revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

ezra_pound

Bullseye1 wrote: »

If a family is interested in a property they know to be occupied by an elderly woman why not employ an agent to approach the woman with an offer to buy. The last thing we need is more government interference.

You seem to have me confused with someone else. No idea what your on about with 50 year stamp duty.

OK Mr. Right wing libertarian. Fair enough. Government should stay out of banking the economy and private individuals lives... Waita minute, didn't that get us onto this mess! Doh


... Yes I did mix you up with someone else. Apologies.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

But some homeowners were to blame as we have already discussed.

Yes, and here is your discussion........

MadsL wrote: »

Bruthal wrote: »

Ok, I will simplify as much as I can. Is a person here who bought a home for their family, to blame for your woes?

If they overbought, borrowed again and then defaulted probably.
If they got greedy and borrowed for a overseas apt in Bulgaria, Budapest and the like, probably.
If they flipped houses, probably.
If they got a buy-to-let despite never having been the rental market before, probably.

I dont see people who just bought a family home in there. So no progress has been made to my question.

So these are your options
1. Raise income tax alone (bad for economy, bad for low wages)
2. Tax only homeowners (but..but...)
3. Tax a subset of homeowners (the ones to blame, who are they?)
4. Tax other things.

So, what are your choices. If 4, what do you tax?

Option 5, leave, as I am not to blame, seems to be missing from your list.

So sell your house and don't have that liability. All the taxes mentioned above are voluntary except income tax.

You believe you should not have to pay for the problems caused by others. So why should I?

Bullseye1

ezra_pound wrote: »

OK Mr. Right wing libertarian. Fair enough. Government should stay out of banking the economy and private individuals lives... Waita minute, didn't that get us onto this mess! Doh


... Yes I did mix you up with someone else. Apologies.

What's with this right wing insults? You seem fond of throwing insults around. What is wrong with wanting less government interference? Do you want someone to hold your hand throughout your life?

What has my post got to do with unregulation of the banking sector?

darkhorse

MadsL wrote: »

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?

It reads like you are saying that everyone that owns a family home in Ireland overborrowed. Is that what you are saying?

Bruthal

darkhorse wrote: »

It reads like you are saying that everyone that owns a family home in Ireland overborrowed. Is that what you are saying?

Here is what I see he is saying.

1. I never bought a house, so I am not to blame, and should not have to pay more taxes.

2. People who bought homes, are to blame. But only some of them.

3. If you are a home owner, who had no blame, too bad, you are lumped in with property buyers who were to blame. And because you bought a home, and are not to blame, you still deserve to be blamed, because you did something that others who are to blame also did.

4. I,m not to blame, and that`s all that matters to me.

Bullseye1

4. Being M to T.

darkhorse

MadsL wrote: »

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

At last the bleedin penny drops. When I complete a weeks work, Income tax is deducted from my weekly wage, are ya with me so far. When the government look for a property tax from me, because I choose to buy a home for my family, instead of putting them to the bother of trying to house us, where do you imagine the money for to pay for the property tax comes from, thats right, you guessed it, from the same wages that I had already paid my income tax from. Is this not double taxation.

MadsL

Bullseye1 wrote: »

If a family is interested in a property they know to be occupied by an elderly woman why not employ an agent to approach the woman with an offer to buy. The last thing we need is more government interference.

Totally missed the point.

Bruthal wrote: »

Yes, and here is your discussion........


I dont see people who just bought a family home in there. So no progress has been made to my question.

I've addressed that, I have asked how the Govt seperates out that subset? Care to answer?

Option 5, leave, as I am not to blame, seems to be missing from your list.

I'm not the only one, you should be grateful I did not do as a friend of mine did, bought, borrowed heavily to gut the place, made a 2 bed a one bed, and then emigrated and bunged the keys back through the letter box. €450k easily.

You believe you should not have to pay for the problems caused by others. So why should I?

Oh look, your agument has brought you to the point where you agree with this man...

Mr B. Lenihan wrote:

We all partied

MadsL

darkhorse wrote: »

At last the bleedin penny drops. When I complete a weeks work, Income tax is deducted from my weekly wage, are ya with me so far. When the government look for a property tax from me, because I choose to buy a home for my family, instead of putting them to the bother of trying to house us, where do you imagine the money for to pay for the property tax comes from, thats right, you guessed it, from the same wages that I had already paid my income tax from. Is this not double taxation.

