Malcom,
If you asked me some month ago, I would have said exactly the same thing. In Sweden and Swedish it is used with clear distinctions. I never really thought about it. When I started to read all kind of Internet publications and many articles about energy in transport sector. I also started to be more vigilant about interviews/programs on TV (CNN) etc. and was surprised about how many that mixed up road tax and fuel tax. It was also very surprising how many politician who both directly and indirectly mixed them. Power of words are enormous. One example of this is this discussion list, were on many occasions people used the name road tax for fuel tax. If you never heard fuel tax be called road tax, then you are very new to this list. It is also a sign of the effects of the press who does not think when they quote. The politicians like indirect taxes because it reduces psychologically the importance of tax issues in election campaigns. It also give possibilities of manipulating the people. For years now, we have seen this restating of purposes and/or misuse of definitions, all geared up to make issues less transparent. Methods very compatible with the things that we now are putting executives from Worldcom and Enron in jail for. If the politicians had the same stringent rules as corporations today, they would be in big trouble and we all agree that the rules for corporations must be even more stringent. The personal responsibly for decisions both for executives and politicians must be set higher. Look only on the MTBE addition case, were the lawmakers are trying to cover up for the oil industry, in a case that have larger financial loss potential than Enron and on top of that are gambling with human lives. If we got equal professional accountability standards for executives and politicians as for the doctors, the big question is if it is not cheaper to put bars on our parliaments and governmental buildings, than building new prisons. Hakan At 09:45 AM 10/12/2002 +0000, you wrote: >I've never heard fuel tax be called road tax. That term is reserved >for the annual licencing tax. There are several fuel tax levels, >heating fuel tax and off road fuel tax, both very low, and road fuel >tax, very high. It has never been claimed that this tax is for >spending on the roads and no reason for it to be. >Malcolm > >--- In [EMAIL PROTECTED], Hakan Falk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > I like to point out something that we might be missing here. Road >tax have > > traditionally been a yearly levy on the vehicles in most countries, >at > > least in Europe. This road tax is meant to cover the road and >transport > > systems, a so called ear marked tax. Tax on fuels is a sales tax >that > > normally to other needs of the society. Fuel tax is wrongfully and > > deliberately attempted to label as road tax by politicians, but >have very > > little to do with roads. > > > > Talking with politicians, they often label the higher fuel tax as a >way to > > control consumption and encourage energy savings. Like tobacco tax >is there > > to encourage "no smoking", Sweden just lowered the tobacco tax >because sale > > was going down to much. > > > > It might have been a noble argument to save energy and ease up on >the > > expensive oil import. Reality today is that most governments have >gone in > > to the oil business in a big way. EU have taken directives for tax >exempt > > for bio fuels and UK is one of the countries that resists >implementation > > and that also is prepared to use the police to protect their oil >business. > > > > So we should stop calling fuel tax with the name "road tax" and >instead > > call it "sales tax". In the latest oil crises Blair and other >politicians > > refused to ease the tax to help the transportation industry. The >argument > > was that they would have to close schools and hospitals if they >did. Quite > > a revealing argument on how they use the "road tax". > > > > The above should be said at all presentations. > > > > Hakan > > > > > > At 08:25 AM 10/10/2002 +0900, you wrote: > > >Hello Dan > > > > > >Just want to respond to this bit: > > > > > > >Are producers getting shut down for lack of road tax payment? > > > >I just heard a small clip on NPR this morning about arrests? or >fines > > > >against people but I did not hear the whole clip. (can't find it >on > > > >archive either.) > > > > > >and this: > > > > > > >I could use a bit more info on govt. regs. small scale producers, > > > > > >Re small scale producers, please see this message cross-posted from > > >Biofuels-biz: > > >http://archive.nnytech.net/index.php?view=17393&list=biofuel > > > > > >Re taxes, a small producer has been penalised, not for producing >the > > >fuel, but for using it on-road without paying the tax. The onus is >on > > >the user. Here's the message