proposal to keep us - not as they are doing at the moment by threatening gloom and doom and financial disaster - that regretfully in order to demonstrate their on-going power over us could result in using forceful means should we unilaterally walk away - albeit they have not got the EU controlled self-contained armed-forces they were pressing for should matters get out of hand.

So a negotiated deal is likely to be reached in the course of time. Either IN or OUT with an equitable deal under our control will suit me. 

 

[Machpoint005]

2 hours ago, Horace42 said:

not as they are doing at the moment by threatening gloom and doom and financial disaster

Wrong thread, but I don't think the EU27 negotiating team is threatening any such thing - they just want to know what the UK actually wants!

[Steilsteven]

As nice as it has been to run a boat on red diesel ( especially with PETRA at 5 liters an hour ) I wonder how that came to be. I read on another forum that it might have been that way since the 1930s or a ''thank you from the government'' for the Dunkirk little ships. Neither of these theories bear scrutiny as most private leisure boats had petrol engines and petrol isn't duty free as we all know. So how did it come to be?

[Jerra]

7 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

As nice as it has been to run a boat on red diesel ( especially with PETRA at 5 liters an hour ) I wonder how that came to be. I read on another forum that it might have been that way since the 1930s or a ''thank you from the government'' for the Dunkirk little ships. Neither of these theories bear scrutiny as most private leisure boats had petrol engines and petrol isn't duty free as we all know. So how did it come to be?

I don't claim to know but I have always been given to understand DERV (Diesel Engined Road Vehicle) fuel was taxed anything not on the road could use red diesel.

[Steilsteven]

2 minutes ago, Jerra said:

I don't claim to know but I have always been given to understand DERV (Diesel Engined Road Vehicle) fuel was taxed anything not on the road could use red diesel.

Well yes but that name also implies that DERV isn't suitable for anything else. Splitting hairs I know.

Keith

[Jerra]

9 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

Well yes but that name also implies that DERV isn't suitable for anything else. Splitting hairs I know.

Keith

To me, no not implying it isn't suitable for anything else, merely showing it has duty paid for use on roads

[Steilsteven]

18 minutes ago, Jerra said:

To me, no not implying it isn't suitable for anything else, merely showing it has duty paid for use on roads

Yes indeed and I was being flippant really.

The only explanation that I can think of as to why leisure boats were allowed to use marked diesel is that successive governments overlooked it. After all it''s rare that the  tax man gives much away and leisure use isn't comparable to ag or plant use. I think we've been very lucky to have been allowed to use it at all.

Keith 

[Jerra]

2 minutes ago, Steilsteven said:

Yes indeed and I was being flippant really.

The only explanation that I can think of as to why leisure boats were allowed to use marked diesel is that successive governments overlooked it. After all it''s rare that the  tax man gives much away and leisure use isn't comparable to ag or plant use. I think we've been very lucky to have been allowed to use it at all.

Keith 

You can have an off road Land Rover etc take to the venue on a trailer and use red diesel, clear leisure use but that hasn't been under the spotlight yet.