ABS light is on

Page 4 of 7  


The dealer has administrative costs associated with the collection and sending in of the VAT. VAT is not a dealer charge, and the government wants you to consider it as one so you are mad at the wrong party. If you thought of the VAT as a government fee along with the mountain of other governemnt fees, then you would be mad at the government. But if government can get you to be mad at the dealership for collecting the VAT, then the government is off the hook.
I'm not suggesting you simply swallow the VAT, I'm only suggesting that if you are going to be mad about it, be mad at the proper party -- the government.
But, yes, you have to pay VAT. My point is that it isn't a profit center for the dealership, so you should not look at the service fee as $100 + VAT, as if the VAT goes to the dealer. Collection and administration of the VAT is a cost center for the dealership, not a profit center. I'm certain that the dealership would love to stop collecting the VAT if it could.
Seems like you limeys had an issue some 250 years ago with taxation without representation. And you still have it.
There is a move afoot here in the Colonies to give us a VAT and do away with the Income Tax that we pay. As a small business -- _very_ small business, I think the VAT would probably drive me back to working for the man every night and day. I don't have the resources to collect and pay a VAT on the services I provide, and paying VAT on the services I consume is likely to cause me to raise my prices which will decrease my business and increase the percentage of costs to administer the VAT.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 14:16:58 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:
[...]

Here in the UK there is a threshold below which small businesses do not have to register for VAT. It's currently defined thus:
If your turnover of VAT taxable goods and services supplied within the UK for the previous 12 months is more than the current registration threshold of £70,000, you need to register.
Chris
--
Remove prejudice to reply.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
much like they were saying:

...or one quarter of that threshold in any three month period...
It's also worth pointing out to the OP that collection is trivial, assuming you use some kind of vaguely sensible accounting software, and being registered for VAT allows you to reclaim the VAT on any goods or services you buy for the business.
Yes, it might decrease your sales - but, since all your competitors will also have the same decision to make (absorb or pass on), it's not likely unless you're supplying discretionary-purchase products.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
FWIW I run a small business (in the UK) and voluntarily registered for VAT as I was below the theshold of taxable income (income for services rendered outside the EU is outside the scope of VAT).
Aside from the discipline it imposes by the quarterly return it takes me very little time to do and gives me a great return on the time spent reclaiming VAT. At the outset my accountant gave me a spreadsheet template that automatically does the calculation and I since refined it to spit out the VAT return numbers automatically as well. Admittedly my affairs are simple but the tax isn't always such a hassle as people unfamiliar with it think.
In the UK the tax is not actually applied in the spirit in which it should be, namely on everything but at a low rate. Here we have a lot of exemptions and so the rate is quite high (but still not as high as in many other EU states, even at the new rate of 20%). It is the boundary between liability and exemption that is the cause of of many admin complications.
The tax has a certain logic, in that the tax is applied at every stage of commercial transaction, but it is only the final buyer of the finished good who pays the tax.
It is not meant as a replacement for income tax but could be implemented that way if the economic and/or political economic environment allowed. It is just another (indirect) tax.
DAS
--
To reply directly replace 'nospam' with 'schmetterling'
--
"Adrian" < snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

& it's sufficiently trivial you don't even need software, even I can do it:-)

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 05/01/2011 22:16, Jeff Strickland wrote:

I'm not mad at having to pay VAT. VAT is applied to nearly everything we buy. Individuals cannot get out from that form of taxation. Which is good. Those that have the money to spend, pay the tax. That is how it should be.
Part of my point was the outrageous cost of the hourly rate, which is double that of some other car marque main dealerships, even though their cars are not that much cheaper to buy....
The other part of my point was; why should people living on the breadline have to subsidise company executive perks such as; company cars; high class hotels; restaurants; flights et cetera, that often get squirrelled away under expenses / disbursements and end up being reclaimed against tax.
Sure, I have had company cars, but it was not a perk as I was driving 950 miles per week, on average. Those whom do 3,000 miles per year in a company car, what is the point of that ? Why should I / we have to subsidise that ?
In some cases, a company gets to write off the whole cost of purchase in the first year, therefore creating extra unearned profit at disposal, at the cost of the taxpayer. Some of whom live off very small pensions.
Sorry for going off topic.
David
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

You don't. They subsidise you.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/01/2011 15:48, Adrian wrote:

No they don't.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Umm, yes, they do. Go and have a look at how co.car tax is calculated. The perk car is LONG since dead.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 06/01/2011 16:12, Adrian wrote:

Umm, no they don't.
The car costs a lot more to buy / lease and run (as a private consumer) than a co. user pays in tax on a company car. But, my complaint is not the driver tax situation, rather the company tax relief that the tax payer subsidises.
The other month, whilst at the Jaguar Learning Centre in the Birmingham area, I was wandering around the car park during a break and more than a dozen new-ish Jag coupes (not being a Jag fan, I don't know what the models were) arrived with two execs on board. They had been out for a jolly. Those cars were perks. My point here is; I do not know how much those cars were, nor their CO2 output, but the depreciation of those cars written off against tax is subsidised by the taxpayer in general.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Are you forgetting the tax-free IR mileage rate?

What "company tax relief" would that be, then?

The only Jag Coupe is the XK.

You know this for a fact, do you?

You know this for a fact, do you?

XK list starts at £60k

High enough that they're 35% tax rate.

You know this for a fact, do you?
Apart from the fact that virtually no company (at least outside the motor industry) actually _owns_ their company cars - they're all leased - I'll tell you for a fact that there will be virtually no depreciation put against Jaguar's books for those cars, since they'll be sold as approved- used cars at a few months old. As for whether they're co.cars or not - I've got various friends that work for UK importers/manufacturers. They have a choice of running them as company cars or effectively buying/ reselling. Where you're looking at cars with an annual tax bill approaching ten grand (like those XKs for a 40% taxpayer) then it's most certainly going to be preferable to do the latter.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/01/2011 11:59, Adrian wrote:

Ok, convince me how they subsidise me.

