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

opti0nal

lugha wrote: »

That doesn't negate my essential point that you home generates revenue that you benefit from, even if it is not in cash form.

I own a coat. I paid for it. I benefit from it because it keeps me warm and dry.

Because I own it and it's a well-made, hard-wearing garment, I don't need to buy another coat. I have saved that amount of money.

Should I pay a 'coat tax'?

lugha

opti0nal wrote: »

I own a coat. I paid for it. I benefit from it because it keeps me warm and dry.

Because I own it and it's a well-made, hard-wearing garment, I don't need to buy another coat. I have saved that amount of money.

Should I pay a 'coat tax'?

Whether it is taxed or not is besides my point that there is a nominal income from living in your own home. And FWIW, it was taxed once. See here

Your “small potatoes” argument about your coat could be extended to other scenarios. If you bought and resold for a profit of say €10, something you bought on ebay then it is hardly worth the effort of the state trying to collect tax on this. However, if you sold you house @ profit of €10 K, the revenue would of course be much more interested.

Similarly we don't go after workers for BIK because they may have free access to a water cooler! Etc.

ncdadam

lugha wrote: »

That doesn't negate my essential point that you home generates revenue that you benefit from, even if it is not in cash form. And the cost to you of this benefit is the interest you pay on your mortgage, not the full mortgage amount.

Your essential point is essentially wrong.
When are you going to cease this trollish lie you peddle?

ncdadam

lugha wrote: »

If you didn't have a house then you would have to pay rent to provide accommodation for your family.

If you didn't own a house the LA will put you up for €30 a week.
They'll also maintain that house for you and won't even have to pay €100 in a HHC.

dvpower

ncdadam wrote: »

If you didn't own a house the LA will put you up for €30 a week.
They'll also maintain that house for you and won't even have to pay €100 in a HHC.

Your view on how LA housing works is fantasy.
And you have the cheek to label others as trolls!

ncdadam

dxhound2005 wrote: »

A person can hold an opinion that any law is unfair. In a democracy where the rule of law applies that does not allow them to break that law.

Some of the lawbreakers on this thread are very concerned that everything done by a public body must be fully legal. Something which I agree with myself but it smacks of double standards and hypocrisy coming from lawbreakers.

I presume your referring to me there.
The point is that I am a private individual making a protest.
I pay every other tax I'm liable for but I won't pay this HHC.
The LA's are paid using the money I and everyone else pays in taxes so if your ok with the fact that LA's are prepared to break the law while you pay them to do it, that says more about you than me.

ncdadam

Izzy Skint wrote: »

DX, approx 80% of the increase in spending in education has gone on pay, pensions and allowances.....nothing to do with population increase.
Most third level students are funded through the hard work of themselves and their parents....very little cuts to staff pay.
FG and Labour are in govt. now so it is their responsibility to correct mistakes of the past.
Any wasteful spending by the govt. at a time when people are struggling to survive and being asked to cough up more has imo everthing to do with the hhc

What happened was the below standard PS in Ireland were always complaining about being lower paid than the private sector.
They then jumped on the celtic tiger with bertie and jack and rode it until it died.
Now they still want the big money and pensions, but want to do as little as
possible for it. (average 32 hour week joke).
The PS for the most part are lecherous individuals who look out for number 1 and screw everyone else, see how they don't give a ****e about new recruits?
We have what we hold and we hold the country to ransom.

Ghandee

lugha wrote: »

Whether it is taxed or not is besides my point that there is a nominal income from living in your own home. And FWIW, it was taxed once. See here

Your “small potatoes” argument about your coat could be extended to other scenarios. If you bought and resold for a profit of say €10, something you bought on ebay then it is hardly worth the effort of the state trying to collect tax on this. However, if you sold you house @ profit of €10 K, the revenue would of course be much more interested.

Similarly we don't go after workers for BIK because they may have free access to a water cooler! Etc.

One in five would argue with you there lugha.

Try telling these folk their home is generating an income.

THE mortgage crisis will peak next year with one in five home loans in default, according to a major new report. And as mortgage losses surge, debt write-offs for homeowners are predicted to be the only way to eventually fix the market.