No. You have a choice not to pay property taxes.
A discretionary tax does not form part of a double taxation definition.
EDIT" Tell me. do you consider VAT or excise duty to be "double taxation" as you have already paid income tax?

darkhorse

MadsL wrote: »

Paying two taxes on a item is NOT double taxation.

What an idiotic statement.

darkhorse

ezra_pound wrote: »

Its about delivering a tax which is economically sensible.

For who?

MadsL

darkhorse wrote: »

What an idiotic statement.

It is how economics defines it. Look it up.

You pay motor tax and sales tax on a car - that is NOT double taxation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_taxation

Bullseye1

MadsL wrote: »

Totally missed the point.

:pac::rolleyes: You seem misplaced.

Yet you failed to quote my post about poor planning. You really are a bitter person blaming everyone but yourself. Yet you have friends who have defrauded the tax payer of this country with to keys through the letter box.

There is only so much whining and self indulgent bitterness this person can take. consider yourself ignored. Don't bother responding to my posts in the future.

MadsL

Bullseye1 wrote: »

:pac::rolleyes: You seem misplaced.

Wut? That makes no sense.

Bullseye1

I'm outta here. Life is too short for this.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

I've addressed that, I have asked how the Govt seperates out that subset? Care to answer?

Yea, a person who bought 1 house as a home seems a good start, especially as you seem to fail to be able to blame them yourself, but are also having severe difficulty saying they are not to blame, yet you mention your house over there as a utility, not an investment, as a way to show it cant contribute to any economic problems as a result.

But as I said countless times to the posters who come up with bizarre reasons for this tax, the reality is, it is a simple easy cash target. Nothing to do with blame. The blame thing is purely your own method to absolve yourself, and justify some sort of anger toward others for your position.

Another poster said property tax was a tax on the money saved by not renting. Others that it is a wealth tax. All BS. It is simply a cash cow, and the government waste no time analysing what is actually being taxed. To them, it is just an easy cash flow target.

I'm not the only one, you should be grateful I did not do as a friend of mine did, bought, borrowed heavily to gut the place, made a 2 bed a one bed, and then emigrated and bunged the keys back through the letter box. €450k easily.

When he comes in here telling us we are all to blame, then we can discuss that with him.

Oh look, your agument has brought you to the point where you agree with this man...

Again, confirmation that you believe you are in some rare elite blame free club.

darkhorse

MadsL wrote: »

Sorry meant to post this URL https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/ which is still down (internet savvy Ben let his domain lapse)

Cached here http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9uHKCyUNJuAJ:https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Similar freeman voodoo.

It certainly is voodoo alright.

MadsL

Bruthal wrote: »

Yea, a person who bought 1 house as a home seems a good start, especially as you seem to fail to be able to blame them yourself, but are also having severe difficulty saying they are not to blame, yet you mention your house over there as a utility, not an investment, as a way to show it cant contribute to any economic problems as a result.

So a property tax that raises very little - where does the rest come from?
A house is a utility, not believing that was the major problem in the boom.

But as I said countless times to the posters who come up with bizarre reasons for this tax, the reality is, it is a simple easy cash target. Nothing to do with blame. The blame thing is purely your own method to absolve yourself, and justify some sort of anger toward others for your position.

Well, just to note that you have directed your ire directly at me whereas I am trying to explain why I believe a property tax to be just.

Another poster said property tax was a tax on the money saved by not renting. Others that it is a wealth tax. All BS. It is simply a cash cow, and the government waste no time analysing what is actually being taxed. To them, it is just an easy cash flow target.

Where else should they get the needed cash?

When he comes in here telling us we are all to blame, then we can discuss that with him.

She. Be thankful I didn't leave you with a 450k additional mess.

Again, confirmation that you believe you are in some rare elite blame free club.

So you do agree with Lenihan that everyone is to blame, how interesting.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

So a property tax that raises very little - where does the rest come from?
A house is a utility, not believing that was the major problem in the boom.


Well, just to note that you have directed your ire directly at me whereas I am trying to explain why I believe a property tax to be just.


