Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

'IRISH PROPERTY TAX' FOR YEAR 2009. HOW WOULD YOU ANSWER FOR THAT?

Options
24

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Krustacean
    Registered Users Posts: 25 ✭Krustacean


    smccarrick wrote: »
    So- in other words- make all those first time buyers who got out of paying stamp duty shoulder the can?

    Hey I didn't say my suggestion was perfect. Just work in progress.

    What about 3 years grace on Property Tax for first time buyers.??


  • Options
    #33
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    asdasd wrote: »
    We should definitely tax property. Why are all taxes in Ireland taxes on labour, or consumption, why not wealth. Tax the rich in rich housing. The top ten-twenty percent taxed at 2-5% of equity in the house.

    All this will mean is a return to the situation we were in up to the 1950s- where death duties meant it was cheaper to simply hand over properties directly to the state than try to pay the taxes due. Thats how we got Johnstown Castle and numerous other estates into public hands.

    Everyone should pay- but on a pro-rata basis, and be accessed on their ability to pay.

    5% of a property valued at 1 million (and there are lots of them out there even now) is 50k...... Even the rich don't necessarily have 50k floating around these days....... Most rich people have gotten burnt even worse than the average punter, with the credit crunch, fall in stock markets, plunging pension values, fall in property prices etc.

    Its not equitable to say only the top 10% should pay- everyone must be seen to be contributing.......


  • Options
    #34
    4arc
    Registered Users Posts: 54 ✭✭4arc


    i think that if this is the best solution our "government?" can come up with then were all fcuked!

    its time to take to the streets!


  • Options
    #35
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Krustacean wrote: »
    Hey I didn't say my suggestion was perfect. Just work in progress.

    What about 3 years grace on Property Tax for first time buyers.??

    Why?
    Why should first time buyers be considered special?
    As a demographic group they are less likely to loose their jobs than someone 10 years older than they. Further, if they do loose their jobs, they are far more likely to find a new one. We can't mollycoddle them- everyone must pay.


  • Options
    #36
    asdasd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,185 ✭✭✭asdasd


    5% of a property valued at 1 million (and there are lots of them out there even now) is 50k...... Even the rich don't necessarily have 50k floating around these days....... Most rich people have gotten burnt even worse than the average punter, with the credit crunch, fall in stock markets, plunging pension values, fall in property prices etc.

    My heart goes out. The point about wealth taxes is that they are a tax on wealth, not income. Someone on 50K a year is getting taxed on income, yet he could never afford such a house, nor does he have wealth in the house the rich have. The guys in the rich house may have to sell, but what of it? This encourages new money to replace old, something that is more meritocratic.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    asdasd wrote: »
    My heart goes out. The point about wealth taxes is that they are a tax on wealth, not income. Someone on 50K a year is getting taxed on income, yet he could never afford such a house, nor does he have wealth in the house accrued to him. The guys in the rich house may have to sell, but what of it? This encourages new money to replace old, something that is more meritocratic.

    In practice this isn't what happens. The property just sits on the market (look at most of the old landlord estates that no-one could afford to buy)- until such time as the government steps in and agrees to take over the asset in lieu of payment of the outstanding taxes. Thats what happens. Its not new money replacing old- its a large house on ground with a stupid amount of ongoing necessary maintenance, being given to the OPW to take care of (further ballooning public sector paybill), no cash transactions, and everyone unhappy.......


  • Options
    #38
    Oafley Jones
    Registered Users Posts: 6,495 ✭✭✭Oafley Jones


    Mr. Incognito wrote: »
    Ah yes- but it won't be dressed like that.

    It'll be dressed as a tax on ALL property, home and abroad. And then they'll allow it as a deduction against rent received in the same way mortgage interest is available as a deduction for investment properties. To the man on the street it looks equitable, but it's not.


    Rent received on a PPR???


  • Options
    #39
    funky.monkey
    Closed Accounts Posts: 23 ✭funky.monkey


    For any tax to be fair it has to be based on people's ability to pay it. a 1000 euro a year property tax represents 1% of the income of someone on 100,000 a year, but 25% of the income of someone on 25,000 a year. Thats why its unfair on the low paid. Owning a property will become the exclusive privilidge of the rich if this comes about.


  • Options
    #40
    asdasd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,185 ✭✭✭asdasd


    ts not new money replacing old- its a large house on ground with a stupid amount of ongoing necessary maintenance, being given to the OPW to take care of (further ballooning public sector paybill), no cash transactions, and everyone unhappy.......

