Belgium considers Lockheed F-35 to replace F-16s

Program progress, politics, orders, and speculation
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

optimist

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 988
  • Joined: 20 Nov 2014, 03:34
  • Location: australia

Unread post20 Jan 2018, 06:17

also don't the EU have to pay a local tax on the import, or does some assembly in Italy get around this?
Aussie fanboy
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post20 Jan 2018, 06:38

Military goods are exempt from Import Duties.

Its purpose is to suspend import duties on certain weapons and military equipment to allow the EU countries’ authorities in charge of defence to procure the best military material available in the world.

It is only applicable to goods imported by or on behalf of the defence authorities in EU countries.

...

The goods on which the duties are suspended are arms and ammunition, including parts and accessories, certain rare gases, explosives, detonators, certain photographic materials and certain chemical products.

The regulation also applies the suspension of customs duties to imported parts, components and sub-assemblies that are to be incorporated into or fitted to the goods in the annexes or which are necessary for training or testing.


http://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/ ... M%3Al11015
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 17:25

GB must be smokin some good stuff... He thinks the $6.53 is JUST for the F-35 procurement.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... lgium.html

(EDITOR’S NOTE At today’s rate, the $6.53 billion cost of the 34 F-35s offered to Belgium equates to 5.33 billion euros, which is 48% higher than the 3.6 billion euro budget that Belgium has allocated to buy its new fighters.
A spokesman for Belgian Defense Minister Steven Vandeput told Belga news agency that the cost figure was “premature,” and that the final price would be determined once the ministry’s own experts have evaluated the Best And Final Offers (BAFO) due on Feb. 14.
In fact, Vandeput’s spokesman might well have been referring to the announcement itself as being premature, which it was.
Lockheed and the DCSA were undoubtedly hoping to keep the price under wraps until after the Feb. 14 deadline for the BAFO.
However, it was the prospect of the shutdown of the US Federal Government on Friday night that prompted the DSCA to issue its notification of Congressional approval. In fact, the DCSA has shut down, and its website as well – which is why the above notification is dated Jan. 18.
This notification also confirms the unit cost of an F-35A is $190 million – over twice the $85 million price that Lockheed is still claiming – and which is very close to the $206 million that we determined for Lot 5 aircraft being delivered in 2017.
And those $190 million do not include the cost of ground equipment and weapons – both things that are required for a warplane to fly combat missions.
So far, governments in Italy, Norway, Denmark and the UK swallowed the Pentagon’s bait, along with its hook, line and sinker, but they did not the true cost. Even the UK government, which is the largest non-US F-35 partner, still cannot tell Parliament how much they cost.
But now, as Belgium alone knows the true price of all three candidates before its signs an order, Vandeput and the government cabinet will be able to show how good negotiators they are.)
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6001
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 17:30

optimist wrote:also don't the EU have to pay a local tax on the import, or does some assembly in Italy get around this?


Lol it's always amazing how governments exempt themselves from such taxes
Choose Crews
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6001
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 17:31

SpudmanWP wrote:GB must be smokin some good stuff... He thinks the $6.53 is JUST for the F-35 procurement.

http://www.defense-aerospace.com/articl ... lgium.html

(EDITOR’S NOTE At today’s rate, the $6.53 billion cost of the 34 F-35s offered to Belgium equates to 5.33 billion euros, which is 48% higher than the 3.6 billion euro budget that Belgium has allocated to buy its new fighters.
A spokesman for Belgian Defense Minister Steven Vandeput told Belga news agency that the cost figure was “premature,” and that the final price would be determined once the ministry’s own experts have evaluated the Best And Final Offers (BAFO) due on Feb. 14.
In fact, Vandeput’s spokesman might well have been referring to the announcement itself as being premature, which it was.
Lockheed and the DCSA were undoubtedly hoping to keep the price under wraps until after the Feb. 14 deadline for the BAFO.
However, it was the prospect of the shutdown of the US Federal Government on Friday night that prompted the DSCA to issue its notification of Congressional approval. In fact, the DCSA has shut down, and its website as well – which is why the above notification is dated Jan. 18.
This notification also confirms the unit cost of an F-35A is $190 million – over twice the $85 million price that Lockheed is still claiming – and which is very close to the $206 million that we determined for Lot 5 aircraft being delivered in 2017.
And those $190 million do not include the cost of ground equipment and weapons – both things that are required for a warplane to fly combat missions.
So far, governments in Italy, Norway, Denmark and the UK swallowed the Pentagon’s bait, along with its hook, line and sinker, but they did not the true cost. Even the UK government, which is the largest non-US F-35 partner, still cannot tell Parliament how much they cost.
But now, as Belgium alone knows the true price of all three candidates before its signs an order, Vandeput and the government cabinet will be able to show how good negotiators they are.)


He's either retarded or twisting facts.
Choose Crews
Offline

sunstersun

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 148
  • Joined: 12 Jul 2017, 06:50

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 19:30

Italy probably gets to assembly these Belgium F-35's right?
Offline

bojack_horseman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2016, 19:51
  • Location: Ireland

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 19:38

XanderCrews wrote:He's either retarded or twisting facts.


I wouldn't rule out him being both.
Offline

bojack_horseman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2016, 19:51
  • Location: Ireland

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 19:42

optimist wrote:also don't the EU have to pay a local tax on the import, or does some assembly in Italy get around this?


