COE and Car Prices

Thread Rating:
  • 1 Vote(s) - 1 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage
“夏则资皮,冬则资纱,旱则资船,水则资车” - 范蠡
Reply
(16-05-2013, 01:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage

That is true...but I suppose there are people more creative than I am to think of ways to get around.
Reply
(16-05-2013, 02:12 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage

That is true...but I suppose there are people more creative than I am to think of ways to get around.

FYI, there already a motivation to register name with ONLY one car ownership, due to the insurance's NCD. NCD is substantial nowadays with the high premium.

NCD entitlement valid only on ONE car ownership.
“夏则资皮,冬则资纱,旱则资船,水则资车” - 范蠡
Reply
NCD only for one car - that's new information to me - never get the chance to find out since I have only one car.
Reply
(16-05-2013, 01:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage

That depends on the amount of surcharge. $100 probably not. $10000??

Unless the law specifically mandates that only the owner of the car can drive the car and no one else, there is nothing to stop a non-owner to drive the car for 10 years as long as the owner agrees.

I have no problem renting the car to anyone for 10 years if he is willing to pay a princely sum of money.
Reply
(16-05-2013, 03:29 PM)yeokiwi Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage

That depends on the amount of surcharge. $100 probably not. $10000??

Unless the law specifically mandates that only the owner of the car can drive the car and no one else, there is nothing to stop a non-owner to drive the car for 10 years as long as the owner agrees.

I have no problem renting the car to anyone for 10 years if he is willing to pay a princely sum of money.

I am sure you have no problem. The problem is with the one pays the full car price, but registered under other's name. Big Grin
“夏则资皮,冬则资纱,旱则资船,水则资车” - 范蠡
Reply
(16-05-2013, 04:30 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 03:29 PM)yeokiwi Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:58 PM)CityFarmer Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:43 PM)egghead Wrote:
(16-05-2013, 01:25 PM)yeokiwi Wrote: Even with the above measures, I suppose some smart alecks are more than willing to buy a car on behalf of someone for a token sum of money.

Exactly. Those who are not able to afford one in the first place will sell their COE (Certificate of Exemption - from surcharge) to the rich. Both party get what they want but the state lose.

I assume the "exemption" is non-transferable. I don't see one will buy a car, registers it under a stranger's name, and pays him/her a fee, instead of pays the GOV with the surchage

That depends on the amount of surcharge. $100 probably not. $10000??

Unless the law specifically mandates that only the owner of the car can drive the car and no one else, there is nothing to stop a non-owner to drive the car for 10 years as long as the owner agrees.

I have no problem renting the car to anyone for 10 years if he is willing to pay a princely sum of money.

I am sure you have no problem. The problem is with the one pays the full car price, but registered under other's name. Big Grin

And nothing to stop the person to sell off the car as it belongs to him/her officially. Any contracts below the real buyer and offical buyer should be illegal.
Reply
The Straits Times
www.straitstimes.com
Published on May 17, 2013
Govt seeks 'more equitable' COE system

Among the ideas: Impose surcharge on multiple-car ownership
By Christopher Tan Senior Transport Correspondent


OWNING a second car could attract a surcharge, as the Government considers ways to make the vehicle quota system more socially equitable. Another option on the table is to re-categorise cars to better separate luxury vehicles from mass-market ones.

Transport Minister Lui Tuck Yew said yesterday that the proposals were among the various suggestions the Government had received from the public.

He has asked the Land Transport Authority to consult the public and stakeholders before deciding on changes.

The Straits Times understands that any change could be implemented as early as next February.

Mr Lui noted that last year, luxury brands like BMW and Audi took up more than one-third of Category A certificates of entitlement (COEs), which are for cars of up to 1,600cc. In 2010, the figure was less than 7 per cent.

"While this is a reflection of increasing affluence and consumer preferences, we also want to make sure Cat A, which is intended for buyers of smaller, budget cars, retains its original purpose."

Ways to do this could include re-categorising COEs by engine power, or to apply another criterion on top of engine capacity.

As for the proposal to impose extra levies on multiple-car owners, Mr Lui said it was "extremely difficult" for the Government to decide "who should be allowed to own cars and how many". That should best be left to the market.

But he added that there may also be merit in linking multiple- car ownership to "proportionately" higher levies - even though such a scheme could "fuel anti- wealth sentiments" and also be easily circumvented.

Mr Ron Lim, general manager of Nissan agent Tan Chong Motor, said: "If people want to get around such a rule, there are so many options, such as registering a car under another name."

He said care should be exercised in COE re-categorisation. If a car's power rating is used, strict enforcement is needed to prevent owners from tuning up the engine after registration, for instance.

Transport Government Parliamentary Committee member Lim Biow Chuan welcomed a review. "Ultimately, what we are looking for is social equity. Cat A is really intended for the man in the street who wants a basic car to transport him from point A to B. My sense is they are being crowded out... because of all the luxury vehicles that are in Cat A as well."

He said a balance will have to be struck between over-taxing the rich and meeting the interests of the man in the street.

About 7 per cent of motorists currently have more than one car. Retiree K.S. Ong, 57, who is one of them, believes car ownership is not an entitlement, and how COEs are distributed should be determined by market forces.

"People just have to accept that the world is competitive. Not everyone in London, New York and Hong Kong owns a car. Those who do pay through the nose."

But another retiree, Mr Lee Kok Meng, 56, said segregating luxury and everyday cars is "a good idea", but "the difficulty is in drawing the line" between the two.

He said a better way would be to have premiums pegged to a car's open-market value. That way, those who buy up-market cars will end up paying more.

Said Mr Lee: "Then you may not even need different categories or any other surcharge."

christan@sph.com.sg

Additional reporting by Royston Sim
My Value Investing Blog: http://sgmusicwhiz.blogspot.com/
Reply
Just mandate second and subsequent car get zero financing.
"... but quitting while you're ahead is not the same as quitting." - Quote from the movie American Gangster
Reply
(17-05-2013, 08:05 AM)opmi Wrote: Just mandate second and subsequent car get zero financing.

That is not a problem for those have the money.
Reply


Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 11 Guest(s)