[mjothi]

Originally Posted by AWD

Questions on "implementation" are not difficult to be answered. Ration the subsidized commodity! There are Govt. bodies like ARAI, etc. who calculate Fuel averages & a cost/acre, hectare could be framed. For transporters again, fuel averages & distances covered. This gives a rough idea to work on. Savings for the Govt. are going to be huge, even after taking into pilferages, etc. Army also gets subsidized fuel, pilferage is a low percentage. We simply cannot put it on lack of implementation & say this can't be done.

This is a right move & a solution has to/can be found.

Moreover this more will discourage the indiscriminate sale of fuel guzzling machines. Don't we all want a clean, future happy environment!

The Govt. can also start by increasing taxes on environmental un-friendly vehicles & rewarding the friendly ones!

Originally Posted by Samurai

It can't be done for saving money, but it can be done for show. New government departments will be created for rationing fuel, they will suck away any savings. Most trucks run overloaded, in bad traffic conditions, so ARAI numbers will be meaningless.

If you really know how these feel good laws are "implemented" by the government, you would be thinking otherwise.

Guys, I remember that for the subsidized Kerosene there was some blue color additive added to it to keep it away from black market. So, why not something in that line?

Even using the domestic LPG in car is offence. Are there not people doing it? And there is also legal sources finding them to fine and bring them before law. So, any implementation will have its own flaw.

Its the will to implement and try to reduce flaw that's needed. Not a 100% fool proof method. Me thinks...

[jaysmokesleaves]

Welcome To The DIESEL RATION SHOP - FOR FARMERS ONLY.

[akj53]

Subsidy burden is borne by the entire nation. Subsidy and Reservations are the favourite tools of politicians to appease or benefit a set of people by robbing rest of the nation. Most of the subsidies provided by the government fall under this category. Time has come to gradually withdraw all subsidies and all users should be made to pay full cost of all items. Lest we forget, the maximum benefit of subsidies is enjoyed by combination of politicians, bureaucrats and unscrupulous businessmen. Most of subsidised kerosene is used in adulterating petrol, most of the subsidised foodgrains does not reach the poor and is sold at full price at private shops. All babus, police and politicians know fully well what is being stolen and get their share to keep their mouth shut, and who bears the cost - rest of the nation. So why should these subsidies continue.

The minister is right but should not have targeted any particular brand. In fact the all private diesel vehicle owners should be made to pay full price. The idea is also not difficult to implement.


Diesel is subsidised in India but subsidy is not meant for cars (even small cars). So Government should levy 1 time Subsidy surcharge at the time of purchase of vehicle. This should be calculated to the extent of the amount of subsidy, by which that vehicle would have benefited, in running for say 1 lac kilometers. This should be fixed by Government for every vehicle with different engine variants, as per their real life average fuel consumption. This surcharge should be collected with excise duty from the manufacturer.

2. All larger cars including SUV's consume more fuel per passenger per km due to their weight. Simultaneously all vehicles with more powerful engines consume more fuel per per passenger per km., even when they are not using their full power. Most large vehicles are driven by only the driver or with one passenger, most of the time, thereby further increasing the fuel consumption per passenger. Now as concerns like global warming and fast depleting fuel reserves have become critical issues, excessive and wasteful fuel consumption must be curbed with a heavy hand. So all vehicles (both petrol and diesel) should be taxed based on their per passenger / per kilometer consumption to discourage use of fuel guzzlers.

Also the large vehicles hog more road and parking space which should also be discouraged due to chaos prevailing in our congested roads and cities. So vehicles should also be taxed as per their size.

In. U.K., all cars are taxed based on their CO2 emissions to discourage use of more polluting engines. We also must have such a tax which will force auto manufacturers to discontinue inefficient outdated engines and introduce latest technologies.

We need out of box thinking to control the situation, before it gets out of hand.

[AWD]

@Mjothi, I agree. Aim for 100% but anything above 50% is pass!

In some states only farmers get "FREE" electricity, SC, BC, etc. classes get quota. All these & more are well implemented policies, with some discrepancies. Bottom line, motive achieved.

Offcourse most SUV owners are going to speak against this policy & that can be seen also because they are going to be the affected parties & loose the advantage they enjoyed for long. I myself have an SUV but think above personal interests.

I again say "let the subsidies be for the ones who need". Making the rich richer won't do any good to the majority of the Country.

[diwakarmuthu]

Definetely a good initiative. However it would have been better if the honorable minister addressed the topic with some good references. Personally I believe the two of the following should be followed:
1. When the minister says SUV what are the vehicles is he referring at - Indian makes or is he referring to the gas guzzlers
2. I believe there should be a differential pricing. One for private fleet operators and one for private car owners. For private fleet operators who use the heavy trucks and other gas guzzlers, it is required for them to purchase at open market rates

[mjothi]

Originally Posted by AWD

In some states only farmers get "FREE" electricity, SC, BC, etc. classes get quota. All these & more are well implemented policies, with some discrepancies. Bottom line, motive achieved.

You missed the Free TV, LPG stove

[SPARKled]

Every vehicle that's not a farm vehicle or a public services vehicle not taxis mind you should not get cheap subsidised diesel. There should be no exceptions to this. Forget expensive vehicles even entry hatches which provide the so called "turbo pull" should be banned from using cheap subdised pull.

[AWD]

Originally Posted by mjothi

You missed the Free TV,

That's a populist move, I vehemently oppose it.

What actually I was trying to convey was that these policies were implemented inspite of claims that implementation would be im-possible. Similarly, the diesel policy can also be implemented if thought out properly.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by AWD

Offcourse most SUV owners are going to speak against this policy & that can be seen also because they are going to be the affected parties & loose the advantage they enjoyed for long. I myself have an SUV but think above personal interests.

I have a petrol SUV, so it doesn't apply to me.

I am against anything that tries to solve a problem by adding more bureaucracy, because that only leads more cost and more corruption. Our babus turn every new restriction into a money making operation. I don't want any extra powers in their greasy slimy hands.

You really want to save diesel? Improve the electric transmission grids, reduce transmission losses, strictly monitor and reduce electricity thefts. This will reduce load shedding. If you remove/reduce load shedding, companies will reduce their diesel generator usage. That is a huge savings. No need for rationing departments, more corruption, etc.

Eliminating corruption leads to saving in our country. We don't need more stupid laws and regulations and restrictions. Just implement existing laws/regulations will bring out the maximum savings. But that would turn off the money tap for the babus and politicians. So they will never do that. Instead they create more money making rules.

[CBlazer]

Govt. policies need to be revised. Indian automotive scene has changed a lot since these subsidies were introduced. Not just SUVs, but all other passenger cars too must run on non-subsidized fuel.

[AWD]

Originally Posted by Samurai

I am against anything that tries to solve a problem by adding more bureaucracy, because that only leads more cost and more corruption. Our babus turn every new restriction into a money making operation.
No need for rationing departments, more corruption, etc.
Eliminating corruption leads to saving in our country. We don't need more stupid laws and regulations and restrictions. Just implement existing laws/regulations will bring out the maximum savings. But that would turn off the money tap for the babus and politicians. So they will never do that. Instead they create more money making rules.

Now this is turning into a Political discussion, I don't know whether you read a thread created by me some days back, the title of which read "Death penalty for corruption". The thread was moved another Mod, since then I have no clue.

Yes Im dead against corruption but we cannot let corruption stop our way. Do we stop doing a job which involves corruption? We have to stand & fight corruption head on.

I would again suggest the Govt. to make some stringent laws against corruption & see them enforced but we cannot let corruption stop us on the path of development.

Just think of it, subsidy for the rich/moneyed class on Diesel is stupid & not the other way around. We can only move forward with new laws & regulations which benifit public. Just because there's corruption doesn't mean we cannot have any laws!

[Ranendra]

I believe removing subsidy from diesel for non-commercial vehicles would lead to black marketing diesel by commercial vehicle owners. Implementing something like that would be an utter non-sense. I am sure if diesel for private vehicles is without subsidy, then one of the new means of making money by transport operators would be to sell diesel at price lower than the non-subsidized diesel and higher than subsidized diesel.

May be a way out for the government might be to tax diesel passenger cars (non-commercial) separately with some calculation based on engine capacity and average consumption. The taxes can be 5 yearly and levied along with road taxation mechanism. I know it would hit diesel vehicle sales but would make things a bit more rational as well.

What do you all say!

RD

[SunilM]

I voted "yes".

However, I do agree that implementation is very difficult, especially in a country like India where corruption is rampant.

Better approach would be to load a tax of fixed percentage of the diesel SUV price, say 20%. That should be easier to implement and taxpayers like us don't end up subsidizing rich person's SUV fuel (read builder, politician, babus etc..). This proposal was mooted sometime back, not sure what happened to it?

[rajess_in]

Yes, totally agree!

Most SUVs' cost above 8 Lac rupees (except for the Mahindra Bolero), have a mileage of 10~15 kmpl (just a rough value) or less , so it will make sense.

An additional charge may be collected to these vehicles at the bunk itself.

What will happen to the politicians? First let them stop using these vehicles!

[bj96]

Agree with Samurai. We don't need anymore new "selective" taxation. This will not work.

Why SUVs only? Why not luxury (Volvo) buses too, which charge four times more fare than normal buses? During Diwali, a Pune-Nagpur Volvo one way ticket went up to ~2000/-. Why do such opportunists need diesel subsidy?

Btw, a SUV carrying 7 people is more efficient than 3 small cars carrying two in each.

-BJ