Updated: VAT on car registration case: Government would honour responsibilities

G.Schembri

Mar 24th 2009, 12:28

@ Joseph Camilleri I'm making no assumptions, I'm just asking questions. Things can always be made legal by the government - It has the majority in parliament, and no matter how much the opposition and the people in the street complain, the party in government always do what they like. So of course "a court would have deemed the taxation as legal". As for buying goods knowing we are being over charged, what do you expect if one needs a car or anything else for that matter, one buys it - During the war people exchanged bread and vegetables for gold, even though they knew they were being overcharged.
It is as unfair to ask the taxpayer to pay for the refunds as it was unfair to charge the double taxation in the first place, now what would be fair- asking the minister to pay?

Joseph Camilleri

Mar 23rd 2009, 00:13

@G. Schembri: Of course double taxation is not fair.. my point is that people who purchased cars did so knowing about double taxation.. just like we do now with a number of other products. Even more unfair is asking the taxpayer to finance a refund in a situation where a court would have deemed the taxation as legal. ... you seem to make a lot of assumptions about me.. and about what i might have complained about in the past. don't you think you are being a bit presumptous?

s schembri

Mar 23rd 2009, 00:09

@G. Schembri "Did you complain when our taxes were spent on luxury cars for the CHOGM, then sold for a few hundred of Liri?" These cars were donated by BMW and not purchased by the government. These were later publicy auctioned, and you, like everyone else, had the opportunity to participate. All the proceeds were for Istrina.

G. Schembri

Mar 22nd 2009, 23:22

@ Mario Mercieca Can you please explain how the Labour government discriminated against those who bought houses, because he gave plots and houses to help the workers own their houses?

G. Schembri

Mar 22nd 2009, 23:17

@ Joseph Camilleri - If a person needed to buy a car, and with public transport being what it is in Malta, a car is no luxury, even though he is being charged extra taxes he will buy it.

Taxes are fair when you pay for what you buy or earn, double taxation is never fair, even when you pay VAT on taxes paid on non EU products. If a person was unfaily taxed he should get a refund. Did you complain when Austin Gatt bought his Jaguar with your taxes? Did you complain when Dr. Gonzi decided for the first time in history to give a golden handshake to the ex ministers. Did you complain when your taxes were being spent for PN propoganda before the general election? Did you complain The road that leads to Castile was resurfaced twice in a couple of weeks? Did you complain when our taxes were spent on luxury cars for the CHOGM, then sold for a few hundred of Liri to some blue eyed boys?

It seems you opnly complain when the average citizen gets his money back.

m farrugia

Mar 22nd 2009, 21:39

When millions of jobless throughout the world are trying to make ends meet and queue to get jobs, we in malta queue to get refunds on our new cars back.

Il fatti jitkellmu wahedhom, with all its defects, the PN has over the years managed to keep the country moving forward and prospering. That's why in every general election, the choice is obvious.

L..Galea

Mar 22nd 2009, 21:25

Mario Mercieca
You are saying this because you are envious of other people, but maybe you could afford to build your house and the others didn't. Did this occur to you? Re virgin land and the environment you did build your house didn't you?

O Galea
The VAT should not have been collected in the first place as evidenced by its removal under threat by the Commission. Furthermore, what is in question is not Maltese law bu eu law since Maltese law has become subordinate to eu law.

Joe Vella (Mellieha.)
Simply calling shame and referring back to history shows that you have absolutely NO argument in trying to protect your Gonezipn.

J.Scicluna
He never tells the people how much we have been and shall be giving back to the eu during the same period.

All pn apologists, you can try as much as you want but Gonezipn's position is indefensible and he shall have to pay back what he (as a government not personally) STOLE.

Joseph Camilleri

Mar 22nd 2009, 21:00

@G Schembri: When is tax fair? Is it fair that I will have to pay more taxes to refund money to people who paid the price which was asked of them when purchasing a car? If the courts decide that the tax is illegal, then by all means I support that it is refunded.. but if not then it would be extremely unfair to burden everyone else with taxation to refund something which would have not been illegal.

