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

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

Nope - the rubbish is the delusion that the charge isn't going 100% to local authorities - as defined by law.

The ACT says that the payment has to be made to the Local Authorities It also says that the Local Authorities have to collect it.

Household Charge (to whom cheques were to be made payable) is not a Local Authority. I can't see in the ACT where it says the payment has to be made to 'Household Charge'

RobbieTheRobber

Freddie59 wrote: »

Welcome back Alastair. Were you MIA? You still haven't answered those questions (par for the course with you though):

1. Do you think it is fair that 400m is being borrowed weekly to prop up CS/PS wages & "entitlements"?

2. Do you think it is fair that 160,000 households which can well afford the "household charge" are exempt from it?

3. Do you think it is right to keep paying ludicrously high rates to SW recipients?

4. Do you think it is fair to keep paying ludicrously high rates to HSE "contractors"?

5. Do you think it is fair that the other 1.5m workers foot the bill for these gravy trains?

Now, do be polite and try to give an honest answer. For once.:)

Is their a reason you have entitlements and contractors in quotation marks, are the words being used in some special manner here?

alastair

Freddie59 wrote: »

Welcome back Alastair. Were you MIA? You still haven't answered those questions (par for the course with you though):

1. Do you think it is fair that 400m is being borrowed weekly to prop up CS/PS wages & "entitlements"?

2. Do you think it is fair that 160,000 households which can well afford the "household charge" are exempt from it?

3. Do you think it is right to keep paying ludicrously high rates to SW recipients?

4. Do you think it is fair to keep paying ludicrously high rates to HSE "contractors"?

5. Do you think it is fair that the other 1.5m workers foot the bill for these gravy trains?

Now, do be polite and try to give an honest answer. For once.:)

1. You seem to have forgotten the remainder of overheads those borrowings fund. Strange that.
2. No property ownership, no property tax. It's a pretty simple principle.
3. I don't agree that there's much ludicrous about welfare payment levels.
4. By local authorities?
5. It's terrible isn't it. Gravy trains all over the place. Think of the children!

alastair

blowtorch wrote: »

The ACT says that the payment has to be made to the Local Authorities It also says that the Local Authorities have to collect it.

Household Charge (to whom cheques were to be made payable) is not a Local Authority. I can't see in the ACT where it says the payment has to be made to 'Household Charge'

It's a bill enacted into law. That's how these things work. The act is quite clear who the money is paid to. Hint (it's the local authorities)

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

Motor tax is not ringfenced for roads. It's not ringfenced for anything - it just goes into the main revenue pot.

In truth - 'Ringfenced' isn't worth the paper (or screen) it's typed on. Wasn't the National Pension Reserve Fund 'ringfenced' as well? So, 'ringfencing' the Household Charge means SFA

Hijpo

alastair wrote: »

.
2. No property ownership, no property tax. It's a pretty simple principle.

Nice one, i wont own my property for another 30 years

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

It's a bill enacted into law. That's how these things work. The act is quite clear who the money is paid to. Hint (it's the local authorities)

Oh! - I missed that part of the ACT - where exactly in the ACT is 'Hint (it's the local authorities)' writen.

alastair

Hijpo wrote: »

Nice one, i wont own my property for another 30 years

You owned it the day you signed on the dotted line. Your mortgage lender has a lien, not ownership.

mikom

alastair wrote: »

It's a bill enacted into law. That's how these things work.

Much like the poll tax...........

dxhound2005

Hijpo wrote: »

Nice one, i wont own my property for another 30 years

Why do you call it "my property"?

alastair

mikom wrote: »

Much like the poll tax...........

Exactly.

alastair

blowtorch wrote: »

Oh! - I missed that part of the ACT - where exactly in the ACT is 'Hint (it's the local authorities)' writen.

The bit you didn't read, I guess:

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 “household
charge”) specified in accordance with this section.
(2) The sum specified in accordance with this section shall be—
(a) €100, or
(b) where a sum stands prescribed for the time being under
subsection (3), that sum.

alastair

blowtorch wrote: »

In truth - 'Ringfenced' isn't worth the paper (or screen) it's typed on. Wasn't the National Pension Reserve Fund 'ringfenced' as well? So, 'ringfencing' the Household Charge means SFA

One law can supercede another. The fact is that the law pertaining to household charge is quite clear - the money goes 100% to local authorities. It remains so until a different law is enacted (or the tiered property tax comes into effect).

mikom

alastair wrote: »

Exactly.

Exactamundo...........dooooooo........do.

Hijpo

dxhound2005 wrote: »

Why do you call it "my property"?

well is it the banks property then?

alastair

Hijpo wrote: »

well is it the banks property then?

You own it, and are liable for the charge.

