HMRC loses case regarding duty on red diesel for boats

[Phil.]

2 minutes ago, Jerra said:

Farage was saying on TV tonight there are more people wanting to change their vote to leave than there are wanting to change to remain.  If this is correct I fail to understand why Brexiteers are so scared of a second referendum.

Whose afraid of another vote. Perhaps its the stitch up question we fear. If it is accepted by remainers that we voted to leave the eu, then the question should not have a remain option, it should be between leave with the deal as negotiated, or leave with no deal. Would that be ok with you, if so, bring it on.

[Graham Davis]

30 minutes ago, Gareth E said:

Yes of course, before an election it's important to pull out statistics. An effective targeting campaign can then be mounted, making the best use of available resources.

 

Quoting statistics after a one off referendum is a completely different matter. It's obvious that remainers who make the point that the majority of the young and the educated voted to remain do so to make a remain argument. They are on an internet discussion, arguing for remain. OK so far? So, we can deduce that these people, who are aware as anyone else that the result was 52 48 in favour of leave, feel this is altered (morally at least) by the fact that a disproportionate number of the young and the educated voted remain. We can therefore say that these people feel the votes of the young and the educated are more important than the votes of the uneducated and the elderly.

 

As I said earlier, hardly the kind of thinking you'd expect from the so called progressives, those who hold talk of inclusivity and equality dear to their hearts. Ironic really, given that this type of thinking is at the more extreme end of everything the so called progressives purport to loathe.     

Your reply suggests you know nothing about the work a Candidates Political Agent did. It was not just at election time but for long periods both  before and after the election.

And I also begin to wonder whether you understand how statistics work and how they are used. The figures quoted are exactly the same for a referendum as they would be for a normal election. The figures from YouGov have nothng to do with whether you are for or against Brexit. They have no "side" and no-one here has used them to show anything other than FACTS.

Sorry but you really need to stop thinking everything is a conspiracy and the so-called "elite" are out to get YOU. Frankly they are not the thoughts of a thinking adult.

28 minutes ago, Gareth E said:

OK....what is the point in discussing which group voted what in the referendum?

Because the question was asked and some of us find them interesting.
Just because you don't doesn't mean they shouldn't be.

[Graham Davis]

19 minutes ago, Gareth E said:

Well it's been discussed at length in this thread, stats have been posted,  talk of a result skewed by prejudice and misunderstanding. Sounds like a bit more than idle chatter to me. 

Which goes to prove you don't understand statistics.
And you accused me of not understanding discussion forums!

[Jerra]

3 minutes ago, Phil. said:

Whose afraid of another vote. Perhaps its the stitch up question we fear. If it is accepted by remainers that we voted to leave the eu, then the question should not have a remain option, it should be between leave with the deal as negotiated, or leave with no deal. Would that be ok with you, if so, bring it on.

You seem to be missing the point.   A lot (according to Farage) have changed their mind one way or the other, also currently we don't know what the "deal" (and I include no deal in that).  To me any fair minded person would be wondering a) is this still the will of the people and if a Brexiteer thinking yippee we might get a massive percentage difference and b) is the deal (whatever it is) really what the voters want.

 

But no in spite of Farage claiming more now want to leave it has to be a skewed vote missing out the almost 50% of the population and trying to ride rough shod over those who voted leave at first and now have changed their minds.

[Gareth E]

2 minutes ago, Graham Davis said:

Your reply suggests you know nothing about the work a Candidates Political Agent did. It was not just at election time but for long periods both  before and after the election.

And I also begin to wonder whether you understand how statistics work and how they are used. The figures quoted are exactly the same for a referendum as they would be for a normal election. The figures from YouGov have nothng to do with whether you are for or against Brexit. They have no "side" and no-one here has used them to show anything other than FACTS.

Sorry but you really need to stop thinking everything is a conspiracy and the so-called "elite" are out to get YOU. Frankly they are not the thoughts of a thinking adult.

I should understand how statistics work, given that I have a professional qualification in a finance discipline but I don't claim to know everything. This is very basic stuff though so yes, I do understand.

 

I you read my posts a bit more carefully you'll see that I have no issues with the statistics. My point is that they are utterly irrelevant.

