Traffic congestion in Brussels no surprise when European taxpayers subsidise company car use with $31 billion every year

9 comments

  1. Clarification: the $31 billion refers to EU-wide subsidies for company cars. They’re definitely not all subsidies for cars in Belgium

  5. The fact that those people are being called in to work in the office, while they could do that from home and completely avoid even public transportation, doesn’t seem to matter?

  6. Imagine Belgium without company cars. This is what would happen:

    1. The people who have a company car now will buy their own car. This means that for nearly every eco-friendly car (lets be honest, company cars are a LOT more CO2 friendly than private owned cars) a more polluting car is bought. I don’t think that for each company car a private car will be bought, but definitely a lot.
    2. People who don’t have company cars will pay more for fuel. Yes, company cars are subsidized a lot as the article suggest, but they also bring in a LOT of money for the government: they often use their cars more (both for work and private) which results in more tax for the government as they use a lot more fuel. Imagine doing 50 000 km each year at 6l/100km. That’s 500 x 6l x 0,832 euro = nearly 2500 euro in tax just for fuel. I don’t think there are many privately owned cars who do 50 000 km each year. I hope you realize the government will get their tax from somewhere so its the owners of privately owned cars who will pay more then.
    3. There is a huge difference between a company car (like a van for someone who works in construction and carries around lots of tools and construction materials) and a “salariswagen”. The article doesn’t make that difference but the general hate towards company cars has to do with salariswagens. There are about 383 000 salariswagens compared to a total of 5 600 000 cars, or roughly less than 7%. If you think traffic around Brussels is solved by removing 7% of cars you are simply delusional. Ofcourse, not everyone works in Brussels and even those who do don’t drive to Brussels. We’ll get to that later.
    4. As someone who works in Brussel and owns a company car (salariswagen) I can safely say that in my team of 7 employees I’m the only one who uses the car to go to work. All 6 others come to work by train. They use their car to drive to the train station. So the sentence “Fuel is also often provided for free, disincentivizing cleaner, greener transport modes.” is simply not true. In other departments at my office and companies of clients we notice the same trend. Nearly no one drives to Brussel who owns a company car. Yes driving around for free is fun, but being stuck in traffic in a free car is still annoying and a waste of time.
    5. Even if you live in a utopian world thinking that every salariswagen owner will take public transport a lot more investments are needed. We’re talking about 383 000 more people who take public transport. Again, more taxes for everyone.
    6. Unemployment: Currently in and around Brussels a lot of big companies are based. Removing company cars means business will move elsewhere to better reachable places. This means that people who work there without company cars will have to look for another job. Less jobs are also needed in big financial institutions (leasing companies and insurance). Less salesmen are needed in garages, less mechanics are needed,…. Don’t forget to pay them when they are unemployed.
    7. High tax rate: company cars are handed to employees as a way to reward the effort of the employee without being taxed as much as their wage. A VW Golf Variant TCO leasing price is +- 750 euro each month + 21% VAT. Then add some fuel and its easily more than 1000 euro. How much more money would the employer need to spend before the employee has a 1000 euro nett do you think? How much more would prices of goods and services rises of all of 383 0000 salariswagen owners suddenly need to be paid more than 2500 euro gross each month?

    You can downvote this all you want, I don’t care. If this had indeed a negative outcome the government would have prohibited this LONG time ago. Its similar to cigarettes: why are they still allowed? Because a lot of tax is paid on cigarettes and smokers generally don’t live that long so less pension had to be paid. In the end it’s a numbers game. “Money makes the world go round.” No one in the government cares about your time spent in traffic or your health. Sorry kids, but that’s the reality.

  7. There was an article recently explaining why in spite of the fact that most non labour employees work at least 60 percent from home we stil have congestion’s.

    Apparently that’s because the majority of road traffic in congestion zones is NOT PROFESSIONAL!! So parents bringing kids to school or old people doing old people stuff. Unbelievable- but at least it explains this weird combo of empty offices and saturated roads.

    2nd element is the cost of a train subscription if you only need it for 1 or 2 days / week

  8. It’s a far more complex problem than company cars alone. If you would really want to solve this issue rather than push a political agenda to get some votes you should look at a broader set of solutions then focus on the company cars alone. That discussion is pointless as people who currently have a company car know damn well that paying for their own car would result in a far less fancy car and quite a step back in terms of comfort as well as a financial setback. They’ll fight tooth and nails to keep their car. And people who currently don’t have a company car feel its unjust, or maybe better said, are a bit jealous, that their neighbour drives a A-brand car for next to nothing. There is simply no discussing this topic without everyone getting up on their high horses, take out the pitchforks and sharpen their stakes.

    The discussion should instead, IMHO, and for the sake of getting anywhere at all, be focussed on how we can diminish the usage of cars through other means. How we can improve safety and reliability of public transport and make it more accessible. How we can make use of urban planning, commerce to bring small local stores back into the walking/cycling distance of where people actually live. Focus on infrastructure updates to resolve conflicts between cars/bikes/pedestrians. Look to solve housing issues so people don’t have to move to the freaking middle of nowhere to be able to afford a house. Incentivise e-bikes and what not, make city-centers car-free. A fee on KM driven by car would also be able to curve car usage. Look into expanding train networks/boats to lower the amount of trucks on the road, etc… I’m sure plenty of good ideas have been mentioned before, but those pesky company cars prevent the discussion to go anywhere else.

  9. Ah. Somebody naming the Elephant in the room.

    Where are all the politicians that have been lobbied upon by automotive?

    I see. Silent in their corner.

Leave a Reply