Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 3] *Poll Reset*

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

If it were a tax on homes, then people in rented accommodation and local authority housing would be liable as well.

And so they should be, after all it is for the LA services that they use, isn't it?

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I think its quite legitimate that people can oppose a tax for different reasons.

In my opinion, the issue of landlords "passing it on" is a bit of a red herring. You could equally argue that if income tax were increased, landlords would also pass this on to their tenants.

What the system does do is allow the market to dictate things. The landlords who attempt to pass on too much will be penalised in favour of those who don't.

So the fairest thing would be to call it a "Service Charge" and include the services of bin collection, sewage, water and street cleaning and charge an appropriate fee i.e. 650 euro per annum. Nobody would have any complaints then and there would be no anti movement. Win / win situation.

Chips Lovell

tayto lover wrote: »

So the fairest thing would be to call it a "Service Charge" and include the services of bin collection, sewage, water and street cleaning and charge an appropriate fee i.e. 650 euro per annum. Nobody would have any complaints then and there would be no anti movement. Win / win situation.

One of the problems of folding things like waste and water into a home tax like the one Gerry proposes is that we're committed to the Polluter Pays Principle in terms of environmentally sensitive services.

So, for example, if you put people's bin charges into one flat annual fee, they have no incentive in terms of the amount and type of domestic waste they generate.

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

One of the problems of folding things like waste and water into a home tax like the one Gerry proposes is that we're committed to the Polluter Pays Principle in terms of environmentally sensitive services.

So, for example, if you put people's bin charges into one flat annual fee, they have no incentive in terms of the amount and type of domestic waste they generate.

Very easy to fix that. Have weighing scales on the bin lorry with a chip on the bin and give a refund as an incentive. Or charge a bit extra if bin is above set weight.
Same with drains. Have a small call-out charge.
Water -- We are told we will have a set allowance and have to pay for over-use.

Simple to organise really and makes a lot of sense. Cuts out the squabbling too.

gerryo777

tayto lover wrote: »

Very easy to fix that. Have weighing scales on the bin lorry with a chip on the bin and give a refund as an incentive. Or charge a bit extra if bin is above set weight.
Same with drains. Have a small call-out charge.
Water -- We are told we will have a set allowance and have to pay for over-use.

Simple to organise really and makes a lot of sense. Cuts out the squabbling too.

But tayto, if we had a simple, transparent & fair system, the junta wouldn't be able to pitch one section of society against the other.
It's all a game.

tayto lover

gerryo777 wrote: »

But tayto, if we had a simple, transparent & fair system, the junta wouldn't be able to pitch one section of society against the other.
It's all a game.

The Govt just rushed into this without putting any thinking into it. As a result 600k plus home owners didn't pay and thus the trouble with marches etc.

Why do they always have to rush into things and think that because other countries have a Property Tax we have to have one. They didn't bother to look at the other things other countries have like free GP's, school buses etc. It's all duck and no dinner.

Chips Lovell

They probably should have gotten an expert group together to look at the big picture, the entire taxation system, and give full consideration to a property tax as part of that.

gerryo777

tayto lover wrote: »

The Govt just rushed into this without putting any thinking into it. As a result 600k plus home owners didn't pay and thus the trouble with marches etc.

Why do they always have to rush into things and think that because other countries have a Property Tax we have to have one. They didn't bother to look at the other things other countries have like free GP's, school buses etc. It's all duck and no dinner.

You know the old saying 'monkey see, monkey do'? That's our politicians.
They are incapable of ideas of their own and know nothing about what's happening on the ground. Hard to see that far from the ivory towers.

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They probably should have gotten an expert group together to look at the big picture, the entire taxation system, and give full consideration to a property tax as part of that.

Vlad, that is the most sensible post I've seen from a pro property tax man like yourself in a long time.

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They probably should have gotten an expert group together to look at the big picture, the entire taxation system, and give full consideration to a property tax as part of that.

Irish people do not like the term "Property Tax".
It's probably something that comes from Cromwellian times when the Crown claimed ownership of Irish properties. An Irishman's home is his castle hence the importance among Irish people towards owning their own property.

I think a Service Charge would be better in all honesty, like I explained above.

Chips Lovell

gerryo777 wrote: »

Vlad, that is the most sensible post I've seen from a pro property tax man like yourself in a long time.

