[mkumar79]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

Well, am kind of surprised and confused whether a person capable of buying a 10L car is really a "common man"!

Amusing indeed. But such a "common man" does exist. Easily spotted on a fuel hike day in a City waiting in the long queue at the fuel station.

Support the hike but hope that PC has a GC fund to credit 30% of underbody repair bill for cars with GC < 170 mm

[Parm]

I think bad budget or good budget, people will make noise for few days and then end up buying the cars they want.

Its the same as with petrol or diesel price rise, noise for few days and then everyone back to petrol pumps to fill their tanks.

Coming back to "common man", its the one with a scooter or a Nano! Not the one with a 10 Lakh car.

[drpudhi]

Originally Posted by swiftnfurious

Well, am kind of surprised and confused whether a person capable of buying a 10L car is really a "common man"!

For that matter, a person capable of buying a car itself is not common.

Only 1% of the Indian population own private cars. We are actually the top elite.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...les_per_capita

[rock75]

Originally Posted by drpudhi

For that matter, a person capable of buying a car itself is not common.

Only 1% of the Indian population own private cars. We are actually the top elite.

Source : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of...les_per_capita

In a country where only about 18 lac people show an annual income of above Rs 10 lacs per annum, anybody buying a Rs 10 lac car is not 'aam aadmi'. PC has taken this logic.

One should not worry about what vehicle is SUV or sedan, that is besides the point. PC was least interested in description of categories in the auto industry. His objective was to get some revenue from high growth segment, without hitting the low and mid end, and he successfully achieved this by not touching the 12% and 24% excise slab vehicles. (consider yourselves lucky!)

Many vehicles are grossly overpriced and still sell like hot cakes. Take Swift, for example, it falls in 12% excise slab and there is no reason why a diesel swift should cost above Rs 5 lacs, except crazy demand.

One good year of recession will bring some sanity in auto makers' mind. Tata's are already talking of discounts! (http://www.moneycontrol.com/news/bus...16.html#toptag)

[stringbh]

Statistics have to be taken with a pinch of salt. That is in yesteryears, when owning a car detached you from the tag of 'common man'. Many who had dreamt of owning just about any car in the past generation, are now unable to settle for "any" car.

Just a scattered example: the owner of a recent mini atta chakki close to my house was about a buy an Alto, but, thought hard, then took a loan and finally settled for a 7 lac swift diesel. I was shell-shocked. He is what I would have called a common man, but, now he does not fit that definition

[Ashley2]

Originally Posted by GTO

...
It’s a poor budget for the auto industry and can be best described as one that doesn’t acknowledge the sector’s problems at all. The market has been reeling under the effects of a decrease in demand, rising fuel prices and poor sentiment; the Finance Minister (FM) announced absolutely nothing that could rejuvenate demand. ....

Dear, I think you have quoted keeping in mind only the passenger car manufacturers as Indian Auto industry. More than any other segment, CV (limited to M&HCV) segment is losing sale MoM starting from April 2012 to till date. This is upto 25% and SIAM has itself reduced the projection for the segment to less than 5% this year. Thanks to the cyclic trend in GDP growth affecting the sales. All the major manufacturer are under severe sales pressure.
But this budget is a huge relief to Commercial vehicle manufacturer like Ashok Leyland and Tata as GoI propose to buy around 10000 buses under JNnurm. Total value of buses to be purchased will be around 14k crores.

Much more better news is that this is going to continue in forthcoming budgets also.

Shares of commercial vehicle manufacturers rose on the Bombay Stock Exchange (BSE) on Friday, a day after the government announced a budgetary provision of Rs. 14,873 crore for Jawaharlal Nehru National Urban Renewal Mission (JNNURM) projects, mainly for the purchase of 10,000 buses

While Tata Motors' shares moved up 1.2% to Rs. 161, Ashok Leyland rose 4.5% to Rs. 23 and Eicher Motors gained 0.3% to Rs. 2,765 on the BSE.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/India-...1-1019690.aspx

More news about JNnurm here in Tbhp

Originally Posted by mxx

....
Even if a sedan has all 3 of the above said criteria, it will be taxed as an SUV.
But if a SUV/UV(non-GOI classic definition) does not meet any one of the above criteria -like ertiga,duster- there is no change in the tax bracket.
Body style has nothing to do with it.

Yes, body style doesn't matter here. Quanto actually qualifies as a small car as per Excise and not as a baby SUV. So any car meeting the specification of more than 4m in length etc will be called as a SUV's as of now.
But a better clarity should be given soon.

[swiftnfurious]

TATA Motors MD Karl Slym slams the government on the tax hikes. The excerpts of the interview with ET

Slamming the government for raising excise duties in the budget on SUVs, Slym said, "The government believes it can gain more revenues by taxing SUVs.

"The only three sections doing well in India are diesel, SUVs and luxury cars," he said.

"It's a shame that it is our approach. It's a shame that instead of trying to grow the industry, we are trying to penalise and the one that seems to satisfy customer requirements," he said.