For the information of those who keep insisting that Vat on tax is illegal, had better check the facts before commenting. The EU directive allows VAT to be charged on tax and in fact it happens regularly when we buy non-EU products and a number of other items. The issue whether VAT on registration tax is legal or not is extremely complex as can be seen from the conflicting judgments given by the European Court of Justice.

Marcelle Cini

Mar 22nd 2009, 20:26

@r mifsud
joe citizen buys car and he ALSO pays taxes ,so it is his right that what was illegally taken from him should be given back.

Mario Mercieca

Mar 22nd 2009, 20:13

The labour party was also wrong in giving out free plots and houses as it discrimanated against us who had to buy our houses later. Besides building up a lot of virgin land without considering the enviroment etc

Paul Micallef

Mar 22nd 2009, 18:34

To S.Darmanin.

Bid dejn kollox tixtri.
A monument to the MLP,must be the houses that where given away and housing estates,,not like today you must fork out bundles and bundles on MONEY. So grow up, a Skoda in the 80s was agood car as they are still on our roads???Pay up P.N Gonzi you are wrong .....AGAIN.

Charles J Buttigieg

Mar 22nd 2009, 18:08

The court case is not about whether or not the Government should have charged VAT or not, that is a foregone conclusion- would the Government have changed the law if it conformed to EU Legislations? The court will decide whether the tax payer is entitled for a refund.

In the likely event that our court decides in favour of the tax payer, the Director General of the VAT office must refund otherwise he will be in contempt of court and subject to criminal proceedings and the Finance Minister as well as the Prime Minister would be politically responsible. Dr. Gonzi is not being generous when he declares that he would honour the court’s ruling, he is only being logical as otherwise we would really become a Banana Republic.

Generosity is being celebrated by Joseph Muscat who recognises the moral rights of the tax prayer, he is not responsible for the fracas yet he promised reimbursement when in government.

O Galea

Mar 22nd 2009, 18:07

This is certainly a rich country. Incredibly 30,000 + people acquired new cars after 2004. And they knew what they were paying for.

Did the goverment know that VAT was not due on registration? Probably no as 4 years are fairly a long time not to realise. One natural question to follow. Was the Government in breach of law? Not sure and JM says let's go to court and see. If yes, then pay back is guranteed by Gonzi. If no....vote Labour and JM shall pay them out from Johnny tax payer's pocket.

Would JM be breaking the law if he would then be paying back money to car purcahsers with money "illegally" collected (through new taxes) from those other people who did not aqcuire cars? Because if the Courts decide that the Government did not break any Maltese laws in charging VAT, then JM would be "stealing" money from those who did not purchase cars.

Would then the PN in opposition register legal suites against the Government obo the remaining 380,000 people? We shall wait and see.

Charles J Buttigieg

Mar 22nd 2009, 18:02

What is the difference between a thousand PN supporters who bought a car after 2004 and another thousand PN supporters driving older vehicles?
The thousand new car owners would unanimously insist that Gonzipn should refund them back their VAT; the other thousand would unanimously argue that that wouldn’t be fair on the other tax payers.

S Darmanin

Mar 22nd 2009, 17:53

Hehehe kieku bqajna tal l-MLP konthu tixtruwhom l karozzi l godda ghax kieku ghadna bl-iskoda LS jew b xi fiat 850, b xi herald etc. niskanta tkun addej mit triq wara xi meeting tarhom addejin bil mercedes u bil bandiera tal labour. TIXTRUWHOM L KAROZZI KIEKU MA KIENX GHAL PN

G.Schembri

Mar 22nd 2009, 17:51

@Joe Vella (Mellieha) and Anthony Magri - Maybe you don't know that there are also PN clubs that have been taken from their owners. How do you expect Gonzi or Muscat to right such a wrong?
@ Joseph Camilleri - If something is legal it does not necessarily mean it is fair. It was legal for the MLP to be in power in the 80's but was it fair? Since it was legal why all the fuss made by Fenech Adami and co. as I said legality has nothing to do with fairness. The government is in a position to make anything legal since it has the majority in parliament - the institution where laws are made. So if for the sake of the argument he decides that every citizen is to pay 5 euro in taxes daily - what could we do about it- it would be legal but would it be fair. It would be plain daylight robbery. That is what happened with VAT on tax.