Oh wait....


... they did. http://www.commissionontaxation.ie/Report.asp

Chips Lovell

Let's see what they said...

We consider that stability is an important attribute of a tax system. This implies that the tax system should be designed with a view to eliminating as far as possible volatility of tax receipts. A consideration in achieving a stable tax base is to tax those factors that cannot avoid the charge to tax. The most obvious example of this is immovable property. We consider that the taxation of property is one area of Ireland’s tax system that is particularly in need of reform. Introducing an annual tax on residential property represents an important step towards providing a stable and non-volatile tax base.

We recommend that there should be a new configuration of taxation of property in Ireland, including an annual property tax that provides recurrent and sustainable revenue for the Exchequer and, in due course, for local government financing.

tayto lover

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Let's see what they said...

So we can expect our Local Government to provide services then?
That will be a pleasant change.:D

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Let's see what they said...

Yea, haven't heard too much about taxing land banks held by the government's buddies as recommended here too, have you?
A full report there, probably cost a fortune and I can guarantee you that the only bit they'll try to implement is a tax on peoples homes.

Chips Lovell

gerryo777 wrote: »

..and I can guarantee you that the only bit they'll try to implement is a tax on peoples homes...

You should probably read it before you start speculating.

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You should probably read it before you start speculating.

There's probably not much point really, it's Ireland and it's another report, one of thousands. The government's mates sitting on land banks won't be touched.
Everyone can see the path this shower have taken, screw the middle classes to protect the 'top' and the 'bottom'. I don't need any reports to show me that.

Hijpo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You should probably read it before you start speculating.

There is always a little side door left open for the wealthy to escape

gerryo777

You have to laugh at some of the stuff in that report.
We should 'move away from a reliance on stamp duty' LOL. There's no fcuking stamp duty to speak of now. State the obvious or what....

And this little gem...
'We are proposing a recurrent tax on development land' followed in the very next paragraph by 'we are not recommending a land or site value tax'

gerryo777

Following on and having read the section on property tax in vlad's report what we can see is the following.

1. We have raped the citizens of this country for stamp duty for the last 15 years.
2. There is no stamp duty to be collected anymore.
3. We have to get money out of these cheeky fcukers some way for having the neck to provide their own homes.
4. We can't have LA tenants or renters paying for the services the LA's provide them with.
5. Developers and speculators sitting on land banks cannot be touched.

Who comes up with this sh1te, another quango set up to tell a bunch of **** how to screw the middle class into the floor.

For shame.

Chips Lovell

I have to admire the speed of U turn there.

Within the space of a few posts you've gone saying that a review by an expert group is a "sensible" idea, to saying its "sh1te", "another quango", "probably cost a fortune".

Ghandee

gerryo777 wrote: »

There's probably not much point really, it's Ireland and it's another report, one of thousands. The government's mates sitting on land banks won't be touched.
Everyone can see the path this shower have taken, screw the middle classes to protect the 'top' and the 'bottom'. I don't need any reports to show me that.

Out of all the political parties manifesto's pre election, only labour had any mention of a property tax, (we all know how fg felt pre election)

There was one difference with labours idea though, it was a site valued tax, meaning......

You got it!

Developers sitting on land banks would have been hit.

Now, we're told the troika insisted on a property tax, so, FG (hands tied and all that:rolleyes:) then went on to introduce one (despite it not being in the manifesto), but rather than go with labours site valued one, which would bring in many millions more in revenue as it would catch property owners, and wealthy developers, sitting on land that would be worth millions, someone, somewhere decided that that the tax would apply to family homes only.

They, (troika) then were later seen to come out and tell us that they actually didn't mind where the money came from, a property tax could be abolished if another suitable revenue raising exercise could be brought to the table.

It might look like, (to the untrained eye obviously) that someone, somewhere, was looking out for their buddies.

But sure that wouldn't happen in Ireland, and especially not within the FG party.

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I have to admire the speed of U turn there.

Within the space of a few posts you've gone saying that a review by an expert group is a "sensible" idea, to saying its "sh1te", "another quango", "probably cost a fortune".