 

A thinking adult can either gobble up everything put in front of him and think it's all wonderful or he can pick and choose, eat the tasty bits, discard the bad bits, after careful examination. Both approaches are equally acceptable for adults.  

 

[Graham Davis]

Funny that everyone else seems to understand their relevance to this discussion.

[MtB]

The statistics discussion kicked off because Doraxplorer asserted old gits voted leave and youngsters voted remain, and I said my perception is the split was more along lines of edumacation, and asked if anyone had any statistical evidence for any of this.

 

Edit to iron out the wine effect!

Edited October 19, 2018 by Mike the Boilerman

[Wanderer Vagabond]

Just as a suggestion, and I know that threads do often go off at a tangent, but this thread seems to be becoming a duplicate Brexit thread. Whilst I'm more than content to contribute to the Brexit discussion, could we perhaps keep it on the Brexit thread itself. This was supposed to be about HMRC and red diesel, and can anyone yet tell me why I should be exempt from fuel duty when I buy it for my boat but truckers have to pay it when they burn white diesel in their Espersbachers?

[MtB]

The more threads about brexit the better. 

 

Its not as if there has been much discussion about it so far. 

 

 

[Momac]

I presume trucks could have a tank dedicated to the heater and could use red diesel for the heater. 

 

[Momac]

I expect any change to present arrangements will takes months if not longer. We need not panic.

 

If a retailer was required to change to white it would presumably take several deliveries of white before the red dye staining becomes acceptably diluted. Therefore introducing a further inevitable transition period. 

 

 

[Sea Dog]

9 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

can anyone yet tell me why I should be exempt from fuel duty when I buy it for my boat but truckers have to pay it when they burn white diesel in their Espersbachers?

Yes.  Because truckers are very naughty an you're very nice.  HMRC would do well to incentivise being nice.

 

[Momac]

Does white diesel potentially have more biodiesel in it compared to red?

If so of think this may be more liable to water in fuel / diesel bug issues.  I already use a precautionary fuel treatment as I suspect red diesel supplied by marinas may be white with dye added rather than FAME free as it ideally should be for boats with a low rate of fuel turnover. 

Marinas presumably turn over far less fuel than a road fuel station. Could this mean enhanced risk of taking on bad fuel? Our EU friends don't seem to have a problem 

[mrsmelly]

16 hours ago, Jerra said:

A couple of points (again).  First I am not sure where the 5% comes from, at my time in Grammar school 25% went to grammar school and the majority went on to university.  So even 50 + years ago it was well over the 5%

 

Secondly many of those who weren't studying for a degree were in polytechnics and the like studying for tertiary level qualifications.

 

Thirdly (sorry gone more  than my couple of points) have you studied for a degree in recent years?  Both my daughters have studied for degrees (3 different ones) I didn't see the work they had to produce as being out of a lucky bag.

Whilst I dont disagree the work involved is not easy, going to uni straight from school and doing a degree is far from onerous. One of my daughters did it that way. One whilst doing a full time job paid herself for seven years doing an open university degree and I have one aged 38 who has just finished her degree in mental health nursing. She has done that whilst already working full time for the nhs, running a home and having a four year old and 12 year old child and yes her degree work was rather complex but done as an 18 year old with no other commitments a degree taking uni lifestyle isnt hard. As for percentages of kids doing degrees straight from school whatever it is its far far higher than when I went to school but I take the point there were other ways of getting better qualifications in those days.

[peterboat]

12 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Just as a suggestion, and I know that threads do often go off at a tangent, but this thread seems to be becoming a duplicate Brexit thread. Whilst I'm more than content to contribute to the Brexit discussion, could we perhaps keep it on the Brexit thread itself. This was supposed to be about HMRC and red diesel, and can anyone yet tell me why I should be exempt from fuel duty when I buy it for my boat but truckers have to pay it when they burn white diesel in their Espersbachers?

