2009 ACC levy proposal
From New Zealand Motorcycle Wiki
In 2009 ACC proposed to increase the levies charged to motorcyclists. Submissions can be made up until the deadline of 5pm 10 November 2009.
Contents |
Proposed increases
Currently mopeds pay a levy of $59 and motorcycles pay $252.69 per year.
- 0-125cc motorcycles (including mopeds) $292.93
- 126-600cc motorcycles $546.78
- 601+cc motorcycles $781.12
Formal reactions by motorcycle community
- BRONZ (Auckland) next meeting is on 21 October [1]
- Protest tee-shirts are available at the quasimoto online store [2]
Statement
We support and appreciate the excellent principles of the ACC, and accept that under this system, motorcyclists must fairly pay to cover the cost of the injuries we cause ourselves or others. However, the levy as proposed is currently unfair to motorcyclists and we ask that it be amended.
Summary Of Arguments Against The Current Levy
- Motorcyclists (and other road users) should not be charged for accidents and injuries caused to them by other road users.
- Clearly, the at-fault party should pay that cost, subsidizing the ACC in direct proportion to the cost of injuries they cause other citizens. If this is not corrected, the Government will be charging the victims of accidents, not the perpetrators - an absurd and unjust situation [is this actually indefensible in law, by the way? Can any legal expert comment, please]. It is worth noting that the ethos of ACC is no fault so examining parties for accident fault is not done; though this seems hypocritical in view of the increased charges proposed for only one user group.
- It is debated whether injuries resulting from off road use such as farms/trail rides/track days contribute to the money sought from road bike levys. Recording errors may be defaulted to road injuries, policy may dictate any off road use is not included, CITATIONS NEEDED.
- No evidence of a correlation between engine size and crash costs, or engine size and crash risk, has been provided, nor can any be found (in many accidents engine size is not recorded). In light of this the proposed size discrimination levy seems unjust.
- The levy cannot reasonably be made per vehicle, since an owner can only ride or drive one vehicle at a time and the risk of accident or injury does not therefore increase with multiple vehicles. (But it is accepted that cars and bikes do represent different risks of accident and injury, and could reasonably be charged separately). However, the current per vehicle levy is extremely punitive to owners of multiple vehicles, and this unfairly taxes motorcyclists who often own more than one bike. We propose that each owner be charged only once per type of vehicle (If you own a bike and a car, that would be two charges; if a car and two bikes - two charges; two cars, two bikes - two charges. etc). Or alternatively if one is 'higher risk loaded' then only the higher of the two should be paid to cover the maximum level of risk.
- The levy unfairly discriminates against one group. It is not logical to insist that one group operate on a user pays basis while others are exempt from this. There needs to be a consistency that ensures citizens in this country are treated equitably regardless of the sports activities they choose to pursue; be it the odd sunday motorcycle ride, pushbike riding, netball, rugby, basketball, skateboarding, horseback riding, skiing, etc. etc... Anything less than a fair and equal treatment can be construed as a breach of basic human rights.
- Public policy backs a move towards more efficient vehicles. Biker accidents and injuries should be addressed by their causes, not by their symptoms. Rather establish better policies and procedures to address the main factors in bike accidents, to reduce accidents and hence injury payouts (eg link ACC payouts or levies to recent speeding or alcohol offences, compulsory wearing of high vis jackets, compulsory advanced refresher courses). The proposed approach is disingenious and lazy.
- The entire idea of the ACC levy increase can be avoided if the timing of the deadline for the ACC to be "fully funded" is moved to 2019 (as proposed by Labour). In fact, labour proposed REDUCING the ACC levies before the last elction. There is no crisis that cannot be solved by some patience and smart targetted policies.
This section had become cluttered with arguments and counterarguments... please keep these in the dicussion page
Advantages of Motorcycles to the Community At Large
Motorcycles provide many tangible advantages to the community at large, and the government may therefore wish to encourage their safe use, rather than restrict it by the proposed levy. These advantages are well known, but revisited here in support of our request.
- Motorcycles have a smaller carbon footprint than cars
- All motor vehicles are imported, and since motorcycles cost less than cars, this provides less detriment to the national balance of payments
- Motorcycles occupy a smaller footprint in the road, allowing traffic as a whole to move more freely, and creating less road wear
- Motorcycles smaller size imposes much less parking burden at their destination
- Lower fuel usage requires less petrol to be imported.
- Recreational motorcycling can provide a mental health benefit, in some cases mitigating or removing the need for expensive drugs and therapy.
- Motorbikes have a lower wear and tear effect on road usage due to their lower weight.
[ please provide more advantages to the community of motorcycling]
Relevant Statistics
Rider at fault
- Accounts for 58% of all motorcycle accidents, CITATION NEEDED
- Unknown whether monetary cost scales accordingly
$2,700 cost claimed by national
- It is claimed that a large bikes true cost would be $2,700
- With $62mil needed, with 72,00 bikes and 25,000 moped currently registered (see below) this would average out to $640 each or $861 if only bikes pay
- If the non-rider fault is taken into account (a big if) these figures drop to $371, and $500 respectively.
Registered Bikes As of June 2008 [3]
- 71,648 motorcycles
- 25,304 mopeds
Cost per claim for different road users[4]
Cyclists:
- 567 active claims
- $12,573,000
- $22,174 per claim
Pedestrians:
- 1115 active claims
- $24,494,000
- $21,967 per claim
Car Occupants:
- 8525 active claims
- $208,305,000
- $24,434 per claim
Motorcyclists:
- 3173 active claims
- $62,523,000
- $19,704 per claim
Crash Probability, Cars vs Bikes[5]
Cars
- 1.1 deaths per 10,000 vehicles
- 47 injuries per 10,000 vehicles
- 34 injury crashes per 10,000 vehicles
- 8.6 deaths per 100,000 population
- 356 injuries per 100,000 population
Bikes
- 5.2 deaths per 10,000 motorcycles
- 144 injuries per 10,000 motorcycles
- 142 crashes per 10,000 motorcycles
