Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

L0ui5e

Can I just make a point to the nay sayers here who are telling us all to cop on it's just €100, if you can't afford that blah blah..

It has been stressed by politicians of all divides that this is a PROGRESSIVE tax and would you be happy to pay MULTIPLES of this in the years forward?

Micky Dolenz

650gs wrote: »

Be sure you read the third line down.
A real joke

The "owned by a Minister of the Government" relates to property owned in an official capacity as in the Minster of Defence would own houses on barracks etc.

The rest relate to council housing etc.

Tenants don't own the property and are exempt.

But don't tenants still benefit from local services? so why be exempt from a service charge? Because it isn't a service charge it's a property tax.

hondasam

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

The "owned by a Minister of the Government" relates to property owned in an official capacity as in the Minster of Defence would own houses on barracks etc.

The rest relate to council housing etc.

Tenants don't own the property and are exempt.

But don't tenants still benefit from local services? so why be exempt from a service charge? Because it isn't a service charge it's a property tax.

This is a good point, if the money is going on local services these people will benefit same as you and I and everyone else, only difference is we will pay for them an us.

alastair

L0ui5e wrote: »

Can I just make a point to the nay sayers here who are telling us all to cop on it's just €100, if you can't afford that blah blah..

It has been stressed by politicians of all divides that this is a PROGRESSIVE tax and would you be happy to pay MULTIPLES of this in the years forward?

You do realise a progressive tax is a good thing, yeah?

demanufactured

Go on Luke Flanagan TD and the late late show audience for sticking it to Fergus O'Dowd minister for the environment!!! Basically shove the household charge up your arse!!!

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

Anger isn't going to sway the need to rebuild our revenue structures - sorry.

It might restore democracy though. No taxation without representation as they say.

Lookin' pretty grim for Big Phil at the mo, innit?

Am Chile

Just seen the late late show, good on luke ming flanagan, fergus o dewd has been spouting off the last week and tonight about the swimming pools won,t be open, what swimming pools is he on about that,s funded by local services? any swmming pools I ever used I had to pay to use them and never ever got any free use of any swimming pool-besides swimming pools are funded by those who actually pay to use them via gym/club membership.

Micky Dolenz

alastair wrote: »

You do realise a progressive tax is a good thing, yeah?

Erm, no. No it's not.

Flex

Ghandee wrote: »

We could start by not paying over three billion euro (twenty years worth of household scam payments) to unsecured bond holders on the 31St of March?

There's a three billion hole plugged straight away?

No, this is part of the misconception. Thats a once off payment, its not coming out of current expenditure, ie. The government doesnt look at that and say "We need to pay €3.1B there, we better cut social welfare by €3.1B", theyll say, "The interest on that €3.1B will be about €100m a year, we need to factor that in (when we actually do start servicing that interest)". Our deficit of some €16B is a constant overspend we have every year, the bailout is a once off payment. If we only had to deal with the bank bailout (bad as it was) and had no deficit we'd actually be home and dry by now.

Ghandee wrote: »

And again Ferguscompared the tax where you get: nothing for your money your not already paying for,
Against rates in the north, where you get waste collection, no emergency service charges, free health care (for every one), lower motor tax, no tolled roads, lower rate of VAT rates, etc etc etc,

There are no comparisons Fergus!

Rates = something for your money.
Household charge = nothing for your money! (that you're not already paying for)

The "something" youre getting at the moment is only available to you (and me and everyone else in the country) because we're using borrowed money to fill in the gap (thus we're not already paying for it). The extra taxes are being raised so that we can pay for these services and welfare benefits ourselves.

We have to pay because the services and welfare we have now arent adequately funded by us. Either petition the government demanding they cut services (hospitals, schools, etc.) and welfare (dole, state pension, disability, etc.), or else we pay more tax

Wild Bill

Can't be bothered reading the back posts - so anyone know if Weird Al has explained how a property "worth" minus 100k equals wealth?

Still waiting for him to get his wee mind around that one

jack67

alastair wrote: »

You do realise a progressive tax is a good thing, yeah?

eh no i dont:eek:

L0ui5e

alastair wrote: »

You do realise a progressive tax is a good thing, yeah?

oh bloomin' marvelous, yeah

Wild Bill

demanufactured wrote: »

Go on Luke Flanagan TD and the late late show audience for sticking it to Fergus O'Dowd minister for the environment!!! Basically shove the household charge up your arse!!!

Saw that!

O'Dowd had that wide-eyed 'rabbit-in-headlights' look - just before he was turned into roadkill by young Ming!

Micky Dolenz

I suspect we'll see a major U turn in the next week or so. It will possibly come in an extension of the dead line while they get "easier" ways to pay, via the post office etc. In that extended period, they'll hope public opinion will soften. but for now they are stuck in a hard place because,

The Mahon report + bogus property tax in the same week = potential breaking point of the people.

eth0

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I suspect we'll see a major U turn in the next week or so. It will possibly come in an extension of the dead line while they get "easier" ways to pay, via the post office etc. In that extended period, they'll hope public opinion will soften. but for now they are stuck in a hard place because,

The Mahon report + bogus property tax in the same week = potential breaking point of the people.

Just hope that will be an actual u turn and not a break before a renewed effort to bring on the "fair" and progressive 500-900e property tax next year.

jack67

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I suspect we'll see a major U turn in the next week or so. It will possibly come in an extension of the dead line while they get "easier" ways to pay, via the post office etc. In that extended period, they'll hope public opinion will soften. but for now they are stuck in a hard place because,

The Mahon report + bogus property tax in the same week = potential breaking point of the people.

yep i agree u turn of sorts is on the cards.

