Diesel excise tax poised to be raised by 1-3 baht

[robblok]

I would guess Rob is not driving a truck.

I am not.. but that does not change the argument. One could say that those that do drive a truck are bias.

[transam]

I would guess Rob is not driving a truck.

I am not.. but that does not change the argument. One could say that those that do drive a truck are bias.

Biased about what.?

[robblok]

arguments and back your numbers up or don't state them.

Rob, another way to look at it that cannot be quite so easily quantified, is that the pickup serves as THE family vehicle in Thailand, sometimes for a very extended family. So that means, rather than having an SUV, a small sporty car, and a large roomy sedan as many of us do, Thais have to depend on the pickup for all functions as consumers, AND, that same pickup may also be used as a commercial vehicle by the breadwinner in the family.

That same empty pickup you see on Monday with one driver, may be hauling around 12 people on the weekends to the wat.

True that is an other option. However poor people buying a jazz or an economy care are not getting sponsored by the state and these are. I could buy the business argument but not the these poor get it and those don't argument.

In my view its unfair to the population as a whole to subsidize one kind of fuel for the common people and not the other kind of fuel.

But really most of the pickups i see driving here are definitely not for business and if it was all for business the real expensive ones would not sell so good as its not needed for a business. The only reason is that fuel costs are cheaper... just level the playing field here. Let diesel go up just like benzine goes up or pin them both and get tax somewhere else.

I am all for the business argument, but there are ways to combat that with red diesel and other measures. That argument i can buy and understand as economical.

[robblok]

I would guess Rob is not driving a truck.

I am not.. but that does not change the argument. One could say that those that do drive a truck are bias.

Biased about what.?

Trans my mate if something is costing you money even if the arguments are sound you wont like them or agree with them not because the arguments are wrong but because money is persuading you. Bias.

I have nothing to win here financially as I don't drive a diesel, maybe the satisfaction of people driving diesel paying a fair price but I don't buy much for that. So that does not influence me much. But farangs having to buy a few beers less because of raising diesel prices might not care for any argument at all as long as they keep their cheap diesel and can buy their beers.

edit *not aimed at you personally Trans*

Edited July 1, 2014 by robblok

[keemapoot]

arguments and back your numbers up or don't state them.

Rob, another way to look at it that cannot be quite so easily quantified, is that the pickup serves as THE family vehicle in Thailand, sometimes for a very extended family. So that means, rather than having an SUV, a small sporty car, and a large roomy sedan as many of us do, Thais have to depend on the pickup for all functions as consumers, AND, that same pickup may also be used as a commercial vehicle by the breadwinner in the family.

That same empty pickup you see on Monday with one driver, may be hauling around 12 people on the weekends to the wat.

True that is an other option. However poor people buying a jazz or an economy care are not getting sponsored by the state and these are. I could buy the business argument but not the these poor get it and those don't argument.

In my view its unfair to the population as a whole to subsidize one kind of fuel for the common people and not the other kind of fuel.

But really most of the pickups i see driving here are definitely not for business and if it was all for business the real expensive ones would not sell so good as its not needed for a business. The only reason is that fuel costs are cheaper... just level the playing field here. Let diesel go up just like benzine goes up or pin them both and get tax somewhere else.

I am all for the business argument, but there are ways to combat that with red diesel and other measures. That argument i can buy and understand as economical.

Did you also consider that this is tied in with the long term government auto industry development objectives, and that the tax structure on pickups was specifically designed to result in massive sales of diesel powered pickups? As the tax structure stands now, people cannot afford to buy other than pickups because pickups offer the most for the money due to government incentives and tax structures on the auto producers.

[AnotherOneAmerican]

I have nothing to win here financially as I don't drive a diesel, maybe the satisfaction of people driving diesel paying a fair price but I don't buy much for that. So that does not influence me much. But farangs having to buy a few beers less because of raising diesel prices might not care for any argument at all as long as they keep their cheap diesel and can buy their beers.

I think it would negatively affect poor Thai farming families, more than white foreigners.

Not to mention everything transported by road would suddenly take a price hike.

[transam]

Rob, I know...........

