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

jay-me

Not saying how it was managed wasn't a load! But there is a lot of money in it as we shall see soon enough!

Noreen1

dvpower wrote: »

This type of international coverage is a success for the anti charge campaign?

About as much as this woman is good publicity for the Fine Gael delegates.:p

http://img853.imageshack.us/img853/6...6887174215.jpg

You can dress some people up, but you still can't take them out.:D:D

ArmaniJeanss

jay-me wrote: »

Yet hand it over to greyhound etc and it is a very profitable company!! Recycling is a huge money maker!

Greyhound seem to be far harsher on waivers than the councils, (anecdotally). So they've developed an extra stream of income which the councils were unable or unwilling to do.

The recycling is interesting - I know that I put out my (free) green bin every 2 weeks without fail, and my black bin about 4 times a year. So from Greyhounds pov the blackbin income is small and the greenbin is initially a lossleader as they take it from me for free. So it comes down to the efficiency of the company of translating my newspapers, cans and plastics into cash. Greyhound specialise in this, councils don't.

Theres also an issue that commercial entities like Greyhounds do studies to work out maximising efficiency. So in my area days and times of collections have changed, and I'm sure thats related to local traffic flow, mimimising time sorting rubbish, shifting sorted rubbish onto third parties at the most suitable time, reducing worker hours etc etc.

It's frankly not surprising that Greyhound, Panda and their ilk do it better than a load of career council office workers.

lugha

hondasam wrote: »

I have read it a few times but I'm still confused.

gerryo777 wrote: »

Is it just me or does anyone else find some of lugha's posts hard to follow?

Interesting that both of you should subsequently thank a post that refuted mine (well, it didn't actually), if you didn’t understand the point I was making? :P

tayto lover wrote: »

But only one person played both sides of the same coin.
If its not right in England why is it right in Ireland ?
The rest of us are not changing our arguments at all. We are resolute.

The allegation against a poster was that he was a hypocrite because he refused on principle to pay the poll tax in Britain but did not respect Irish people’s right to do the same. That would be all fine and dandy if those making the allegation respected his principled stance. But I don’t think Paddy does respect his stance given that he has expressed the view

paddy147 wrote: »

So yep,hes a tax evador/tax cheat/criminal.

Hence Paddy, and anyone who shares his view is every bit as hypocritical wouldn’t you say?

Perhaps it is not surprising that many of those who saw hypocrisy where there was none in relation to Phil Hogan and his Portugal property would fail to see such a blatant instance of it in this case.

