'Ineffective' car emission scheme being reviewed

[Watwheels]

Lai liao, lai liao. LTA chut new pattern. Brace for impact!

 

'Ineffective' car emission scheme being reviewed

 

Christopher Tan | The Straits Times | Saturday, Oct 11, 2014

THE Land Transport Authority (LTA) is reviewing a scheme that rewards or penalises motorists based on the amount of carbon dioxide their cars emit.

 

The carbon emissions-based vehicle scheme (CEVS), which was introduced on Jan 1 last year and is slated to run till June 30 next year, has been criticised for being lax, biased and ineffective.

Cars with low carbon emissions receive rebates of between $5,000 and $20,000, which are offset against the vehicle's Additional Registration Fee (ARF). But motorists have complained this lowers the residual cost of the car.

Cars with high carbon emissions pay a registration surcharge of between $5,000 and $20,000.

Motor traders said the main beneficiaries have been sellers of European makes with small-capacity turbocharged direct-injection engines.

Experts have also questioned the effectiveness of CEVS in reducing air pollution.

Asian Clean Fuels Association executive director Clarence Woo said: "You can lower CO2 and yet not lower pollutants such as particulate matter."

 

Since Singapore plans to adopt the Euro 6 emission standard, which specifies a big reduction in pollutants such as fine particulate matter and nitrogen oxides, the CEVS could be refined towards meeting this objective, he said.

LTA met motor industry representatives on Tuesday to inform them of the review and gather feedback. The Straits Times understands several industry players have suggested rewards be delinked from ARF.

 

One dealer, who did not want to be named, said: "Often, dealers use the CEVS rebate to fatten their own margin."

LTA would not comment on what changes it is considering. "We will share more details once the review is completed," a spokesman said.

Government Parliamentary Committee for Transport chairman Cedric Foo said road tax is based on engine size, which is a proxy for the amount of pollution a car causes.

"It would be good if we can extract the pollution element and build it into the CEVS," he said, adding that pollution should not be confined to CO2.

 

National University of Singapore transport researcher Lee Der Horng agreed: "The current CEVS may send a wrong message that the higher the rebate, the more environmentally-friendly a car is."

Motorist Leslie Chia, 49, said the CEVS in its current format is an "oxymoron".

"You give a rebate, but you also reduce the scrap value of the car," the businessman said. "So actual savings as a percentage of car cost are insignificant."

 

Motorists suggest tying rebates and penalties to road tax or income tax.

Observers said the current scheme is not stringent enough as nearly two-thirds of new cars qualify for it. According to LTA, the CEVS has cost the Government about $62 million to date - nearly double the amount originally expected.

 

http://transport.asiaone.com/news/general/story/ineffective-car-emission-scheme-being-reviewed?page=0%2C0

 

[Watwheels]

"According to LTA, the CEVS has cost the Government about $62 million to date - nearly double the amount originally expected."

 

Siao liao. They are hinting,"It's pay back time!"

[Tiger1]

Haaaa...

 

Next LTA review would be...."diesel road tax to be reviewed to better differentiate commercial and private vehicles, and to ensure a better quality of life in Singapore" .... We are gathering feedback from dealers now and details would be announced at a later time after 2016.

[Benarsenal]

Sigh.

 

See lah. This is what we mean. Implement policy never think.

 

F***ing cock.

[Powxus]

It's quite obvious that dealers will makan the CEVS rebate and benefit themselves rather than consumers. No need trial and feedback to know this right

[Deckbuild]

They taking car owners as idiot la, left pocket to right pocket then tell us lose 60 over million, when we scrap they pay back to us so much lesser due to CEVS leh...

[Vhtfhwlego]

We don't need to pay our minister millions when they often have wrong forecast.

[Wildfaye29]

They taking car owners as idiot la, left pocket to right pocket then tell us lose 60 over million, when we scrap they pay back to us so much lesser due to CEVS leh...

 

Its 'lose'. Not real loss.

 

CEVS is a rebate against PARF - meaning owners take back lesser PARF.

 

LTA never actually take lesser money from owners upfront, so where is the loss? Its arbitrary. But they did take 'more' from COE.

 

Beneficiaries are dealers, they makan owners CEVS rebates to make up their loss in sales due to lesser COE.

 

Who actually lose? Owners.

[Watwheels]

Just dunno what bombshell they will drop on us this time?

Edited October 12, 2014 by Watwheels

[F355]

Last time buy used car ; see published OMV figure know what is scrap value.

 

Then ARF keep changing , from 150% OMV to 100% OMV , so scrap value keep changing too. You need to see which year the car is registered to know the scrap value.

 

Then comes CEV rebates and taxes which affects the scrap value again.

 

And then comes the tiered ARF system ( 140% and 180%thingy ) , affect scrap value again.

 

And now they want to tweak again . Keep changing until blur liao.

 

Used car prices always reflects the OMV of the car ; never tell you scrap value . And nowadays many dealers don't put down depre .

 

LTA should make it compulsory for the ADs and second hand dealers to state the PARF benefits in the advertisements so that we can know the bottom line.

 

 

[Dark]

That's why we need million-dollar ministars and scholars to manage such a complex scheme that is beyond what our ordinary minds could handle.

 

No scholar no talk.

[Soya]

First, reduce COE quota. Drove up inflation. Result = FAIL.

 

Then, try to reduce 'cost' w CEVS rebate. Result = FAIL.

 

After that, implement populist 130bhp rule. Result = FAIL.

 

So why r we even surprised by this.....??

[Jman888]

First, reduce COE quota. Drove up inflation. Result = FAIL.

 

Then, try to reduce 'cost' w CEVS rebate. Result = FAIL.

 

After that, implement populist 130bhp rule. Result = FAIL.

 

So why r we even surprised by this.....??

 

One conclusion, Singapore people cannot live without a car [laugh]

[ER-3682]

First, reduce COE quota. Drove up inflation. Result = FAIL.

 

Then, try to reduce 'cost' w CEVS rebate. Result = FAIL.

 

After that, implement populist 130bhp rule. Result = FAIL.

 

So why r we even surprised by this.....??

Transport Minister Lxx=FAIL.. [furious]My Mazda 6,2.5 paper value is just $12k,compare with not so enviroment friendly Camry 2.5 got $14k..despite,both got the almost same OMV.

Edited October 12, 2014 by ER-3682

[Sturtles]

Transport Minister Lxx=FAIL.. [furious]My Mazda 6,2.5 paper value is just $12k,compare with not so enviroment friendly Camry 2.5 got $14k..despite,both got the almost same OMV.

the Mazda 6 should be selling much cheaper than the Camry. Its a huge upfront saving already

[Eyke]

My Mazda 6,2.5 paper value is just $12k,compare with not so enviroment friendly Camry 2.5 got $14k..despite,both got the almost same OMV.

but was ur Mazda 6 cheaper to buy than the Camry?

[Baal]

I think for a start, the carpet will be pulled for those euro 5 TD. Great fuel eco, special tax reduce from 1.25 down to 0.40, just too good to be true/last long.

Never forget the CNG lesson.

[ER-3682]

but was ur Mazda 6 cheaper to buy than the Camry?

No,at my time,about the same. Actually,at that time,salesman also do not really know,how much lesser[the scrap value] when the car reach 10th year,until got the log card... [furious]I got a friend driving a very "Green" car,with low OMV,10th year got $0.00..

Edited October 12, 2014 by ER-3682