Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Hong Kong' started by markwj, Feb 20, 2014.
Well it's finally over, but that was kind of odd to see... he sure seemed upset :tongue:
He got thrown out of the CE's policy address as well. I think he gets antsy if he sits in one place for too long. I think he is missing the point that to be an effective legislator you need to stick around for the vote.
So here is what we do.
We get the car of our dreams. Then we lobby the government to put FRT on electric vehicles. The we sell in 3 years for what we paid for it.
You're right Mark. Not sure if you've been following HK so-called politics, but that IS exactly his point. All he does is: oppose whatever government is proposing, attack the speaker personally, make a scene by stupid acts so the Council has no choice but to throw him out. The result is: he gets to avoid listening the speeches or whatever discussions there may be and goes for coffee break. Consider his vote an ABSTAIN or a NO. I simply cannot understand who voted him for legislator.
Whether you like the man or not, he is the only politician in HK who has the guts to stand up for what he believes in. It's the foundation of democracy...oh wait....
Hi. I spoke to Tesla today. I don't think it's 100% that the FRT is renewed? It has only been proposed but they still have to vote on it? Any view on this? I don't want to pay an extra $500K for the car. Actually, I won't.... Appreciate any thoughts.
The legislature does what the government demands. Its not a democracy.
So you think it's a done deal? FRT is extended?
This is what the govt said in the speech
"For years, we have been promoting the use of electric vehicles by exempting them from First Registration Tax. I propose to extend the tax exemption by three years up to31 March 2017[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]."[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Verdana, Helvetica, sans-serif]Since the government permanently owns the majority of the votes in parliament I would say its a done deal. But you have to decide for yourself...[/FONT]
From my meeting with the Under Secretary of EPD and one of the Legislature Councilman for Finance few months ago, I was told everyone in the government supports it (CAP 330 extension). It was up to the Treasurer to tell them if it is economical feasible. I guess the speech told us his decision.
My personal opinion is that it is rubber stamp stage at this moment. The budget bill needs to be signed into law, but it would be very hard to stop this now - and think of the confusion if the government put something in the budget and then didn't follow through. A large number of politicians would also have to vote against the support for 'environmentally friendly vehicles'.
On a similar note, say this was already law, and you ordered the car on that basis. There would be nothing stopping the government changing the law before delivery, introducing a new tax, or other such measures that would affect you before delivery.
Closest analogy we have was the sudden FRT increase a few years ago - seeing the issue of order vs delivery, not to mention alleged conflict of interest in the finance committee, the government back-pedaled and gave back the difference to those who had ordered but not yet received delivery, I've got no idea of how that back-pedaling was technically implemented, but I don't see how they had time for a full council vote.
Lastly, I am not sure of the actual mechanics of this (given that it is likely to take several months to pass the budget appropriations bill, but FRT exemption is due to expire next month). I know the government had power to adjust expenditure items in committee (rather than a full council vote), and suspect that is how this will be handled.
Bottom line is the extension of the FRT waiver is now in a bill before Legco. The bill is not law, yet.
I'm confirming my Model S order today.
Technically it is just a proposal by FS, however I don't think any Politicians would vote that down.
Environmental protection etc are big topics on moral high ground so no one would dare to say No.
Perhaps when EV getting too popular and traditional car importers may lobby for a fair playing field, but that won't happen in 5 years I think.
Lawmaker Albert Ho apologises over model photos | South China Morning Post
Perhaps he got bored, after waiting to hear if the EV FRT exemption was renewed.
Scantily-dressed pictures of models on the 17" screen inside the Model S would be even nicer...
It appears that the original story was maliciously orchestrated. He wasn't looking at Models, he was looking at Model S. Must have been excited by the announcement of FRT waiver extension.
Models ... Model S ... it's just a space and a capital letter, easy to get confused by this if you are a tabloid journalist :tongue:
Well. All I can say is he has taste
Exactly, both are nice to both drive and look at. Ooops, I think it's getting quite laid in the evening now, better go to bed.
With the help of the EPD, I've managed to clarify the mechanics behind the implementation of the extension for the FRT waiver.
Today (5th March) at 4:30pm a LegCo subcommittee will meet to approve going forward with this change:
Legislative Council of the Hong Kong Special Administrative Region - Subcommittee on Proposed Resolution under Section 5(4) of the Motor Vehicles (First Registration Tax) Ordinance (Agenda) 5 March 2014
The proposed legislative change is here:
with Legal Services Division "no objection" report here:
and LegCo briefing paper here:
Subject to the agreement of LegCo, the Secretary for the Environment will move the resolution for approval during March. There is a small confusion on the exact date - the resolution paper itself says 19th March 2014 and the LegCo briefing says 26th March 2014. Whichever - they're trying to get this done before the 31st March expiry date (presumably to avoid the grey area of vehicles registered after 31st March but before the resolution passes).
The resolution itself is very simple: "Repeal 2014, Substitute 2017". It is not tangled up with anything else, and I can't see anything stopping it.
What I find interesting is the justifications listen by Government in this:
Here is the quoted strategy document: