Single Flat Rate ACC Levy per road user?

[FastBikeGear]

There is a lot of consensus on Kiwi Biker about what we need to do and how we need to go about it. The more we discuss it the more consensus we seem to be reaching.

I am not sure that we have reached a strong consensus though on what we want. Do we want?

1. The status quo? No changes in current ACC rates (Current pre-proposal different rates for different road user risk groups)
2. The same % increase for all road user groups on the current rate?
3. A change to a single ACC levy per road user regardless of the number of vehicles they own? (They just pay the premium for the highest risk group they are in)
4. A change to a Single Flat Rate ACC Levy per road user? (Regardles of risk group)
5. An insurance style premium which is a fair and true assessment of the risk we present?
6. Complete privatisation of ACC coverage for road users?
7. Increases in motor vehicle rates in relation to motobikes rates commensurate with the fact that they actually present more danger and risk to us than vice versa
8. Something else?

Perhaps a bit of open discussion on this and then a poll to see what consensus we have?

[Ixion]

MANIFESTO says , abolition of the separate motorcycle classification (for ACC purposes). So, we end up exactly the same as cars.

As a second objective, the methods of collection, for both cars and bikes could be improved.

[MSTRS:Me]

1. The status quo? No changes in current ACC rates (Current different rates for different road user risk groups) Pre-proposed rises?
2. The same % increase for all road user groups on the current rate? Would support
3. A change to a single ACC levy per road user regardless of the number of vehicles they own? (They just pay the premium for the highest risk group they are in) Not so sure now. Leaves us open to current abusive levy rise
4. A change to a Single Flat Rate ACC Levy per road user? (Regardles of risk group) Would support this
5. An insurance style premium which is a fair and true assessment of the risk we present? Nope
6. Complete privatisation of ACC coverage for road users?Nope
7. Increases in motor vehicle rates in relation to motorbikes rates commensurate with the fact that they actually present more danger and risk to us than vice versa Nope
8. Something else? Maybe funded from fuel.

Good idea. Although should we really be doing 'their job for them'?

[Rayray401]

[QUOTE=MSTRS;1129508233]Something else? Maybe funded from fuel.QUOTE]

Nooo, dont tax the fuel anymore?

[StoneY]

[QUOTE=Rayray401;1129508244]

Something else? Maybe funded from fuel.QUOTE]

Nooo, dont tax the fuel anymore?

Why not???
Coveres every Petrol/Diesel user, fairly too based on consumption. Be it a Chain Saw, a Concrete cutter, generaotor on a builders site, consumption = exact recovery of risk via use

And EQUITABLY at that
Other such levys could be: 10% of value on safety gear (potentially this would be not good but has been suggested), levy tyres (get the user on a per km basis that way) Bikes would by default pay a little more if on tyres as we use em faster than a cage does

Many options, but Fuel is a good one IMO

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Something else?

100% Levy on traffic infringements,
$50 levy when you buy a vehicle paid on change of ownership,
$5 levy on WoF, 6moths, $10 for a year.

these alone would generate more than enough money for the traffic account, nearing 800million dollars (at present the traffic account is 650ish million)

Put token levy on vehicle rego even across the board.

Rejoin all the accounts ACC was designed to operate with the seperate accounts

Why not???

While in theory it sounds good and easy, doing this during a recession is not good as it will increase the cost of living, price of food goes up, transport cost rise and all gets past on to the consumer who hasn't had a pay rise in 2 years.

[StoneY]

Nighthawke, thats brilliant

You run that past John judge????

[MSTRS:Me]

While in theory it sounds good and easy, doing this during a recession is not good as it will increase the cost of living, price of food goes up, transport cost rise and all gets past on to the consumer who hasn't had a pay rise in 2 years.

I've heard this bandied about. But why would it? It's simply moving a cost to industry and the individual from here to there. The actual cost outlay would change little, if at all.

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

Nighthawke, thats brilliant

You run that past John judge????

was in my submission

[FastBikeGear]

100% Levy on traffic infringements,
$50 levy when you buy a vehicle paid on change of ownership,
$5 levy on WoF, 6moths, $10 for a year.

The less points we collect ACC from and the simpler it is the cheaper it is to administer. I wonder what percentage of ACC's revenue is consumed by the administration of collecting it?

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

I've heard this bandied about. But why would it? It's simply moving a cost to industry and the individual from here to there. The actual cost outlay would change little, if at all.

We simply don't have the population, our rail network is crap and 90% is done by road.

Simple business if you want to transport a load from Dunedin to Auckland then you pass on all costs to the consumer. While many of the fuel increases have been absorbed by the transport company but if you put a large increase on a levy that is also taxed by GST then they simple have increase their prices to transport.

Which in turn increases your end product price... while may only be a little effect, NZ doesn't have the population and we are so issolated that it can effect us. During a recession as well its not a good thing... the best time to do that is when the country is doing well.

[MSTRS:Me]

We simply don't have the population, our rail network is crap and 90% is done by road.

Simple business if you want to transport a load from Dunedin to Auckland then you pass on all costs to the consumer. While many of the fuel increases have been absorbed by the transport company but if you put a large increase on a levy that is also taxed by GST then they simple have increase their prices to transport.

Which in turn increases your end product price... while may only be a little effect, NZ doesn't have the population and we are so issolated that it can effect us. During a recession as well its not a good thing... the best time to do that is when the country is doing well.

Forgive me for being stupid, but I still can't see it.
ACC is currently gathered from reg and petrol/diesel. If you move the reg component (even + a bit) to fuel, what's the real difference?

[NighthawkNZ:Me]

The less points we collect ACC from and the simpler it is the cheaper it is to administer. I wonder what percentage of ACC's revenue is consumed by the administration of collecting it?

It all goes to treasuray anyway. If treasurary can't keep the books in order when all the money comes in get a new accountant.

[Pixie]

100% Levy on traffic infringements,
$50 levy when you buy a vehicle paid on change of ownership,
$5 levy on WoF, 6moths, $10 for a year.

these alone would generate more than enough money for the traffic account, nearing 800million dollars (at present the traffic account is 650ish million)

Put token levy on vehicle rego even across the board.

Rejoin all the accounts ACC was designed to operate with the seperate accounts

None of these things will help ACC get sold to IAG

[Marmoot]

What we should have is single flat rate ACC levy per NZ citizenship/residency.

That way cyclists, horse riders, and rugby players are levied too.
Also including prone-to-fall elderlies.

Flat rate ensures a no-fault and non user-pays system (i.e., ACC not being an insurance scheme).