    Yeah, but you are talking about the fifties. There was no money. Now we are in the dynamic get-up-and-go celtic ... ah forget it.

    I am really talking about Dalkey etc. For Big Houses with historical and tourist value opening up to visitors could be in lieu of tax. Britain does something like that.


  • Options
    #41
    karen3212
    Closed Accounts Posts: 668 ✭✭✭karen3212


    Mr. Incognito wrote: »
    mortgage interest is available as a deduction for investment properties.

    That's not true, is it? I don't think that's the case in Ireland, or am I wrong?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    gnxx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 228 ✭✭gnxx


    Taxes should be applied to an asset. I'm not sure any property purchased in the last 10 years could now be considered an asset.

    Homeowners who are facing negative equity do not deserve another kick.

    Surely the people with multiple rental properties are already paying tax on their rental income?

    Over the next 12 months, the banks will start selling properties they have seized. This is going to have a significant impact on prices. I'm not sure that having a huge number of rental properties flooding the market at the same time is a good idea.


  • Options
    #43
    Boggle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 964 ✭✭✭Boggle


    In short, a property tax will be the last straw. I have never protested before but if this comes in I'll go straight to rioting.

    (on my own with spare bats - see how long it takes to escalate!!)

    Any of you prepared to stand for this should be ashamed.


  • Options
    #44
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    What is this governments obsession with property?? A property tax is fair enough so long as it replaces stamp duty and does not apply to existing homes.

    But why is everything FF does done in a sneaky complicated way? Its just like VRT debate, people should pay for the amount of petrol they use, not the size of their engine. In this case, people should pay for the amount they earn, not the size of their home. The solution is simple, increase income tax and do it for every single person living in the country...if you earn less you pay less tax. Its very simple and its as fair as it can get.

    Sh!t or get off the pot Cowen and do it quickly so we can all get on with our lives.


  • Options
    #45
    asdasd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,185 ✭✭✭asdasd


    Any of you prepared to stand for this should be ashamed.

    Or we dont own property. I agree that it shold be only on an asset. That is on equity. Which means you dont pay if you are in negative equity.

    Hard to do the sums there though.


  • Options
    #46
    Hand_Of_Steel
    Closed Accounts Posts: 55 ✭✭Hand_Of_Steel


    You can't tax people for owning a home, this is mad!
    There is no way that this will go through, there would be riots!


  • Options
    #47
    asdasd
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,185 ✭✭✭asdasd


    You can't tax people for owning a home, this is mad!
    There is no way that this will go through, there would be riots!

    Every country in the world taxes property. Even the US. Especially the US.

    So, of course you can. Just not in Ireland.


  • Options
    #48
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,078 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    karen3212 wrote: »
    That's not true, is it? I don't think that's the case in Ireland, or am I wrong?

    Mortgage interest is an allowable expense against income on investment properties.


  • Options
    #49
    Berti Vogts
    Registered Users Posts: 417 ✭✭Berti Vogts


    Hand_Of_Steel wrote: »
    You can't tax people for owning a home, this is mad!
    There is no way that this will go through, there would be riots!

    Well, to the best of my knowledge, property tax exists in some shape or form in virtually every other European country.

    You are correct though. There is no chance of the Irish public accepting this lightly.

    However, the fundamental problem remains that there is a massive difference between public expenditure and what is brought in taxes. This is not just going to go away of itself. Something is going to have to be done and it is going to be very, very unpopular.


  • Options
    #50
    The_Conductor
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 32,285 Mod ✭✭✭✭The_Conductor


    Hand_Of_Steel wrote: »
    You can't tax people for owning a home, this is mad!
    There is no way that this will go through, there would be riots!

    Why can you not tax people for owning a home?
    If you don't tax people for owning property- what sort of a tax would you propose in its place?
    We need to raise taxes, simple as. If you forego raising taxes in one area- you have to accept that you will have to raise them in another.


  • Options
    #51
    ejmaztec
    Registered Users Posts: 24,078 ✭✭✭✭ejmaztec


    I suppose they could re-introduce window tax. All those big windows, all that money!


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    gandalf
    Registered Users Posts: 26,458 ✭✭✭✭gandalf


    Once we see the savings from rationalising the public service then property tax can be put on the table. I think that primary residences should be exempt and totally agree that 2nd properties onwards be taxed.

    Property taxes should not be used to help continue to subsidise inefficiencies and outdated work practices that exist in the public and semi state sectors.


  • Options
    #53
    Mr. Incognito
    Registered Users Posts: 9,798 ✭✭✭Mr. Incognito


    Rent received on a PPR???

