So.. I have paid 100 euro for property tax

Wibbs

*ASIDE*

Dave! wrote: »

We were previously getting loads of tax from stamp duty, but that only applies when people buy property, and the property market will never be the same again,

Ohh I wouldn't be too sure about that D. I'll go on record here and make a prediction that in I reckon 15 to 20 years time we're going to have another property price spike, indeed I'd go so far as to say we'll even see an over inflation in the market. People have short memories and there's a new demographic wave coming along that will need housing.

alastair

Wibbs wrote: »

*ASIDE*Ohh I wouldn't be too sure about that D. I'll go on record here and make a prediction that in I reckon 15 to 20 years time we're going to have another property price spike, indeed I'd go so far as to say we'll even see an over inflation in the market. People have short memories and there's a new demographic wave coming along that will need housing.

Would you advocate continuing propping up tax revenues on stamp duty in that hope? I know I wouldn't.

smash

alastair wrote: »

That's not income tax.

Maximum income take rate:

55% (41% Pay As You Earn (PAYE) Tax, 4% Pay-Related Social Insurance (PRSI) and 10% Universal Social Charge (USC))

I thought that was pretty clear?

Dave!

Wibbs wrote: »

*ASIDE*Ohh I wouldn't be too sure about that D. I'll go on record here and make a prediction that in I reckon 15 to 20 years time we're going to have another property price spike, indeed I'd go so far as to say we'll even see an over inflation in the market. People have short memories and there's a new demographic wave coming along that will need housing.

Fair enough, I'll bookmark this post and come back to ya in 20 years' time

I'm sure we'll see house prices go up and down, but I couldn't see it getting to the same level again.

Regardless, we can't rely on stamp duty as a sustainable source of revenue anymore.

meoklmrk91

I'm sorry but since when did the Irish become such bitches? Kenny and Noonan do everything that is asked of them, waiting for the troika to give them a pat on the head. And the ridiculously over taxed population is asked to pay yet another ludicrous charge and people who dont pay it are admonished by the people who did because the politicians say they will have to pick up the tab for those who didn't. The Greeks rioted and yet we take everything and anything that is thrown at us.

If you are happy to pay the charge, then do, you choose to register and quite frankly it is nothing to you whether anyone else did or not, regardless of what they say in Dublin. You can't volunteer and then feel hard done by because others didn't, you had the chance to say **** em' this is a step too far and you choose not to.

alastair

smash wrote: »

I thought that was pretty clear?

It is - but it's not income tax. The same bundled figure for Denmark is 54%, and then there's higher levels of VAT etc. We're paying a lot less tax than the Danes.

alastair

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

You can't volunteer and then feel hard done by because others didn't.

No-one has the option to 'volunteer' - you'll be be paying yourself if you're liable - the only question is what overhead you pay for delaying.

bgrizzley

alastair wrote: »

It is - but it's not income tax. The same bundled figure for Denmark is 54%, and then there's higher levels of VAT etc. We're paying a lot less tax than the Danes.

could the danes have more personal allowances for that extra 1%? i cant find figures. could they have a lower cost of living? 1 % lower tax doesnt make life any easier when your loaf of bread costs twice as much

smash

alastair wrote: »

It is - but it's not income tax. The same bundled figure for Denmark is 54%, and then there's higher levels of VAT etc. We're paying a lot less tax than the Danes.

Apart from income tax (which is more or less the same), they get a lot more for in return for their extra taxes. We don't.

meoklmrk91

alastair wrote: »

No-one has the option to 'volunteer' - you'll be be paying yourself if you're liable - the only question is what overhead you pay for delaying.

I won't be paying for anything because I don't own a house, still wouldn't even if I did. And by registering oneself then I would consider that volunteering.

alastair

smash wrote: »

Apart from income tax (which is more or less the same), they get a lot more for in return for their extra taxes. We don't.

Their income tax is higher. Their cost of living is higher. Their overall taxation overhead is higher. They do get a lot more services for their additional taxation.

alastair

meoklmrk91 wrote: »

I won't be paying for anything because I don't own a house, still wouldn't even if I did. And by registering oneself then I would consider that volunteering.

You might consider it so, but its not a voluntary tax.

smash

alastair wrote: »

They do get a lot more services for their additional taxation.

That's my point. We don't, never have and wont in the future either.

alastair

smash wrote: »

That's my point. We don't, never have and wont in the future either.

Not at the lower taxes we pay - no.

Dave!

smash wrote: »

That's my point. We don't, never have and wont in the future either.

We have a massive deficit at the moment, so we need to cut expenditure and increase revenue. We have to do both. Without doing so, how do you propose we get the services you so desire? Or are you just throwing your hands in the air and saying "we've never gotten better services and never will, so let's just keep borrowing to maintain this massive deficit"?

mikom

alastair wrote: »

Not at the lower taxes we pay - no.

Not at the present taxes either.

Give them more and you just become an "enabler".

alastair

mikom wrote: »

Not at the present lower taxes either.

Give them more and you just become an "enabler".

Fixed that for you there.

smash

alastair wrote: »

Not at the lower taxes we pay - no.

Sorry, but it's not all about higher taxes, it's about sorting out the underlying issues with government spending and wastage.

alastair

smash wrote: »

Sorry, but it's not all about higher taxes, it's about sorting out the underlying issues with government spending and wastage.

Even with Danish style levels of efficiency, we'd never get the quality of services they have without increasing our taxes. It's about the higher taxes.

bgrizzley

alastair, if your wife had an expensive shoe and handbag addiction, that was costing you a small fortune, would you give her extra money at the end of the week or would you tell her start shopping in Dunnes stores?

alastair

bgrizzley wrote: »

alastair, if your wife had an expensive shoe and handbag addiction, that was costing you a small fortune, would you give her extra money at the end of the week or would you tell her start shopping in Dunnes stores?

That presupposes the state has something that equates to a handbag addiction - which I don't buy. Whatever problems we do have - they're not going to be solved by keeping our existing taxation model.

smash

alastair wrote: »

Even with Danish style levels of efficiency, we'd never get the quality of services they have without increasing our taxes. It's about the higher taxes.

Yes we would if people got off their asses! Before Motor tax we had road tax which paid for the roads, and even back then you'd see 1 guy filling a 1 meter hole while 6 others watch him. There's wastage all over the country.

alastair

smash wrote: »

Yes we would if people got off their asses! Before Motor tax we had road tax which paid for the roads, and even back then you'd see 1 guy filling a 1 meter hole while 6 others watch him. There's wastage all over the country.

You're saying the Danes need to get off their asses too? They're needlessly paying extra taxation without benefit?

bgrizzley

alastair wrote: »

That presupposes the state has something that equates to a handbag addiction - which I don't buy. Whatever problems we do have - they're not going to be solved by keeping our existing taxation model.

theres no government waste you say?

smash

alastair wrote: »

You're saying the Danes need to get off their asses too? They're needlessly paying extra taxation without benefit?

oh god :rolleyes:

alastair

bgrizzley wrote: »

theres no government waste you say?

Yeah - that's exactly it. :rolleyes:
Why not engage with the point I do make?

alastair

smash wrote: »

oh god :rolleyes:

Me:

Even with Danish style levels of efficiency, we'd never get the quality of services they have without increasing our taxes. It's about the higher taxes.

You:

Yes we would if people got off their asses!

I don't think we ever had a road tax btw.

Bullseye1

You would be better off spending the 100 euros at your local shop or business. At least that way it won't be wasted.

bgrizzley

alastair wrote: »

Yeah - that's exactly it. :rolleyes:
Why not engage with the point I do make?

why not answer my original question?

is a 70 million spend on the European presidency waste duriing a time of recession?

mikom

alastair wrote: »

Not at the lower taxes we pay - no.

If your fuel tank is pissin' out petrol from a hole in the bottom then topping it up won't help much.

chainsawman

I should never bought a house years ago, Because of property tax is €1,000, that means I am paying €20 a week in equivalent to a council council householders who never bought the house at the first place.

alastair

bgrizzley wrote: »

why not answer my original question?

I did.

bgrizzley wrote: »

is a 70 million spend on the European presidency waste duriing a time of recession?

Well - it' a responsibility we can't really avoid, and I've no idea what the costs involved are - so can't comment if there's any waste involved. Are you aware of any waste in that overhead?

smash

alastair wrote: »

I don't think we ever had a road tax btw.

We did! Do some research.

alastair

mikom wrote: »

If your fuel tank is pissin' out petrol from a hole in the bottom then topping it up won't help much.

I think you'll find efficient running your car involves a fairly steady stream of fuel as well. Topping it up comes with the territory.

alastair

smash wrote: »

We did! Do some research.

Care to link to any evidence of same?

bgrizzley

alastair wrote: »

I did.


Well - it' a responsibility we can't really avoid, and I've no idea what the costs involved are - so can't comment if there's any waste involved. Are you aware of any waste in that overhead?

70 million? cmon Alstair thats nearly the full take realised from the HHC. for what? so enda can be seen on the international stage getting his hair ruffled by merkel.

(Also, im aware there is a tender out for 10000 silk ties and 10000 silk scarves, that is waste)

phil1nj

bgrizzley wrote: »

theres no government waste you say?

+1.
I've seen Al's post in several other threads on boards (and each time he advocates mroe and more taxation of the general population). Not once has he come down on the side of cuts/efficiencies that need to be made to ensure proper spending of tax revenues. He made the point earlier that not everybody that owns property pays PAYE, fair enough, I'd go along with that. But by the same token not everybody that has a medical card, or receives free public transport, tv licences,electricity credits, children allowence payments etc are on low/no pay either. I'm pretty sure there are massive savings that could be made by ending universal entitlements that are paid out year on year. Instead though, we look at taxation to keep the machine fed.

alastair

phil1nj wrote: »

But by the same token not everybody that has a medical card, or receives free public transport, tv licences,electricity credits, children allowence payments etc are on low/no pay either.

That would be an abuse of the system then - not a problem of the system itself.

bgrizzley

alastair wrote: »

That would be an abuse of the system then - not a problem of the system itself.

its not Alastair, you can be a rich old person and get all those, or a multimillionaire with children and get childrens allowance. all legal, all bad legislation wasting more of our tax money

opinion guy

alastair wrote: »

You drive a car?

Yeah I sure do.

But a car isn't critical to my basic survival. A place to live is.

phil1nj

alastair wrote: »

That would be an abuse of the system then - not a problem of the system itself.

Not really, it could just be a fault of the system. Not to pick on pensioners or anything but look at the debacle several years ago when the government wanted to end the right to a medical card for all over 70's ( a cheap vote gathering stunt that FF pulled). The amount of uproar that came from "the grey vote" frightened the govewrnment in to a u-turn. You mean to tell me that every single member of the over 70's population in Ireland (retired politicians, barristers, judges, doctors etc) could not afford to look after their medical needs if push came to shove once they hit 70? The answer is yes they could but they were entitled to a medical card. No abuse of the system, just a failing of the system.

That is my point.

alastair

bgrizzley wrote: »

70 million? cmon Alstair thats nearly the full take realised from the HHC. for what? so enda can be seen on the international stage getting his hair ruffled by merkel.

(Also, im aware there is a tender out for 10000 silk ties and 10000 silk scarves, that is waste)

From a cursory glance - it seems typical - Those efficient Danes appear to have tried to do a yellowpack arrangement and hoped to spend €35 million. The two previous presidencies were Poland at €115 million, and Hungary at €70-€75 million. Isn't Enda looking for corporate sponsors for some of the costs too?

alastair

phil1nj wrote: »

Not really, it could just be a fault of the system. Not to pick on pensioners or anything but look at the debacle several years ago when the government wanted to end the right to a medical card for all over 70's ( a cheap vote gathering stunt that FF pulled). The amount of uproar that came from "the grey vote" frightened the govewrnment in to a u-turn. You mean to tell me that every single member of the over 70's population in Ireland (retired politicians, barristers, judges, doctors etc) could not afford to look after their medical needs if push came to shove once they hit 70? The answer is yes they could but they were entitled to a medical card. No abuse of the system, just a failing of the system.

That is my point.

Point taken - but the solution still requires rebuilding our tax system to a sustainable level. Rich pensioners medical cards and unrequired child allowance aren't going to shift the balance.

alastair

opinion guy wrote: »

Yeah I sure do.

But a car isn't critical to my basic survival. A place to live is.

A place to own isn't though. And you pay your motor tax - which isn't applicable to all.

phil1nj

alastair wrote: »

Point taken - but the solution still requires rebuilding our tax system to a sustainable level. Rich pensioners medical cards and unrequired child allowance aren't going to shift the balance.

I agree they are not , but they will certainly aid. IMHO there has to be balance in any system. Placing nothing but increased taxes on an already squeezed middle income earning working population will be conuterproductive in the long run. Eliminating government waste, inefficienies, tempering public expenditure on pensions/pay/benefits/allowences will help along with a broadening of the tax base. That is all.

AEDIC

alastair wrote: »

Care to link to any evidence of same?

What do you guys mean by 'Road Tax'? surely what we have at the moment is a road tax...

*apologies for the off topic question but I was genuinely confused

alastair

phil1nj wrote: »

I agree they are not , but they will certainly aid. IMHO there has to be balance in any system. Placing nothing but increased taxes on an already squeezed middle income earning working population will be conuterproductive in the long run. Eliminating government waste, inefficienies, tempering public expenditure on pensions/pay/benefits/allowences will help along with a broadening of the tax base. That is all.

Maybe you hadn't noticed but there is a balance to dealing with the deficit. You'd think that we hadn't had any change in expenditure. This tax won't be the last introduced, and we haven't seen the last of cuts either.

alastair

AEDIC wrote: »

What do you guys mean by 'Road Tax'? surely what we have at the moment is a road tax...

*apologies for the off topic question but I was genuinely confused

We don't have a road tax - we've a motor tax - which goes into general taxation revenues.

AEDIC

alastair wrote: »

We don't have a road tax - we've a motor tax - which goes into general taxation revenues.

Dont see the difference. What the tax money is used for is irrelevant to the reason for collecting it. That decision is down to the Govt (rightly or wrongly)

According to these guys a 'road tax' is exactly what we have

http://www.vrt.ie/roadtax.php

Ghandee

alastair wrote: »

We don't have a road tax - we've a motor tax - which goes into general taxation revenues.

Along with income tax, vat, vrt, and usc, various levies, service charges and now a grand a year on top all earmarked for the same pot?

This is getting ridiculous.