Stamp Duty Tax Back??

garred

grumpytrousers wrote:

Tough! Get over it! On a smaller scale I get done over the EXACT same way on my shares in Bank of Ireland. I have to pay stamp duty on the purchase. I pay tax on the dividends and I have to pay capital Gains Tax if I'm lucky enough to sell it on at a profit. But the profit tends to outweigh the burden of the duty. The amount of people who invest in property given the level of duty implies that it's still a doable for a lot of people.

Not bitching just showing the tax issue with relation to the comment about "raping" people with more than one home. I accept I have to pay tax but what bugs me is comments that anyone with more than one home is creaming it and should be taxed to the hilt.

MorningStar

rooferPete wrote:

MorningStar,

I firmly believe that the stamp duty especially on first time buyers is nothing short of a Penal Tax that has been allowed to continue without justification.

For owners / buyers of second and more properties I also believe that unless they are shown as the primary pension of the individual they should :


.

I see the point about it being a penalty but as with most things the answer is not simply remove it. It is obvious that the prices would rise if the stamp duty were removed. Any thing to benifit the buyer will really benifit the seller.
Two houses for pensions maybe three houses gets the situation where rich people don't pay tax.
Something needs to change but it needs to be balanced and all effects considered. A simple removal probably is a bad idea. Maybe a method to get some of the money back or I would prefer a credit system so you don't keep paying stamp duty if you upgrade

Kinetic^

The only way you'll get tax relief for paying stamp duty is when you buy an investment property, sell it and have to pay CGT.

You can add the stamp duty to the cost of purchase, which in turn will reduce your CGT liability.

MorningStar

garred wrote:

Not bitching just showing the tax issue with relation to the comment about "raping" people with more than one home. I accept I have to pay tax but what bugs me is comments that anyone with more than one home is creaming it and should be taxed to the hilt.

AS a lndlord (owning more than one house) I provide a service needed in Dublin city. I pay 42% tax on all rental income and if I sell I pay capital gains. That is plenty of tax and without landlords the city would be in trouble. I am, not creaming anything

My Family paid higher taxes and huge interest rates on their property over the years they have paid there way can't see any reason why they should pay more now after providing years of service.

garred

MorningStar wrote:

AS a lndlord (owning more than one house) I provide a service needed in Dublin city. I pay 42% tax on all rental income and if I sell I pay capital gains. That is plenty of tax and without landlords the city would be in trouble. I am, not creaming anything

My Family paid higher taxes and huge interest rates on their property over the years they have paid there way can't see any reason why they should pay more now after providing years of service.

You must of misread what I said.

grumpytrousers

garred wrote:

Not bitching just showing the tax issue with relation to the comment about "raping" people with more than one home. I accept I have to pay tax but what bugs me is comments that anyone with more than one home is creaming it and should be taxed to the hilt.

Fair enough; my exhortion to 'get over it' may, by the way, have come accross as a trifle grouchy...that was not the intention. On a broader more, um, holistic scale it's pretty much endemic that unless you're really rich, and by that, I mean almost literally sh*tting money, you'll get ridden on tax anyway. It's just a question of when, or how. There are very few of us who have the €€€ to fork into a multi-story carpark, a hospital or a horse - and so there is an inequality at work anyway.

However, when we get down to the level of ordinary joes, the fact of the mater is, IMHO, that if you're lucky enough to be able to afford a second property, then a higher level of stamp duty than the FTB pays would seem to be fairest. It's true, you're getting penalised for being prudent with your money; you're taking a hit 'cos you choose not to blow your spare money on whores and gin or whatever, but that's just the way...

MorningStar

grumpytrousers wrote:

However, when we get down to the level of ordinary joes, the fact of the mater is, IMHO, that if you're lucky enough to be able to afford a second property, then a higher level of stamp duty than the FTB pays would seem to be fairest. It's true, you're getting penalised for being prudent with your money; you're taking a hit 'cos you choose not to blow your spare money on whores and gin or whatever, but that's just the way...

That already happens so are you happy with how it works now you know?;)

grumpytrousers

MorningStar wrote:

That already happens so are you happy with how it works now you know?;)

Yes. I mean, I think. I was trying to, I suppose, highlight that one persons opinion of being 'raped on stamp duty' is another persons belief that if one is fortunate enough to be able to invest/speculate/earn from property, then one should see stamp duty as just another cost of business. I think most professional landlords do...it's the sideliners that seem to feel more hard done by...As I don't invest in property, and the OP has been answered - no you can't claw back money you ponied up for stamp duty - I'll get me coat. I've whores and gin to, er, splash out on...

lomb

grumpytrousers wrote:

I've whores and gin to, er, splash out on...

and ul waste the rest:D

lomb

rooferPete wrote:

Hi lomb,

Just short note to lighten the deep tone of this topic, an old gent very highly educated and a staunch socialist but with a great sense of humour asked me the definition of an Irish Socialist ?

After long thought and a speech the Labour Party and rich vs poor etc, He

No Son, An Irish Socialist is just a Capitalist without money .

thats funny that coming from a socialist probably means he is one of the only true socialists:D
disagree with the rates on residential, number of reasons, firstly its passed on to the tenant, the tenant always pays the rates, and any other taxes etc
secondly if they did that i dont think rates would be too far away on owner occupiers.
at the end of the day residential property is just that, whether its rented or for owner occupiers, people live in it...its like healthcare, a fundamental requirement. penalising it because its rented goes against the funtamentals of property rights that date back eons(landlords and tenants). just my two cents..

RainyDay

MorningStar wrote:

I pay 42% tax on all rental income

All rental income? So you don't deduct your mortgage interest and other expenses from your income before calculating your tax bill?