Property Tax (MOD REMINDER: Don't get too personal)

cageyeuclid

Phoebas wrote: »

Way to change the goalposts!
You didn't say anything about disposable income in your original post.

It is really loosing touch with reality to suggest that a €5 p/w cut for home owning pensioners is cruel in the current environment or to suggest that the Revenue officials involved in collecting this tax (mostly lower paid CPSU members) are 'well heeled'.

I was making a comparison between the attitude of comparitively (with OAP)well heeled pro government posters and the reality for OAPs, LPT is a VERY UNJUST TAX. ... BTW the €50 DI is dependent on warm weather.

As regards the CRUEL LPT aspect, (pls read post again) I applied it to Soc Wel recipients, for whose plight you seem to have lost touch with reality, or more likely never knew the reality for this group, that LPT is a CRUEL TAX.

I had replied to the post from Maryanne84 which shows that she is out of touch with reality to not recognise the magnitude of LPT for OAP (with her "Mansion Post" frivolous retort), a reality which will rise to an effective 20% (or more) cut before the next GE according to the depressing rises in LPT payments almost predicted by posts in here.

OAPs remember how the old LG rates went up and up, and fear a return to the same position where extortionate house rates in Dublin were so bad they could not be (and weren't) democratically levied.
Such induced LPT fear is cruel.

There are tears in my eyes when I realise that a lot of posters in here seem to not realise how The LPT is CRUEL and UNJUST to so many, and with the same posters at times more sensitive than this cruel coalition govt.. I despair of any justice.

Phoebas, is the LPT unjust or not???? ... please let me know you opinion ... you know mine.

cageyeuclid

Am Chile wrote: »

.... the union in revenue the cpsu is affiliated with the campaign against the property tax ....

Dear Phoebas,
I apologise as I didn't realise the above.
Of course the low paid will suffer from LPT disproportionately.
This further shows the LPT is unjust.

I really mean't to refer to those (from whom an effort was made to extract 4% a La Croke Park II) who are not CPSU, as the well heeled (with comparison to OAP and Soc Wel). I of course respect that a 4% cut would hurt those too. I think that the CPSU (low paid) were not to be levied (correct me if I have got it wrong).
Even the well heeled may have huge mortgages and in a negative equity trap and no provision re ability to pay is made for this in the LPT.

Lazy unjust governance should be opposed (and remembered).

darkhorse

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They can't add 15 per cent every year.

Are you sure they cant?

K-9

cageyeuclid wrote: »

I was making a comparison between the attitude of comparitively (with OAP)well heeled pro government posters and the reality for OAPs, LPT is a VERY UNJUST TAX. ... BTW the €50 DI is dependent on warm weather.

Mod: Cut out this this type of posting please. You have no way of knowing if they are well heeled.

There is far too much subjective and pejorative slurring and sniping on this thread. Either discuss the topic and post or do not bother posting. Experienced posters from previous property tax threads should be very well aware of this.

Phoebas

cageyeuclid wrote: »

There are tears in my eyes when I realise that a lot of posters in here seem to not realise how The LPT is CRUEL and UNJUST to so many, and with the same posters at times more sensitive than this cruel coalition govt.. I despair of any justice.

Phoebas, is the LPT unjust or not???? ... please let me know you opinion ... you know mine.

Its pretty clear that I don't think its unjust. Its pretty modest really, and the deferrals will protect the worst off (your OAPs and most social welfare recipients will qualify for deferrals).
Personally I'd have preferred a site value tax and there were other variations of a property tax that were mentioned that I could have lived with, but overall I think its fair enough.
I would have also liked to see more harsh penalties for evaders, but I predict their numbers will be low.

Phoebas

darkhorse wrote: »

Are you sure they cant?

They can only vary it in relation to the national central rate (0.18pct). I can't quite remember if the central rate is in the legislation or can be changed by ministerial order, but its clear that, as it stands, they can't add 15pct upon 15pct.

