[AnnaRocks]

Originally Posted by amvj

Before everyone jumping in joy, Isn’t this is applicable only those who are in Govt or in private if they have offices in more than 4 locations?

Yes. It will start with this category. Consider it similar to the vaccinations that started with the senior citizens first as they were the most vulnerable. Similarly these category of people(Govt + major companies' employees ) are the most affected ones because of work related transfers.
BUT , it will be rolled out later for the remaining folks.
Considering the chaos that we have seen during implementing such reforms in a single shot in recent years (GST confusion, demonetisation, the recent Income Tax portal update etc), this seems like a sane move. The initial confusions and system errors can be ironed out by the time it is open to the rest of citizens.

[samkat1]

Isn't this applicable only for newly purchased vehicles? Vehicles that are already registered under the current setup won't get to avail this benefit.

[swunkjyn]

It is a good notion but why is it not possible to centralize the RTO. That way it will be less under the table money in my opinion. Have a common tax for the cars so that if you relocate, taxes should not have to be paid on the vehicle again, plus there will be less bothersome cops.

When I was in Bangalore, I did not face any issues with my car that was registered in Chandigarh but my friends from Tamil Nadu and Kerala had different experiences. Though I own an Alto and they had Kia Seltos and Creta.

[libre sito]

Please go through the gazette copy attached for all clarifications.

[Voodooblaster]

Couldn't the rate of tax levied be increased after a few years ? Add unexpected cess and levies.. (we have too much cess and levies in other sectors)

User will have to shell out more in such cases over the long run.

Also to whom does the revenue for 2 years accrue ? Centre or State registering the vehicle ?

[Turbanator]

Some points from the circular

1. They shall come into force with effect from the 15th day of September, 2021.

2. working certificate in Form 60, in case the applicant working in private sector applies for BH-Series registration mark;
Or
Official Identity Card, in case the applicant working in Government office applies for BH-series registration mark;”


3. The registration mark for BH-series vehicle generated randomly through the portal shall be in black on white background and shall be exhibited in the following manner, namely:—


So, an example can be: 21-BH-0001-A.


4. Principle for motor vehicle tax.—(1) In case of fully built non-transport vehicles, the
motor vehicle tax shall be calculated electronically through the portal on the basis of invoice price excluding Goods and Services Tax (GST).




5. where the vehicle bears BH-Series registration mark, the motor vehicle tax shall be levied electronically through the portal for two years, or in multiples of two, as the case may be, in the following manner, namely:


Good for start, not sure if this is valid only for Individual buyers or Corporates too. I feel, it's the later that needs the most and in subsequent months, they should also add for corporates who have multiple offices.

[RMN]

Originally Posted by 84.monsoon

The financial levers available to states are being slowly curtailed. Yes, this is a conveniently system, however, it will increasingly eat into state road tax revenues. This is one of the few indirect tax revenue streams left for the states after GST came in, besides partial tax levy on alcohol and fuels. I expect states will vehemently oppose this.

Hence a better option would have been to make sure all the states have the same road tax % and allow out of state vehicles to run about legally however long they want.

This would mean no one will go to the extent of registering the vehicle out of state or with forged addresses and all the states get their cut

[swami]

Originally Posted by Voodooblaster

Also to whom does the revenue for 2 years accrue ? Centre or State registering the vehicle ?

Notification is clear. Tax will be levied by State / UT (see extract, in italics, from notification below). I assume this will be state / UT that the vehicle is in when registration payment is due. So money will be spread across states if the owner keeps shifting. Probably one reason why there has been not much protest.

(2) The Motor Vehicle Tax levied by the States or Union Territories at the time of registration in respect of BH - Series non-transport vehicles shall be the following, namely:—

[girishv]

Originally Posted by RMN

Hence a better option would have been to make sure all the states have the same road tax % and allow out of state vehicles to run about legally however long they want.

This would mean no one will go to the extent of registering the vehicle out of state or with forged addresses and all the states get their cut

On the way to my office, I regularly see that almost every third car is from other state. The reasons may be different. One of them is what you are mentioned ie., the higher tax here. But many people would like to buy the four wheeler in their own state and place for emotional reasons even though they are going to stay in the host state for many more years.

