Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 2] *Poll Reset*

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

I assume you are if you are talking about Negative Equity

No negative equity only comes into it when someone tells me my house is an asset.

An asset to whom?

Its no longer even an asset to the mortgage holder, if I hand them the keys in the morning, even they lose out.

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

No negative equity only comes into it when someone tells me my house is an asset.

An asset to whom?

Its no longer even an asset to the mortgage holder, if I hand them the keys in the morning, even they lose out.

Well I only think Negative Equity comes into it when someone is trying to sell their house, if they are not selling it then Negative Equity is irrelevant.

Besides if the property tax is done on a valuation of the property surely its better for the valuation to be as low as possible.

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

I assume you are if you are talking about Negative Equity.

I agree with the explanation of people being able to save money on Motor Tax if they can, I myself got rid of my car as myself and my wife can manage with one car so we were in the lucky position of halving our annual Motor Tax bills.

Try to do that if you owned 2 properties, both in negative equity.



Just regarding the motor tax comparison, alastair (the tax evader depending on his location) reckons that if you don't own a car you don't pay road tax.

If you use public transport (buses or taxi's) you're paying road tax.
It may be indirectly, but you pay it non the less through part of your fares.

That takes care of the motor tax comparison.

It's the same with the DART, the LUAS and other trains. You are paying tax as part of your fare.

So unless you walk or cycle everywhere, everyone is paying tax for using the roads/rails one way or another.

It's an indisputable fact.

There is no counter argument to this.

It'll be funny to watch the pro taxers try to prove me wrong.

Taxi's

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=9&sqi=2&ved=0CGIQFjAI&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.nationaltransport.ie%2Fdownloads%2Ftaxi-reg%2Freview-national-maximum-taxi-fare.pdf&ei=wiIJULSPIdK0hAfDqcyBCg&usg=AFQjCNHebIhk71RBzOL3QYvgdewfsQd8qQ&sig2=89enVCR8doi98cE60rU_IQ

Read the list on the top of page 24, fixed costs, these are passed on to the customer through fares just like any business.

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

No negative equity only comes into it when someone tells me my house is an asset.

An asset to whom?

Its no longer even an asset to the mortgage holder, if I hand them the keys in the morning, even they lose out.

Can you flog the thing for cold hard cash?

If so - it's an asset. Regardless of what you paid for it.

And what difference does negative equity make to your mortgage outgoings, compared to someone not in negative equity's mortgage outgoings?

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

Just regarding the motor tax comparison, alastair (the tax evader depending on his location) reckons that if you don't own a car you don't pay road tax.

There's no such thing as road tax. Only vehicle owners are liable for motor tax - just as only property owners are liable for property tax.
And yes - sure everyone is paying for local authority services indirectly - but only property owners pay that property tax.

For those who need a recap:

Own car - pay motor tax
Don't own car - don't pay motor tax
Own property - pay property tax
Don't own property - don't pay property tax

(exemptions apply)


I thought you were off?

kr7

It doesn't take long for the pedantic ****e to start, does it?

'there's no such thing as road tax, it's called motor tax':rolleyes:

Motor tax paid for by the vehicle owner and passed on indirectly , that's indirectly for those who can't/won't read a sentence properly.

It's hard to argue a point with ignorant, pedantic people.

Next.....

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

Try to do that if you owned 2 properties, both in negative equity.

Wouldnt need to as I would just pass on the NPPR, Property Tax / HHC to any tenants I have in the second property so wouldnt really matter.

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

Wouldnt need to as I would just pass on the NPPR, Property Tax / HHC to any tenants I have in the second property so wouldnt really matter.

Yea, that's true.

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

It doesn't take long for the pedantic ****e to start, does it?

'there's no such thing as road tax, it's called motor tax':rolleyes:

Motor tax paid for by the vehicle owner and passed on indirectly , that's indirectly for those who can't/won't read a sentence properly.

It's hard to argue a point with ignorant, pedantic people.

Next.....

Motor tax receipts make up a huge slice of local authority funding directly.

Yes people may pay tax on their bus ticket or train ticket, however this does not go directly to LA's it will go to Bus Eireann who will pass it on to the Govt which may or may not be used for local services, same way as we pay tax on Petrol for our cars for example this gets passed on but isnt necessarily used to fund LA's in the way that Motor Tax is.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

Motor tax paid for by the vehicle owner and passed on indirectly , that's indirectly for those who can't/won't read a sentence properly.