Curly Judge

I paid the charge today.
Got back an e-mail with a 35 character identification code, a mixture of letters and numbers.
35 characters is sufficient to describe the number of atoms in the known universe.
Why do we need this to lunatic bureaucracy in a country of four and a half million people?

alastair

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Erm, no. No it's not.

Erm, yes. It is.

eth0

Curly Judge wrote: »

I paid the charge today.
Got back an e-mail with a 35 character identification code, a mixture of letters and numbers.
35 characters is sufficient to describe the number of atoms in the known universe.
Why do we need this to lunatic bureaucracy in a country of four and a half million people?

its probably an encrypted phrase. "Nice! We caught another one!" or something similar. There's also a group of 20 or 30 TD's daughters employed to think up these unique phrases for each person who pays

Am Chile

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I suspect we'll see a major U turn in the next week or so. It will possibly come in an extension of the dead line while they get "easier" ways to pay, via the post office etc. In that extended period, they'll hope public opinion will soften. but for now they are stuck in a hard place because,

The Mahon report + bogus property tax in the same week = potential breaking point of the people.

I meant to address the payment at the post office bit.

Straight From the horses mouth: they have no database for bills or Invoices, and registration is all about building that. Don't Register, Don't Pay.

Some have criticised the payment methods in recent weeks, with many arguing that it should be possible to pay by cash in local post offices.

But CEO of the Local Government Management Agency Paul McSweeney said this option is not possible.

"When we started this… we certainly had an informal conversation with An Post," Mr McSweeney said.

"They require you to come in with an invoice. To generate an invoice, you need a database - that database doesn't exist.

"That's one of the purposes of the whole household charge, to create that database.

http://news.eircom.net/breakingnews/20425890/?view=Standard

Micky Dolenz

alastair wrote: »

Erm, yes. It is.

Course it is.

hondasam

alastair wrote: »

100% - it's in the legislation/act.

Who knows? More for sure.

Sorry to ask you for a link, I have looked but cannot see where it says 100% of the money collected stays local.

Yes next year will be more and that is what worries me, it's going to go on house size which is not really fair either imo.

alastair

jack67 wrote: »

yep i agree u turn of sorts is on the cards.

The money that's keeping things going at the moment was lent on the basis of having a property tax in place by 2014. There won't be any u turn that actually stops the introduction of a property charge. Anything short of that - maybe.

jonnygee

Right so I have been following this thread for some time now and have seen it degenereate into a load of bollocks to be honest. so I have one question that i need answered. If everyone paid the charge this year and this brings in 160 million and this will fund all the local authorities this year then why would we need an increased property tax next year of multipile times this amount to fund the same local authorities to provide the same services.

alastair

hondasam wrote: »

Sorry to ask you for a link, I have looked but cannot see where it says 100% of the money collected stays local.

Yes next year will be more and that is what worries me, it's going to go on house size which is not really fair either imo.

3.—(1) In the year 2012 and in each subsequent year thereafter, each person who, on the liability date of the year concerned, is the owner of a residential property shall, subject to this Act, pay to the relevant local authority the sum (in this Act referred to as a “house- 25 hold charge”) specified in accordance with this section.

http://www.oireachtas.ie/documents/bills28/bills/2011/7411/b7411s.pdf

sonic85

hondasam wrote: »

Sorry to ask you for a link, I have looked but cannot see where it says 100% of the money collected stays local.

Yes next year will be more and that is what worries me, it's going to go on house size which is not really fair either imo.

according to the irish times article i posted earlier it will go on house value:

Under the commission’s proposed scheme a charge of €188 would be paid on houses valued at up to €150,000; €563 on houses between €150,000 and €300,000; €938 on houses up to €450,000; €1,313 on houses valued at up to €600,000; €1,699 on houses up to €750,000; €2,188 on houses valued at up to €1 million; €3,125 on houses up to €1.5 million and 0.25 per cent of the valuation on houses over that.

alastair

jonnygee wrote: »

Right so I have been following this thread for some time now and have seen it degenereate into a load of bollocks to be honest. so I have one question that i need answered. If everyone paid the charge this year and this brings in 160 million and this will fund all the local authorities this year then why would we need an increased property tax next year of multipile times this amount to fund the same local authorities to provide the same services.

€160 million won't fund the local authorities - it'll help fund the local authorities.

Dublin City Council's (slashed) annual operating costs are €800 million. It looks like it could pay for Mayo though - but just Mayo.

Wild Bill

alastair wrote: »

The money that's keeping things going

Ah! Al is preparing the ground for a retreat .....reality is dawning on even the dimmest!

You mean the money that's keeping the German Banking shell trick going!

I doubt that scam will be still in place by 2014. So a delay will be as good as a defeat.

And a defeat is what the house tax is heading for!

Frank Black

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Course it is.

Which bit do you have the issue with?


Definition of 'Progressive Tax'
A tax that takes a larger percentage from the income of high-income earners than it does from low-income individuals.

Read more: http://www.investopedia.com/terms/p/progressivetax.asp#ixzz1pzHLkVkH

Wild Bill

jonnygee wrote: »

Right so I have been following this thread for some time now and have seen it degenereate into a load of bollocks to be honest. so I have one question that i need answered. If everyone paid the charge this year and this brings in 160 million and this will fund all the local authorities this year then why would we need an increased property tax next year of multipile times this amount to fund the same local authorities to provide the same services.

Because it isn't to fund local authorities - it's to repay German Banks' gambling debts; and as the interest on that debt keeps rising and the economy remains in recession so the need for more debt repayments goes up.