Tony Mallia

Mar 22nd 2009, 17:40

It saddens me to see the PM act in this way. I really trusted Dr Gonzi however by time I am having second thoughts on whether my trust was well placed.

I am one of those who had to pay VAT on his registration and who thought that eventually, thanks to EU membership, we would benefit from some form of redress. Yet unfortunately I have now to witness th PM and fellow PN ministers ignoring my and other voters plight and arrogantly telling me that if i want my rights upheld, the same ones that they promised to strongly uphold prior to last election, then i have to take them to court. To add insult to injury, the PM is now proclaiming that he will honour responsibilities. Dr Gonzi, is this something to boast about? That is sine qua non, especially from someone of your stature. It would have been newsworthy had you told us you were to refund the amount due to us immediately as afterall was done in the last 6 months of 2008 with whoever registered his car. Why are you forcing me to join labour's court case? why are you forcing me to vote Labour?

J>Borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 17:36

Case 1:

Car Registration tax + VAT.................against EU policies.

Then

Case :
Plastic Bags eco tax + VAT.....is this in favour of EU policies

Kevin Borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 17:30

@Noel Cutajar

I think you should read more history books about violation of human rights outside the European union before making such statments. The current Europe has become so respectful of human rights that it is almost hurting itself.

Noel Cutajar

Mar 22nd 2009, 16:59

@Joe Vella (Mellieha) - people like you make me laugh...as if the EU had invented the pill for every ill...your rights and mine were not protected by EU...as if life in Malta started in 2004!! To go back to some history lesson, there was no other region in the world that has so much violated human rights more than Europe...so stop comparing Europe as our saviour.

tony caruana

Mar 22nd 2009, 16:58

''The government, Dr Gonzi said, had technical legal advice ''



I wonder Dr Gonzi , Is this advice coming from the same legal experts that promised us Spring Hunting ?

Joseph Camilleri

Mar 22nd 2009, 16:07

@David Zarb: I think to be fair what the PM is saying is that he believes that it is not illegal - but if it is found to be then he will abide by the court judgment.

Clearly if the court decides in favour of government then it would have not been illegal and the government would have not 'stole' anything from anyone.

Claudine Bonavia

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:59

Convenience politics is when you time your actions in order to benefit politically in terms of vote catching prior to an election. May I refer you in this respect to the times editorial of a day or two ago...a certification to the PN of it being an expert in this. Politics based on principles is when you commit yourself, four years prior to an election when the voter is very much prone to forget you've promised it, of reimbursing it the VAT it paid unjustly. That is the difference Joseph Muscat has made on Labour.

As an aside, may i refer all those arguing against the PL's stand to consult the online poll being held by the times on the issue. Another principle of democracy to be upheld that decisions by government should reflect the electorate...the electorate wants government to pay up now not wait and hope the courts would rule in its favour. may i remind you as well of the maltese saying which goes on the lines that he who is in the wrong stands to benefit most from a court case

David Zarb

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:45

What is Dr. Gonzi epecting from us? To say a BIG THANK YOU if the courts' decision would put Dr. Gonzi's government in shame? A THANK YOU for stealing our own money and giving them back? HOW PATHETIC!!!!! That's what he has to do next! considering not to reimburse us who bought a car from 2004 onwards! Whom are you trying to fool??

Claudine Bonavia

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:40

What is Gonzi trying to do? He will have no other option but to respect a court judgement if it were to be delivered against him. but I guess that truly shows his belief that he is above everything and everyone and is so detached that he considers it a big feat to actually abide by a court judgement.

Dr Gonzi, this is a battle that you have already lost, definitely from a public perception point of view. Just admit you have implmented a system that was pure and simply against taxation principles, namely a tax on a tax. Come clean and admit it was wrong and that is why you revised the system by end of 2008.

As for the 50 million, well, we surely can find the funds to return what is rightfully not government's! we did as a nation find the funds to give more VAT refunds, income tax refunds, various allowances immediately prior to the last election didn't we? it should therefore be simple for Dr Gonzi to find 50 million more. cutting waste perhaps?