It's a nonsense though, When I buy a choc ice, I'm paying motor tax, commercial rates, corporation tax, VAT on utility overhead, and a rake of other taxes 'indirectly' - am I liable for any of them though? No I'm not.

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

Motor tax receipts make up a huge slice of local authority funding directly.

Yes people may pay tax on their bus ticket or train ticket, however this does not go directly to LA's it will go to Bus Eireann who will pass it on to the Govt which may or may not be used for local services, same way as we pay tax on Petrol for our cars for example this gets passed on but isnt necessarily used to fund LA's in the way that Motor Tax is.

I know that's how it works, but I just want to put to bed the lie that if you don't own a vehicle, you don't pay motor tax.

You do pay it, you just pay it indirectly.

Agreed?

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

I know that's how it works, but I just want to put to bed the lie that if you don't own a vehicle, you don't pay motor tax.

You do pay it, you just pay it indirectly.

Agreed?

No. You don't pay it. The argument is fatuous.

kr7

Do pedantic people not understand the meaning of the word indirectly?

This may help, although I doubt it.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=3&sqi=2&ved=0CFwQFjAC&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2Findirect&ei=ESoJUPzeLIjAhAfUmfTzCQ&usg=AFQjCNHT3zP8RGTIyo0pzvC5MegRCSgJHA&sig2=HQp1z3fLjXEFz48ib6zlyA

kr7

alastair wrote: »

No. You don't pay it. The argument is fatuous.

Here's another one for you.
It does describe most of your posts.

http://www.google.ie/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&sqi=2&ved=0CFkQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fdictionary.reference.com%2Fbrowse%2Ffatuous&ei=oCoJUNmwEs2ThgeXsY34CQ&usg=AFQjCNGsmw7dDuki_CZ_aSNHwC_dVBBHLQ&sig2=nUPMKQQzs-T7SFsJJjmu6Q

Travel back in time and pay your poll tax in England and then come on here when you have your credibility restored.

Until that happens your double standards will trip you up as long as you are on this thread.

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

I know that's how it works, but I just want to put to bed the lie that if you don't own a vehicle, you don't pay motor tax.

You do pay it, you just pay it indirectly.

Agreed?

No you dont pay Motor Tax as such, as I have explained Motor Tax is paid by the owner of vehicles and this is sent directly to the LA's to fund the LA's.

What you pay when using public transport is not Motor Tax its VAT or whatever which is completely different from Motor Tax.

Directly or Indirectly Motor Tax is Motor Tax and VAT is VAT. All taxes are different if they werent they would just be called Tax.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

Do pedantic people not understand the meaning of the word indirectly?

I don't buy heroin myself, but I do buy it indirectly by buying other things and freeing that money into the system.

So unless everyone stops paying for anything, everyone is paying for heroin one way or another.

It's an indisputable fact.

There is no counter argument to this.

lugha

kr7 wrote: »

I know that's how it works, but I just want to put to bed the lie that if you don't own a vehicle, you don't pay motor tax.

You do pay it, you just pay it indirectly.

Agreed?

Ok. So LA tenants who use public transport contribute to motor tax, which in total, is far more than that needed to maintain the roads, the excess going in part to local authorities! Ergo, they contribute to local authorities ... indirectly?

Can the "the HHC is not fair" go to bed with the motor tax argument? :pac:

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

No you dont pay Motor Tax as such, as I have explained Motor Tax is paid by the owner of vehicles and this is sent directly to the LA's to fund the LA's.

What you pay when using public transport is not Motor Tax its VAT or whatever which is completely different from Motor Tax.

Directly or Indirectly Motor Tax is Motor Tax and VAT is VAT. All taxes are different if they werent they would just be called Tax.

Donal, come on!

It's motor tax for gods sake, there's also VAT on the fare.

There's no two ways about it, everyone using public transport on the road indirectly pays motor tax.

If you can't concede that this is a fact, I don't know what to say.

I thought you were a fair an intelligent guy.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

Until that happens your double standards will trip you up as long as you are on this thread.

I thought you were off? Not terribly credible by that score, eh?

No double standards at play here - but then you know that already.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

I thought you were a fair an intelligent guy.

He's showing every sign of it - ymmv.

kr7

alastair wrote: »

I thought you were off? Not terribly credible by that score, eh?

No double standards at play here - but then you know that already.

You didn't pay your poll tax in England because you didn't agree with it.

