Buying a car in the UK. How to avoid paying VRT?

S

Sharky

Registered User
Messages
33
Is it true that if i get a friend who has lived in the UK for 2 years+ to buy (me) a car over there and get him to bring it back to ireland he wont have to pay vrt because he has lived there for more than 6 months. He applies to get an irish registration right away and i take (buy) the car off him
 
Mathepac, your attitude is a typical Irish reaction to this type of thing. When millionaires do similar such as making their wives resident in Italy and use cinderalla clauses to save sh!t loads of money on the advise of their accountants its tax avoidance, but when Joe Soap does something similar to save 3 or 4 grand its tax evasion. If the OP is correct about the 6month rule and no VRT he is dead right to exploit it - come down of your high horse Mathepac!
 
Your friend has to keep the car in his name for a year after getting it vrt'd on a change of residence. (free vrt if he owned the car in UK for 6 months),but he will be asked to prove his address in the UK,and provide utility bills in his name for the Irish address he is relocating to.
I think you will find that other people tried this before and the revenue know all the tricks.Do a search on here and you'll find many examples.
Back to the drawing board i'm afraid.
 
FLANDERS` said:
Mathepac, your attitude is a typical Irish reaction to this type of thing. ...
Click to expand...
Hopefully what that means is that when someone sees a proposal they regard as tax evasion and that could get the proposer into hot water with the tax authorities, they tell the proposer and help prevent them getting into trouble.
FLANDERS` said:
... When millionaires do similar such as making their wives resident in Italy and use cinderalla clauses to save sh!t loads of money on the advise of their accountants its tax avoidance, but when Joe Soap does something similar to save 3 or 4 grand its tax evasion. ...
Click to expand...
I don't know what schemes or clauses you are alluding to here and I'm not sure what they have to do with OP's question.
FLANDERS` said:
... If the OP is correct about the 6month rule and no VRT he is dead right to exploit it ...
Click to expand...
OP is not correct as I have already stated by posting ...
mathepac said:
No ...
Click to expand...
above. As has been pointed out above and in previous threads here many many times, Revenue have a strict protocol they expect to have observed; any deviation from that protocol is tax evasion.
FLANDERS` said:
... - come down of your high horse Mathepac!
Click to expand...
I have posted my informed honest opinion here, and, as per the posting guidelines have not directed abuse or disrespect at any poster.
 
mathepac said:
Hopefully what that means is that when someone sees a proposal they regard as tax evasion and that could get the proposer into hot water with the tax authorities, they tell the proposer and help prevent them getting into trouble.
I don't know what schemes or clauses you are alluding to here and I'm not sure what they have to do with OP's question.
OP is not correct as I have already stated by posting ...
above. As has been pointed out above and in previous threads here many many times, Revenue have a strict protocol they expect to have observed; any deviation from that protocol is tax evasion.
I have posted my informed honest opinion here, and, as per the posting guidelines have not directed abuse or disrespect at any poster.
Click to expand...

but your turned avoid into evade with no clear reason why, a loophole is just that.
 
I didn't turn something into anything else - I stated that the proposal by OP was evasion IMHO and I stand by that. I don't understand what you mean by "a loophole is just that".
 
The difference is that in OP's specific case, the topic of this thread, no loophole exists, therefore the scheme as proposed is evasion IMHO.

I have never said here or elsewhere that there's anything wrong with working the tax (or any other) system within the law by exploiting loopholes.
 
read the title.....does it say avoid or evade ?

What is illegal about what was proposed, its its illegal its evasion ? Nothing illegal, just a lot of wasted time.
 
For the record i have zero intentions of breaking the law! I heard that it was possible to get around it in some way (a loop hole). And yes if i could avoid paying the VRT i would for sure.........sorry!
 
Ron Burgundy said:
read the title.....does it say avoid or evade ? ...
Click to expand...
I read the thread title carefully and as already stated, I addressed myself to the proposal made by OP - this was an elaboration on the question posed in the thread title.
Ron Burgundy said:
... What is illegal about what was proposed, its its illegal its evasion ? ...
Click to expand...
I never commented on legality or illegality; I gave my opinion that OP's proposal was evasion.
Ron Burgundy said:
... Nothing illegal, ...
Click to expand...
If you say so.
Ron Burgundy said:
... just a lot of wasted time.
Click to expand...
I don't regard time spent explaining something a poster is having difficulty understanding as time wasted, even something I believe I have clearly explained already. I have no problem trying to provide clarity where there is confusion even if I believe I didn't create the confusion.
 
Sharky said:
... I heard that it was possible to get around it in some way (a loop hole)...
Click to expand...
They've been around the block a few times with this stuff and I believe they have any loop-holes plugged (apparently other than the blatant non-registration of imports)
Sharky said:
... And yes if i could avoid paying the VRT i would for sure....
Click to expand...
You and me both.
 
avoidance is legal

evasion is illegal

you mentioned evasion so therefore were putting it forward that what the op was planning to do was illegal.........is that simple enough or will i write it in crayon
 
Ron Burgundy said:
... you mentioned evasion so therefore were putting it forward that what the op was planning to do was illegal.........is that simple enough or will i write it in crayon
Click to expand...
I described OP's proposal as "evasion" and stated that was my honestly held opinion. Any conclusions you reach about "illegal" and "planning" are entirely your own.

I can't comment as to why you seem to be allowed only crayons to write with, but they won't be of much addition to you posting here. Again IMHO, your difficulty in this thread seems to be in reading and understanding my previous posts, not writing more of your own.
 
No no you stated that AAM does not encourage tax evasion. That sounds like you stating a fact to me.

I'm not the only one who seen it that way, read above. Your alone in your view of evasion.

You said its a scheme to evade, if not not illegal how can it be tax evasion ?

You have failed to show how it is evasion in any way ?
 
When I read OP's title and post I, like mathepac, read 'avoid' to mean 'not pay vrt' .... which meant to me that someone was asking if what was in their post was a way of not paying vrt.

Perhaps, the OP should have worded his thread title a little more carefully as 'avoid' is a synonym of 'evade'!

http://thesaurus.reference.com/browse/evade
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top