Joe Vella (mellieha.)

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:26

@ Maria Falzon

"The government will honour its responsibilities should it lose the court cases". What on Earth should he otherwise do?"

Perhaps Gonzi should do what Mintoff and the MLP/PL did in the past.

But we all now that Gonzi and any PN Government won't do that. Have to much respect of the rule of law and the right of the individual.

Only the MLP/PL is capable of suspending the Constitutional Court so that individuals could not pursue what they believe is rightly theirs.

Cannot really believe that people have such a short memory, or is it memory of convenience?

In Malta now it has become fashionable by Joseph Muscat and the PL to practice Politics of convenience over what is right.

Franco Massa

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:20

If all the people criticising the PL were to do some calcualtions they would realise that the actual figure is more close to 20 million euro than 50. But maths aside, where was the money for building the new parliament building costing 80 million euro coming from? Certainly not from budgeted sources. Now that the parliament will not be built - PN apologists please note yet another u turn! we surely have the 50 million to go towards VAT refunds and some 30 emillion more to spare - perhaps they can go towards meeting the costs of a national breast screening programme that was promised with so much pomp yet a year and more after the election is still a phantom program. So no, no tax increases but better financial management with the consumer as top priority

this is yet another PN u turn the effects of which are being conveniently held back until it can be used to its fullest extent in a couple of months time during the MEP election campaign

Joe Vella (Mellieha.)

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:12

The difference between the PN and the MLP/PL could not be more crystal clear.

One of the fundamental reason that the PN wanted Malta to join the EU was to ensure that fundamental rights of Maltese Citizens where protected regardless of who is in Government.

On the other hand the MLP/PL wanted to keep Malta out of the EU so that when Maltese citizens wanted to take the Government to Court to ascertain it's rights, the Government could have the prerogative to suspend the Constitutional Court as did in the past .

Shame on Joseph Muscat and the PL. They are nothing else but hungry wolves in sheep clothing.

Kevin Borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:09

@Franco Massa

Thanks for the good news that at last Dr.Muscat is acting on conviction not on convenience, as he did last week in parliament during the illegal imigration speech. However I think that your statment needs some more time to convience us it is true, because Dr.Muscat has a brilliant past of convenience based decissions, such as when from telling us that Brussels will lead us from our nose he veered to the other side and is now telling us he is all for Europe and its rights.

A person is said to act on conviction and not convenience when he can prove that his visions have led the country to prospurous lands. Dr.Muscats's vision of partnership is today proving to have been the real wrong option because what he is doing today in the Vat case would not have been done if we remained, on his advice, outside of Europe.

Now lets hope and wish he wins the case so that I can get my refund back on the cars I bought and maybe start convincing myself Dr.Muscat is worth what he says he stands for.

Anthony Magri

Mar 22nd 2009, 15:05

The Hon. Dr. Gonzi Malta's Prime Minister, has harangued the L.P. to right things done wrongly when in Government. Repeating suggestions from bloggers urging the Labour Party to return buildings to their proper owner, Malta's Prime Minister is telling the Labour Party what to do in case it is elected!
Prime Minister, a short question. If a Labor Party is empowered to return some property to its proper owner when in government, why wait and not use your power to right a wrong (if it exists).You quickly solved the Magic Kiosk problem, why wait and aren’t you yourself able to right wrongs, not having been done in the course of twenty years in government. Come on Dr. Gonzi give a straight answer, the question is very simple childish would say.
A forthcoming L.P. government is being asked, to right pretended wrongs. Why not cut short the time and put things right immediately. Why wait still more than 20 years Dr. Gonzi, P.N. government. Very simple reasoning. After so many years in government, why not remedy other wrongs immediately. If not you are, the P.N. is, and has been, an accomplice to wrong doings, if any, for tens of years..!

Joe Vella (mellieha.)

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:57

@ Franco Massa

"The property issue is nothing but a way of trying to deflect attention not to mention that it is a clear case of the PM confusing the demarcation line wetween government and the party. "

Perhaps the PM is using the issue of "The property issue" to confuse the demarcation line between Government and the party line.