That's a fact, you told us all.

You broke the law in England and you were a tax defaulter in England.
Stop twisting things.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

You didn't pay your poll tax in England because you didn't agree with it.

That's a fact, you told us all.

You broke the law in England an you are a tax defaulter in England.
Stop twisting things.

Ehh - yes - I told you I didn't pay it. I'm not a tax defaulter in the UK - I'm 100% tax compliant. No double standard at play here.

Timely recap:

Nah - I've no problem with those who are opposed to it on it's own terms. My problem is with the following (represented in this very thread, over and over).

Delusions about it not being a real tax.
Delusions about it not going 100% to local authority funding.
Delusions about James Reilly's gaff being exempt (so why should I pay )
Red herring nonsense about James Reilly Portugese management fees dispute
Delusions that people won't have to pay the thing
Delusions about evading tax not making you a tax evader
Delusions about the ability of the state to identify property tax evaders (the clue to this delusion is a bricks and mortar one)
Whinging about 'intimidation'
Assuming anyone who supports property taxation is a shill for FG/FF/Enda/Reilly/etc
Rolling out every bleeding sob story / rant about state mis-spending when the scale of our taxation deficit is obvious to anyone who looks.
Those who can't discern the distinction between a poll tax and a property tax
Those who seem to think we can magically graft UK levels of local services into this state before they'll cough up their tax.
Those who can't spot that taxation levels are higher in the UK, and that this might just have something to do with the gap in service provision.
And people who think they can just whinge about their choice not to pay the tax, and the thought of how extra-whingey they'll be when they have to stump up their tax with penalties.

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

Donal, come on!

It's motor tax for gods sake, there's also VAT on the fare.

There's no two ways about it, everyone using public transport on the road indirectly pays motor tax.

If you can't concede that this is a fact, I don't know what to say.

I thought you were a fair an intelligent guy.

Motor Tax goes straight to funding LA's.

Tax you pay on Public Transport doesnt.

Motor Tax and Tax you pay on Public Transport are two completely different things.

So basically anyone that doesnt agree with you is not intelligent.

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

Motor Tax goes straight to funding LA's.

Tax you pay on Public Transport doesnt.

Motor Tax and Tax you pay on Public Transport are two completely different things.

So basically anyone that doesnt agree with you is not intelligent.

About six times i highlighted the word indirectly, as in not straight to.

I can't help it if you can't / don't want to read my posts as their meant.

Another old expression for you, 'you can't reason with a mule while it's kicking the face off you'.

Carry on...

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

About six times i highlighted the word indirectly, as in not straight to.

I can't help it if you can't / don't want to read my posts as their meant.

Another old expression for you, 'you can't reason with a mule while it's kicking the face off you'.

Carry on...

So you admit then that those that use Public Transport dont pay Motor Tax and that the money they pay in taxes to use the Public Transport doesnt go to LA's.

Thats grand so.

lugha

kr7 wrote: »

About six times i highlighted the word indirectly, as in not straight to.

I can't help it if you can't / don't want to read my posts as their meant.

Another old expression for you, 'you can't reason with a mule while it's kicking the face off you'.

Carry on...

Again I ask: if public transport users do pay motor tax, albeit indirectly then don't those who are exempt from the HHC also pay for local services, also indirectly? And where does that leave the argument about fairness?

kr7

alastair wrote: »

Ehh - yes - I told you I didn't pay it. I'm not a tax defaulter in the UK - I'm 100% tax compliant. No double standard at play here.

The only reason you may be tax compliant in the UK is because the poll tax was scrapped.

While it was the law and you didn't pay it you were a tax defaulter.

You may/may not be compliant now but you weren't then.

Jesus, you are so confused that you can't even admit what you were.

alastair

lugha wrote: »

And where does that leave the argument about fairness?

Ah now - don't bring logic into the equation.

kr7

lugha wrote: »

Again I ask: if public transport users do pay motor tax, albeit indirectly then don't those who are exempt from the HHC also pay for local services, also indirectly? And where does that leave the argument about fairness?

I'm not the one trying to link the motor tax to the HHC.

I'm the one trying to show you pro taxers that the motor tax argument wrong.

kr7

Wouldn't it be logical to assume that someone living in the UK while liable for poll tax, who refuses to pay that poll tax thereby breaking the law as it was, would have been classed as a tax defaulter?

I suppose the pro taxers will tell me different.