Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Upcoming Irish property tax to cost 'on average' €1000 per house.(can you afford it?)

Options
1…2627293132…107

Comments

  • Options
    #842
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    I refuse to pay for something that targets my home. If they want help then i will pay extra Income Tax to help BUT leave my home out of it.

    If a guy living at the bottom of my street runs into problems with his mortgage because he has spent too much money gambling in Paddy Powers and someone comes to me and says "you must pay a tax on your home to help him keep his" then it's the same as this Property Tax to me. Now i might offer him a few bob to help him out but not a tax on my home.

    Red herring removed.

    Once again - sheer coincidence that you'd be liable for lower taxation if property tax was transferred to income tax? Nothing self-serving there?


  • Options
    #843
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    What's so special about your home though? This is what you're failing to articulate here. You've no objection to your income being taxed. Or your savings. Why can't a house be taxed?

    I have always considered my home as being above taxation. It's the one big item you will purchase in a lifetime. It's where you will settle down and raise a family, decorate it the way you want and put the furniture you like into it. You have privacy there and should be able to enjoy it in peace in your old age.
    You will understand it better when you're older.


  • Options
    #844
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    I have always considered my home as being above taxation.

    You considered wrong. You've forgotten the days when you paid rates then?


  • Options
    #845
    bgrizzley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭bgrizzley


    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    What's so special about your home though? This is what you're failing to articulate here. You've no objection to your income being taxed. Or your savings. Why can't a house be taxed?


    whats not special about your home? its the place where you see you child take their first steps, its where you escape to after spending the day working to pay all the other taxes we have. its where we leave the troubles of the world on the doorstep.
    its not an investment property, its not a wealth asset. that was the problem with this country, greedy people looking at homes as some kind of way to make money.


  • Options
    #846
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    alastair wrote: »
    Red herring removed.

    Once again - sheer coincidence that you'd be liable for lower taxation if property tax was transferred to income tax? Nothing self-serving there?

    So you cut out the bits that trip up your argument.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #847
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    With all due respect, it doesn't make much sense to say: "I shouldn't have to pay tax on it because it's mine and I worked for it" and in the same breath saying you've no objection to other taxes like income tax.

    I refuse to pay for something that targets my home. If they want help then i will pay extra Income Tax to help BUT leave my home out of it.

    If a guy living at the bottom of my street runs into problems with his mortgage because he has spent too much money gambling in Paddy Powers and someone comes to me and says "you must pay a tax on your home to help him keep his" then it's the same as this Property Tax to me. Now i might offer him a few bob to help him out but not a tax on my home.

    The whole point of a property tax is that it will create a stable and predictable yield each year. An increase in income tax will not do this.


  • Options
    #848
    golden lane
    Registered Users Posts: 1,364 ✭✭✭golden lane


    keep going tayto ...you are winning...

    you, object to paying a tax on your property......they, by quoting all sorts of other taxes are losing the arguement.....

    keep up the good work......


  • Options
    #849
    Scanlas The 2nd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Scanlas The 2nd


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    What's so special about your home though? This is what you're failing to articulate here. You've no objection to your income being taxed. Or your savings. Why can't a house be taxed?

    I have always considered my home as being above taxation. It's the one big item you will purchase in a lifetime. It's where you will settle down and raise a family, decorate it the way you want and put the furniture you like into it. You have privacy there and should be able to enjoy it in peace in your old age.
    You will understand it better when you're older.

    The goal of your principle seems to be to meet your own preferences. That's no use to our society, we need principles which benefit society.

    If you think excluding houses from being taxed benefits society then explain how.


  • Options
    #850
    bgrizzley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭bgrizzley


    dvpower wrote: »
    So you like the principle, but you don't know why?

    humour is just lost on you guys sometimes, lol.;)


  • Options
    #851
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    So you cut out the bits that trip up your argument.

    No - I cut out the nonsensical analogy that bears no relationship to the actual situation. No comment on those rates you used to pay?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #852
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    donalg1 wrote: »
    The whole point of a property tax is that it will create a stable and predictable yield each year. An increase in income tax will not do this.

    They are going to the same place anyway so what odds - BONDHOLDERS.
    I pay privately for the important services already. I also pay plenty of other taxes which cover the miserable services provided by the LA.
    Also I asked your pro PT if farmers will have to pay on all their "site" but got no answers.


  • Options
    #853
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They are going to the same place anyway so what odds - BONDHOLDERS.

    No - they go 100% to local authority funding.


  • Options
    #854
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    alastair wrote: »
    No - I cut out the nonsensical analogy that bears no relationship to the actual situation. No comment on those rates you used to pay?


    There were no rates when became a home owner in 1977 just a big Stamp Duty.


  • Options
    #855
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    I like this principle.


  • Options
    #856
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    alastair wrote: »
    No - they go 100% to local authority funding.

    Yeah right :rolleyes:


  • Options
    #857
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    I also pay plenty of other taxes which cover the miserable services provided by the LA.