Yea, you can probably guess that I wouldn't trust this government, or any of the cronies it hires to tell them what they want to hear, to organise a piss up in brewery, never mind come up with a fair taxation system.
A paddy answer to a paddy problem. Maybe they should have asked Ted, Jack and Dougal.

gerryo777

Ghandee wrote: »

Out of all the political parties manifesto's pre election, only labour had any mention of a property tax, (we all know how fg felt pre election)

There was one difference with labours idea though, it was a site valued tax, meaning......

You got it!

Developers sitting on land banks would have been hit.

Now, we're told the troika insisted on a property tax, so, FG (hands tied and all that:rolleyes:) then went on to introduce one (despite it not being in the manifesto), but rather than go with labours suite valued one, which would being in many millions more in revenue as it would catch property owners, and wealthy developers, sitting on land that would be worth millions, someone, somewhere decided that that the tax would apply to family homes only.

hey, (troika) then were later seen to come out and tell us that they actually didn't mind where the money came from, a property tax could be abolished if another suitable revenue raising exercise could be brought to the table.

It might look like, (to the untrained eye obviously) that someone, somewhere, was looking out for their buddies.

But sure that wouldn't happen in Ireland, and especially not within the FG party.

Don't you know that since FF were booted out the door there is no such thing as cronyism or vested interestes in little old Ireland.:rolleyes:

Chips Lovell

Ghandee wrote: »

It might look like, (to the untrained eye obviously) that someone, somewhere, was looking out for their buddies.

I know. It smacks of a conspiracy. I mean, it's not like the independent report we commissioned on taxation said that the introduction of a property tax was one of the most urgent reforms needed in the Irish taxation system.

gerryo777 wrote: »

Yea, you can probably guess that I wouldn't trust this government, or any of the cronies it hires to tell them what they want to hear.

Except it wasn't this government that commissioned the report.

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I know. It smacks of a conspiracy. I mean, it's not like the independent report we commissioned on taxation said that the introduction of a property tax was one of the most urgent reforms needed in the Irish taxation system.



Except it wasn't this government that commissioned the report.

Oh yea, thanks for pointing that out.

This report is at least 3 years old, even more irrelevant now considering the economy has completely collapsed since then.

Good man.

Le_Dieux

bgrizzley wrote: »

Well, if it doesnt make much difference its just an excerise in futility.

And its been said by the pro side here that all these tiny protest marches are laughable and dont amount to anything. whats wrong with amalgamating them? its the Govs own fault for not listening to the people.
its about fcuking time everyone stood together...

Starting tomorrow!!!

Chips Lovell

gerryo777 wrote: »

This report is at least 3 years old, even more irrelevant now considering the economy has completely collapsed since then

We went into recession in 2008, when the commission was established. It was tasked with outlining how our tax system should be structured for the next 10 to 15 years.

Hijpo

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

We went into recession in 2008, when the commission was established. It was tasked with outlining how our tax system should be structured for the next 10 to 15 years.

Structure yeah, where just like a structure the more thats pilled on top the more pressure you feel near the bottom.

gerryo777

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

We went into recession in 2008, when the commission was established. It was tasked with outlining how our tax system should be structured for the next 10 to 15 years.

All it is, is a commission tasked with finding ways of screwing more money out people.
Why not just send the viper around.
Same difference.
He'll get the cash and take 40% for himself, the government will try the same and keep 40% to keep the PS gravy train, which you're on, trundling along.

If you, and the rest of your pro-tax mates on here want €3.5 billion this year, take 5% from welfare and 10% from PS pay and pensions.
Sorted.

Vested interests eh.......

Ghandee

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I know. It smacks of a conspiracy. I mean, it's not like the independent report we commissioned on taxation said that the introduction of a property tax was one of the most urgent reforms needed in the Irish taxation system.

Tell me this Vlad.

If, as we're constantly reminded, the countries stone broke, and badly (urgently) even in need of a stable, reliable, predictable revenue income, and if all the signs pointed that property was the way forward, why then leave potentially billions out by not making any such tax a site valued one?

Site valued property gives a potential double whammy, you get to tax the value of the house, and the site (plot of land) the house sits on.

If you simply own a plot of land, without a house on it, you're still liable for a tax.

Now, the latter to me, would be a true asset/wealth tax, as the developers are simply sitting on millions of euro worth of land, just awaiting things to improve so as they can build/flip it. And by collecting tax from land, and a property owner, you could reduce the burden on a home owner, while still collecting same (even more revenue)

Yet, they get away scott free.

Something fishy about that, no?