From 1 January 2015 local authorities will
have discretion to vary the LPT
rates by +/- 15% of the national central
rate.

The ability of local authorities to vary the rate is one of the positive aspects of the LPT, as it gives local councillors more accountability for local government finances. I'd like to see this 15pct amended in the future and we'll begin to see which councils are being we'll run and which are not.

Banjo String

Love it.

Especially loved the bit in bold.

Others have things like ‘I have no more to give’ and ‘Do your best’.

I see they're talking about introducing legislation to forcibly cut ps workers salaries too o on the assumption cpa2 gets rejected again.

The union that represents the workers in revenue won't like that one bit. They may go on a go slow/refuse to implement some things for the govt forcibly taking cash from their pockets.

The whole things going Pear shaped guys.

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

Its pretty clear that I don't think its unjust. Its pretty modest really, and the deferrals will protect the worst off (your OAPs and most social welfare recipients will qualify for deferrals).
Personally I'd have preferred a site value tax and there were other variations of a property tax that were mentioned that I could have lived with, but overall I think its fair enough.
I would have also liked to see more harsh penalties for evaders, but I predict their numbers will be low.

how will deferrals protect the worse off? by the usurious adding of interest to the tax? so that someone who already cant afford this tax gets hammered on the double for being poor?

that sounds unjust to me, maybe your definition is different!

then again, the fact that you want harsher penalties for evaders, many of whom are hiding solely because they cant afford to give any more probably shows most clearly your definition of just.

barrackali

SamHall wrote: »

Love it.

Especially loved the bit in bold.



I see they're talking about introducing legislation to forcibly cut ps workers salaries too o on the assumption cpa2 gets rejected again.

The union that represents the workers in revenue won't like that one bit. They may go on a go slow/refuse to implement some things for the govt forcibly taking cash from their pockets.

The whole things going Pear shaped guys.

You are living in la la land with tinky winky and dipsy (sry spent 2 much time watching tellytubbies with the kid lol) if you think that is even likely to happen. There is no going back on property tax, much like the water taxes which are coming soon.

Banjo String

barrackali wrote: »

You are living in la la land with tinky winky and dipsy (sry spent 2 much time watching tellytubbies with the kid lol) if you think that is even likely to happen. There is no going back on property tax, much like the water taxes which are coming soon.

Seeing as the unions have already repeatedly threatened industrial action, it might be you that needs to leave tubby-land, and get back to reality Ali.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/breakingnews/ireland/public-servants-union-cpsu-threatens-industrial-action-586336.html

The Civil Public and Services Union, which represents lower-ranked public servants has threatened industrial action if measures in the €1bn state pay deal are enforced.

The CPSU, one of a number of bodies to pull out of crunch talks on the new pay agreement, claimed that their members have nothing more to give.

The union representing lower paid civil servants has voted unanimously to ballot for industrial action if the Government imposes any cuts in pay and conditions. The Civil Public and Services Union rejected the Croke Park II proposals last week. At its annual conference in Galway, 350 delegates passed an emergency motion calling for a ballot for industrial action up to and including full strike action if the Government moves to introduce pay cuts or changes in terms and conditions through legislation or any form of other unilateral action. The motion also opposes any attempt to "tweak" what it called the failed LRC proposals. It also calls for further campaigning for higher taxes for the wealthy. CPSU General Secretary Eoin Ronayne warned that the battle was only starting and that if the cuts are implemented, they will not be the last.

http://www.politicalworld.org/showthread.php?14228-CPSU-Votes-for-Industrial-Action-Against-Cuts!-Campaigns-for-Raised-Taxes-for-the-Rich

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

how will deferrals protect the worse off? by the usurious adding of interest to the tax? so that someone who already cant afford this tax gets hammered on the double for being poor?

that sounds unjust to me, maybe your definition is different!

It protects the worse off by deferring the tax until they can afford it. Some level of interest was required otherwise they would be no incentive at all for people below the deferral limits, who could afford it, to elect to pay it.

bgrizzley wrote: »

then again, the fact that you want harsher penalties for evaders, many of whom are hiding solely because they cant afford to give any more probably shows most clearly your definition of just.

Its a pretty common definition of justice to want to sanction law breakers.
What would you do to them?

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

It protects the worse off by deferring the tax until they can afford it. Some level of interest was required otherwise they would be no incentive at all for people below the deferral limits, who could afford it, to elect to pay it.

thats fair enough but what if you can never afford it?

Its a pretty common definition of justice to want to sanction law breakers.

since when have law and justice been the same thing?

What would you do to them?

i wouldnt be adding to the debt of someone with their back to the wall anyway, especially if i was the State and had a duty of care to the vulnerable.
You cant get blood from a stone and you cant charge interest on blood that isnt there.

Hijpo

bgrizzley wrote: »

thats fair enough but what if you can never afford it?
.

Thats the scenario the government and the economists on boards seem to over look constantly. The cost of these taxes can and will only go in one direction and thats up, while peoples gross incomes stay the same meaning there disposable income decreases.

bgrizzley

Hijpo wrote: »

Thats the scenario the government and the economists on boards seem to over look constantly. The cost of these taxes can and will only go in one direction and thats up, while peoples gross incomes stay the same meaning there disposable income decreases.

i have to laugh every time i see the "+/- 15%" figure quoted the last couple of days. As if that "-" will ever see the light of day.

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

thats fair enough but what if you can never afford it?

Then they never pay it - it just gets taken on transfer of their estate.

bgrizzley wrote: »

i wouldnt be adding to the debt of someone with their back to the wall anyway, especially if i was the State and had a duty of care to the vulnerable.
You cant get blood from a stone and you cant charge interest on blood that isnt there.

I didn't ask you what you wouldn't do - I asked what you would do.

Le_Dieux

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yes, but I can't see what will stop candidates from running on a platform of what they'll do the following year though.

Come on Vlad, You SERIOUSLY think anyone will buy their lies again? I can tell You this: I live in an Estate that is a GE in EVERYTHING but recognition by BFP. We are doing things ourselves to see if we can get recognition ( am not prepared to say what we are doing right now, suffice to say it IS legal:-)). This is the same Cllr who told us last year ( when they were invited to our AGM to try to justify then why we were not on the GE list, and told us to pay the €100 and it WOULD be reviewed next year - 2013). The lies we have been fed is mindboggling here.Also, I dare the FG cllr to come knocking on the doors in our Estate next year when he/she is looking for votes to be re-elected.

Hasn't a snowball's chance in hell as far as we are concerned.

Le_Dieux

darkhorse wrote: »

Are you sure they cant?

I too would be sceptical of this DH. But saying that, am not sure...perhaps Vlad can enlighten us?

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

Then they never pay it - it just gets taken on transfer of their estate.

what if their beneficiary cant afford to pay it? or transfer it because they cant afford it?

I didn't ask you what you wouldn't do - I asked what you would do.

I would change the legislation so that the already hard pressed aren't automatically criminalised because they cant afford this ill concieved tax. then i would apologise to them for all the glib remarks such as get rid of your Sky Sports, new cars and holidays.

cageyeuclid

Phoebas;84546693]It protects the worse off by deferring the tax until they can afford it.

Please explain when will an OAP be better able to afford defered LPT ... are they going to get younger???

How will those on a permanent disability allowance (DA) be able to better afford defered LPT ... do you think they will all get better???

How is it just to defer LPT to special needs offspring on a permanent DA???#

Do you think it is just to collect defered LPT from those just getting back to work after the debt build up of long time Soc Wel?

LPT is both UNJUST and CRUEL

cageyeuclid

Phoebas wrote: »

Its pretty clear that I don't think its unjust. Its pretty modest really .......

