Big hikes in ACC levies for some

[davereid]

http://www.acc.co.nz/PRD_EXT_CSMP/groups/external_levies/documents/papers_plans/wpc114247.pdf

The "whos next" program was right on target, and the answer appears to be the 3501kg truck...


Interestingly, it also introduces the idea of charging trucking companies that have a lower "audit" or "Fleet Operator" rating, a higher ACC levy.

I bet this ends up coming back to bite bikers...

[James Deuce]

Hahahahahahahahaha.

I like to see the levy scheme changed to put the over 600cc LAMS bikes in category 2.

If truckers start looking for support from us, remember to tell them to get fucked.

[DEATH_INC.]

If truckers start looking for support from us, remember to tell them to get fucked.
No. We should back them up as much as we can. They will be in the same boat as us, where a lot of those truck accidents are not caused by the truck, yet they are expected to pay for it. If they can beat it, then we get a second chance....

[swbarnett]

If truckers start looking for support from us, remember to tell them to get fucked.
Quite the opposite. I'll be there with bells on and I would hope the rest of the 6 odd thousand that turned up in Welly will be there to.

By all means let them know that we told them so but, now that they know we were right we're in an ideal position to join forces.

[sidecar bob]

Or perhaps they are going to be a little fairer to people that drive diesel cars under 3501kg , rather than have them continue to pay the commercial vehicle levy as they have been.

[James Deuce]

The amount of schadenfreude leaking out of the Trucking lobbyists during the Bikoi was disgusting. Let the fuckers rot. There is no avoiding this path, no one will "fix" it now. We lost, move on, laugh at the dickheads who refused to nip the removal of ACC in the bud and the ongoing dismantling of any form of Governmental social contract with the voters.

Laughing at the short-sighted muppets is the only satisfaction you'll get.

[James Deuce]

Or perhaps they are going to be a little fairer to people that drive diesel cars under 3501kg , rather than have them continue to pay the commercial vehicle levy as they have been.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha hahahahahaha.

*Sigh*

[bogan]

Top figure of page 7, why is the current portion we pay now, double what it will be in 2019? Are we going to halve the accident cost by then, then allow it to start increasing again, cos thats what the graph seems to be saying.

With the GSV thing, their budget shows 110k in fuel costs for a 3 truck business, with ACC's 9.9c per L (4.5% currently) that would give them 4950 bucks, or 1650 per vehicle. Seems like that should cover it right?

FSIP is just another up-to-fuck-all 'safety' initiative that will end up costing us all more.

[Maha]

No. We should back them up as much as we can. They will be in the same boat as us, where a lot of those truck accidents are not caused by the truck, yet they are expected to pay for it. If they can beat it, then we get a second chance....


Quite the opposite. I'll be there with bells on and I would hope the rest of the 6 odd thousand that turned up in Welly will be there to.

By all means let them know that we told them so but, now that they know we were right we're in an ideal position to join forces.

This very notion was put on the table by the 'Events Organiser' of an ill fated action group....but was met with a few folded arms and finger wagging by the many. Soon after, 'the many' lept like Lemmings off a clif. I guess with realisation that, without the support from everyone that could/would be effected, the shit just couldn't be pushed any further up that rather steep incline.

[mashman]

Quite the opposite. I'll be there with bells on and I would hope the rest of the 6 odd thousand that turned up in Welly will be there to.

By all means let them know that we told them so but, now that they know we were right we're in an ideal position to join forces.

seconded...

[mashman]

The amount of schadenfreude leaking out of the Trucking lobbyists during the Bikoi was disgusting. Let the fuckers rot. There is no avoiding this path, no one will "fix" it now. We lost, move on, laugh at the dickheads who refused to nip the removal of ACC in the bud and the ongoing dismantling of any form of Governmental social contract with the voters.

Laughing at the short-sighted muppets is the only satisfaction you'll get.

pot kettle black... praps the trucking INDUSTRY will have more luck than solo motorcyclists?

[James Deuce]

pot kettle black... praps the trucking INDUSTRY will have more luck than solo motorcyclists?
Not a hope. This isn't to tie up the "Industry", this is to sort out tradesmen and utility type vehicles, as well has targeting SUVs and recreational diesel vehicles. The "Industry" won't touch it lest they draw attention to themselves.

[Ocean1]

I can't be fucked even looking at the document.

Becha the price structure will be changing. To include more finely differentiated categories, possibly to introduce new ones altogether. Yes?

Small wager: the fee structure changes will be nicely aligned to better target those that can afford to pay 'em. Costs for those groups alone will be rising.

Am I close?

In spite of statistical contortions a 6 year old could see through it'll have fuck all to do with any "fairer" way to attribute costs.


Just call me Nostradamus.

[Ocean1]

Oh, for those interested I've just released my own policy consultation document:

Come hell or high water I'll be paying less ACC related costs next year.

[mossy1200]

I wonder how many minority groups the government can touch before we have our own NZ Guido Fawkes night.