Please, with all due respect don't rub salt into wound into those families that property was taken unjustly by the government of the day to benefit the Party in Government.

I for one,if have anything to say, would encourage the PN that every Sunday would protest outside every PL club that the property was obtained unjustly and without just compensation.

A.Borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:57

@ J.Farrugia

If you're so convinced that Gonzi is right about the VAT thing, why did Govt feel the need to amend the system as of 1 Jan 2009?? Something was definitely not quite correct le?

And yes, if a new Labour Govt would have to fork out €50m in refunds which are rightly ours u jizdied id-dejn, it won't be PL's fault but PN's irresponsible governance. We'll point fingers at PN and we'll be morally, politically and ethically right to do so.

Maria Falzon

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:54

"The government will honour its responsibilities should it lose the court cases". What on Earth should he otherwise do?

alex grech

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:31

ah PL are already buying votes for the next election by promising to pay the tax paid on the registration should they lose the court case. it would be interesting if they win the next election, would we be entitled to take PL to court for buy votes? interesting PN keep note.

r mifsud

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:28

Dr. Muscat, Joe citezen buys a car and I pay for his taxes. Thanks but no thanks!! Is this the new progressive style of thinking. No thanks. Meta trid tirkeb sib lil min irid ihallik mhux lili grazzi!!

J.Scicluna

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:17

@J.Farrugia
"50 miljum l'hawn u 50 miljun l'hemm" LOL

Tonio Fenech just said that Government won't be hounding NI defaulters fro 47 or million! Get a grip on life!

GonziPN is responsilbe for a 3,500,000,000 (that's 3.5BILLION!) in public debts. That is a record no one can break.

Joseph Borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 14:16

Ehe, thallas ta bilfors ikollok Sur Gonzi.

J Farrugia

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:58

franco massa mbaghad oqghod gerger metya l-gvern laburista xi darba jzidlek it-taxxa biex jaghmel tajjeb ghal HOFRA ta' 50 miljun euro. Viva l-lejber, viva l-lejber.

Tiziana Azzopardi

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:53

What should gonzi do about VAT reg tax?

Please have a look at times online poll!

PAY UP.

J. Cilia Vincenti

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:33

@ Louise Vella

"I was present and I can confirm that "dialogue" is a gross misnomer.
The prime minister speaks, the candidates answer a prepared question
each. The public is not given a chance to speak and not even to ask
questions. The public is allowed to clap the speakers. "

Welcome to poitical maturity !!!!
The situation has no partisan boundaries.

G.Schembri

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:32

Dr.Gonzi waited for no court order to give a golden handshake to his friends - exministers who were not reelected in parliament. He waited for no court order to fork out thousands of euro for the "Dar Malta" in Brussels. He is only waiting for a court order to give us back what he STOLE from us in taxes so as to misuse in PN promotion in last election. This means that while the PN is using our taxes to fund Party Politics the PL is using party money to fund public interest.

David Bugeja

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:26

Lawrence Gonzi huwa prim ministru supperv. Jien hallast 1000 ewro f'Vat taxxa tar-registrazzjoni. Bhali hallsu madwar 30,000 ruh ohra. U issa jigi l-PM u jghidilna li ghandna mmorru l-qorti. x'jippretendi l-Prim li lanqas wara li tisfurzah il-qorti ma jaghtina l-flus lura.

Tinsiex prim. Jien xtrajt karozza, u jekk niehu l-1000 ewro lura mhux wahdi se ngawdi imma anke z-zewg uliedi u marti li ghadha kif tilfet xoghla minn ma' lukanda ewlenija.

Jien imwegga bl-agir tieghek u ghalhekk iffirmajt mal-PL ... xi haga li qatt ma bsart li se naghmel.

J.Scicluna

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:17

"Earlier, the Prime Minister said that it was not true that Malta was a net contributor to the EU. The country had attracted €1.25 billion euros, instead of the promised €855 million."

The catch is in the word "attracted". The PM should out and say whether these €1.25 billion ACTUALLY came to Malta. It is one thing to say that this amount was set aside for use by Malta and another to say that it WAS used. How much of this fabled amount was actually used in Malta and how much was lost (never to be gained) due to late submissions of Government projects eligible to EU Funding?