That's according to a wide-ranging report on the mortgage market from rating agency Moody's, published yesterday. The research includes the first county-by-county breakdown of mortgage arrears since the economic crisis began in 2008. Cavan and Laois have the highest rate of mortgage defaults -- not paying their home loan for more than 90 days.

http://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/one-in-five-mortgages-now-in-big-trouble-according-to-ratings-agency-3235030.html

donalg1

I also am struggling with the concept that my home is generating an income for me. Ok I realise that the expenditure of my home is less than the rent I would pay in the private rented market and I realise too that this expenditure will decrease the longer I am there, however, when I take into account the amount of money I will spend on maintenance and what not over the next 30 years coupled with the incoming property tax I think the gap has decreased significantly and so the difference cant really be seen as a significant amount of income generated.

Anyway income generated is the wrong term as most people would assume you get money whereas it really is just saving money so instead of income generating its just expenditure saving.

ncdadam

dvpower wrote: »

ncdadam wrote: »

If you didn't e own a house the LA will put you up for €30 a week.
They'll also maintain that house for you and won't even have to pay €100 in a HHC.

Your view on how LA housing works is fantasy.
And you have the cheek to label others as trolls!

Only going on what I know to be fact.
I had a place rented to the council on the RAS and the person in it was paying €120 a month, actually wasn't paying it so I had to do the LA's work and have her evicted.
She also cost €4k damage to the property and stole fixed items from me.
Never again.
I also know several people in LA properties an €30 is the average they pay a week.
Don't talk to me about trolling, you and laugha are the kings of the trolling on here.

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

I also am struggling with the concept that my home is generating an income for me. Ok I realise that the expenditure of my home is less than the rent I would pay in the private rented market and I realise too that this expenditure will decrease the longer I am there, however, when I take into account the amount of money I will spend on maintenance and what not over the next 30 years coupled with the incoming property tax I think the gap has decreased significantly and so the difference cant really be seen as a significant amount of income generated.

Anyway income generated is the wrong term as most people would assume you get money whereas it really is just saving money so instead of income generating its just expenditure saving.

How is private renting dearer than paying a mortgage with compulsary life insurance and house insurance and maintanance costs?
Like i said in another post, i took out a mortgage for 225000 but currently if my repayments stay at 980 per month then at the end of the now 372 repayments ill have payed 364000 and thats just the mortgage. That doesnt include life insurance that goes up after a certain age and house insurance. Are you going to tell me that someone living in the same house as me is going to pay over 364000 over there lifetime in rent?

Where is this income or expenditure saving on owning a home?

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

How is private renting dearer than paying a mortgage with compulsary life insurance and house insurance and maintanance costs?
Like i said in another post, i took out a mortgage for 225000 but currently if my repayments stay at 980 per month then at the end of the now 372 repayments ill have payed 364000 and thats just the mortgage. That doesnt include life insurance that goes up after a certain age and house insurance. Are you going to tell me that someone living in the same house as me is going to pay over 364000 over there lifetime in rent?

Where is this income or expenditure saving on owning a home?

Well the way I see it, say for instance I buy a house for €100k, the bank gives me this €100k which I give back to them over time say 30years so this €100k doesnt cost me anything in the way of expenditure.

Now the bank charge me interest on this €100k of say €40k over the 30 years, and this is what my expenditure is, so each month I pay back x amount made up of capital (€100k) and interest (40k broken down over 30years), so each month whatever the interest is, is my expenditure, now if I was in private rented I would be paying more on rent than I would on interest in my own house.

So the income generated or expenditure saved is the difference in the interest I have paid and the rent I would have paid in the private rented house.

Now as I said above over the course of 30 years between maintenance and incoming property tax and what not the gap between the interest paid (+ maintenance, property tax and other associated expenses) and hypothetical rent paid would have decreased dramatically, and this is why I dont see my house as generating an income.

Hijpo

lugha wrote: »

opti0nal wrote: »

I own a coat. I paid for it. I benefit from it because it keeps me warm and dry.
J
Because I own it and it's a well-made, hard-wearing garment, I don't need to buy another coat. I have saved that amount of money.

Should I pay a 'coat tax'?

Whether it is taxed or not is besides my point that there is a nominal income from living in your own home. And FWIW, it was taxed once. See here

Your “small potatoes” argument about your coat could be extended to other scenarios. If you bought and resold for a profit of say €10, something you bought on ebay then it is hardly worth the effort of the state trying to collect tax on this. However, if you sold you house @ profit of €10 K, the revenue would of course be much more interested.

Similarly we don't go after workers for BIK because they may have free access to a water cooler! Etc.