[James Deuce]

I wonder how many minority groups the government can touch before we have our own NZ Guido Fawkes night.
As many as they want. This is New Zealand. Kiwis in concentration camps will still be taking the approach that they wouldn't be there if they hadn't done something to deserve it.

[mashman]

Not a hope. This isn't to tie up the "Industry", this is to sort out tradesmen and utility type vehicles, as well has targeting SUVs and recreational diesel vehicles. The "Industry" won't touch it lest they draw attention to themselves.

I agree, but it will hit the trucking industry too and they don't usually take too kindly to price increases do they... or is NZ a different animal?


I can't be fucked even looking at the document.

Becha the price structure will be changing. To include more finely differentiated categories, possibly to introduce new ones altogether. Yes?

Small wager: the fee structure changes will be nicely aligned to better target those that can afford to pay 'em. Costs for those groups alone will be rising.

Am I close?

In spite of statistical contortions a 6 year old could see through it'll have fuck all to do with any "fairer" way to attribute costs.


Just call me Nostradamus.

You like totally freak me out Nostradamus.

[huff3r]

Not a hope. This isn't to tie up the "Industry", this is to sort out tradesmen and utility type vehicles, as well has targeting SUVs and recreational diesel vehicles. The "Industry" won't touch it lest they draw attention to themselves.

Oh you are so bright aren't you? Since when are recreational diesel vehicles and SUVs registered as "Goods Service Vehicles"?

As that is what this proposal is targeting yeah?

Those with a "Goods Service Vehicle" Registration?

[madandy]

Its not such a large cost increase.
I run a light van and a heavy truck & trailer so one(well two really cause I bet there's an increase on the trailer rego) levy goes up & one goes down.
A few cents increase at the pumps has a far greater cost to me and dont mention the recent RUC fuck over.

[bogan]

Oh you are so bright aren't you? Since when are recreational diesel vehicles and SUVs registered as "Goods Service Vehicles"?

As that is what this proposal is targeting yeah?

Those with a "Goods Service Vehicle" Registration?

I think he means the trucking industry (40T vehicles), as opposed to trades etc who might just have a two axle 5 ton 'truck'. The former comes under a single 'industry' banner, the later, not so much.

[Usarka]

Top figure of page 7, why is the current portion we pay now, double what it will be in 2019? Are we going to halve the accident cost by then, then allow it to start increasing again, cos thats what the graph seems to be saying.


Check the graph on weekly compensation costs. Took a huge dive in 2012 so obviously lots of disabled people have been successfully "rehabilitated" by ACC. They probably expect the same rate of culling over then next few years.

[bogan]

Check the graph on weekly compensation costs. Took a huge dive in 2012 so obviously lots of disabled people have been successfully "rehabilitated" by ACC. They probably expect the same rate of culling over then next few years.

So why did the current portion rise during that period on the other graph?

It looks very much like a 'massaged' set of figures to make it look like things will get better in the long term. But they've made sure the long term is far enough ahead so most will forget when that is supposed to happen.

[James Deuce]

Oh you are so bright aren't you? Since when are recreational diesel vehicles and SUVs registered as "Goods Service Vehicles"?

As that is what this proposal is targeting yeah?

Those with a "Goods Service Vehicle" Registration?
i'm being sarcastic. I know how my relies register their farm vehicles. Plus what bogan said.

[Usarka]

So why did the current portion rise during that period on the other graph?


I'm not sure what graph you mean, so I'll assume..... It's because National decided that ACC needed to act like an insurance company and have all the funds necessary today to pay for the life of all current claims. They fixed something that wasn't broke because they want to privatise it.

[bogan]

Having a closer look at the 'current levy portion'. Of the 257, 120 is to fund the new claims from that year. Another 120 is for funding adjustment, an ambiguous term which I think means to make sure ACC is overfunded so any big claim years are smoothed out. Another 16 for Scheme cost which I assume means admin, with approx 3mil vehicles thats around 50mil per year.

So in other words, the $334 bill covers a lot of things, only $120 of which is a levy to cover the current years claims.


I'm not sure what graph you mean, so I'll assume..... It's because National decided that ACC needed to act like an insurance company and have all the funds necessary today to pay for the life of all current claims. They fixed something that wasn't broke because they want to privatise it.

Nope, thats separated out into the dark green, its the light green I'm talking about.

[Usarka]

Nope, thats separated out into the dark green, its the light green I'm talking about.

You;ll have to help us out bro, there's 13+ tables and graphs in the doc....

[bogan]

You;ll have to help us out bro, there's 13+ tables and graphs in the doc....

You mean I should say something like top figure of page 7 then?

[swbarnett]

Let the fuckers rot.
Cutting off your nose to spite your face, me thinks.

[swbarnett]

I wonder how many minority groups the government can touch before we have our own NZ Guido Fawkes night.
As many as they like if done slowly enough. Boiling frog yet again.