LOL .... Exactly my point .... modest for those in a good job. [I am not allowed to say "well heeled".]

But make no mistake LPT would go up and up (political greed) and be far from modest if allowed to stand ... but it won't.

LPT is UNJUST, UNFAIR and CRUEL to many.

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

what if their beneficiary cant afford to pay it? or transfer it because they cant afford it?

If the outstanding tax is more than the value of the property then there wouldn't be anything left to transfer, so that doesn't apply.

Zubeneschamali

cageyeuclid wrote: »

But make no mistake LPT would go up and up (political greed) and be far from modest if allowed to stand

Never fear! Fianna Fáil are ready and waiting to destroy our tax system and wreck our economy again!

They just have to wait until FG and Labour clean up after the last time they did that, just as they had to back when FF did away with Domestic Rates after the 77 election, wasn't it?

Am Chile

I see from facebook in waterford some anti property tax protesters occupied a fine gaeler office when sean kelly came along.

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=627448253950347&set=vb.327428877285621&type=2&theater

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?v=627450090616830&set=vb.327428877285621&type=2&theater

Good loser

I read there the other day that the average household net wealth in Ireland is over €100,000. The average person should be well able to afford this modest tax. Many houses have more than one income coming in.

Was helping a LA tenant last week to get her LPT waiver. The good lady smokes 30 fags a day, drinks to excess and drives her own car.

If the citizens in every country in Europe can afford this tax we can.
Was in southern India last year - one house paid €200 per annum and another €400 per annum.

darkhorse

Phoebas wrote: »

Its pretty clear that I don't think its unjust. Its pretty modest really, and the deferrals will protect the worst off (your OAPs and most social welfare recipients will qualify for deferrals).
Personally I'd have preferred a site value tax and there were other variations of a property tax that were mentioned that I could have lived with, but overall I think its fair enough.
I would have also liked to see more harsh penalties for evaders, but I predict their numbers will be low.

Just on your remark inside the brackets, one can only assume that, a) you are not in this country, or b) you do not like older people. Just an observation.

darkhorse

Le_Dieux wrote: »

Come on Vlad, You SERIOUSLY think anyone will buy their lies again? I can tell You this: I live in an Estate that is a GE in EVERYTHING but recognition by BFP. We are doing things ourselves to see if we can get recognition ( am not prepared to say what we are doing right now, suffice to say it IS legal:-)). This is the same Cllr who told us last year ( when they were invited to our AGM to try to justify then why we were not on the GE list, and told us to pay the €100 and it WOULD be reviewed next year - 2013). The lies we have been fed is mindboggling here.Also, I dare the FG cllr to come knocking on the doors in our Estate next year when he/she is looking for votes to be re-elected.

Hasn't a snowball's chance in hell as far as we are concerned.

He/She will probably just move to Meath.:D:D:D

cageyeuclid

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Never fear! Fianna Fáil are ready and waiting to destroy our tax system and wreck our economy again!?

FG austerity has done even more wrecking piled on top of what FF did, and FG are still at it, ably assisted by Lab.

May I remind all that FF are not in charge in Dublin (CC) ... Lab and FG have had a majority for years ... but even then, the City Council Manager walks all over them (A La the bins) ... will he insist on +15% onto LPT, you betcha.

Do any of you remember how extortionate the old rates system was??? I do.
Over 12 times the average weekly wage .. ( a €6,000 local tax approx. by today's values).
That is where LPT is headed for sure, should people comply.

I will vote for whomever will remove the threat of a home tax which
this Unjust, Unfair and Cruel LPT is to many, and I will do my best for democracy to prevail, so that the removers of LPT have a legimate mandate unlike this lazy and unjust govt.

darkhorse

cageyeuclid wrote: »

FG austerity has done even more wrecking piled on top of what FF did, and FG are still at it, ably assisted by Lab.