"The government instead of trying to help, maybe some of the struggling segments, is seemingly trying to stifle some other segments slightly remaining to be okay," Slym added

Details:http://economictimes.indiatimes.com/...w/18777025.cms

[Sommos]

Originally Posted by Parm

I think bad budget or good budget, people will make noise for few days and then end up buying the cars they want.

Its the same as with petrol or diesel price rise, noise for few days and then everyone back to petrol pumps to fill their tanks.

Coming back to "common man", its the one with a scooter or a Nano! Not the one with a 10 Lakh car.

Do the people have any other option except making some noise and showing their grudge. Having a car in the house is a necessity atleast for all the members here. So one would buy the car even if it costs more and make some adjustments somewhere else, or at the most delay the purchase for some time.

Same is the case with petrol price hike. It pinches everyone, so one makes noise and then buys the same as he has no other option.

[rock75]

Originally Posted by Sommos

Do the people have any other option except making some noise and showing their grudge. Having a car in the house is a necessity atleast for all the members here. So one would buy the car even if it costs more and make some adjustments somewhere else, or at the most delay the purchase for some time.

Same is the case with petrol price hike. It pinches everyone, so one makes noise and then buys the same as he has no other option.

I too see no reason for the car sales to be effected by this small excise hike of 3%. If we see the overall cost the hike comes to about 2% or even lower, something which the car makers keep on doing every year or so. Nobody wants to pay more but if you have no option, you have to pay it. 'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes' (Benjamin Franklin)

A customer who is keen on buying an SUV will buy an SUV come what may, a 2-3% hike is not going to deter him, though if it was 20% hike, it may effect his decision. Similarly no duty change has happened to at least 80% of car industry, the 12% duty hatches and compact sedan/suvs and sedans below 1500cc petrol and diesel engines but greater than 4m in length (24% excise duty). That is definitely the way to go.

[Sommos]

Originally Posted by rock75

I too see no reason for the car sales to be effected by this small excise hike of 3%. If we see the overall cost the hike comes to about 2% or even lower, something which the car makers keep on doing every year or so. Nobody wants to pay more but if you have no option, you have to pay it. 'In this world nothing can be said to be certain, except death and taxes' (Benjamin Franklin)

That is definitely the way to go.

But, personally I do not support this extorsionist attitude of the GOI. It is extremely easy for the FM to impose extra tax on every performing sector to mop up revenue, without considering the long term impact.

To give an example, just take the readymade garment industry. We all have heard that the taxes have been slashed in this sector because the industry is reeling under pressure. IIRC the ED had been hiked in the same readymade garment sector just four years back by the same FM.

[Dry Ice]

Cross posting from the Thar official test drive thread - will it escape the extra 3% or will it not?

The website says prices are being updated, just like the ones for Scorpio or Bolero are saying. Maybe we will know for sure in a few days time.

Originally Posted by Parm

As per the new budget 2013...

The government defined an SUV/Utility vehicle as a vehicle that has an engine capacity exceeding 1500 cc, is over 4000mm in length and has a ground clearance of 170mm and above. If a vehicle meets all the three criteria, it will face a higher excise duty.

So my question is will we see a Thar with Quanto engine?

Originally Posted by slalom

Will the 3920 mm length save the Thar ?

I don't think they will plonk the Quanto engine ,it won't generate the low end grunt required for the Thar I believe .

Moreover Mhawk is being tested in the Thar as reported ,let's cross our fingers and wait .

Originally Posted by niks_devil666

isnt thar less than 4 m in length ?

Originally Posted by Dry Ice

With the current criteria, as posted by Parm above, the Thar might just escape.

From Thar specs -

Dimensions
Front track : 1445 mm
Rear track : 1346 mm
Overall length : 3920 mm
Overall width : 1710 mm
Wheelbase : 2430 mm
Overall height : 1930 mm

Only problem is, I hope the govt. doesn't modify the rule to include a seating capacity restriction also.

[Nilesh5417]

Originally Posted by Parm

I think bad budget or good budget, people will make noise for few days and then end up buying the cars they want.

Its the same as with petrol or diesel price rise, noise for few days and then everyone back to petrol pumps to fill their tanks.

Coming back to "common man", its the one with a scooter or a Nano! Not the one with a 10 Lakh car.

Parm - Actually people will buy cars but may not be the ones they want! I'm in the market for a diesel sedan under 10lacs and trust me, i don't have any decent options that provide all the safety features (ABS+Airbags). I'm stuck with Dzire which is hardly a sedan.

Also, if car sales for models like Alto are taking a hit now, it sure is pinching hard. People are not just making noises but they are actually putting off their car purchases. The so called middle class that is formed of IT folks like me has been hit hard from every possible angle. The overall cost of living (the fixed costs) has gone up by like 25% over the past few years while the pay check has remained virtually stagnant.

So here i'm, driving around my stone age Esteem and will probably continue to do so unless the goodies/discounts pour in.