Where else should they get the needed cash?



She. Be thankful I didn't leave you with a 450k additional mess.

O right, so its changing from blame, to taxing property for revenue reasons now?

And here was me thinking you didnt want to pay extra taxes here because it was not your fault the economy crashed.

So you do agree with Lenihan that everyone is to blame, how interesting.

You clearly think only you are blame free. Bitterness is clouding your thought process there with twisting posts.

How many times have I asked you now, if a person who bought a home for their family, is to blame? Now if I ask that, I hardly agree with your silly claim there. You simply cant answer that simple question. Clearly you are a very bitter individual, with that bitterness aimed at a wide and very general group.

K-9

Posts are getting way too noisy yet again, far too much personal attack rather than substance.

MadsL

darkhorse wrote: »

It reads like you are saying that everyone that owns a family home in Ireland overborrowed. Is that what you are saying?

Some did. Do you dispute that fact?

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Edited text

Yet you failed to quote my post about poor planning. You really are a bitter person blaming everyone but yourself. Yet you have friends who have defrauded the tax payer of this country with to keys through the letter box.

I'm responsible for the actions of my friends, wow, that's new. I haven't seen her since she ditched. Interesting that you feel I should take some responsibility, yet when I suggest that homeowners should bear collective responsibility you object vigorously.

There is only so much whining and self indulgent bitterness this person can take.

How ironic on a whining about taxes thread.

MadsL

Bruthal wrote: »

How many times have I asked you now, if a person who bought a home for their family, is to blame? Now if I ask that, I hardly agree with your silly claim there. You simply cant answer that simple question.

If you want everyone to be taxed then clearly you feel there is no blame, ie: "We all partied". Let me ask you this, if you could get exactly what you paid for your house, in your hand tomorrow, plus a % for legal fees, and your stamp duty back, and move into a rented accomodation. Would you be singing so loudly for renters to pay the tax?

Fact is that property taxes are broadly targeting those who can afford them and are removing the difficulty of putting a tax burden on those with lesser assets. As I have indicated, and been roundly abused for, I believe that there is some natural justice in that, and unfortunately some who did not "party" will be subjected to that tax. I am yet to hear a practical suggestion as to how to tax the partygoersvs the non-partygoers.

As I indicated above, if the person who bought a family home (and is still working) is not able to afford the LPT then clearly they over-borrowed as €30 a month increase in expenses should have been in the family budget and stress test. I don't not believe unemployed families should be liable for LPT.

Clearly you are a very bitter individual, with that bitterness aimed at a wide and very general group.

Perhaps when you are forced to emigrate you'll appreciate the experience, however many, many of that wide and very general group were cheerleaders of that property boom.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

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.

Again, once it excludes you from blame.

If there was no rental demand, there would not have been much buy-to-let property demand. So you did actually contribute in some way.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

Perhaps when you are forced to emigrate you'll appreciate the experience, however many, many of that wide and very general group were cheerleaders of that property boom.

I wont be forced to emigrate probably, but who can say for sure?. But due simply to being very careful during this party time you keep mentioning, I get by now. I was often accused of being too careful during it.

But once I bought a modest house, I deserve to be lumped in with speculators, is`t that it madsl? The fact I did nothing to do with over borrowing etc, doesnt matter to you. I deserve it for daring to have something in common with a property speculator.

Come on, admit it, you have a raging bitterness, and it simply has anyone who bought a house, within its scope. You bought a house there. If it went mad there and a property boom happens, you know full well you would be singing on about how you bought without over borrowing, and again, others would be to blame.

Banjo String

ezra_pound wrote: »

Property price 2007 100e
Sd paid 2007 @6% 6e


Property price 2013 (half 2007 price) 50e
Lpt. @ 1.8% 0.9e


Divide sd paid 2007 by one years lpt

6/0.9 = 6.6

I'm lost by what you're trying to say here tbh.

We bought a house in 07
Paid almost 22k in stamp duty.

Now, the proposed property tax on our house is €405 per year.

22, 000 ÷ 405 = 54.32

What's your 6.6 years in reference to?

Bruthal

SamHall wrote: »

I'm lost by what you're trying to say here tbh.

We bought a house in 07
Paid almost 22k in stamp duty.