Am Chile

There’s been a fair bit of commentary on twitter re. the household charge numbers and speculating in the media. Having just watched RTE1 News at 6pm it seems incredible to me that the Local Government Management Agency seems to have little idea as to how many housing units are liable for the household charge. It seems even more odd that number seems to be floating between 1.6m and 1.8m. There seems to be a conflation between households (1.654m according to Census 2011) and housing stock minus exemptions/waivers (1.755m based on calculation below). It is housing stock that is the base for the household charge (a vacant house is just as liable as an occupied house – this is a tax on property not occupancy). Namawinelake has a post up about who is and isn’t eligle. Working off the data contained in his post (I’ve updated a couple of his figures to Census 2011 data, but otherwise I’m quoting his figures and sources) we come up with the following. I]On request, I have updated this post to match the data to the exemptions and waivers exactly as set out on the [URL="https://www.householdcharge.ie/"][COLOR=#0066cc]householdcharge.ie[/COLOR][/URL] website - 21.15pm, Apr 1st[/I
What is eligible:
All housing units in the state, with seven exemptions and two waivers
Housing units in the state according to Census 2011: 1,994,845
What is exempt:
(1) Residential properties that are part of the trading stock of a business and have not been sold or been the source of any income since construction
18,638 unoccupied vacant housing units in unfinished estates the vast majority of which are unsold (under-construction were not counted in Census)
(2) Residential property vested in a Minister of the Government or the Health Service Executive
Not known but small, ask govt depts and HSE
(3) Residential property vested in a housing authority, including property where households are purchasing their homes under the Shared Ownership Scheme and where the local authority still retains an ownership stake,
129,033 (renting social housing, Census 2011, Table 39), DECLG should have exact figure
23,547 (being bought from LAs, Census 2006 – I can’t find in Census 2011), DECLG should have exact figure
(4) Voluntary and co-operative housing,
14,942 (renting voluntary housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
(5) Residential property subject to commercial rates and wholly used as a dwelling,
Not known but small, ask local authorities (there was a question on the Census, Table 38, but the class also includes apts in converted houses, could ask CSO if it could disaggregate)
(6) Residential property owned by certain charities or comprised in a discretionary trust, and
Not known but small
(7) Residential property where a person has to leave their house due to long-term mental or physical infirmity (e.g. a person that has moved into a nursing home).
Not known but small, possibly ask HSE
What is waivered:
(1) Owners of residential property entitled to mortgage interest supplement
19,000 (mortgage interest relief, Keane Report), Dept Soc Protection should have exact figure
(2) Owners of residential property located in certain prescribed unfinished housing estates
34,000 (category 3/4 unfinished estates, Money Guide Ireland, exact figure can be obtained from the Housing Development Survey undertaken by DECLG)
Houses eligible – a calculation based on above:
1,994,845 (housing units, Census 2011)
-18,638 (unoccupied vacant housing units unsold, Housing Development Survey, DECLG, 2011)
-129,033 (renting social housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
-14,942 (renting voluntary housing, Census 2011, Table 39)
-23,547 (being bought from LAs, Census 2006 – I can’t find in Census 2011)
-19,000 (mortgage interest relief, Keane Report)
-34,000 (category 3/4 unfinished estates, Money Guide Ireland)
= 1,755,685 (this still needs other small amounts of property taken-off namely exemptions 2, 5, 6, 7 – all of these will be very low in number and should not substantially alter this figure)
Households paid, minus the 12,500 who have registered but qualify for the waiver
621,717 (already processed)
+89,000 (by post awaiting processing)
+ 82,175 (registered in local authority offices yesterday)
= 792,892

The percentage of those paid, based on those figures = 45.16%
(54.84% left to pay)

http://irelandafternama.wordpress.com/2012/04/01/household-charge-numbers/

Sionach

alastair wrote: »

Ahh now - where to start? The Universal Social Charge is also a tax.

Did you have to register for the USC?

MagicSean

Le_Dieux wrote: »

MS

I am in an estate thats unfinished, yet the hoors didn't deem it right to declare us a ghost estate. Dare I ask what estate You are talking about? What LA You are in? And what assurances You were give?

If it's too sensitive, You can PM me

Thanks

I'm in a different county to you. I was assured that they had instructed a solicitor to proceed with bringing the developer to court with a view to completing the estate. If the developer stopped trading the estate would be exempt from next year.

MagicSean

Sionach wrote: »

Did you have to register for the USC?

In the same way you have to register for PAYE, prsi, income levy etc etc

Joey the lips

i have car tax due. I have a 100 euro a&e bill. I have a service overdue. I have utilitie bills outstanding. I just dont have the money for this at the moment even if i wanted to.

But i dont want to pay and will do my best not to.

steve9859

hondasam wrote: »

You should be worrying because you will be paying a lot more than €100.

yeh, up to €30 in a year's time. Scary!! That's a price I am prepared to pay to drag this thing out for as long as possible.

Thats 8 cents a day - I lose more than that down the back of the sofa.

Bruthal

steve9859 wrote: »

hondasam wrote: »

You should be worrying because you will be paying a lot more than €100.

yeh, up to €30 in a year's time. Scary!! That's a price I am prepared to pay to drag this thing out for as long as possible.

Thats 8 cents a day - I lose more than that down the back of the sofa.

I think you read hondasam`s post wrong. She is saying the other poster should be worrying about paying more than €100 next year in the context of the property charge increasing for year, not in terms of not paying it this year and having to pay penalties.

dvpower

steve9859 wrote: »

yeh, up to €30 in a year's time. Scary!! That's a price I am prepared to pay to drag this thing out for as long as possible.

Thats 8 cents a day - I lose more than that down the back of the sofa.

You probably have this in common with most of the non payers. Take a punt on the charge being defeated and pay up if it survives a difficult birth.

steve9859

dvpower wrote: »

You probably have this in common with most of the non payers. Take a punt on the charge being defeated and pay up if it survives a difficult birth.

