50% of Irish workers pay NO income tax

Scofflaw

K-9 wrote: »

I agree with what you are saying, but hell, even SF reduced their taxation policy. Low tax and high spend became the accepted political policy with no dissenters, and by God, we are paying for it now.

FG wanted to cut Stamp Duty in late 06 to help FTB's.

The legacy of these policies: We now have low tax revenues and high expenditure.

What's really sad is that this is the classic banana republic mistake - the price of your major product jumps, the government makes a packet, and spends the money on hiring more people onto the payroll. When the price collapses, the government is left with an unsustainable situation.

What makes it funnier in this case is that the rise in our principal product, which appears to have been houses, wasn't even based on a real change in demand or supply, but was based entirely on the availability of credit.

cordially,
Scofflaw

K-9

Scofflaw wrote: »

What's really sad is that this is the classic banana republic mistake - the price of your major product jumps, the government makes a packet, and spends the money on hiring more people onto the payroll. When the price collapses, the government is left with an unsustainable situation.

What makes it funnier in this case is that the rise in our principal product, which appears to have been houses, wasn't even based on a real change in demand or supply, but was based entirely on the availability of credit.

cordially,
Scofflaw

YEp and Govts. the world over fall for it, so did 90% of our electorate!

I hope our property obsession is now over. Sadly, I think we'll still be spouting "rent is dead money" etc. in 20 years time.

It's going to take a massive change in attitudes and I can't see it happening. Maybe if it gets worse, we might.

Dannyboy83

K-9 wrote: »

YEp and Govts. the world over fall for it, so did 90% of our electorate!

I hope our property obsession is now over. Sadly, I think we'll still be spouting "rent is dead money" etc. in 20 years time.

It's going to take a massive change in attitudes and I can't see it happening. Maybe if it gets worse, we might.

There needs to be a massive change in legislation, before there can be a massive change in attitudes.

Renting (in this city at least) seems to have become a bit like gambling, based on the stories I'm seeing lately.

draward

nipplenuts wrote: »

If you tax the lower paid, you must reduce welfare to keep any incentive to work. But I'd be in favour of everyone earning paying tax, and welfare being cut by 20% and to subsistence level for anyone on the dole more than six months.

God point, now i was doing a course for work payroll did you know if you earn 75,000 --100,000 you pay NO TAX. LOOK IT UP

danman

draward wrote: »

God point, now i was doing a course for work payroll did you know if you earn 75,000 --100,000 you pay NO TAX. LOOK IT UP

I would doubt that very much, I think someone is taking you for a ride.
100,000euro and pay no tax....????? I think that page on your payroll book was pulled out.

mickoneill30

draward wrote: »

God point, now i was doing a course for work payroll did you know if you earn 75,000 --100,000 you pay NO TAX. LOOK IT UP

No. The common practise is for a poster of a weird claim to provide links to substansiate their claim.

ixoy

draward wrote: »

God point, now i was doing a course for work payroll did you know if you earn 75,000 --100,000 you pay NO TAX. LOOK IT UP

Whose pay roll was this then - the local drug lord's? Of course people on that amount pay tax - I know a couple of them and they're more than paying their way. In fact I'd wager they're particularly good for tax take because they're not earning quite enough to avail of any tax shelters that the uber-rich could.

seclachi

I reckon the 70-150k bracket probably get the biggest ring sting of all tax payers if you think about it, they are paying the upper band on most of there salary (52% ?). Compare it to somebody whos selling land who only has to pay 25% captial gains or other windfalls that happen to people.

I reckon this bracket are the most likely to have big loans too as it would take a fair while to work up the 6-700,000 they are likely to spend on a house. Then throw a loan for the ole beemer and a few other things in and I can imagine there are a plenty of high bracket people with alot of debt staring down the barrel of pay cuts, job losses and more taxes.

Thats what I think of when I hear the unions calling for more taxes on "those who caused all this". I wouldnt exactly be suprised in that case to find out in 5 years time that tax bracket has fled in droves, and I believe they make up a sizeable amount of the income tax take.

shoegirl

nipplenuts wrote: »

If you tax the lower paid, you must reduce welfare to keep any incentive to work.

Exactly. Its not just that though. Try finding accomodation for rent at less than 500 a month in Dublin, or 400 in most parts of the country, for many people their "minimum wage" is their rent/mortgage plus 200 a week to live on. Thats why most long term welfare recipients are those in the rented sector - they do not want to or cannot afford to meet the rent levels themselves on the potential wages they are likely to earn.

Until housing costs are reduced drastically, it makes it very hard to keep wages or welfare low. Most of the reported "high welfare" scenarios are based on significant rental subsidies being paid to beneficiaries (which in reality generate large profits for Slumlords).

The real question I have though, is how this figure conflicts with years of suggestions about the "average industrial wage." It simply doesn't add up if the "average" wage is 34k since that would already be at the marginal rate of 41% and not just 20% either. Unless there are huge armies of working couples or lone parents on these levels, I don't understand how the actual number of people paying tax in a country with so many single workers with no dependents can be paying no tax, unless the real figures are including very high paid workers. In most countries the top 10% of earners are ommited from "average" calculations to avoid skewing.

I wonder if our "real" average wage is something more in the region of 5-6k less than the statistics that have been coming out for years.

Stark

shoegirl wrote: »

The real question I have though, is how this figure conflicts with years of suggestions about the "average industrial wage." It simply doesn't add up if the "average" wage is 34k since that would already be at the marginal rate of 41% and not just 20% either. Unless there are huge armies of working couples or lone parents on these levels, I don't understand how the actual number of people paying tax in a country with so many single workers with no dependents can be paying no tax, unless the real figures are including very high paid workers. In most countries the top 10% of earners are ommited from "average" calculations to avoid skewing.

I wonder if our "real" average wage is something more in the region of 5-6k less than the statistics that have been coming out for years.

Well a single person starts paying 41% tax at €36,400 salary (up from €35,400 in previous budget). The average single person has €3660 worth of tax credits to begin with as well (PAYE tax credit + single person tax credit). This means they have to earn at least €18,300 before they start paying tax. Add on a bit extra for other tax credits like rent relief, bin charges, medical expenses etc and that'll probably come to €20k+.

I think the average wage had dropped to €32k when statistics were released in February as well btw. It's probably even less now.

K-9

Stark wrote: »

Well a single person starts paying 41% tax at €36,400 salary (up from €35,400 in previous budget). The average single person has €3660 worth of tax credits to begin with as well (PAYE tax credit + single person tax credit). This means they have to earn at least €18,300 before they start paying tax. Add on a bit extra for other tax credits like rent relief, bin charges, medical expenses etc and that'll probably come to €20k+.

I think the average wage had dropped to €32k when statistics were released in February as well btw. It's probably even less now.

There is about 10% on minimum wage and a large section of part time workers that also would be in that 50% not paying tax figure.

SparkyLarks

DublinWriter wrote: »

Bullsh*t. We\'re a low direct tax economy.

Factor in things such as VRT, duty on alcohol & tobacco, stamp duty and stop quoting the pre 9th December 2009 FF party mantra.

Do please factor them in what do you get??

Well acording to the OECD we are still a low tax economy
Especially by European Standards

Total taxation as % of GDP (most recent) by country
*Denmark 48.9
*Sweden 48.2
*Belgium 44.4
*France 43.6
*Norway 43.4
*Italy 43.3
*Finland 43
*Austria 41.9
*Iceland 41.4
*Hungary 39.3
*Netherlands 38
*Spain 37.2
*Luxembourg 36.9
*United Kingdom 36.6
*Portugal 36.6
*Czech Republic 36.4
*Germany 36.2
*New Zealand 36
*Poland 33.5
*Canada 33.3
*Ireland 32.2
*Greece 31.3
*Australia 30.6
*Slovakia 29.8
*Switzerland 29.7
*Korea, South 28.7
*United States 28.3
*Japan 27.9
*Turkey 23.7
*Mexico 20.5

worth noting
EU average 39.7
OECD average 36.2


Source ^ Revenue Statistics 1965-2007, 2008 Edition. OECD


Via Here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP#cite_note-1

OMD

SparkyLarks wrote: »

Do please factor them in what do you get??

Well acording to the OECD we are still a low tax economy
Especially by European Standards

/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_as_percentage_of_GDP#cite_note-1

But this data is 2 years old and was an estimate. I am not arguing against the fact that we are a low tax economy but you cannot prove it based on these figures. We ahve had rises in both direct and indirect taxation in the mean time. Also our GDP has shrunk.

SparkyLarks

OMD wrote: »

But this data is 2 years old and was an estimate. I am not arguing against the fact that we are a low tax economy but you cannot prove it based on these figures. We ahve had rises in both direct and indirect taxation in the mean time. Also our GDP has shrunk.

Well if someone has more accurate figures to show we are not alow tax economy please let them put them forward.

Or if someone can sho a flaw in the methodology used?
Ther are other studies which put us ina similar place in the world.

And while our GDP has shrunk so too has our tax take, despite the increase in tax rates, the amount taken is is down.

According to this article by 17%.

Idbatterim

I have been banging on about this for months now! Ill tell you who is getting screwed most the high earners! its ridiculous that 50% of workers pay no tax, but fair play to them atleast they are working! The social welfare payments have to drop to! as does the minimum wage! I am working in the private sector and I am prepared to take "my share of the pain"! but not while others around us are still milking it! no way! A big dilemma is the cost of renting or buying! as long as this remains the case, were between a rock and a hard place when it comes to slashing Social Welfare rates! If for example 1 million workers are paying no tax at all, as has been said if you even got €20 a week from them, thats one billion right there! We should go to town on the PS! Also with child benefit, pay for max 3 children! realistically the only people likely to have more than 3 children now are scum bags, who will milk the system for their entire life! Everyone here walks around on eggs shells, well why not call it as it is! We should be encouraging the middle and upper class to have more kids, not the other way around!

Taxipete29

SparkyLarks wrote: »

Well if someone has more accurate figures to show we are not alow tax economy please let them put them forward.

Or if someone can sho a flaw in the methodology used?
Ther are other studies which put us ina similar place in the world.

And while our GDP has shrunk so too has our tax take, despite the increase in tax rates, the amount taken is is down.

According to this article by 17%.

I cant remember the figure qouted, but economist on the radio the other day said only Romania has a lower tax take as a % of GDP( In EU) Thats not good

draward

ixoy wrote: »

Whose pay roll was this then - the local drug lord's? Of course people on that amount pay tax - I know a couple of them and they're more than paying their way. In fact I'd wager they're particularly good for tax take because they're not earning quite enough to avail of any tax shelters that the uber-rich could.

Sorry was wrong get sw14 from tax office. Private Sector employments. JO = first 75,036 = NILL TAX
OVER 75,036 =NILL

Stark

SW14 deals with PRSI contributions. There's a PRSI ceiling of €75k, above which you don't pay PRSI. You still pay PRSI on the first €75k of your earnings and you still pay PAYE and income levy on all of your earnings.

ntlbell

shoegirl wrote: »

Exactly. Its not just that though. Try finding accomodation for rent at less than 500 a month in Dublin, .

Searching for a room in shared accommodation for less than €500 in Dublin City

Found 2,369 properties.

it's not that hard.