    No you don't. We're in a deficit. Nothing is 'covered' except on the back of borrowings.


  • Options
    #858
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    Yeah right :rolleyes:

    Yes - as you're well aware. If you have evidence to the contrary feel free to show it.


  • Options
    #859
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    There were no rates when became a home owner in 1977 just a big Stamp Duty.

    So - you were well aware that houses were not 'above taxation'? Did you forget in the meantime?


  • Options
    #860
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They are going to the same place anyway so what odds - BONDHOLDERS.
    I pay privately for the important services already. I also pay plenty of other taxes which cover the miserable services provided by the LA.
    Also I asked your pro PT if farmers will have to pay on all their "site" but got no answers.

    50, 000000 (fifty million) euro was also taken out of the coffers today, in order to pay an unsecured, anonymous bond holder.

    Why the big secret?


  • Options
    #861
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    alastair wrote: »
    Yes - as you're well aware. If you have evidence to the contrary feel free to show it.

    There's a guy standing outside Paddy Powers begging. He lost all his money on the Galway races. He's expecting a FG rep to come soon though and give it back to him because he votes for them and plays golf with one of them.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #862
    Scanlas The 2nd
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 3,144 ✭✭✭Scanlas The 2nd


    bgrizzley wrote: »
    Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »
    . that was the problem with this country, greedy people looking at homes as some kind of way to make money.

    That's not the problem with this country. Our society functions largely as a result of people seeking to make money for themselves. People have a natural drive to advance their self interests, this is never going to change, attempting to do so is counterproductive. We need to understand human nature and harness it in a way which benefits society. If people see an easy way to make profit to will attempt to do so.

    I see no point in being judgmental about this behaviour. People have always been the same with regards self interest. What we need to do is have laws in place to protect against the negative sides to our natural drives.


  • Options
    #863
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Ghandee wrote: »
    50, 000000 (fifty million) euro was also taken out of the coffers today, in order to pay an unsecured, anonymous bond holder.

    Why the big secret?

    A name would make you happier?


  • Options
    #864
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    alastair wrote: »
    Yes - as you're well aware. If you have evidence to the contrary feel free to show it.

    How much did la funding get cut by at the last budget?

    Where has the money that previously paid that been diverted to?


  • Options
    #865
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    tayto lover wrote: »
    There's a guy standing outside Paddy Powers begging. He lost all his money on the Galway races. He's expecting a FG rep to come soon though and give it back to him because he votes for them and plays golf with one of them.

    Again with the analogies? Have you an iota of evidence that property taxes won't be applied 100% to local authority funding?


  • Options
    #866
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    Ghandee wrote: »
    How much did la funding get cut by at the last budget?

    Where has the money that previously paid that been diverted to?

    There's been cuts across the board - for the last few years - maybe you missed this?


  • Options
    #867
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    alastair wrote: »
    A name would make you happier?

    They are protecting their friends by hiding their names behind companies as we have seen already. Pity they couldn't have hid Reilly's before Stubbs got it.


  • Options
    #868
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    tayto lover wrote: »
    They are going to the same place anyway so what odds - BONDHOLDERS.
    I pay privately for the important services already. I also pay plenty of other taxes which cover the miserable services provided by the LA.
    Also I asked your pro PT if farmers will have to pay on all their "site" but got no answers.

    They aren't though, but ignore the facts anyway to make your point.

    Do you not see the difference in the two, one will provide a stable and predictable yield each year for the LA's the other one wont.

    And if you believe what you say about "what odds" then what odds does it make to you to pay a property tax or income tax. You said you will pay one but not the other, yet you believe they are going to the same place so again to quote you "what odds"


  • Options
    #869
    tayto lover
    Registered Users Posts: 51,926 ✭✭✭✭tayto lover


    donalg1 wrote: »
    They aren't though, but ignore the facts anyway to make your point.

    Do you not see the difference in the two, one will provide a stable and predictable yield each year for the LA's the other one wont.

    And if you believe what you say about "what odds" then what odds does it make to you to pay a property tax or income tax. You said you will pay one but not the other, yet you believe they are going to the same place so again to quote you "what odds"

    Again because it targets MY home.


  • Options
    #870
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,309 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    donalg1 wrote: »
    You said you will pay one but not the other, yet you believe they are going to the same place so again to quote you "what odds"

    I believe the pertinent question is which mechanism (income tax hike or property tax) will cost Tayto more. It's property tax btw. The confusion over what 'principled objection' applies might have something to do with this. Same story for the forgetfulness about previous property taxation.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #871
    Ghandee
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,653 ✭✭✭Ghandee


    alastair wrote: »
    There's been cuts across the board - for the last few years - maybe you missed this?

    No, that's not what I asked.

    Where is the money going that used to fund the LA previous to this scam being introduced?

    Its been diverted to shore up the banks/bail out the banks.


    Like your 'indirect' tax principle, this money may be ear marked for local services, but only because the way they were previously funded now pays the banks and bondholders.

    We're expected to indirectly pay for it. That is a fact.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement