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

dvpower

Le_Dieux wrote: »

I really have no idea, but , for me, as long as it isn't FG or Lab/

The truth is that there is no combination of parties that will repeal the property tax. Even SF won't repeal it in the unlikely scenario that they get power.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

A property tax would further depress the housing market and would plunge Ireland even deeper into recession.

Do you think that a property tax would be more damaging than increases in other taxes?
Or do you think we don't need tax increases at all?

Ghandee

Valetta wrote: »

Belfast City Council set the level of rates themselves, not Westminster.

http://www.belfastcity.gov.uk/rates/districtrates.asp

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/rating-review/index/archive/regional_rate/frequently_asked_questions_-_regional_rate.htm

Scroll down to where they receive block funding, and who controls their overall taxation levels.
Welcome back btw

steve9859

Ghandee wrote: »

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=80440149&postcount=52

You've finally got around to acknowledging a coalition is currently in govt in the north, you've yet to acknowledge they have zero, absolutely zero powers to set their levels of taxation though, as this gets controlled by westminster.

Council tax is set by the councils across the UK, not by Westminster. Those who run the local services set the price and raise the moeny to fund them directly, independent of Westminster.

very simple....a bill from the local council drops into the letter box of every property (whether rented or owned) and you have to pay, or apply for a waiver. Why Noonan couldn't come up with a simple system like that, I have no idea

lugha

Ghandee wrote: »

A property tax would further depress the housing market and would plunge Ireland even deeper into recession.

But there are disadvantages to any measure, tax high or spending cut, that you might take to address the crisis. Perhaps a property tax would depress the housing market but an income tax will inhibit employment opportunities, the greater evil IMO.

And taking money out of the economy using any measure will also depress the economy but what choice do we have? Even if we were prepared to stack up the debt for future generations (now, that would be immoral!), nobody will lend us the money to maintain a deficit.

There are pros and cons to any initiative, and property tax is no different. But these are economic issues. The “won’t pay” side insist there is an overriding moral argument.

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

Do you think that a property tax would be more damaging than increases in other taxes?
Or do you think we don't need tax increases at all?

Increase income tax.

Add a third level of taxation.

Tax financial transactions routed through the IFSC. (been discussed already)

PS pay cuts

None of the above seem to tickle the current govts fancy though.

Valetta

Ghandee wrote: »

http://www.dfpni.gov.uk/rating-review/index/archive/regional_rate/frequently_asked_questions_-_regional_rate.htm

Scroll down to where they receive block funding, and who controls their overall taxation levels.
Welcome back btw

From your link.


District Rates are struck independently of the Regional Rate; each of the 26 individual councils strike their own District Rate. Just over two thirds of the Councils’ income is met through this source, which includes both domestic and non-domestic elements (as with the Regional Rate).

Ghandee

steve9859 wrote: »

Council tax is set by the councils across the UK, not by Westminster. Those who run the local services set the price and raise the moeny to fund them directly, independent of Westminster.

very simple....a bill from the local council drops into the letter box of every property (whether rented or owned) and you have to pay, or apply for a waiver. Why Noonan couldn't come up with a simple system like that, I have no idea

Yes or no?

Does the coalition govt in the north have the direct power to abolish domestic rates?

Level of vat?

Corporation tax?

Motor tax?

Income tax?

Excise duty levels?

Heroditas

Ghandee wrote: »

Increase income tax.

That's going to be done anyway. However, it'll be done under the changing of tax credits and altering the bands.
they'll still then claim they haven't increased income tax .... despite people taking home less money.

Ghandee

lugha wrote: »

But there are disadvantages to any measure, tax high or spending cut, that you might take to address the crisis. Perhaps a property tax would depress the housing market but an income tax will inhibit employment opportunities, the greater evil IMO.

And taking money out of the economy using any measure will also depress the economy but what choice do we have? Even if we were prepared to stack up the debt for future generations (now, that would be immoral!), nobody will lend us the money to maintain a deficit.

There are pros and cons to any initiative, and property tax is no different. But these are economic issues. The “won’t pay” side insist there is an overriding moral argument.

How much would even a modest/marginal income tax levied upon any wage earning person eligible to pay tax (minimum wage earner, right to the top) raise combined, against a medium to high property tax placed upon already struggling homeowners only raise?

(and not put a persons family home at risk?)

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

Increase income tax.

Add a third level of taxation.