[James Deuce]

Cutting off your nose to spite your face, me thinks.
Yes and no. The nose has already been cut off, so there's nothing left to spite. There is no point putting any effort into this. You'll get a five second surge of camaraderie, slightly damp trousers, and not much in the way of an outcome except another under-performing minister in a hatchet-man role put out to pasture.

Or alternatively (and probably most likely), none of the small truck operators won't notice anything amiss until they head in to register their vehicle and that will be despite a small and vocal group yelling, "ACC, blah, blah, blah, bastards" in squeaky Lilliputian voices at them for a couple of months.

[davereid]

There is no point putting any effort into this. You'll get a five second surge of camaraderie, slightly damp trousers, and not much in the way of an outcome except another under-performing minister in a hatchet-man role put out to pasture.


While the brain says you are right, as usual I will make submissions, and rant and rave, in the hope that something changes. This document should not be read alone, it should be considered in context with the vehicle licensing reforms also being consulted on at the moment.

These changes together effectively take fuel based acc levies off the table, and introduce the new idea that not only will vulnerable vehicles be charged extra, now so will vehicle operators that dont meet the grade... the key word being operator NOT necessarily driver, who is pinged separately via fines and demerits..

Wait until that is extended to the small vehicle user...

expect demerits on speed camera tickets
expect driver licence stop orders if you dont pay fines or owe vehicle licensing or RUC
expect an increase in levies so you can be given a discount if you pay on time
expect hefty penalties and late payment fees if you get behind

[swbarnett]

Yes and no. The nose has already been cut off, so there's nothing left to spite. There is no point putting any effort into this. You'll get a five second surge of camaraderie, slightly damp trousers, and not much in the way of an outcome except another under-performing minister in a hatchet-man role put out to pasture.
This may well be true. However, one thing that may well come from us supporting them is that next time we need their support we'll be more likely to get it. I say bury the hatchet and let's do what we can to create a sense of synergy among road users no matter the chosen mode of transport.

[kevie]

Maybe the trucking industry and bikers should combine and do what the French truckers done a few years ago ... after many objections and warnings ...... the Industry told them at a certain hour on a certain day the whole countries trucks will STOP where they are at that moment..... this happened, they stopped at intersections, motorways, roundabouts ..... everywhere... and stopped the country in its tracks... the powers to be sat up and took notice !!!

NZ would be worse if this happened ... after all ... virtually everything that moves in NZ is moved by trucks and a nationwide stop would stop NZ in its tracks, especially when you consider that 99% of companies have settled into a "Just in Time" policy for stock levels.

How much more would it stop the country if the trucks and biker community both combined for a massive stoppage ...... It would hit the news worldwide Id say LOL


But Alas !!!!!!!! kiwis are too scared to stick their heads up ..... what happened to the 60s-70s and the massive protests back then????

Even us ... the biker community have seemingly given up trying and jut go on and pay the costs.
A massive increase to the trucking companies will be passed on to ALL ... as the increases will manifest in the prices we pay for goods (and all services)

[pete376403]

Yes, despite the French being described as "cheese eating surrender monkeys" by some, they do know how to organise a decent protest.

[Maha]

Yes, despite the French being described as "cheese eating surrender monkeys" by some, they do know how to organise a decent protest.

So does they Gay community.

[scumdog]

So does they Gay community.

It must be hell dealing with a gay Frenchman then.:shit:

So how many of those do we have in the motorbike community?:shifty:

[tri boy]

...............

[Katman]

This may well be true. However, one thing that may well come from us supporting them is that next time we need their support we'll be more likely to get it. I say bury the hatchet and let's do what we can to create a sense of synergy among road users no matter the chosen mode of transport.

Well I vote for double infraction points for anyone using the word 'cager'.

[imdying]

For sure, that'll learn them.

[Clockwork]

From page 13...

"ACC does not charge a standard or flat levy for each vehicle on the road because we believe it is fairer
to ensure the groups of vehicles that contribute a greater risk of injury are contributing a larger share of
the total levy ACC needs to collect to pay for injuries that occur in road crashes.
ACC sets the Motor Vehicle levies according to ‘classes’ of vehicle. The existing risk-based vehicle
classes have been developed over time based on the information ACC has available and the
information on the Motor Vehicle Register"

This is the justification for charging motorcyclists more, "we hurt more when we have an off, regardless of blame for said off."

As a rule, surely the larger the vehicle the lesser injury would be sustained by its occupants. On that basis, smart cars should be getting charged more that say, Falcon owners. Light trucks maybe a little less and the large trucks should be practically free of ACC changes.

But this from page 14...

"The analysis showed that the cost of injuries arising from occupants of trucks (GSVs with a gross
vehicle mass of 3,501 kg and over) is substantially more than those arising from occupants of lighter
GSVs such as vans and utes. This means that there is a significant cross-subsidy between higher-risk
trucks and lower-risk lighter GSVs such as vans and utes."

This seems entirely counter-intuitive, does anyone have any ideas on how this may be?

[Ocean1]

This seems entirely counter-intuitive, does anyone have any ideas on how this may be?

Yes. Follow the money.

There's no point in taxing groups thagt don't pay.