Of course....given enough time the government will get everyone with this. But I absolutely don't see the point in volunteering up my details.

And the government will be reluctant to impose the full charge until they feel that their database is sufficiently accurate (irrespective of EU demands), so maybe its wins a delay in the full tax.

It has sent a message to the government. To quote the FT today: "The danger is that the moral authority of the government to bring in new taxes is being weakened by the boycott and its legitimacy is under attack"

But I still fundamentally disagree with it. Other countries don't double hit their homeowners with stamp duty AND property tax. Instead they levy household taxes on the basis of residence, not ownership (and hence can justify it, given that it is spent on local services used by residents). I know as I am paying £1,000 council tax in London for the services that I use as a tenant, and am being asked to pay (or at least will be in the future) in Dublin for services that I don't. Of course I will have to pay eventually, but I will pass on as much as I can to my tenants, after contributing to delaying it as much as I can, and making it as hard as possible for the Government, who will keep coming at us until there is resistance. If we pay up without moaning every time they levy a tax or charge they will just keep coming back for more.

Deus Ex Machina

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

Born to Die

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

And how easily the Irish public can be distracted from the real problems of this country.

Bruthal

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

Thanks for your contribution to making it even longer:pac:

lugha

steve9859 wrote: »

Other countries don't double hit their homeowners with stamp duty AND property tax.

There is an another issue relating to stamp duty. One of the great failures of the various FF led administration was their failure to control the housing boom. Of course they did not have the traditional tool of raising interest rates so one of the things they could do to apply some restraint was to impose massive taxes on property transactions. Thus could stamp duty not be regarded as an instrument employed by the government to try to restrain a market that was spiralling out of control? Much like the newer motor tax rates are influences by environmental rather than transportation considerations.

steve9859 wrote: »

It has sent a message to the government. To quote the FT today: "The danger is that the moral authority of the government to bring in new taxes is being weakened by the boycott and its legitimacy is under attack"

….. after contributing to delaying it as much as I can, and making it as hard as possible for the Government, who will keep coming at us until there is resistance. If we pay up without moaning every time they levy a tax or charge they will just keep coming back for more.

And this is a good thing, why? If the moral authority of the government is undermined and it becomes more difficult to bring in new taxes or charges then it will also be more difficult for them to make spending cuts, it will make it more difficult for them to tackle public sector pay / pensions, it makes it more difficult to reform social welfare etc.

The net result will possibly be that it may mean taking an extra few years to eliminate the deficit and multiples of billions added to an already crippling debt. Which in turn means more of the burden for the mistakes of this generation will be passed on to the next one. Not a very ethical plan I would say.

steve9859

lugha wrote: »

And this is a good thing, why? If the moral authority of the government is undermined and it becomes more difficult to bring in new taxes or charges then it will also be more difficult for them to make spending cuts, it will make it more difficult for them to tackle public sector pay / pensions, it makes it more difficult to reform social welfare etc.

The net result will possibly be that it may mean taking an extra few years to eliminate the deficit and multiples of billions added to an already crippling debt. Which in turn means more of the burden for the mistakes of this generation will be passed on to the next one. Not a very ethical plan I would say.

Maybe it will make them a little more imaginative than going after homeowners again on the basis of their misguided view that someone with a €200 grand house and a €300 grand mortgage is wealthy.

The fact is that there has proven to be clear public support behind ripping up Croke Park and reforming wefare and cutting PS pay. But, no, there are too many vested interests there, so they go after what they have perceived to be easy pickings in homeowners.

Well, this has taught them a lesson hopefully

lugha

steve9859 wrote: »

But, no, there are too many vested interests there, so they go after what they have perceived to be easy pickings in homeowners.

So you make it more difficult to go after the "easy pickings" (the HHC was hardly easy!) by undermining their moral authority of the government then that makes it more likely that they will tackle the tougher nut that is the public sector? Sorry, don't follow the logic there at all.