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

The bit you didn't read, I guess:

And around we go again. The ACT is quite specific.. 'the owner of a residential property shall, subject to this Act, pay to the relevant local authority' But the charge had to be paid to 'Household Charge' - which is not a relevant local authority. So if you're quoting the ACT, then tell me where the ACT says that the payment must be paid to 'Household Charge'

stevedublin

Hijpo wrote: »

well is it the banks property then?

If the mortgage payments stop, then it would be sooner or later.

Lenders should pay the household charge unless the mortgage is paid off.

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

One law can supercede another. The fact is that the law pertaining to household charge is quite clear - the money goes 100% to local authorities. It remains so until a different law is enacted (or the tiered property tax comes into effect).

So, once they've their Database up-and-running, the Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011, will be consigned to the bin and a new 'Property Tax ACT' will come into being. And out goes the ringfencing.

The Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011 seems to be a temporary ACT then. If it's temporary then (superceded in a year by a Property Tax),
after 12 years, if a property is sold, then.....

'(2) A residential property shall not, as against a bona fide purchaser
for full consideration in money or money’s worth or a mortgagee,
remain charged with or liable to the payment of a household
charge, late payment fee or late payment interest referred to in subsection
(1) after the expiration of 12 years from the date upon which
the amount concerned fell due.'

Bruthal

alastair wrote: »

There's no such thing as road tax.

No such thing as car ownership tax either, except in your delusional world.

Never have i seen a poster on boards that talks such bollox.

alastair

robbie7730 wrote: »

No such thing as car ownership tax either, except in your delusional world.

Never have i seen a poster on boards that talks such bollox.

Motor tax is only levied on car owners - defacto it's a tax on car ownership. It's not a road tax, any more than VAT or the USC is. No delusions needed.

alastair

blowtorch wrote: »

So, once they've their Database up-and-running, the Local Government (Household Charge) Act 2011, will be consigned to the bin and a new 'Property Tax ACT' will come into being. And out goes the ringfencing.

...along with all other aspects of the act. Sure. How does that undermine the current ringfencing specified in the act?

Bruthal

alastair wrote: »

Motor tax is only levied on car owners - defacto it's a tax on car ownership. It's not a road tax, any more than VAT or the USC is. No delusions needed.

O right, so with my leg injury and not driving, i dont pay the owner tax on it? How is that? I now dont own it, is that it?

You equated it to property tax, so if its the same, how come i am not exempt if i live in a friends house for 6 months? Yet i am from the motor tax if i dont drive it for even a month?

You still never explained how the negative equity owner is being taxed on wealth either? But you did suggest this may be addressed in the full property tax. If thats the case, this tax must be unfair. So if thats the case, why are you paying an unfair tax, after telling us you dont pay unfair taxes?

O wait, you have decided it is fair. So thats that.

And as for the road tax, did you not know what the poster meant? Or was it just your usual smart arse postings, mr spell check?

blowtorch

alastair wrote: »

...along with all other aspects of the act. Sure. How does that undermine the current ringfencing specified in the act?

This ACT, which in effect will facilitate the collection of €160m for 2012 (and at a push for 2013 as well) 'ringfences' only two years income maximum for the LA's.

So, out goes the ringfencing after maximum 2 years. The ACT will still exist, but income after 2013 is not ringfenced by this ACT.

So you can play on 'current ringfencing' if you wish, but that's politician's speak, and avoiding post 2013.

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

Those 'optics'? Has he had the same old phone for years or not?

We wouldn't be close enough to him to know that. I bet a few on here could tell you though.

Bruthal

tayto lover wrote: »

We wouldn't be close enough to him to know that. I bet a few on here could tell you though.

Yea their names are likely stored in it. No wonder they have to pay.

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

I thought your premis was that this was the case nationally? :rolleyes:

Very few paid in Cavan, Monaghan, Louth and Donegal. So its not just Galway.

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

Simple calculation. Try it yourself.

Households liable to pay (according to that link): 1.72 million
Actual payments received so far (880,433 minus waiver registrations): 866,600
Outstanding household payments: 853,400

Take the waivers, unfinished estates etc and what have you ?

alastair

robbie7730 wrote: »

O right, so with my leg injury and not driving, i dont pay the owner tax on it? How is that? I now dont own it, is that it?

You equated it to property tax, so if its the same, how come i am not exempt if i live in a friends house for 6 months? Yet i am from the motor tax if i dont drive it for even a month?

Like I said before - you own a car-shaped garden ornament - once you try to use that ornament as a functional motor car once again, you'll be taxed for the privilege.

The functional value of the car is what you're paying your tax on - move into your mate's house for a month and your home is just as functional, and the wealth contained in the property is unchanged. The parallel between motor tax and property tax is pretty simple - I'll lay it out for you one more time:

No car ownership = no motor tax
No home ownership = no property tax

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

Take the waivers, unfinished estates etc and what have you ?

They've already been removed from the registration figure. Otherwise the majority would be greater.