In that case, won't the host state lose on the tax?

[RMN]

Originally Posted by girishv

On the way to my office, I regularly see that almost every third car is from other state. The reasons may be different. One of them is what you are mentioned ie., the higher tax here. But many people would like to buy the four wheeler in their own state and place for emotional reasons even though they are going to stay in the host state for many more years.

In that case, won't the host state lose on the tax?

If you think about it, it evens out a lot right. For eg, if a person from State A works in State B, today they might still register in their home state for either sentimental values or beacuse they eventually would be moving back.

If the law was like I said, then majority of the people would register wherever they currently reside for the convenience.

Today the most common reason why people register out of state is simply for the lower tax or because of the hazel for re-registration without getting a refund.

[NoLurkerForLong]

We can all agree there is a problem for people who move between states. This solution just carves out a subset of people and leaves the rest to fend for themselves. It must be a short term and I don't know how this could be a lasting solution.

I am sure states have the authority to levy tax and union cannot infringe on that right. But the union can bring all states to the table to ensure there is a common platform (hint: vaahan, parivaahan etc) to automatically transfer the pro-rated tax when the request comes from the new state. The new state can take their cut and process the excess as refund to owner or if the incoming from old state isn't enough, new state can make the owner pay the difference. This or some variation of this would the long term solution and not this band-aid of BH series.

Ideally we would like to have yearly renewals with stickers like US, but practical enforcement will be a nightmare. I believe the lifetime tax was a solution to address this enforcement and which govt would let go of the opportunity to levy more tax huh? I am fine with this life time tax, but they should make life easier for people who want to move either voluntarily or because of job situation or whatever.

If we go this BH series route, ripping off this band-aid would prove more painful in the long term.

[ganesc]

If this goes mainstream, highly unlikely states would agree and may even challenge this in the court due to the revenue the road tax generates in addition to property/registration charges.

Better to wait for a year or so to decide as it can become a nightmare until union and state governments come to a mutual agreement. I see calculations made above for future renewals with the current rate, doubt that will stay same then. I wouldn’t be surprised if state governments increase road tax exponentially for such registration to even out the loss.

They acknowledge the difficulty in getting the refunds but rather than working on it to improvise (blame on state Govt), here they are introducing additional load for all parties involved.

[MADMAX111]

In fact, IN series would've made it look cool and like an international plate.[/quote]

This Govt loathes coolness. So they will make you Bhartiya instead.

[techspark]

Will this be applicable to CBU cars as well? Currently, road tax on CBUs in Mumbai is exorbitantly high.

[SS-Traveller]

Originally Posted by abhishek_hch

The tax rates under this proposal are -
- 8% for cars upto 10 lacs
- 10% for cars upto 20 lacs
-12% for cars > 20 lacs

The formula in Circular is

Slab tax on Car Value (excluding GST)*1.25*2/15.

This upfront payment at time of purchase comes out to a total of 0.12% of Total Invoice Value of a car. Currently, states like Karnataka charge 17% upfront!

Originally Posted by febin8055

What is the “1.25” mentioned in the formula meant for?

Originally Posted by AnnaRocks

This is how it should be. Kindly correct me if anyone else differs . Probably one could set the numbers of years upfront too.

Originally Posted by Turbanator

Some points from the circular

5. where the vehicle bears BH-Series registration mark, the motor vehicle tax shall be levied electronically through the portal for two years, or in multiples of two, as the case may be, in the following manner...

The Gazette notification is confusing. Assuming one bought a 10L-rupee (ex-showroom) petrol car. Does one:
- pay 8% of 10L as tax per year? or
- pay 8% of 10L for the whole period, i.e. 14/15 years? or
- pay according to the formula (Car Value*1.25*2)/15 every 2 years? or
- pay according to the formula (Car Value*1.25*2)/15 in 7 instalments of 2 years each, i.e. for 14 years?

Friends in the Armed Forces appear confused too - their cars are registered in states like JH, where taxes are among the lowest. Would it be worth their while (and money) to change to BH-reg?