revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

Annasopra

MadsL wrote: »

So Sam, as you are cheerleading Ben Gilroy, please do explain...

http://www.attackthetax.com/about.html



"I am a freeman" being the theme I expect. What was said/explained at the meetings?

The freemen have been consistently shown to be peddling nonsense

http://ukhumanrightsblog.com/2012/09/30/freemen-of-the-land-are-parasites-peddling-pseudolegal-nonsense-canadian-judge-fights-back/

http://www.thejournal.ie/readme/column-ignore-the-conspiracy-theories-the-household-charge-must-be-paid-370964-Mar2012/

http://www.lawsociety.ie/Documents/Gazette/Gazette%202012/April2012.pdf

tayto lover

dxhound2005 wrote: »

If the President has any doubt about the constitutionality of a piece of new legislation he can refer it to the Supreme Court.

http://www.lawlibrary.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=15

Article 26 of the Constitution says that the President may refer Bills to the Supreme Court to get a ruling on whether or not they are constitutional. If the Supreme Court rules that the Bill is constitutional, that Bill cannot be challenged again on its constitutionality.


The President did not consider there was any reason to refer the LPT legislation so all I can say to the amateur lawyers from the Freeman movement or anywhere else is the best of luck.

You may be unaware that Sinn Fein are going to introduce a Bill to repeal the LPT legislation. They didn't introduce the tax in the North but bizarrely they deny that it exists.

As soon as you mentioned the President I stopped reading.
He's a Labour man so he's highly unlikely to refer anything they introduce to anyone.
Christ you'd think to read your post that there was no corruption in Irish politics.

tayto lover

Leftist wrote: »

pay your taxes and stop whinging. Sick and tired of everyone moaning about contributing to a society they constantly think owes them something.

Your post reminds me of the posters who are supporting Ming regarding his penalty points corruption. It's like the Legalise Cannabis posters versus the Anti-cannabis posters only on this thread it's the FG/Labour posters versus the anti Property Tax posters.
Can you not think for yourselves lads. Not all taxes are good.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Can you not think for yourselves lads. Not all taxes are good.

Which jurisdictions have no property taxes?

How are these taxes 'bad' in your view?

Income tax
Property tax
Wealth taxes/Death duties
Sales taxes

These type of taxes seem to be pretty universal, Ireland is unusual in having abolished property taxes.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Which jurisdictions have no property taxes?

How are these taxes 'bad' in your view?

Income tax
Property tax
Wealth taxes/Death duties
Sales taxes

These type of taxes seem to be pretty universal, Ireland is unusual in having abolished property taxes.

Is the USC universal?
Are the levies for Quinn, PMPA, Health etc universal?

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Is the USC universal?
Are the levies for Quinn, PMPA, Health etc universal?

Payroll taxes are pretty universal so whilst the names differ some form of social insurance is usually taken. Would you prefer not to have a pension?

So you are not paying the property tax because of the Quinn, PMPA, & Health levy? Is that your justification?

MadYaker

MadsL wrote: »

So Sam, as you are cheerleading Ben Gilroy, please do explain...

http://www.attackthetax.com/about.html



"I am a freeman" being the theme I expect. What was said/explained at the meetings?

FYI if you want to talk about these idiots or indulge in some more freeman bashing (which I recommend) there is a thread in the Legal Discussion forum.

dxhound2005

tayto lover wrote: »

As soon as you mentioned the President I stopped reading.
He's a Labour man so he's highly unlikely to refer anything they introduce to anyone.
Christ you'd think to read your post that there was no corruption in Irish politics.

You should have continued reading, you missed most of the good bits.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Payroll taxes are pretty universal so whilst the names differ some form of social insurance is usually taken. Would you prefer not to have a pension?

So you are not paying the property tax because of the Quinn, PMPA, & Health levy? Is that your justification?

I never said that. How do you arrive there?
My problem is with having any tax on MY property and I would prefer a tax increase to it.

PS
Don't compare it to my car as we have been through that 100 times at least.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

I never said that. How do you arrive there?
My problem is with having any tax on MY property and I would prefer a tax increase to it.

PS
Don't compare it to my car as we have been through that 100 times at least.