    A PPR is not an investment property. Rent received falls under the rent a room scheme and above this threshold is taxed in full. Household costs can be apportioned. Anyway- this is off topic.
    That's not true, is it? I don't think that's the case in Ireland, or am I wrong?

    It is the case. Ordinary people get it at source, like Health insurance so don't realise they are getting relief on it too.

    Anyway the way the economy is going it's only a matter of time before we see property taxes but don't expect to see it on developers pockets- it's you and I that will be paying it.


  • Options
    #54
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    smccarrick wrote: »
    Why can you not tax people for owning a home?
    If you don't tax people for owning property- what sort of a tax would you propose in its place?
    We need to raise taxes, simple as. If you forego raising taxes in one area- you have to accept that you will have to raise them in another.
    I don't accept that as a reason for property tax. I would be in favour of property tax to replace stamp duty, because stamp duty is cyclical. If nobody is buying houses you get no tax. Property tax would ensure a steady flow no matter what the climate. But its unfair to slap it on everyone. If its introduced it should be from now on and not applied to existing home owners.

    I accept we need more taxes to plug the hole. Property tax is good for going forward, but not as a quick fix. But FF are just trying to do what FF do best, that is raise taxes without pissing people off. It won't work. They're as transparent as a pane of glass. They should just accept their fate - increase income tax, call a general election and sit their fat asses on the opposition bench for the next 20 years.


  • Options
    #55
    Duck Soup
    Registered Users Posts: 3,996 ✭✭✭Duck Soup


    smccarrick wrote: »
    Why can you not tax people for owning a home?
    Because it has no correlation with ability to pay. Many larger homes are owned by retired people, who have raised their families in them and are now living on pensions.

    By all means raise extra tax revenue, but make sure that it comes from people with the means to pay it.


  • Options
    #56
    Serenity Now!
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,326 ✭✭✭Serenity Now!


    My old fave solution here: Save millions by cutting child allowance off couples who can already afford to have children ie. double earners over a certain limit.
    It is an abused and over-indulgent waste of money.
    Would any polly have the balls to do this though? Nah.


  • Options
    #57
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    smccarrick wrote: »
    All this will mean is a return to the situation we were in up to the 1950s- where death duties meant it was cheaper to simply hand over properties directly to the state than try to pay the taxes due. Thats how we got Johnstown Castle and numerous other estates into public hands.

    Everyone should pay- but on a pro-rata basis, and be accessed on their ability to pay.

    5% of a property valued at 1 million (and there are lots of them out there even now) is 50k...... Even the rich don't necessarily have 50k floating around these days....... Most rich people have gotten burnt even worse than the average punter, with the credit crunch, fall in stock markets, plunging pension values, fall in property prices etc.

    This is unworkable, a house has no intrinsic value. Better to base it on sq. ft rather than "value". Seems unfair that someone living in a 10 bed mansion should pay the same as a family living in a poky 1-bed apartment.


  • Options
    #58
    professore
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,857 ✭✭✭professore


    Duck Soup wrote: »
    Because it has no correlation with ability to pay. Many larger homes are owned by retired people, who have raised their families in them and are now living on pensions.

    By all means raise extra tax revenue, but make sure that it comes from people with the means to pay it.

    Well if they can't afford it then they should sell it and buy something smaller. Square footage is the way to go.


  • Options
    #59
    ManFromAtlantis
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,483 ✭✭✭ManFromAtlantis


    ejmaztec wrote: »
    I suppose they could re-introduce window tax. All those big windows, all that money!


    ha ha. i'll be blocking up the sun room.


    all those big windows, all that money, all that heat loss..............

    if i had to do it all again.id build a two bed cottage 700sq.ft max, no car, grow veg, no tv no mobile, i'm serious.


  • Options
    #60
    20goto10
    Registered Users Posts: 1,210 ✭✭✭20goto10


    professore wrote: »
    Well if they can't afford it then they should sell it and buy something smaller. Square footage is the way to go.
    Thats nonsesne. If you can't afford it then don't buy it - thats a fair enough statement. But why should people who have already bought their home have to sell and downgrade in order to pay a poxy tax? Thats ridiculous.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    gnxx
    Closed Accounts Posts: 228 ✭✭gnxx


    The government and banks played a hand in driving up property prices. Within the next 24 months, most people who recently bought property will be in a negative equity position.

    We don't tax US corporations on their losses :-) Why tax homeowners who are stuck with a negative asset.

    The only fair way to apply this tax is based on valuation .. I believe it would be an interesting exercise to value properties for tax purposes in this climate.


Advertisement