we received: > > > > > > >... from World Energy ... > > > > > > > >Snip> > > > >We run into a lot of small producers who are trying to do the >right thing, > > > >but I would be remiss if I did not warn about the severity of >cutting > > > corners > > > >from an IRS or EPA standpoint. > > > >Any biodiesel producer or seller needs to understand that any >biodiesel used > > > >(not sold)as fuel in an on-road vehicle is subject to on-road >tax. We have a > > > >number of producers around the country who do not want to deal >with the tax, > > > >and sell it tax exempt. This fuel does often end up in peoples >vehicles. > > > Just > > > >as you and I pay tax at the pump, it is the user who is >ultimately > > > >responsible for road tax. > > > > > > > >We just had a small producer in another state in a similar >situation. They > > > >own a number of diesel vehicles and have been using it for about >a year. > > > They > > > >were just hit with bill for $0.31/gallon State excise tax plus >penalties and > > > >interest for every gallon they have produced. In addition, since >the > > > fuel was > > > >used in on-road vehicles, the Federal Government can (and most >likely will) > > > >fine up to $10.00/gallon for every gallon used. The organization >in Maine is > > > >a non-profit agency and is therefore tax exempt. They also do >not sell any > > > >fuel to te outside world. > > > > > > > >Many of these small producers are yet to realize how sad the >ending may > > > be. I > > > >don't mean to sound rude or abrupt, but the tax consequences can >be quite > > > >severe. I have already seen it happen once. I think we will see >it happen > > > >again. > > > > > >It might be interesting to compare the subsidies gallon-for-gallon > > >used for fossil fuels and biofuels, or not even necessary - we all > > >know which way that goes. A lot of us see no justification in >taxing > > >biofuels at all. This is what someone on another list just said >about > > >it: > > > > > > >To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > >From: John Archibald <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > > > >Date: Wed, 09 Oct 2002 14:19:15 -0500 > > > >Subject: [wastewatts] Frying Squad > > > > > > > >Keith, > > > > > > > >I'm glad this has happened in the Northeast. Boston is in the >Northeast. > > > >There was a certain "social gathering" there in the 1770s that >sparked a > > > >revolution due to what was perceived as an unjust tax on a >certain > > > >beverage. > > > > > > > >I think a little non-violent protest is needed to bring home the >ideas. > > > >If I were out there, I would try to get arrested and then fight >it in > > > >court. > > > > > > > >Pretty soon they'll have to tax the Amish because they feed their > > > >carriage hauling horses soybeans and hay! Then you will have a >case > > > >involving religion and fuel. Can any lines be drawn then? I >think the > > > >Constitution would be a pretty safe place to hide at that >point. "The > > > >pursuit of happiness and freedom from religious persecution" or > > > >something like that comes to mind. > > > > > > > >Archibald > > > > > >Tea, anyone? > > > > > ><snip> > > > > > >Nice outline for your presentation. Please tell us how it goes, and > > >best of good luck. > > > > > > >this is the best forum in all of yahoo.! > > > >keep it up keith. > > > > > >Thankyou Dan! I'll buy you a virtual beer for that. :-) But it's >the > > >whole gang, not just me. The complete catastrophe, as they say, not > > >just the match that lit the fuse. > > > > > >All best > > > > > >Keith > > > > > > >dan rosen > > > > > > > > > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: > > >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > > > > > >Biofuels list archives: > > >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > > > > > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. > > >To unsubscribe, send an email to: > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > > > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to >http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ > > > > >Biofuel at Journey to Forever: >http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html > >Biofuels list archives: >http://archive.nnytech.net/ > >Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. >To unsubscribe, send an email to: >[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/ ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~--> Home Selling? Try Us! http://us.click.yahoo.com/QrPZMC/iTmEAA/MVfIAA/FGYolB/TM ---------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Biofuel at Journey to Forever: http://journeytoforever.org/biofuel.html Biofuels list archives: http://archive.nnytech.net/ Please do NOT send Unsubscribe messages to the list address. To unsubscribe, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