What tax would you increase? And if income tax why do you feel squeezing people with no property is preferable to squeezing those with property?

moon_man

tayto lover wrote: »

Is the USC universal?
Are the levies for Quinn, PMPA, Health etc universal?

the universal social charge is a tax by any other name , if they scrapped it and simply set a rate for those earning over or under a certain amount , what difference would it make

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

What tax would you increase? And if income tax why do you feel squeezing people with no property is preferable to squeezing those with property?

Because why should I pay for having the "honour" of paying a stamp duty, mortgage, insurance etc on housing my family while others just rented or received free houses and partied all the time. Income tax is supposed to catch all, not just the same people all the time.

Should nobody purchase homes and just rent or let the Govt house them?

tayto lover

moon_man wrote: »

the universal social charge is a tax by any other name , if they scrapped it and simply set a rate for those earning over or under a certain amount , what difference would it make

So are levies in my book. If it's taken from wages without consent then it's a tax. I reckon we are now paying 62% tax at least so why not 64% and scrap this Home Tax?
Why should my children and grandchildren have to pay 56 k debt.

Bullseye1

MadsL wrote: »

What tax would you increase? And if income tax why do you feel squeezing people with no property is preferable to squeezing those with property?

Well you could have a property but be cash poor or you could be cash rich and no property. Say someone has a property and its worth €200,000 they would need to sell the property to realise a value and it might sell for more or less. You could also have someone with €200,000 cash in a deposit account renting.

Maybe there should be a tax on all assits?

In its current form the property tax is poorly thought out like most ideas coming out of Dáil Éireann.

ezra_pound

SamHall wrote: »

I'm not getting into a slanging match with you Seamus.

Leeches are the cretins in govt, hundreds of thousands of euro salaries, topped up by vast expenses on top if you don't mind, (some of which are tax defaulters/evaders themselves).

I'll pay the property tax with no resistance and no fuss if they refund the stamp duty I paid in 2007. That alone would is equal to approx fifty years of what (I think) my property tax will be.

Can I ask you Seamus, what tax will be a tax too far for you as an individual, or will you pay every tax applicable to you, regardless whether you can afford to pay it or not? (because its law)

50 years?

Now I cannot believe that I'm sorry.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Because why should I pay for having the "honour" of paying a stamp duty, mortgage, insurance etc on housing my family while others just rented or received free houses and partied all the time. Income tax is supposed to catch all, not just the same people all the time.

Should nobody purchase homes and just rent or let the Govt house them?

Are you for real? You decide to buy a house using the same information open to those who rented. Your reference to partying seems to indicate that you feel you are owed something by buying a house. I don't really see what you feel is wrong with people who rented and used their money to party, as it turned they saved money by renting.

By the way, seeing as you think people should be treated the same, why don't we move mortgage interest relief down to the same level as rent relief.

As to free houses?? Wtf?

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

So are levies in my book. If it's taken from wages without consent then it's a tax. I reckon we are now paying 62% tax at least so why not 64% and scrap this Home Tax?
Why should my children and grandchildren have to pay 56 k debt.

Why should my child have to pay off the troika debt when no-one in her family speculated on property?

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Why should my child have to pay off the troika debt when no-one in her family speculated on property?

Exactly. You made my point. Thanks.
We should only have to pay our own personal debts.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Are you for real? You decide to buy a house using the same information open to those who rented. Your reference to partying seems to indicate that you feel you are owed something by buying a house. I don't really see what you feel is wrong with people who rented and used their money to party, as it turned they saved money by renting.

By the way, seeing as you think people should be treated the same, why don't we move mortgage interest relief down to the same level as rent relief.

As to free houses?? Wtf?

I do not feel owed for buying a house but neither do I feel I owe for the same pleasure.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Exactly. You made my point. Thanks.
We should only have to pay our own personal debts.

Who pays the troika debt then? The leprechauns?

Overborrowing for inflated property prices was the petrol on the flames of the bubble. Therefore a property tax is more appropriate than an income tax.

Explain to me why everyone should pitch in to make life easier for those who overborrowed?

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

I do not feel owed for buying a house but neither do I feel I owe for the same pleasure.

What's all this partying resentment about then? You feel people who rented should now contribute more because they made good financial decisions??

Very odd.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Who pays the troika debt then? The leprechauns?

Overborrowing for inflated property prices was the petrol on the flames of the bubble. Therefore a property tax is more appropriate than an income tax.

Explain to me why everyone should pitch in to make life easier for those who overborrowed?