Some trucks have separate tanks and use red diesel for heating, or they did when I worked for Cornelius

[Jess--]

1 hour ago, peterboat said:

Some trucks have separate tanks and use red diesel for heating, or they did when I worked for Cornelius

so it's much the same as it will probably end up being for boats then

 

only one tank = use white diesel for everything at full rate
multiple tanks = white for main engine / red for heating/cooling/power generation (from memory the chiller units on artic trailers can legally run red)

[Momac]

3 minutes ago, Jess-- said:

so it's much the same as it will probably end up being for boats then

 

only one tank = use white diesel for everything at full rate
multiple tanks = white for main engine / red for heating/cooling/power generation (from memory the chiller units on artic trailers can legally run red)

That may be because it is not for road use.

Apply the same logic to boats and red diesel should be okay. Our EU friends are not logical thinkers.

[Alan de Enfield]

16 minutes ago, MartynG said:

That may be because it is not for road use.

Apply the same logic to boats and red diesel should be okay. Our EU friends are not logical thinkers.

Definition of private pleasure craft

‘Private pleasure craft’ is defined in the EC Council Directive 2003/96, known as the Energy Products Directive, as:

‘Any craft used by its owner or the natural or legal person who enjoys its use either through hire or through any other means, for other than commercial purposes and in particular other than for the carriage of passengers or goods or for the supply of services for consideration or for the purposes of public authorities.’

For the purposes of the relevant provisions of the Hydrocarbon Oil Duties Act 1979 (the primary legislation that governs the levying of duty on fuel oil in the UK) ’private pleasure craft’ has the same meaning as in the Energy Products Directive.

The definition of ‘private pleasure craft’ is different from the definition of ‘pleasure vessel’ used in UK legislation such as regulations made under the Merchant Shipping Act 1995, including the Merchant Shipping (Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure) Regulations 1998.

The definition of ‘pleasure vessel’ is narrower than that of ‘private pleasure craft’ so it’s likely that some craft that are not ‘pleasure vessels’ for the purposes of the Merchant Shipping (Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure) Regulations 1998 and therefore have to comply with the relevant Code of Practice will nevertheless still be ‘private pleasure craft’ for the purpose of purchasing fuel.

In most cases it will be clear whether a craft is being used for private pleasure purposes, for example, privately owned yachts, motor boats or canal boats. Likewise, the bareboat hire or leasing of such boats from a commercial body, for example for holidays, is classed as private pleasure usage.

However, we accept that some arrangements may be difficult to classify, so we have provided the following broad guidance. The following isn’t a definitive list but are examples of what we consider are likely or unlikely, to be private pleasure use:

Bareboat charter: likely to be regarded as a private pleasure craft, whatever the means of payment, if any.

Skippered charter: unlikely to be regarded as a private pleasure craft if the owner/charter company provides a skipper, as this may equate to the carriage of passengers for consideration.

Training courses: unlikely to be a private pleasure craft, as this may equate to the supply of services for consideration.

Yacht delivery: unlikely to be a private pleasure craft if the delivery is by professional crew on behalf of a yacht manufacturer, distributor or charter company; otherwise, likely to be a private pleasure craft.

Club yacht used by members* - likely to be a private pleasure craft.

Club committee boat* - likely to be a private pleasure craft.

Club safety boat* - likely to be a private pleasure craft, although a coastal club may be entitled to reclaim the duty in accordance with Notice 263 marine voyages - relief from fuel duty.

Club launch* - likely to be a private pleasure craft.

*Many of these craft fall within the definition of ‘pleasure vessel’ for the purposes of the Merchant Shipping (Vessels in Commercial Use for Sport or Pleasure) Regulations 1998 and don’t need to comply with the applicable Codes of Practice. As such, it is likely that they would also be regarded as ‘private pleasure craft’ for the purposes of purchasing fuel.

Where you have any doubts you should seek a definitive ruling from us. You can do this by writing with full details of the type of vessel and the circumstances of its use to the HMRC Excise Helpline.

Transportation of staff in corporate yachts: if you transport your staff on corporate yachts to attend a business meeting or trade fair, the fuel duty exemption will no longer be applicable as this is now considered to be private pleasure. A company using its own yachts to transport its own staff is not providing a service for consideration.