Now, the proposed property tax on our house is €405 per year.

22, 000 ÷ 405 = 54.32

What's your 6.6 years in reference to?

He has it wrong I think, by a decimal place. He said today`s 50e at 0.18% = 0.9

That is incorrect. 0.18% of 50 is 0.09, not 0.9.

50 x 0.0018 (0.18%) = 0.09, so it was 66 years he should have got, not 6.6

Banjo String

ezra_pound wrote: »

That would be 6.6 years of lpt assuming that your property has depreciated by 50%. 50 years of Lpt my h#le!

Find a better reason to break the law.

Bruthal wrote: »

He has it wrong I think, by a decimal place. He said today`s 50e at 0.18% = 0.9

That is incorrect. 0.18% of 50 is 0.09, not 0.9.

50 x 0.0018 (0.18%) = 0.09, so it was 66 years he should have got, not 6.6

66 years is a better reason to' break the law. 'Than 50?

Bruthal

SamHall wrote: »

66 years is a better reason to' break the law. 'Than 50?

His calculation method was sound. Just the misplaced decimal backed his claim of stamp duty being only a small number of years worth of property tax.

No doubt it will be dismissed now, along with anything else which removes any blame (according to him) from you, as a home owner, and therefor deserving of justice for his misfortune.

ezra_pound

SamHall wrote: »

66 years is a better reason to' break the law. 'Than 50?

Fair enough. I made a stupid error. It is hard to believe that your sd was 66.6 times the lpr. Wow.

Banjo String

ezra_pound wrote: »

Fair enough. I made a stupid error. It is hard to believe that your sd was 66.6 times the lpr. Wow.

Mistakes happen.

Can you see how some in my position are peeved about this now?

MadsL

SamHall wrote: »

Mistakes happen.

Can you see how some in my position are peeved about this now?

How can you be justifiably peeved by paying a voluntary tax?
And still waiting on the Ben Gilroy questions I asked, did you go to a meeting?

Banjo String

MadsL wrote: »

How can you be justifiably peeved by paying a voluntary tax?

You seem to be a bit peeved about leaving your daughter in Ireland, though your emigration decision was a voluntary one.

MadsL wrote: »

And still waiting on the Ben Gilroy questions I asked, did you go to a meeting?

No. Why would I go to a meeting? Was i obliged to go?

dxhound2005

darkhorse wrote: »

At last the bleedin penny drops. When I complete a weeks work, Income tax is deducted from my weekly wage, are ya with me so far. When the government look for a property tax from me, because I choose to buy a home for my family, instead of putting them to the bother of trying to house us, where do you imagine the money for to pay for the property tax comes from, thats right, you guessed it, from the same wages that I had already paid my income tax from. Is this not double taxation.

No, Double Taxation is a term used in international agreements where taxpayers are liable for taxes in more than one administration.

What you are describing could be called Dual Funding. An example is England where private property owners pay an average £1200 Property Tax based on the value of their houses. They also pay for water and sewerage facilities through direct payments a few hundred a year typically. These monies provide part of the funding for local government to give services to the householders and the community generally.

But there is no way that these levels of taxes could pay for everything locally, they only cover about 25%. So central government grants have to make up most of the shortfall. And central government gets its money from Income Tax Vat etc. Millions of the people paying Property Tax are also paying Income Tax so they are paying it from earned taxed income. But they don't call it Double Taxation in England or anywhere else in the world with similar systems.

Banjo String

dxhound2005 wrote: »

No, Doubsparklyions a term used in international agreements where taxpayers are liable for taxes in more than one administration.

What you are describing could be called Dual Funding. An example is England where private property owners pay an average £1200 Property Tax based on the value of their houses. They also pay for water and sewerage facilities through direct payments a few hundred a year typically. These monies provide part of the funding for local government to give services to the householders and the community generally.

But there is no way that these levels of taxes could pay for everything locally, they only cover about 25%. So central government grants have to make up most of the shortfall. And central government gets its money from Income Tax Vat etc. Millions of the people paying Property Tax are also paying Income Tax so they are paying it from earned taxed income. But they don't call it Double Taxation in England or anywhere else in the world with similar systems.

What you're describing then, is treble taxation for us by your logic.