I come from an era in my own country when the poor folk really had to fight/strike for a living wage. The Thai government I think are correct in keeping diesel prices low so they can try and make ends meet for the poor because there is NO social security system, folk must go it alone. If a farang or Thai hi-so buys a diesel, so what, do you want to laden the poor with tax cos a hi-so drives a diesel.? Noooooooooooooooooo.

[robblok]

arguments and back your numbers up or don't state them.

Rob, another way to look at it that cannot be quite so easily quantified, is that the pickup serves as THE family vehicle in Thailand, sometimes for a very extended family. So that means, rather than having an SUV, a small sporty car, and a large roomy sedan as many of us do, Thais have to depend on the pickup for all functions as consumers, AND, that same pickup may also be used as a commercial vehicle by the breadwinner in the family.

That same empty pickup you see on Monday with one driver, may be hauling around 12 people on the weekends to the wat.

True that is an other option. However poor people buying a jazz or an economy care are not getting sponsored by the state and these are. I could buy the business argument but not the these poor get it and those don't argument.

In my view its unfair to the population as a whole to subsidize one kind of fuel for the common people and not the other kind of fuel.

But really most of the pickups i see driving here are definitely not for business and if it was all for business the real expensive ones would not sell so good as its not needed for a business. The only reason is that fuel costs are cheaper... just level the playing field here. Let diesel go up just like benzine goes up or pin them both and get tax somewhere else.

I am all for the business argument, but there are ways to combat that with red diesel and other measures. That argument i can buy and understand as economical.

Did you also consider that this is tied in with the long term government auto industry development objectives, and that the tax structure on pickups was specifically designed to result in massive sales of diesel powered pickups? As the tax structure stands now, people cannot afford to buy other than pickups because pickups offer the most for the money due to government incentives and tax structures on the auto producers.

Of course this is tied in with the price of trucks, but a small economy car is the same price as a truck. So why should they not get the tax-break.

Sorry I am just don't see the fairness of having one type of fuel that poor people use too not getting a subsidy and the other gets it.

How come 3liter trucks that burn diesel like crazy get the subsidy while economy cars for the poor don't. It just is not fair so either both or neither. I prefer both but Thailand cant afford it. Truth is they can't even afford it now fuel prices have risen but diesel stayed the same costing the state loads of money. Its normal that this gets rectified, and its a good thing this is done by the junta as they don't need to be popular. Someone needs to bring this countries finances back to normal.

[BSJ]

"The Excise Department Director-General also said that a rise of 1 baht per unit in diesel excise tax would yield an increase of 20,000 baht in revenue to the government." How about we take up a collection and send em a cheque for 20k baht.....then they don't have to put the price up!

Personally, I ride my benzene fuelled scooter 10 times more than I drive the diesel pick-up. There are probably 100's of thousands of people who do the same thing, so now we have to pay more!

[ggold]

so ordinary people running lpg etc should pay the same price as benzine as well?

If they are subsidizing LPG sure. Thing is James that there is no good reason why all these trucks that are not driven for business purpose would get tax breaks while people driving cars on benzine do not.

I know that pisses people off who own those big trucks as it will be more expensive to drive them. Traffic would be a lot better with less of those trucks and more small economy cars around.

I am all for things like red diesel for businesses (to keep inflation down) but i really see no reason to give tax breaks to normal people who buy big trucks just because the like them.

So either give the same breaks to benzine drivers or take them away for everyone.. fair is fair.

Thailand is number 1 in the world in truck sales Rob. 90% for biz purposes I imagine. Don't know how you figure a truck takes up more room than a Ford Focus - if it does as you said in another thread by 2cm, it ain't much.

I am not comparing trucks with ford focus but with honda jazz. People say trucks are for poor people so i compare it with other people who don't have much to spend. Thing is a truck is lot bigger as those economy cars and doing a lot more damage to the roads and taking up far more space. So why do they get the break and the other cars not.. you seem to be avoiding that question like the plague because there is none.

Then you come up with BS numbers as 90% of the trucks are for bizz with nothing to back it up. Most of the pickups i see don't transport a thing and certainly are not for business. There sure would be a lot of businesses in Thailand if 90% of the pickups are for business I wonder how someone with brains like yours could come up with things like this. Your not stupid I know that much.

Come give me some good arguments and back your numbers up or don't state them.