There you go with your profits and selling **** again.
Ordinary home owners with 1 property are not business people buying to make a profit in the future.
Now water is BIK and not required by law for an employer to provide lol

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

Hijpo wrote: »

How is private renting dearer than paying a mortgage with compulsary life insurance and house insurance and maintanance costs?
Like i said in another post, i took out a mortgage for 225000 but currently if my repayments stay at 980 per month then at the end of the now 372 repayments ill have payed 364000 and thats just the mortgage. That doesnt include life insurance that goes up after a certain age and house insurance. Are you going to tell me that someone living in the same house as me is going to pay over 364000 over there lifetime in rent?

Where is this income or expenditure saving on owning a home?

Well the way I see it, say for instance I buy a house for €100k, the bank gives me this €100k which I give back to them over time say 30years so this €100k doesnt cost me anything in the way of expenditure.

Now the bank charge me interest on this €100k of say €40k over the 30 years, and this is what my expenditure is, so each month I pay back x amount made up of capital (€100k) and interest (40k broken down over 30years), so each month whatever the interest is, is my expenditure, now if I was in private rented I would be paying more on rent than I would on interest in my own house.

So the income generated or expenditure saved is the difference in the interest I have paid and the rent I would have paid in the private rented house.

Now as I said above over the course of 30 years between maintenance and incoming property tax and what not the gap between the interest paid (+ maintenance, property tax and other associated expenses) and hypothetical rent paid would have decreased dramatically, and this is why I dont see my house as generating an income.

Why cant you take the total amount of expenditure? This is the total cost of owning a home, if i was paying an interest only mortgage i would say fair enough but im not. Basicly all your taking into account is interest on a mortgage and trying to compare it to rent. When it comes to actually paying for the house this simpley doesnt happen, your paying back the money you borrowed plus the cost of borrowing it.

Why cant things be black and white with some people? There has to be income in the form of thin air and number crunching to break down cost which doesnt actually reflect the.cost of the property.

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

Why cant you take the total amount of expenditure? This is the total cost of owning a home, if i was paying an interest only mortgage i would say fair enough but im not. Basicly all your taking into account is interest on a mortgage and trying to compare it to rent. When it comes to actually paying for the house this simpley doesnt happen, your paying back the money you borrowed plus the cost of borrowing it.

Why cant things be black and white with some people? There has to be income in the form of thin air and number crunching to break down cost which doesnt actually reflect the.cost of the property.

I know this is how it seems it should be done, but for accounting or budgetary purposes this isnt how its done, you have to think of your house and mortgage repayments as part of a budget which spans your life.

To break it down smaller take a 2 week period,

Week 1 - I lend you €100

Week 2 - You give me back €100

Now you do up your fortnightly budget and the balance is €0 so therefore no expenditure.

Now if I charge you €10 interest on the money I lend you.

Week 1 - I lend you €100

Week 2 - You give me back €100 + €10 interest

Your fortnightly balance is -€10 therefore your expenditure is €10.

Now I dont pretend to be in anyway a guru on the subject, I simply infer it as the above but of course stand to be corrected.

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

I know this is how it seems it should be done, but for accounting or budgetary purposes this isnt how its done, you have to think of your house and mortgage repayments as part of a budget which spans your life.

To break it down smaller take a 2 week period,

Week 1 - I lend you €100

Week 2 - You give me back €100

Now you do up your fortnightly budget and the balance is €0 so therefore no expenditure.

Now if I charge you €10 interest on the money I lend you.

Week 1 - I lend you €100

Week 2 - You give me back €100 + €10 interest

Your fortnightly balance is -€10 therefore your expenditure is €10.

Now I dont pretend to be in anyway a guru on the subject, I simply infer it as the above but of course stand to be corrected.

I understand how the calculations work but the total cost as in the total amount you are handing over that week is 110. you havent already paid that €100 and are now only paying €10. The whole point of borrowing money is because you dont have that €100 lump sum in your pocket.

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

I understand how the calculations work but the total cost as in the total amount you are handing over that week is 110. you havent already paid that €100 and are now only paying €10. The whole point of borrowing money is because you dont have that €100 lump sum in your pocket.

But that €100 hasnt cost you anything, yes you are down €100 the week you pay it back but the previous week you were up €100 so it balances out. When interest is applied the actual cost of what you bought is the interest only, so the interest is your only expenditure.