Tax financial transactions routed through the IFSC. (been discussed already)

PS pay cuts

None of the above seem to tickle the current govts fancy though.

Increasing Income Tax would be more damaging to the economy than a property tax, particularly to the labour market.
I'd prefer to protect the labour market than the property market.

A third rate of income tax might be a good idea as a solidarity measure but I can't see it raising much before it became counter productive.

PS has already had pay cuts, and will probably have more.

The IFSC transaction tax doesn't sound like a runner to me. A local financial transaction tax will just shift companies out of the IFSC.

Certainly other measures have merit, as too does a property tax, and we need a property tax AND other measures.

bgrizzley

lugha wrote: »

So there’s no difference between income tax and property tax. But you’ll reluctantly (presumably?) pay the former but resolutely refuse to pay the latter?

Once again, the reasoning on the no side is a tad confused.

This is simply regurgitated emotive bluster with a couple of sounds bites like ground rent thrown in. What it isn’t of course is an argument as to why there is something inherently wrong with a property tax. After close to 20,000 posts I cannot recall anyone making an intelligent, as opposed to emotional, argument against the notion that a home might be taxed. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that no such argument is being made because no such argument exists.

We’re not used to this kind of thing, so it must be wrong is the implied argument. I remember a very similar reaction from some to both the smoking ban and the NCT, and we know how quickly those measures were accepted as normal.

The tenants will pay, if the landlord succeeds in passing the cost on. So if the exchequer gets the benefit, why are you so fixated on who actually pays? And of course the landlord will pay a tidy sum in other tax from his other 399 properties anyway.

Yes it is. You might make some arguments as to what it was or was not, but non-democratic it most certainly was not. Neither referendum would be or could be carried until a majority of those that voted were in favour, which of course is what happened. And that is democracy. But like the nonsense that implementing the law constitutes bullying that has been peddled in this debate the non-democratic nonsense was peddled in that one.

Well if memory serves me, the cap was broken (!) by about €15,000 for the guy that much of out fuss is about. Alas our deficit is pretty much one million times bigger than this so I’m afraid you’ll need to think harder!

Joke solutions are fine for you to amuse us with. Unfortunately, the government has to come up with more useful ones.

i didnt say there was no difference, i said theres no difference to me
i didnt say reluctantly, i would pay the former with pleasure to help save my country.
my argument is just as good as " other countries have it, we should have it".(property tax,nuclear bombs, rabies, snakes)
landlords not paying is important if your premise is that this is a wealth tax, why should the tenant(assetless) bear the cost? i could ask you the same question why are you so fixated on who actually pays. pay it yourself if you like it so much and dont bedgrudge those that stood up to it.

E15000 might be peanuts to you but its a lot of money to me and the majority of people in ireland. All this dont worry about the pennies is typical of the yes sides arguments and its the very reason we are where we are. throwing away money just because you can milk the public for more has to stop.

and im glad i amuse you lugha, sometimes people take all this a little too seriously, but they are a funny bunch of madcap rascals up there in the dail...:D

dvpower

Rabies and snakes now?

This is the thread that keeps giving

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

Increasing Income Tax would be more damaging to the economy than a property tax, particularly to the labour market.
I'd prefer to protect the labour market than the property market.

A third rate of income tax might be a good idea as a solidarity measure but I can't see it raising much before it became counter productive.

PS has already had pay cuts, and will probably have more.

The IFSC transaction tax doesn't sound like a runner to me. A local financial transaction tax will just shift companies out of the IFSC.

Certainly other measures have merit, as too does a property tax, and we need a property tax AND other measures.

And some of what you say has merits too.
I still see a marginal/modest tax increase on income Tax that targets every wage earner in the state (who equally use la services) more fair and equitable than targeting home owners only.

Especially seeing as how a lot of home owners have already paid substantial sums in the form of stamp duty.

I see cracks appearing in the govt stance already though.
The name of the senator on VB the other night escapes me now, but he publicly criticized the idea, and Leo Varadkar has become very vocal recently.

I think a climb down may be on the cards.

Twelve weeks left and counting and the govt haven't even decided how it will be applied and how it will be collected?

Coupled with this, the coalition have been in agreement now that the hhc in its introduction and collection has been a failure from day one.