The Government, particularly the PM and Minister of Finance must stop treating the populating as idiots. We want...no, the People DEMAND cold, hard facts and figures.

pierre borg

Mar 22nd 2009, 13:02

joseph muscat must not do politics the way labour has done it the past 29 years, politics of opportunism as this will lead him to the same fate as his predicessors. People as not naive and know how to weigh policies. so you need to stop playing with emotions and start addressing policeis. i also would like to know but are you in favour or are you still against malta being an EU member, all this talk about being net contributor leaves alot of doubt.
i beleive that it is a grace that at thiscritical moment in time we are EU members and in the Eurozone, remember PL was against both.
ALLAHARES SMAJNA MINNKOM

louise vella

Mar 22nd 2009, 12:38

I was present and I can confirm that "dialogue" is a gross misnomer.
The prime minister speaks, the candidates answer a prepared question
each. The public is not given a chance to speak and not even to ask
questions. The public is allowed to clap the speakers.

Obvious Dr Gonzi does not want to speak about illegal immigration. He
does not want to speak about bad news, only about good news. He speaks
like trying to fight again the battles he already won - the EU
referendum 6 years ago; the last election because of people's trusting
him with managing the economy and jobs ... But dear Dr Gonzi we are in
2009. As Rudolph Cini said on Radio 101 some three weeks ago, from his
home visits he can tell that illegal immigration is what is worrying
the people most. Give us a solution to that - or at least a vision
which is in the national interest above all other considerations.

Shaun Camilleri

Mar 22nd 2009, 12:23

Dr Gonzi

How pathetic!!

your party has been in government for more than 20 years...why haven't you done anything to giving people their property back!!

And how about one of your minister's comment - if you want them back, take us to court, because no one would sue the government for a thousand euros.....but now that the LP is acting on the people's interest.......now you will refund aye?

Qisu ed jamel bhal qarnita dan Gonzi......idur al subghajh!!

Noel Cutajar

Mar 22nd 2009, 12:09

The Government would honour the Court's Decision!! Ha what a laugh!! The words by themselves would mean that the government had no intention to honour its obligations if no court action had been instituted....secondly it knows that it is in the wrong and thirdly does the Government think that it is above the law by commenting that it would honour the court's decision. Though I am sure that delay tactics will be utlilized in this case.

dusty williams

Mar 22nd 2009, 12:08

Stajt m'ghadtx! GRAZZI!

Is solitu paroli fierah tal hadd fil ghodu tal Prim Ministru Dottor Gonzi u l Bella Kumpannijja!
Fejn jiltaqaw f' nofs ta pjazza u joqoghdu jattakkaw u jihku b hadd iehor biex juru kemm huma tal-life.

Issa li riesqa l'elezzjoni tal parlament ewropew jibda jpingi kollox sabih u mill-ghada, telfa jew rebha nergaw nibdew bl'istess kantaliena tas -soltu, dak ghax tal Labour, dik mhux hekk, dak tort ta JM, jien mhux hekk ghadt, fhimtuni hazin .... etc ..... etc ..... etc

A. Mizzi

Mar 22nd 2009, 12:03

Drittijiet u mhux pjaciri...anki ghal konsumaturi, Dr. Gonzi.

tony caruana

Mar 22nd 2009, 11:58

Of course you have to honour your responsibilities should you lose the court case !!!

What kind of statement is that ? Who are you trying to fool this time ?

Do the right thing Dr Gonzi !!

Franco Massa

Mar 22nd 2009, 11:51

Dr Muscat's stand is based on conviction, namely that it will make good for a measure that is mroally and politically wrong. Contrary to what the Pm is saying that he will only react if and when obliged to do so. That is nothing but convenience!

The property issue is nothing but a way of trying to deflect attention not to mention that it is a clear case of the PM confusing the demarcation line wetween government and the party. The PL stand on VAT is a question of erroneous fiscal policy, nothing more no less. More than that, it is a moral issue as also highlighted by Ms Metsola Tedesco Triccas. Government should not wait for a court judgement to right something that is morally wrong.