MagicSean

lugha wrote: »

There is an another issue relating to stamp duty. One of the great failures of the various FF led administration was their failure to control the housing boom. Of course they did not have the traditional tool of raising interest rates so one of the things they could do to apply some restraint was to impose massive taxes on property transactions. Thus could stamp duty not be regarded as an instrument employed by the government to try to restrain a market that was spiralling out of control? Much like the newer motor tax rates are influences by environmental rather than transportation considerations.



And this is a good thing, why? If the moral authority of the government is undermined and it becomes more difficult to bring in new taxes or charges then it will also be more difficult for them to make spending cuts, it will make it more difficult for them to tackle public sector pay / pensions, it makes it more difficult to reform social welfare etc.

The net result will possibly be that it may mean taking an extra few years to eliminate the deficit and multiples of billions added to an already crippling debt. Which in turn means more of the burden for the mistakes of this generation will be passed on to the next one. Not a very ethical plan I would say.

I would think that with a fully functional value based property tax and a massive downturn in property sales the government will have a tough time justifying keeping stamp duty at it's current level. People should look at the long term benefits of this charge.

steve9859 wrote: »

Maybe it will make them a little more imaginative than going after homeowners again on the basis of their misguided view that someone with a €200 grand house and a €300 grand mortgage is wealthy.

The fact is that there has proven to be clear public support behind ripping up Croke Park and reforming wefare and cutting PS pay. But, no, there are too many vested interests there, so they go after what they have perceived to be easy pickings in homeowners.

Well, this has taught them a lesson hopefully

Of course there is massive support from the private sector and those on welfare to cut PS wages because it would protect their own interests. Just like there is massive support from the public and private sector to cut welfare because it would protect their own interest. There is also massive support from the social welfare and public sector to hold the private sector accountable for the collapse of the economy.

Frank Black

lugha wrote: »

So you make it more difficult to go after the "easy pickings" (the HHC was hardly easy!) by undermining their moral authority of the government then that makes it more likely that they will tackle the tougher nut that is the public sector? Sorry, don't follow the logic there at all.

The main logic employed by anti-household charge protesters is that someone else needs to pay for the mess.

Hijpo

When a TD outside Dublin doesnt get 116,331.25 euro and when a TD within 24k of Dublin doesnt get 131,098.45 and when they dont get all other perks,such as subsidised maintenance on second homes, payments and expenses for committee work. When Enda Kenny doesnt get 200,000 plus 118,981 expenses. Thats when i will believe its time for me to cough up for extra taxes.

How dare they use my kids to try and guilt trip me into paying money for "playgrounds" to get more money from me, its absolutely disgusting and proves that these arrogant bastards dont care where the money comes from aslong as THEY dont have to make any adjustments to there lifestyle.

If the private sector keeps subsidising there silly, needless, greedy and blind spending they will never change the way money is spent in this country. Lets get real, its the spending that has us where we are not the money coming in.

dvpower

steve9859 wrote: »

The fact is that there has proven to be clear public support behind ripping up Croke Park and reforming wefare and cutting PS pay. But, no, there are too many vested interests there, so they go after what they have perceived to be easy pickings in homeowners.

If they wanted to go after easy pickings they would just reduce tax credits by €50 each.
Introducing a brand new tax isn't easy pickings by any measure.

stevedublin

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

I don't think its the €100 people are upset about, more that this is the thin end of the wedge of hefty property taxes. Young families being evicted from their houses because they can't pay their property taxes is not a boring issue, but yes it is a joyless one.

paddy147

lugha wrote: »

Hence Paddy, and anyone who shares his view is every bit as hypocritical wouldn’t you say?

Difference is that I said from day 1,that I wouldnt register to pay and would say NO to the goverment.

And guess what??I didnt register to pay and I said NO.

So yeah,in time to come if Im fined and/or prossecuted in court,I will be classed as a criminal and tax cheat.And all because I stood up to FG,Enda Kenny and Phil Hogan.

So will welll over 850,000 people too,in this country,maybe up to 1 milliion people actualy.:D

Thats if the goverment can figure out what they are doing though.Sure they cant even tell a lie,they even fcuk the lies up.




I wonder what will the "threat of the day" be today then,and by what minister??????

And if they can actually take their heads out of each others ar5es and figure out how many houses there are in the country.:rolleyes::D





Absolutely amazing how the "we dont know how many houses are in the country" line only came out yesterday from the goverment on RTE news,once the deadline had passed.