I think they're going back to the drawing board.

tayto lover

dxhound2005 wrote: »

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/index/information-and-services/property-and-housing/rates/your-rate-bill/domestic-rate-poundages-2012-to-2013.htm

For Northern Ireland Newry district house valued £175,000 it is about £1232. I have a friend living in a nice big house in the countryside in that council district who pays over £2100. Of course the few time I posted that I was called a liar but all you need is a calculator to see it is eminently possible.

And I don't need a big long list again of stuff people get in the North for their money. And it is a property tax it says so on the website. And Sinn Fein are sharing power in the North and their court service is prosecuting people who don't pay, 47,000 in the last year.

I pay €280 for bins and €100 HHC and I think I get the better end of the bargain for the time being.

That's great value for them with school books, school transport, doctors, bins, water etc. Jaysus I wonder could we get them to run ours. What a bargain, lucky gits.

tunedout

dvpower wrote: »

Do you think that a property tax would be more damaging than increases in other taxes?
Or do you think we don't need tax increases at all?

Loves the oul tax increases, does dvpower!

steve9859

Ghandee wrote: »

Yes or no?

Does the coalition govt in the north have the direct power to abolish domestic rates?

Level of vat?

Corporation tax?

Motor tax?

Income tax?

Excise duty levels?

er....my post is about property tax / council tax

bgrizzley

dvpower wrote: »

Rabies and snakes now?

This is the thread that keeps giving

i aim to please...;)

Ghandee

steve9859 wrote: »

er....my post is about property tax / council tax

My OP was in reply to a suggestion that the Coalition in the north were freely operating a property tax there, while objecting to it here.

They may set its level there, but not by their own decision. Maybe they'd abolish it if they had the power to, who knows?

Perhaps I worded it wrongly, but my opinion on how direct taxation is beyond their power its spot on.

Yes/no ?

bgrizzley

dvpower wrote: »

Increasing Income Tax would be more damaging to the economy than a property tax, particularly to the labour market.
I'd prefer to protect the labour market than the property market.

A third rate of income tax might be a good idea as a solidarity measure but I can't see it raising much before it became counter productive.

PS has already had pay cuts, and will probably have more.

The IFSC transaction tax doesn't sound like a runner to me. A local financial transaction tax will just shift companies out of the IFSC.

Certainly other measures have merit, as too does a property tax, and we need a property tax AND other measures.

please DV, explain to us what the difference to my take home pay between raising income tax and taking the HHC at source?

Ghandee

@ lugha....

This was said a lot more recent than 1994 by someone in FG.

AMAZING how an opinion can change once at the helm.

(I think I'll embed the text before the website gets pulled btw)

July 19th, 2008 Fine Gael Enterprise Spokesman Leo Varadkar TD has called on Taoiseach Brian Cowen to rule out the introduction of a property tax, following the contractual proposal from the National Economic and Social Council (NESC).

“The National Economic and Social Council (NESC) is a Government body under the aegis of Brian Cowen’s Department. The Council consists of the great and the good from the Social Partnership system along with the Taoiseach’s right hand men and women. It is funded by the Department of the Taoiseach and is chaired by Dermot McCarthy, the Secretary General of the Department of the Taoiseach. The Deputy Chairperson, Mary Doyle is also a senior official in the Taoiseach’s Department. Other members include trade union bosses David Begg, Peter McLoone and Jack O’Connor, IBEC’s Turlough O’Sullivan, Fr Sean Healy, Sean Gorman (Secretary General of the Department of Enterprise, Trade and Employment) and the Taoiseach’s special advisor, Peter Clinch.

“Fine Gael in Government abolished the Residential Property Tax and is not in favour of re-introducing it. A property tax would further depress the housing market and would plunge Ireland even deeper into recession.

“Brian Cowen should immediately rule out the introduction of a property tax and to make it clear to the country that he is dissociating himself from the NESC on this matter.”

Ends

EDITORS’ NOTE

The NESC was established in 1973. Its function is to analyse and report to the Taoiseach on strategic issues relating to the efficient development of the economy and the achievement of social justice and the development of a strategic framework for the conduct of relations and negotiation of agreements between the Government and the social partners.

It consists of a chairperson appointed by the Taoiseach, five representatives of the business sector, the congress of trades union, the agricultural sector, the community and voluntary sector and ten representatives appointed by the Government.

http://www.leovaradkar.ie/?p=130

dvpower

bgrizzley wrote: »

please DV, explain to us what the difference to my take home pay between raising income tax and taking the HHC at source?