Defence procurement is subject to VAT.
However, if the project is done through the 'European Defence Agency' then the procurement is VAT exempt.

The EU determines VAT policy for all 28 states and so was able to exempt itself from that tax.

Which, American readers will see (rightly) as a massive unfair advantage.... but hey-ho!

https://www.eda.europa.eu/info-hub/pres ... ooperation
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post22 Jan 2018, 20:43

Seems that there are some NATO exceptions.

Which import transactions are exempt?
The exemptions in this category, which are mandatory, are as follows.

Image


https://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/b ... mptions_en
Last edited by SpudmanWP on 23 Jan 2018, 16:33, edited 1 time in total.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7703
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post23 Jan 2018, 13:23

"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

SpudmanWP

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 8391
  • Joined: 12 Oct 2006, 19:18
  • Location: California

Unread post24 Jan 2018, 08:46

Two things from the Belgian RFP:

First up, what proposal cost covers and for how long:
. Capability Transition Period
The capability transition period is defined as the period starting at signature of the intergovernmental agreement (IGA) and ending with Full Operational Capability (FOC). For budgetary planning purposes, the FOC date is tentatively set for 31 December 2030.
During this build-up period, a substantial support from the partner nation will be required. The proposal for this period of performance will cover all activities in support of:
- Initial procurement and delivery of the weapon system and its related equipment;
- Weapon system management;
- Aircrew type conversion and continuation training;
- Conversion training of all other personnel (operational, technical, support);
- Operational and technical support;
- Operational and technical sustainment, including updates and upgrades on already delivered aircraft or support systems.

http://www.vandeput.fgov.be/sites/default/files/articles/Request%20for%20Government%20Proposal_0.pdf


2nd, Answers to the VAT question:

Value Added Tax, Customs Duties, and Similar Charges
Based on the derogations of the European Common System of Value Added Tax (VAT) of 28 November 2006, the Belgian VAT Code, article 42, §2, exempts from VAT the procurement of aeronautical equipment (aircraft, engines, avionics systems, assemblies, components, equipment, materiel, technical documents and other items such ammunition) and the associated support equipment and services.
According to the EU Council Regulation N° 150/2003 of 21 January 2003 on suspending import duties on certain weapons and military equipment, the duties of the Common Customs Tariff applicable to imports of goods are not due for the material concerned by the present RfGP. Insofar as existing laws and regulations of the partner nation permit, the government agencies will take into account that readily identifiable taxes, customs duties and similar charges on imports or exports are not to be imposed in connection with the activities under the proposed PMoU. Consequently, the government agencies will not enter into the provided cost data the taxes, customs duties and similar charges from which relief is available. Whenever existing laws and regulations of the partner nation do not allow doing so, these charges have to be clearly mentioned. The applicable modalities will be defined in the PMoU. If necessary, a ‘ruling’ will be established in order to formalise the tax modalities applicable to the partnership.
"The early bird gets the worm but the second mouse gets the cheese."
Offline

bojack_horseman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2016, 19:51
  • Location: Ireland

Unread post15 Feb 2018, 01:01

Both the UK (on behalf of BAE/Eurofighter) and the US (Lockheed) have submitted their respective final bids to the Belgians

UK MoD release:
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/mod- ... to-belgium

US State Dept release:
https://be.usembassy.gov/u-s-government ... y-program/
Offline

loke

Forum Veteran

Forum Veteran

  • Posts: 768
  • Joined: 14 Nov 2008, 19:07

Unread post15 Feb 2018, 10:09

The government must choose the successor to the antiquated Belgian F-16s. The selection panel will not be obliged to simply choose between the two offers. The point was stressed by the MR deputy, Richard Miller, on Bel RTL today.

Mr Miller said, “If either of the two do not meet the criteria for the best value for money, we could still consider other offers such as the Rafale (by the French aircraft manufacturer Dassault), or other aircraft manufacturers such as the Swedish Saab (the Gripen range of fighter aircraft).” He added, “We are not simply obliged to choose between the F-35 and European Eurofighter.”


http://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/10 ... cceed-f-16

MR Deputy, what is that ?
Offline

bojack_horseman

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 211
  • Joined: 02 Jun 2016, 19:51
  • Location: Ireland

Unread post15 Feb 2018, 10:55

loke wrote:what is that?


The initials of one of the Belgian political parties.

The "Reform Movement", part of the ruling coalition
Offline
User avatar

steve2267

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2178
  • Joined: 12 Jun 2016, 17:36

Unread post15 Feb 2018, 14:56

loke wrote:
The government must choose the successor to the antiquated Belgian F-16s. The selection panel will not be obliged to simply choose between the two offers. The point was stressed by the MR deputy, Richard Miller, on Bel RTL today.

Mr Miller said, “If either of the two do not meet the criteria for the best value for money, we could still consider other offers such as the Rafale (by the French aircraft manufacturer Dassault), or other aircraft manufacturers such as the Swedish Saab (the Gripen range of fighter aircraft).” He added, “We are not simply obliged to choose between the F-35 and European Eurofighter.”


http://www.brusselstimes.com/belgium/10 ... cceed-f-16

MR Deputy, what is that ?


Phutt the whuck?

Belgium is, of course, free to do whatever they wish... but what is the point of a competition?
Take an F-16, stir in A-7, dollop of F-117, gob of F-22, dash of F/A-18, sprinkle with AV-8B, stir well + bake. Whaddya get? F-35.
PreviousNext

Return to Program and politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 15 guests