Now I wonder why that was??? (FG never scare monger or falsify figures to suit,do they??):rolleyes:





The other difference between myself and Alastair....is that I didnt avoid tax in another country because it was "unfair" but then run back to this country and "preech" to everyone here about the household charge and paying it.....from the "gospel according to alastair".....:rolleyes::rolleyes:


Have a good day.:)




Oh look,theres a road sweeper just going by sweeping the malahide road.

So Dublin City Council didnt close down this morning then.....PHEW...:D:






Im off out now to roam the streets now,as the criminal and very unpatriotic,bold bad man that I am (according to FG).

I might even take a trip to Arbour Hill Barracks/Church to look at my great grandfathers name on the 1916 wall of rememberence there,and thank him for rebelling and being a patriot.:D:D

phil1nj

lugha wrote: »

The allegation against a poster was that he was a hypocrite because he refused on principle to pay the poll tax in Britain but did not respect Irish people’s right to do the same. That would be all fine and dandy if those making the allegation respected his principled stance. But I don’t think Paddy does respect his stance given that he has expressed the view
.

Actually, the allegation of hypocrisy came about because the poster in question maintained that he didn't make any hypocritical statements in this thread. He did in fact admit to not paying the poll tax yet stated here that people should pay their taxes. He claimed the poll tax was unfair, that the household charge/tax was fair and then proceeded to sneer and be condescending to various posters on this thread who asked him why he was in a postion to make such a claim (I don't think he was an elected official somehow, but on boards you never know). Very principled indeed.

He also didn't strike me as being a particularly nice quy, but then again who am I to judge:D

stevedublin

black francis wrote: »

The main logic employed by anti-household charge protesters is that someone else needs to pay for the mess.

So you are owning up to the fact that the household charge is effectively going to pay Anglo bondholders etc.
I thought the official line is that it is "for local services".

Deus Ex Machina

stevedublin wrote: »

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

I don't think its the €100 people are upset about, more that this is the thin end of the wedge of hefty property taxes. Young families being evicted from their houses because they can't pay their property taxes is not a boring issue, but yes it is a joyless one.

That's never happened. If it did happen the issue at hand would be the fact that they'd fuçked up so badly in the game of life that they known nobody who could throw then a C-note. Either way it's a sad indication of the interests of the boring masses. No wonder you're crying about €100 if it is a big deal to you (not you specifically), you're life is fuçked 6 ways to Sunday already, you need something to blame because you're the kind of person who'd get into such a state of fuçk to begin with.

MagicSean

phil1nj wrote: »

Actually, the allegation of hypocrisy came about because the poster in question maintained that he didn't make any hypocritical statements in this thread. He did in fact admit to not paying the poll tax yet stated here that people should pay their taxes. He claimed the poll tax was unfair, that the household charge/tax was fair and then proceeded to sneer and be condescending to various posters on this thread who asked him why he was in a postion to make such a claim (I don't think he was an elected official somehow, but on boards you never know). Very principled indeed.

He also didn't strike me as being a particularly nice quy, but then again who am I to judge:D

Since you bring up the poster who appears to have been banned for being spammed he did actually respond to that particular question in the first thread in the middle somewhere. He didn't explain himself very well though. The difference between the poll tax and this tax seems quite obvious. The poll tax required you only to exist. This tax requires you to have purchased a major asset.

Deus Ex Machina

stevedublin wrote: »

Deus Ex Machina wrote: »

The fact that a €100 charge has resulted in the longest thread in AH history serves to illustrate just how joyless and boring a lot of you really are.

I don't think its the €100 people are upset about, more that this is the thin end of the wedge of hefty property taxes. Young families being evicted from their houses because they can't pay their property taxes is not a boring issue, but yes it is a joyless one.

That's never happened. If it did happen the issue at hand would be the fact that they'd fuçked up so badly in the game of life that they known nobody who could throw then a C-note. Either way it's a sad indication of the interests of the boring masses. No wonder you're crying about €100 if it is a big deal to you (not you specifically), you're life is fuçked 6 ways to Sunday already, you need something to blame because you're the kind of person who'd get into such a state of fuçk to begin with.