I do see it from your point of view though in that telling someone their house is generating an income because they dont have to rent isnt really saying much as it still costs 800+ that month for the mortgage and this is paid out of your monthly income not your lifes income.

bgrizzley

when my washing machine goes or the shower doesnt work, house needs painting, heating fcuked, decorating, lawn need mowing, wheres my landlord?

If phil hogan thinks hes going to charge me rent he damn well better get his overalls on.

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

But that €100 hasnt cost you anything, yes you are down €100 the week you pay it back but the previous week you were up €100 so it balances out. When interest is applied the actual cost of what you bought is the interest only, so the interest is your only expenditure.

I do see it from your point of view though in that telling someone their house is generating an income because they dont have to rent isnt really saying much as it still costs 800+ that month for the mortgage and this is paid out of your monthly income not your lifes income.

I understand where your coming from to in that it balances out.

ncdadam

Hijpo wrote: »

I understand how the calculations work but the total cost as in the total amount you are handing over that week is 110. you havent already paid that €100 and are now only paying €10. The whole point of borrowing money is because you dont have that €100 lump sum in your pocket.

It's like the old joke where you ask a mate for a loan of €100, he says he's only got €50, you say that'll do now you owe me €50 and I owe you €50 so we're quits.
I think lugha sent that little riddle to donal in a PM. Copy and paste!

Hijpo

ncdadam wrote: »

It's like the old joke where you ask a mate for a loan of €100, he says he's only got €50, you say that'll do now you owe me €50 and I owe you €50 so we're quits.
I think lugha sent that little riddle to donal in a PM. Copy and paste!

Ah sure look, i wouldnt be in the least bit suprised if Alastair was PMing lugha. I understand how the calculation makes it balance out, but the fact of the matter is, after 35 years you cant say to someone "sure your only expenditure was the interest on the mortgage, 35 years ago you were up 225000 euro so its balanced itself out now"

donalg1

Hijpo wrote: »

Ah sure look, i wouldnt be in the least bit suprised if Alastair was PMing lugha. I understand how the calculation makes it balance out, but the fact of the matter is, after 35 years you cant say to someone "sure your only expenditure was the interest on the mortgage, 35 years ago you were up 225000 euro so its balanced itself out now"

Thats how some want to look at it though not that is much use to us when we have to hand over 800+ each month in mortgage repayments

Hijpo

donalg1 wrote: »

Thats how some want to look at it though not that is much use to us when we have to hand over 800+ each month in mortgage repayments

im in agreement with you

dvpower

ncdadam wrote: »

Only going on what I know to be fact.
I had a place rented to the council on the RAS and the person in it was paying €120 a month, actually wasn't paying it so I had to do the LA's work and have her evicted.
She also cost €4k damage to the property and stole fixed items from me.
Never again.
I also know several people in LA properties an €30 is the average they pay a week.
Don't talk to me about trolling, you and laugha are the kings of the trolling on here.

So you know for a fact that: If you didn't e own a house the LA will put you up for €30 a week. based on the fact that you once rented a place to the council for the same price and you know some people who average at that rent!

I don't think you're trolling - I think its way worse than that.


Edit: I can understand why, as a landlord, you might be against property taxes. A big huge vested interest.

SingAHappySong

Does the Gov Really think that I have any of the money that the builders and bankers have, that belongs to Germany.
the Germans have already taken our sugar industry ... Now they will take our Livessssss.......

Slurryface

Surely the simple thing for the Government to do is require that anyone looking for anything from the state Medical Card, SW Payment,Planning Permission,Tax Free Allowance,Exam registration,Grants, etc) should have to provide either a payment reciept number or Waiver number for the address at which they reside. No pay no get anything from the state. Simples:)

Hijpo

Slurryface wrote: »

No pay no get anything from the state. Simples:)

I agree, so where does that leave long term social welfare scroungers (even when the place was awash with job oppertunities) that dont contribute anywhere near the amount of tax a home owner does yet gets supported by the state/council??

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

I agree [...]

You do? I thought you were evading this charge?

Hijpo

dvpower wrote: »

Hijpo wrote: »

I agree [...]

You do? I thought you were evading this charge?

Please refrain from editing my quotes so that it blatantly looks like im saying something completely different to the point im making.

dvpower

Slurryface wrote: »

No pay no get anything from the state. Simples:)

Hijpo wrote: »

I agree, so where does that leave long term social welfare scroungers (even when the place was awash with job oppertunities) that dont contribute anywhere near the amount of tax a home owner does yet gets supported by the state/council??

You do? I thought you were evading this charge?