Ok
Yes, I asked.

They could have been given much cheaper alternatives

Obviously
So when I read that, in some circumstances, companies can write off 100% of the cost of the car in the first year against tax, none of them do then?

Someone owns them, had to buy them, unless the leasing companies lease them from the manufacturer

So they did not cost Jaguar much to make, and run, them ? Accountants are paid to find ways of avoiding the payment of tax.

The dealership I worked at (a while ago) did not own the cars in the showroom, but had to pay the manufacturer a daily fee. We never got the importer released company cars. The last time I asked at a dealership, the demonstrators could not be sold until they were six months old.

Probably, but when a company buys that Jag new, (and they do) they are able to write off some depreciation against tax. ie, tax relief.
Also, for some, that ten grand annual tax bill is peanuts.
Then there are the car rental companies. I'm not sure if it is true, but I read buying a fleet of the same model of car can net a reduction of 35% off the list price. If that is true, then that demonstrates an inflated price of new cars to private punters. No subsidy for me there then, if I were to buy new.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Because of the substantial amounts of tax which would be paid. I've already demonstrated that.

They work for Jaguar, ffs. That is what they _do_ for a living. It's not as if they're photocopier salesmen who are being paid to play in a Jag.

Not as much as they will then be sold for as 6 month old, low mileage approved-used cars.

If not more. Probably because they're buying several hundred at a time.

Everything's a conspiracy against you, isn't it?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Furthermore, taxpayers are not "subsidizing". It is somebody's money in the first place.
A tax deduction is not a subsidy.
DAS
--
To reply directly replace 'nospam' with 'schmetterling'
--
"Adrian" < snipped-for-privacy@gmail.com> wrote in message
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 07/01/2011 13:18, Adrian wrote:

As I have stated, accountants are paid to find the loopholes in the tax laws to reduce the tax liability for their company. All businesses do this, and this effectively increases the payments by the individual.
I am not having an issue with co. car drivers. This is not an envy thing. (OT) I could go out and buy nearly any car I wanted, but IMO, it is obscene to spend enormous amounts on a car when, for example, £25 can restore the sight of a blind person in India.

Not at all. I do not believe that you speak for the hundreds of thousands of companies that supply co. cars to their employees.

ffs ??? steady on... In these times, firms are looking to reduce costs. Therefore, what I am saying is that the *true* cost of supplying and running those cars, for employees, (just as an example) is not going to be borne by Jaguar. Some of those costs will be offset against tax. This is what accountants do.

^ I do not believe this statement is accurate.

I don't think you are looking at the bigger picture...

True
Or more

correction: No subsidy for the private new car buyer. (Not that I buy new.)

I am one insignificant individual amongst 6,729,286,xxx (and rising) insignificant individuals, so I do not understand that comment.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Adrian wrote:

And a several-month-old used car hasn't depreciated significantly?
A car depreciates significantly the moment it's driven off the lot and is then "used".
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Which "lot" do Jaguar buy their cars from, then?
--

Ian D

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

I'm with Chris on this single point, the goal is a basic go-no go test. The wave form specifics are not critical because the wave form will either be, or not be.
It makes more sense to me to plug a diagnostic computer into the data link connector. No matter what the vintage of the car, the DLC will tell a qualified diagnostic program what is wrong. This, of course, means a trip to a BMW specialist. This is one of the things that can go wrong with my car that I can spend an afternoon trying to figure out, or have the trouble isolated in a few minutes and have the repairs completed in short order.
I'm not certain, but I believe a Peake scan tool will isolate this problem. You can pick up a Peake scanner from realoem.com or autohasaz.com or rockauto.com.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 09:02:13 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:

You could jack up each corner of the car, and test the output of each sensor, in less than an hour. At least I could, and I'm not a mechanic, and I'm coming up to 65 years of age.
I'm guessing you are in the US? I believe the OP is here in the UK, so things might be very different.
Firstly, you make an appointment with the dealer. At some times of year, it might take up to two weeks before they have a slot.
Then drop the car off, and wait half a day minimum for a call to tell you when you can pick it up.
It's likely that you would be charged for one hour of time. To put that into perspective, one hour of a BMW dealer's service time here would buy you a front ABS sensor, a rear ABS sensor *and* a usable DMM!

But at what cost? (Again, remembering the OP is in the UK, and this is a 15-year-old vehicle.)
Chris
--
Remove prejudice to reply.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Tue, 04 Jan 2011 11:06:16 -0800, Jeff Strickland wrote:

Agree.
Disagree.
(The OP's car is pre-E-OBD, so may have limited diagnostics.)
Examining the sensor rings and sensors for physical damage, cleaning them, then unplugging the sensor connector, cleaning it, and reconnecting it will resolve 50% plus of ABS faults. The diagnostic cost as a DIYer will be zero.
The more competent DIYer should then be able to use a multi-meter to determine which sensor might be faulty simply by comparison of readings.
Compare that to what a BMW dealer (at least here in the UK) will charge for diagnostics...

No it won't.
In the case I mentioned in another post, the ABS module had a short circuit internally for the warning lamp output. This wasn't monitored by the diagnostics. (This wasn't a BMW, I should point out.)
Chris
--
Remove prejudice to reply.

Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Related Threads

    Motorsforum.com is a website by car enthusiasts for car enthusiasts. It is not affiliated with any of the car or spare part manufacturers or car dealers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.