Now I have a severe dislike for Rudd and his Labor government, but I'd like to keep this particular discussion to the luxury car tax rather than their overall performance.
Now can someone tell me what the **** this is all about??
Is it nothing more than a token policy for "battlers" and "working families" to think that Rudd and co. are going in to bat for them?? Give me a break. There are so many flaws with this policy.
1) The government's definition of a "luxury car" is one that is priced at $57k or over.
I don't know if this will change, but what made them arrive at that particular number? I was walking past a Mercedes dealership on my way to work yesterday and was checking out the pice tags on the window of each car. The higher end cars were $90k+ and quite obviously "luxury" whatever way you wanted to look at it. However there were a LOT of cars priced between $45k and $56k which makes me wonder how you can own a really nice looking Mercedes and not have it classed as a "luxury car"?
On the other hand, my dad used to own a Ford Territory, though I actually think it was leased through his company. Depending on which model you choose, some of those things can be priced well over $60k. So a Mercedes is not luxury, but a Ford is? Come on...
2) You are not necessarily "wealthy" because you own a nice car!
Why should luxury car owners be slugged extra simply because they prioritise cars in their life? They might have an average job, average house in the suburbs but REALLY love cars and have therefore saved a lot of money to buy their dream ride. It's not something I'd do and you can argue people like that have their priorities mixed up, but who is the government to pigeonhole people that own luxury cars in to being "wealthy"?
On another note (while still being relevant), it's like the private school system. While the majority of students come from wealthier backgrounds, quite a few don't. Their parents have just worked hard and sacrificed a LOT more for their children's education. It's a similar principle. While an investment in the future of your family is a lot different from a car, a lot of people have made sacrifices and saved money to indulge on what is important to them without being "wealthy".
I just think it's a pathetic, token tax to window dress a Robin Hood budget
EDIT: and FWIW, I don't even own a car!
Now can someone tell me what the **** this is all about??
Is it nothing more than a token policy for "battlers" and "working families" to think that Rudd and co. are going in to bat for them?? Give me a break. There are so many flaws with this policy.
1) The government's definition of a "luxury car" is one that is priced at $57k or over.
I don't know if this will change, but what made them arrive at that particular number? I was walking past a Mercedes dealership on my way to work yesterday and was checking out the pice tags on the window of each car. The higher end cars were $90k+ and quite obviously "luxury" whatever way you wanted to look at it. However there were a LOT of cars priced between $45k and $56k which makes me wonder how you can own a really nice looking Mercedes and not have it classed as a "luxury car"?
On the other hand, my dad used to own a Ford Territory, though I actually think it was leased through his company. Depending on which model you choose, some of those things can be priced well over $60k. So a Mercedes is not luxury, but a Ford is? Come on...
2) You are not necessarily "wealthy" because you own a nice car!
Why should luxury car owners be slugged extra simply because they prioritise cars in their life? They might have an average job, average house in the suburbs but REALLY love cars and have therefore saved a lot of money to buy their dream ride. It's not something I'd do and you can argue people like that have their priorities mixed up, but who is the government to pigeonhole people that own luxury cars in to being "wealthy"?
On another note (while still being relevant), it's like the private school system. While the majority of students come from wealthier backgrounds, quite a few don't. Their parents have just worked hard and sacrificed a LOT more for their children's education. It's a similar principle. While an investment in the future of your family is a lot different from a car, a lot of people have made sacrifices and saved money to indulge on what is important to them without being "wealthy".
I just think it's a pathetic, token tax to window dress a Robin Hood budget
EDIT: and FWIW, I don't even own a car!