I have no idea what your personal circumstances are, so I'm afraid you'll have to work that out yourself.

bgrizzley

dvpower wrote: »

I have no idea what your personal circumstances are, so I'm afraid you'll have to work that out yourself.

lol, thinly veiled "i have no real argument here"

Heroditas

dvpower wrote: »

Increasing Income Tax would be more damaging to the economy than a property tax, particularly to the labour market.
I'd prefer to protect the labour market than the property market.

Sorry, I can't follow this.
How does raising income tax damage the labour market? Is it because it reduces the incentive to work?
If that's the case, then the government needs to examine that too.

The problem is when the government start making exceptions for the property tax - i.e. exempting unemployed, OAPs, the "vulnerable" etc.
That just means the tax is lumped onto the "can pay" people, i.e. those who are deemed the middle earners - the very same people who are affected most by income tax increases.

donalg1

bgrizzley wrote: »

please DV, explain to us what the difference to my take home pay between raising income tax and taking the HHC at source?

I dont think they are taking it at source though, they have said there will be the option for people to have it deducted at source voluntarily. So the difference is income tax will come out of your pay directly you will have no choice in this, whereas you can choose to have the property tax deducted from your pay packet if you so wish.

All good and well but the end result will be the same of course, as in your household income will be down.

lugha

bgrizzley wrote: »

my argument is just as good as " other countries have it, we should have it".(property tax,nuclear bombs, rabies, snakes)

Well “do as other countries do” is a terrible argument! I’m glad I’m not making it! :pac:

bgrizzley wrote: »

why are you so fixated on who actually pays

I’m not remotely fixated on who pays. If you can charm some sugar daddy in to paying any or all of your tax for you I’ll be pig happy.

bgrizzley wrote: »

E15000 might be peanuts to you but its a lot of money to me and the majority of people in ireland.

Ah the ‘aul strawman is out for a walk again! Yes, 15,000 is not negligible to the individual citizens but it is a negligible amount when you are looking at a 15,0000 million deficit.

bgrizzley wrote: »

but they are a funny bunch of madcap rascals up there in the dail...

Sooner or later you will come to realize that how ever funny, how madcappy or how rascally whoever we send to the Dail might be makes little difference to the problems we have and the measures we will have to take to address them.

Ghandee wrote: »

This was said a lot more recent than 1994 by someone in FG.

Yes in July 2008! Before the bank guarantee and before the crisis really got its legs under it. Do you really think any economic policies from any party drafted at that time are still suitable for purpose?

Also, Leo makes an economic argument against property tax, not a moral one.

dvpower

Heroditas wrote: »

Sorry, I can't follow this.
How does raising income tax damage the labour market? Is it because it reduces the incentive to work?.

That's it in a nutshell - less incentive to work, more expensive to create jobs.

The government are doing something about it - choosing property taxation over tax on labour or tax on consumption.

Hijpo

dvpower wrote: »

Heroditas wrote: »

Sorry, I can't follow this.
How does raising income tax damage the labour market? Is it because it reduces the incentive to work?.

That's it in a nutshell - less incentive to work, more expensive to create jobs.

The government are doing something about it - choosing property taxation over tax on labour or tax on consumption.

current social welfare paymets is incentive enough. its been proven you would be better off and i know of people who choose not to work for minimum wage due to housing, child and money benefits.

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

current social welfare paymets is incentive enough. its been proven you would be better off and i know of people who choose not to work for minimum wage due to housing, child and money benefits.

How is social welfare an incentive to do some overtime, to go for a promotion, to try and achieve a bonus?

You have a very narrow view of what an incentive to work is.

Ghandee

lugha wrote: »

Also, Leo makes an economic argument against property tax, not a moral one.

Leo's reasons = economic
Enda's = moral.

You're not making sense at this stage lugha, time to give it up, stop back tracking.

dvpower wrote: »

That's it in a nutshell - less incentive to work, more expensive to create jobs.

The government are doing something about it - choosing property taxation over tax on labour or tax on consumption.

This argument works both ways dv.

Choosing to tax home owners only over a slight rise in income tax which would affect everyone.

I think the bigger/More truthful reason is, they're hoping to raise income Tax anyway

They've little else left they can tax, so once the property tax database has been completed (more doubtful each day now) we'll all be hit anyway.

A blind man could see what they're up to tbh