They get a break because a Pick-up is a lot more useful to a farmer than a Honda Jazz, you aren't going to get many sacks of corn or rice in a Jazz. And that is also why they have a more favourable subsidy than economical cars, because they are a good utility vehicle for farmers. Road tax is also cheaper but not if it is a 4 door version. SO if you must, blame it on the farmer.

however because a basic Pick-up is cheaper than even a Honda Jazz, more people can afford to buy one compared to a car.

As for the damage to roads, I would suggest a Pick-up is no more damaging than a car. It is the bigger trucks that are causing damage to road surfaces.

[robblok]

Rob, I know...........

I come from an era in my own country when the poor folk really had to fight/strike for a living wage. The Thai government I think are correct in keeping diesel prices low so they can try and make ends meet for the poor because there is NO social security system, folk must go it alone. If a farang or Thai hi-so buys a diesel, so what, do you want to laden the poor with tax cos a hi-so drives a diesel.? Noooooooooooooooooo.

I think its a policy that costs too much money. They can have less tax on diesel but to cap it at a certain amount is financial suicide if oil prices rise.

Putting less tax on it but letting it rise with oil prices is far more realistic. Besides if it costs more people will burn less and buy cars that burn less. By fixing it it will only encourage people to use more and not care about usage.

[louse1953]

Well if diesel goes up 1-3 baht per litre expect everything transported to go up accordingly transport companies will not absorb this price increase it will simply be passed on to the consumer.

Also the fishing industry may come to a halt,it wouldn't be the first time.

[bkkjames]

Rob, I know...........

I come from an era in my own country when the poor folk really had to fight/strike for a living wage. The Thai government I think are correct in keeping diesel prices low so they can try and make ends meet for the poor because there is NO social security system, folk must go it alone. If a farang or Thai hi-so buys a diesel, so what, do you want to laden the poor with tax cos a hi-so drives a diesel.? Noooooooooooooooooo.

I think its a policy that costs too much money. They can have less tax on diesel but to cap it at a certain amount is financial suicide if oil prices rise.

Putting less tax on it but letting it rise with oil prices is far more realistic. Besides if it costs more people will burn less and buy cars that burn less. By fixing it it will only encourage people to use more and not care about usage.

Rob. If the price of diesel goes up even 3 baht a litre - I ain't selling the truck because of it. I will absorb the extra cost because I can. As others have pointed out, it will affect those who can't or they will just pass along the increase to their customers.

So don't go complaining when your next trip to your local fruit market you are faced with higher prices, cause these folks ain't using a jazz to do their daily shopping at tops. As others have pointed out several times now, look around at just how many things are powered by diesel here (it's much more than just Transam's vigo or my truck) and you hopefully will see what potential negative impact this will have.

Better to go after the 80% of people here who pay no taxes but should - if it's all about collecting money.

By the way, I don't drive everyday - I use public transport 2-3 times a week to get to and from work because it's often easier and in most cases less stressful. However, when I take my family out on the weekends, fitting them into a taxi cab to some park outside the city is not only unsafe but less cost effective and certainly less convenient. Especially if I want to haul our bicycles....

[AGareth2]

I love my D-Max

[Cake Monster]

The direct result of any increase in the cost of Diesel, will ultimately be passed on to the consumer.

That is to say the cost of a street food meal, which is now say 40 baht will increase to 45 or even 50 baht.

All the street food vendors will be citeing the " massive " increase in Diesel to elevate their prices way above the 2.5% inflation rate that is the official annual inflationary rate here in Thailand.

Of course, the street food vendors will be at the last in line in delaring their price increases, which will mean rampant inflation here in Thailand.

For a country with the economic woes that there are, this will be detremental for the welfare and happiness of the people which the Junta keep trying to improve, and the additional costs for an export market already declining will make Thailand an even more un-competetive nation to many business organizations.

Business will just go to a more competative nation such as Vietnam to source product, and the tourists will go where they get more bang for their buck.

[MYKTHEMIN]

Very Very Very BAD decision!!!!!!

Please give reasons and sources.

Because every thing will go up as diesel is used by anyone here in business to either plough the fields to transporting to market everything will be price hiked and inflation will be even more rife than we are already suffering, if you cannot see that??????