Where did I say that everyone should chip in for those who over-borrowed?
I didn't over-borrow and was always able to pay my bills at the expense of holidays etc. Should I have to pay for those who over-borrowed? Should I have to pay while you don't have to?

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

What's all this partying resentment about then? You feel people who rented should now contribute more because they made good financial decisions??

Very odd.

But you think I should have to pay for my good financial decisions :rolleyes:
Very odd indeed.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Where did I say that everyone should chip in for those who over-borrowed?
I didn't over-borrow and was always able to pay my bills at the expense of holidays etc. Should I have to pay for those who over-borrowed? Should I have to pay while you don't have to?

Because you have the amenity of a house.

Developers were paying property taxes on your behalf for years in the form of a development levy, all that has happened with the LPT is that tax has been transfered back to where it always was - rates on houses.

If renters pay it, then we end up with double taxation.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

But you think I should have to pay for my good financial decisions :rolleyes:
Very odd indeed.

Tell me more about partying and "free houses"!

moon_man

im in favour of the property tax which i know is unpopular

im also in favour of cuts to forms of wellfare , which i know is also unpopular

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

Apathy in Ireland has just made it possible for FF to be reelected within living memory, if that happens, frankly I am so done with Ireland, as you will get what you deserve in that scenario.

A but surely it will only be the fault of people who actually vote for them. Is`t that right?

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Tell me more about partying and "free houses"!

Surely you are aware of some people in council houses who have never contributed anything. Never worked, never will, always able to go drinking. I see it everyday.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Because you have the amenity of a house.

Developers were paying property taxes on your behalf for years in the form of a development levy, all that has happened with the LPT is that tax has been transfered back to where it always was - rates on houses.

If renters pay it, then we end up with double taxation.

If you are going to expect me to pay because I have the "amenity of a house" then I suggest that they tax you on the capital you have saved as a result of not buying a house. That might sound silly and is probably as silly as your argument.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

Because you have the amenity of a house.

Developers were paying property taxes on your behalf for years in the form of a development levy, all that has happened with the LPT is that tax has been transfered back to where it always was - rates on houses.

Well then, people who were paying huge stamp duties were propping you up then, where they not? Where are the warning emails you sent, complaining that you were obviously paying too little tax, due to house buyers paying huge amounts?

If renters pay it, then we end up with double taxation.

Similar to above mentioned stamp duty payers paying the property tax is it?

tayto lover

Ah yes double taxation.
Nice to see Mads change sides and join us.

bgrizzley

tayto lover wrote: »

Ah yes double taxation.
Nice to see Mads change sides and join us.

more like one rule for them and one rule for us...

Bullseye1

MadsL wrote: »

Who pays the troika debt then? The leprechauns?

Overborrowing for inflated property prices was the petrol on the flames of the bubble. Therefore a property tax is more appropriate than an income tax.

Explain to me why everyone should pitch in to make life easier for those who overborrowed?

Eh I think your missing a vital point. The Troika bailout is to cover money pumped into the banks and to pay the deficit currently being run by government. It has nothing to do with bailing out home owners. So how are home owners any more guilty of causing the bailout than those who rented?

It was caused by poorly regulated banking, governments over reliance on Stamp Duty all the while paying public sector workers more money and Bertie's obsession of having 100% employment by boosting public sector numbers instead of leaving job creation to the private sector.

tayto lover

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Eh I think your missing a vital point. The Troika bailout is to cover money pumped into the banks and to pay the deficit currently being run by government. It has nothing to do with bailing out home owners. So how are home owners any more guilty of causing the bailout than those who rented?

It was caused by poorly regulated banking, governments over reliance on Stamp Duty all the while paying public sector workers more money and Bertie's obsession of having 100% employment by boosting public sector numbers instead of leaving job creation to the private sector.

Ah now leave Mads alone. He has come over from the Dark Side and is one of us now. He is against double taxation.

Phoebas

Bullseye1 wrote: »

So how are home owners any more guilty of causing the bailout than those who rented?

They were (many) participants in the bubble property market. I'd hardly call them 'guilty', but they did contribute to it.

Bruthal

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Eh I think your missing a vital point. The Troika bailout is to cover money pumped into the banks and to pay the deficit currently being run by government. It has nothing to do with bailing out home owners. So how are home owners any more guilty of causing the bailout than those who rented?

It was caused by poorly regulated banking, governments over reliance on Stamp Duty all the while paying public sector workers more money and Bertie's obsession of having 100% employment by boosting public sector numbers instead of leaving job creation to the private sector.