[ghostrider]

Originally Posted by ACM

GHOSTRIDER:
In general a Hatch of a company would be cheaper than the sedan or the SUV from the same company and similarly an SUV from a specific company would be more expensive and less fuel effecient than sedans and hatch of the same brand. Yep since we are not talking of preowned vehicles the fact is that most people who go for SUV / MUV can actually make do with a hatch or a sedan that is cheaper and more fuel effecienty for most of the applications to which a person puts the car for.

To me for example in my own usage all the reasons why I go for an SUV are more "Want" rather than "Need" related especially considering that I live in a nuclear family and rarely have we ever crossed 3/4 let alone 5 people in the same vehicle. Though the reason of road space/ footprint given by the FM is mad. The logic of taxing the top end is valid in my view.

How on earth is that valid??? Did we all go to sleep and suddenly wake up in a communist country?? Today I want to live in a slightly better part of town - now should that oaf Chidambaran impose another random and whimsical tax on me and everyone who loves in area X and leave people in area Y alone? Today I want to eat non-vegetarian food which is usually more expensive than vegetarian food in the same restaurant. Should we start taxing chicken and fish now?
These decisions are nonsensical (I'd use much stronger language if it was allowed on the forum) and socialist. It's a very slippery slope we seem to be heading down.

If you want to tax imports to promote local manufacturing, okay.
If you want to tax combustion engines and give sops to cleaner / greener tech, okay.
If you want to gradually remove diesel subsidies to help the deficit, okay.

But to impose a tax on a vehicle based on it's size is NOT okay. Just because your reasons for buying an SUV are based on want rather than need, that doesn't mean that everyone else has that luxury. Suppose I''m handicapped and I need a vehicle which has a larger amount of space for me and my wheelchair?
Suppose I'm a small business owner whose travels involve such terrible roads that I will find navigating them difficult in a sedan?

I already pointed out that there are enough sedans that have a longer wheelbase than other SUVs which is the biggest hole in our moronic FMs logic to tax SUVs.

MESSAGE TO THE CONGRESS: First clean up your house before you tax mine.

[sameeracer]

Just checked with my Toyota dealer in Lucknow. The Fortuner is 76000 more expensive in the 4 wheel drive category. I was told that Toyota is considering a automatic with sunroof in the future. No idea though when this will be launched. This could be same time the limited edition sportivo was launched.

[RSR]

This Union budget offers nothing to either the automobile industry (except perhaps increased bus sales - improved public transport is always welcome) or to the vehicle buying public. Disappointing, to say the least.

Targeting SUVs for increased excise duty is a surprising move, as the ones most affected would be Mahindra and Tata. It's no secret that these two local manufacturers dominate/control the influential auto lobby (SIAM) along with the once local (now Japanese owned) Maruti Suzuki. Not only that, these three also routinely influence governments (both Union & States) through the "Gandhian way" (if you know what I mean ) to purchase their vehicles in bulk.

Mahindra and Tata (including JV partner FIAT) strongly lobbied the government to prevent additional excise duty on diesel vehicles which was being seriously considered, and they were the most delighted ones when the idea was dropped. The government's small car definition (<4m length and <1200cc for petrol or <1500 cc for diesel) was also tailor-made to suit the "small cars" made by Maruti Suzuki and Tata at that time (others took advantage of this only later). As for bulk orders, data on government sales along with common knowledge on how governments function in this highly corrupt country is enough indication of that.

Since there is no standard or scientific way to define an "SUV" internationally, they have come up with an arbitrary, crude and dubious way of defining this perception-based classification.

According to the government, a passenger vehicle that's >4m in length and has an engine that's >1500cc and has a ground clearance of >170mm is classified as an "SUV". As already pointed out, a diesel Duster/EcoSport (even in 4wd guise) is not an "SUV" according to the govt. while a petrol Duster is supposed to be an "SUV" even in 2wd form. Common sense says they are SUVs, even if relatively compact ones. Cars like the SX4 (petrol but not diesel), Altis (petrol but not diesel), Civic and some others are supposed to be "SUVs" according to the govt. but common says dictates that they are anything but SUVs or even UVs. But then again, when did common sense have anything to do with the govt. that claims to work for the common man?

Manufacturers may find ways to bypass/make a mockery of this rule easily. Otherwise, expect to see the number 169 on the technical specification sheet of many SUVs and cars.

Thankfully, vehicles that are either <4m in length or have an engine capacity of <1500cc do not have to worry about lowering the GC for tax benefits! Whatever the idiotic govt. may think, a GC of AT LEAST 170mm is a must for all cars to tackle Indian road conditions, where Mt.Everest-sized speedbreakers and moon-crater like potholes are common.

The lack of excise incentives for fully electric vehicles is completely baffling. If lowering the cost of importing crude oil is a concern, then cutting the tax on vehicles that run on electricity or alternate fuels is the only way forward.

The lesson to be learnt from all this is that the tax structure must be classified based on emission norms (CO2 and particulate matter) with increasing tax slabs for increased emissions, as it is done in the developed countries. This is the best way for rewarding fuel efficient, environment friendly vehicles and penalising fuel guzzling, emissions spewing ones. It is the only way that actually works!