The folk in England are not paying a third time for services, they have free education and health care.

And as we're already funding a central fund via income tax motor tax etc, their system isn't different from ours except they get a lot more for their buck than us.

This has been covered loads of times already though.

Bruthal

MadsL wrote: »

How can you be justifiably peeved by paying a voluntary tax?

You volunteered to leave, and are peeved.

Death and Taxes

Letter from revenue arrived yesterday, filled it in and returned it today.
Cant see what the big deal is myself, its a tax, pay it.

MonkeyTennis

it seems to have scared away the scare mongers

dxhound2005

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Letter from revenue arrived yesterday, filled it in and returned it today.
Cant see what the big deal is myself, its a tax, pay it.

Got my letter yesterday as well. It has a version of my name which is on record with the Revenue Commissioners not the one I used to pay the HHC. So people saying that the HHC was only to create a property tax database would be wrong in my case.

mikom

dxhound2005 wrote: »

So people saying that the HHC was only to create a property tax database would be wrong in my case.

You're special.

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

Sorry meant to post this URL https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/ which is still down (internet savvy Ben let his domain lapse)

Cached here http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:9uHKCyUNJuAJ:https://peopleforeconomicjustice.com/+&cd=1&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=us

Similar freeman voodoo.

Here's another case of voodoo -


Enda Kenny: “Any tax on a persons home is immoral, unjust and unfair”

tayto lover

ezra_pound wrote: »

It is her decision. It just incentivises her to make it. There is currently not enough family accommodation in Dublin. What's your solution to providing such accommodation to families?

NAMA NAMA NAMA NAMA NAMA NAMA

tayto lover

MadsL wrote: »

But some homeowners were to blame as we have already discussed.

So these are your options
1. Raise income tax alone (bad for economy, bad for low wages)
2. Tax only homeowners (but..but...)
3. Tax a subset of homeowners (the ones to blame, who are they?)
4. Tax other things.

So, what are your choices. If 4, what do you tax?



So sell your house and don't have that liability. All the taxes mentioned above are voluntary except income tax.

COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE :pac:
Would there be a market for all our houses? Who would provide the alternative accomodation for all of us?

tayto lover

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Letter from revenue arrived yesterday, filled it in and returned it today.
Cant see what the big deal is myself, its a tax, pay it.

A lot of "wagon circling" going on now. The Cavalry have arrived.

newbie2013

Havent recieved any letter yet but when i do its going in the bin

drdeadlift

WileyCoyote wrote: »

Letter from revenue arrived yesterday, filled it in and returned it today.
Cant see what the big deal is myself, its a tax, pay it.

Suppose you brought your teacher an apple too right ?

MadsL

SamHall wrote: »

You seem to be a bit peeved about leaving your daughter in Ireland, though your emigration decision was a voluntary one.

Do enlighten me how you feel you were forced to buy a house. This should be good.

No. Why would I go to a meeting? Was i obliged to go?

As you are doing a bit of advertising and cheering for the guy I thought you might have gone along.

Bruthal wrote: »

You volunteered to leave, and are peeved.

Nothing voluntary about leaving after applying for 500 jobs, including applications throughout Europe and even Kazakhstan.

tayto lover wrote: »

COMPLETE AND UTTER NONSENSE :pac:
Would there be a market for all our houses? Who would provide the alternative accomodation for all of us?

The option is in front of you all the same.

MadsL

newbie2013 wrote: »

Havent recieved any letter yet but when i do its going in the bin

Let us know how that works for you.

Phoebas

newbie2013 wrote: »

Havent recieved any letter yet but when i do its going in the bin

Isn't that just the equivalent of accepting the Revenue estimate, with the added hassle of being in the Revenue's sights?

revenue.ie wrote:

Where a property owner fails to submit their LPT return by the relevant due date
Revenue’s Estimate of LPT liability will be collected using normal
collection/enforcement options – deduction at source, sheriff, court action,
attachment orders.

tayto lover

Phoebas wrote: »

Isn't that just the equivalent of accepting the Revenue estimate, with the added hassle of being in the Revenue's sights?

When should we expect the letters?

Phoebas

tayto lover wrote: »

When should we expect the letters?

They've already started posting them out according to some people on this thread.
I haven't had mine yet.