Im still waiting on his emails he sent, warning of the trouble home buyers are causing. If he was not able to tell at the time, and only in hindsight, then how could people buying homes know?

I await his answer with interest.

Bullseye1

Phoebas wrote: »

They were (many) participants in the bubble property market. I'd hardly call them 'guilty', but they did contribute to it.

But the property market is not being bailed out. The government is being bailed out as have the banks. The home owner if they default will not be bailed out.

Phoebas

Bullseye1 wrote: »

But the property market is not being bailed out.

The question was the cause of the bailout, not the result of it

Bullseye1 wrote: »

The government is being bailed out as have the banks. The home owner if they default will not be bailed out.

I presume you mean the State, not the Government. I suppose the property market was bailed out to some extent, as it is likely that the property crash would be more severe at least in the short term without the bailout. But youre right, I don't see home owners being bailed out at all.

MadsL

tayto lover wrote: »

Surely you are aware of some people in council houses who have never contributed anything. Never worked, never will, always able to go drinking. I see it everyday.

And they get "free houses", tell me how that works.

Bruthal wrote: »

A but surely it will only be the fault of people who actually vote for them. Is`t that right?

And those who allow it to happen. All this posturing about can't pay is playing right into FF hands.

tayto lover wrote: »

If you are going to expect me to pay because I have the "amenity of a house" then I suggest that they tax you on the capital you have saved as a result of not buying a house. That might sound silly and is probably as silly as your argument.

You never heard of capital gains tax, we did get taxed on capital invested outside of the property market.

Bruthal wrote: »

Well then, people who were paying huge stamp duties were propping you up then, where they not? Where are the warning emails you sent, complaining that you were obviously paying too little tax, due to house buyers paying huge amounts?

Why would I complain about people voluntarily paying too much tax? I thought they were idiots, but why would I try and stop them? I did try and stop colleagues throwing money away, but they knew better than me and laughed when I showed them The Economist articles predicting 30% - 40% price drops.

Stamp Duty propped up mortgage interest relief did it not, I was not fortunate enough to have a Govt helping me pay my rent with a monthly tax refund of that magnitude. I think it was about €500 a year relief for renters.

Similar to above mentioned stamp duty payers paying the property tax is it?

Stamp duty and rates have always existed, Jack Lynch chose to make developers pay rates on property owners behalf. You have always had two taxes on property.

tayto lover wrote: »

Ah yes double taxation.
Nice to see Mads change sides and join us.

EDIT: You do not have double taxation. You obviously misunderstand what double taxation is, it is not one person paying two taxes, it is two people both paying the same tax liability. Double taxation would be both a landlord AND the renter paying LPT. You have ALWAYS had Stamp Duty AND rates. The Landlord is liable for both and the cost of them is effectively factored into the rent. That is why renters should NOT pay the LPT.

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Eh I think your missing a vital point. The Troika bailout is to cover money pumped into the banks and to pay the deficit currently being run by government. It has nothing to do with bailing out home owners. So how are home owners any more guilty of causing the bailout than those who rented?

It was caused by poorly regulated banking, governments over reliance on Stamp Duty all the while paying public sector workers more money and Bertie's obsession of having 100% employment by boosting public sector numbers instead of leaving job creation to the private sector.

EDIT: How did the banks get in that mess? Largely through lending money for unsustainable mortgages.

Bullseye1

I see you quoted be but have not answered.

tayto lover

Bullseye1 wrote: »

I see you quoted be but have not answered.

Same with the double taxation.
Doesn't want it but doesn't mind others having it.

barneystinson

tayto lover wrote: »

Same with the double taxation.
Doesn't want it but doesn't mind others having it.

What double taxation?

Banjo String

ezra_pound wrote: »

50 years?

Now I cannot believe that I'm sorry.

I paid 6% stamp duty when we bought this house.

What's hard to believe about that may I ask?

Do the sums...........

MadsL

Bullseye1 wrote: »

I see you quoted be but have not answered.

Edited

Bullseye1

MadsL wrote: »

EDIT: How did the banks get in that mess? Largely through lending money for unsustainable mortgages.

The banks got themselves in trouble and have been bailed out not the home owner. Not a single penny from the Troika has been paid to bail out the home owner.