 

6. Penalties

Situations where a civil penalty under section 9 of the Finance Act 1994 may be imposed include failure by:

• users to make a declaration that the marked gas oil is intended to be used as fuel for propelling private pleasure craft
• users to make complete and accurate declarations
• suppliers to render returns and payments by the due date
• suppliers to make complete and accurate returns

Penalties of £250 or 5% of the duty due (whichever is greater) and where appropriate daily penalties of £20 after the due date that payment of duty remains outstanding may be imposed for each contravention.

[MtB]

30 minutes ago, Alan de Enfield said:

6. Penalties

Situations where a civil penalty under section 9 of the Finance Act 1994 may be imposed include failure by:

• users to make a declaration that the marked gas oil is intended to be used as fuel for propelling private pleasure craft
• users to make complete and accurate declarations
• suppliers to render returns and payments by the due date
• suppliers to make complete and accurate returns

 

 

So now I'm puzzled. What has changed with this ruling if we are still allowed to buy marked gas oil, and to declare when it is for propulsion?

 

Or has this regulation now been set aside and needs to be redrafted? 

 

 

 

[Chewbacka]

1 hour ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

 

 

So now I'm puzzled. What has changed with this ruling if we are still allowed to buy marked gas oil, and to declare when it is for propulsion?

 

Or has this regulation now been set aside and needs to be redrafted? 

 

 

 

The eu is saying that having marked fuel (red diesel) in a leisure boat propulsion tank is forbidden.  So there will be no need to make a declaration in future as you will either have two tanks, or buy only white diesel.  There will be no allowance for using your propulsion engine to charge batteries or heat water, that engine must only use white diesel.  The problem will be that boat orientated fuel suppliers will not have enough turn over to justify selling both red and white and will choose to sell which ever is the more profitable for them - probably red as white will be cheaper from supermarkets using Jerry cans.

 

added - you will still make a declaration when buying red to ‘promise’ not to put it into a leisure boat propulsion tank.

Edited October 20, 2018 by Chewbacka

[furnessvale]

39 minutes ago, Chewbacka said:

added - you will still make a declaration when buying red to ‘promise’ not to put it into a leisure boat propulsion tank.

That is an interesting thought.  At present sellers of red diesel away from canals/rivers are only interested that it doesn't go into ROAD vehicles.

 

George

[Chewbacka]

16 minutes ago, furnessvale said:

That is an interesting thought.  At present sellers of red diesel away from canals/rivers are only interested that it doesn't go into ROAD vehicles.

 

George

In reality that is how it will probably continue as HMRC have never been interested in boats as the fuel usage in boats is a tiny percentage of total diesel sales.  But will hmrc be forced to stand on the canal, pulling boats over to dip the tanks to keep the eu happy, or will it be ignored in the UK and just leisure sea boats that will be dipped the moment they enter EU waters and hit with a big fine.  The eu would love that.

[yabasayo]

17 hours ago, Wanderer Vagabond said:

Just as a suggestion, and I know that threads do often go off at a tangent, but this thread seems to be becoming a duplicate Brexit thread. Whilst I'm more than content to contribute to the Brexit discussion, could we perhaps keep it on the Brexit thread itself. This was supposed to be about HMRC and red diesel, and can anyone yet tell me why I should be exempt from fuel duty when I buy it for my boat but truckers have to pay it when they burn white diesel in their Espersbachers?

Truckers get the vat back.

[Alan de Enfield]

1 minute ago, yabasayo said:

Truckers get the vat back.

So can boaters if they are VAT registered.

[Alan de Enfield]

Earlier in the thread was the suggestion about hiring the boat out to yourself - the 'tax-man' has thought of that :

 

Some examples of hires and their eligibility for relief are:
If you hire out a boat	with a crew		you can claim relief on the fuel used.
If you hire out a boat	without a crew	and the hirer uses the boat for pleasure purposes	you cannot claim relief on the fuel used as this is a private charter.
If you	as the hirer or owner of a boat	take paying passengers on a diving/fishing trip	you can claim relief on the fuel used if this is a marine voyage.
If you	as the hirer or owner of a boat	take non-paying passengers on a diving/fishing trip	you cannot claim relief on the fuel used as the voyage is entirely for pleasure purposes.