So how exactly have they contributed to our deficit or bailout? Why are they being singled out? The majority of mortgage holders are continuing to pay off their mortgage. The fact that the banks were stupid enough to offer those 110% mortgages and the fact that the majority of the mortgages are on loss making tracker mortgages. They have been bailed out not the people.

MadsL

Bullseye1 wrote: »

The banks got themselves in trouble and have been bailed out not the home owner. Not a single penny from the Troika has been paid to bail out the home owner.

So how exactly have they contributed to our deficit or bailout? Why are they being singled out? The majority of mortgage holders are continuing to pay off their mortgage. The fact that the banks were stupid enough to offer those 110% mortgages and the fact that the majority of the mortgages are on loss making tracker mortgages. They have been bailed out not the people.

Homeowners always paid two taxes, stamp duty and property tax (rates) - rates were abolished and the Development Levy replaced it. You are not being singled out, you are just being asked to pay the taxes for which property was always liable. The boom era levy was a nice holiday from rates. Now it is back to reality.

Banjo String

http://www.rte.ie/news/business/2013/0319/377389-boi-richie-boucher/

Bullseye1 wrote: »

The banks got themselves in trouble and have been bailed out not the home owner. Not a single penny from the Troika has been paid to bail out the home owner.

So how exactly have they contributed to our deficit or bailout? Why are they being singled out? The majority of mortgage holders are continuing to pay off their mortgage. The fact that the banks were stupid enough to offer those 110% mortgages and the fact that the majority of the mortgages are on loss making tracker mortgages. They have been bailed out not the people.

And even after they got bailed out, which the homeowner will pay the cost of, this crap still happens.

Bank of Ireland CEO Richie Boucher received a total package of pay and benefits of €843,000 last year.

The bank's annual report says he had a salary of €690,000, pension contributions of €186,000 and benefits-in-kind, such as a car allowance, of €34,000.

This brought his total package to €910,000; however, Mr Boucher opted to waive €67,000.

The annual report states that the voluntary waiver has been extended until 31 December this year.

The bank's chairman Archie Kane is paid €394,000 for his role.

The company's annual report adds: "In addition he has a consultancy arrangement with Bank of Ireland (UK) plc in respect of which he receives an annual fee of €59,000.

"He also receives an accommodation, utilities and car allowance of €37,000 per annum."The bank's group chief financial officer Andrew Keating has an annual salary of €390,000.

The govt received bailout funds, that they in turn passed on to banks.

But you lads think it's homeowners fault?

Bullseye1

So how are they any more responsible for the trouble we are in? You have suggested the homeonwner is responsible and not the renter? Yet without the renter there would be no buy to let market? So how are they any more responsible for the countries collapse?

The banks are responsible for the collapse, the governments reliance on stamp duty is responsible for the countries collapse and running a huge deficit with the loss of 300,000 jobs has resulted in the Troikas entry. You also blamed the property market bubble for your leaving Ireland. I'd like an explaination how myself and others buying a house has resulted in people having to emigrate.

MadsL

Bullseye1 wrote: »

So how are they any more responsible for the trouble we are in? You have suggested the homeonwner is responsible and not the renter? Yet without the renter there would be no buy to let market? So how are they any more responsible for the countries collapse?

Do you really think that Ireland had a mature buy-to-let market? Even in this thread we have seen people facing up the fact that they ought to register as landlords.

As to a buy-to-let market, the boom created an artificial one - buying apartments to let to immigrants coming to build apartments to let to immigrants.

Normal renters were in no way part of that madness.

The banks are responsible for the collapse, the governments reliance on stamp duty is responsible for the countries collapse and running a huge deficit with the loss of 300,000 jobs has resulted in the Troikas entry.[/QUOTE]

Who fed the Govt their Stamp Duty? Certainly not renters.

You also blamed the property market bubble for your leaving Ireland. I'd like an explaination how myself and others buying a house has resulted in people having to emigrate.

Really not that hard to understand the events of the past few years, did you never hear of a Folie à deux? the relationship between the willingness of people to pay overinflated prices and a Government hell-bent on staying popular meant that the round and round she goes nature of the boom spiralied out of control.

If you put all of that on the banks, god love ya.

flutered

i was speaking with one of these farmer blokes today, he is in long fills constituncy, i asked him will he pay the household charge, he said that he had it paid already, i asked his why so early, he claimed that unless he paid the household charge he would not recieve the single farm payment, he also claimed that it had already being put to farmers.