May I remind all that FF are not in charge in Dublin (CC) ... Lab and FG have had a majority for years ... but even then, the City Council Manager walks all over them (A La the bins) ... will he insist on +15% onto LPT, you betcha.

Do any of you remember how extortionate the old rates system was??? I do.
Over 12 times the average weekly wage .. ( a €6,000 local tax approx. by today's values).
That is where LPT is headed for sure, should people comply.

I will vote for whomever will remove the threat of a home tax which
this Unjust, Unfair and Cruel LPT is to many, and I will do my best for democracy to prevail, so that the removers of LPT have a legimate mandate unlike this lazy and unjust govt.

On that note, just have a look at this clip. Scary, isn't it? Take from it what you will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8bfDOGNboE8

cageyeuclid

barrackali wrote: »

...... There is no going back on property tax, much like the water taxes which are coming soon.

How come you don't remember what happened to the old water charges??? ... and there were waivers on these for the poor.

It is very simple ... the 97% compliance quoted will not ever be reached ... and processing even 25% non compliance would take years.

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

If the outstanding tax is more than the value of the property then there wouldn't be anything left to transfer, so that doesn't apply.

you envision the state selling the house out from under someone to pay the tax?

bgrizzley

Good loser wrote: »

I read there the other day that the average household net wealth in Ireland is over €100,000. The average person should be well able to afford this modest tax. Many houses have more than one income coming in.

bgrizzley E1
Sam Hall E1
LeDieux E1
Darkhorse E1
Phoebas E1
Vladamir E1
Goodloser E699,994


Average E100,000

Was helping a LA tenant last week to get her LPT waiver. The good lady smokes 30 fags a day, drinks to excess and drives her own car.

and you want me to pay this tax for her?

If the citizens in every country in Europe can afford this tax we can.
Was in southern India last year - one house paid €200 per annum and another €400 per annum.

Wow its a stretch comparing Ireland to India
can you show me an example of the house please?

since we are comparing to India here is an article Times of India saying that 10% of taxed houses in Nagpur pay less than E3 PA. (its the first one i found and roughly same population as Dublin)

http://articles.timesofindia.indiatimes.com/2013-04-17/nagpur/38614621_1_crore-rs-properties

What do the bottom 10% of properties in Dublin pay?

Le_Dieux

darkhorse wrote: »

On that note, just have a look at this clip. Scary, isn't it? Take from it what you will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8bfDOGNboE8[/QUOTE]

FRIGHTENING stuff DH, eh?

Le_Dieux

Good loser wrote: »

I read there the other day that the average household net wealth in Ireland is over €100,000. The average person should be well able to afford this modest tax. Many houses have more than one income coming in.

Was helping a LA tenant last week to get her LPT waiver. The good lady smokes 30 fags a day, drinks to excess and drives her own car.

If the citizens in every country in Europe can afford this tax we can.
Was in southern India last year - one house paid €200 per annum and another €400 per annum.

What's modest about a tax that ALREADY is earmarked for a 15% hike in 1.5 years? ( Yes, it's said they can go up OR down, but LBH here, what is going to drive this extortionate tax to drop by 15%? )? ALL this news release of the 15% hike has done is drive me more into NOT paying this tax.

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

you envision the state selling the house out from under someone to pay the tax?

No. The Revenue will take it on transfer after death.

Phoebas

Le_Dieux wrote: »

What's modest about a tax that ALREADY is earmarked for a 15% hike in 1.5 years? ( Yes, it's said they can go up OR down, but LBH here, what is going to drive this extortionate tax to drop by 15%? )? ALL this news release of the 15% hike has done is drive me more into NOT paying this tax.

There have been a good few posters who say they will vote for parties who will cut the tax by 100% so I can't see what so far fetched about parties offering to cut it by 15%

Banjo String

Good loser wrote: »

I read there the other day that the average household net wealth in Ireland is over €100,000. The average person should be well able to afford this modest tax. Many houses have more than one income coming in.

Let the average household with a 'net wealth of €100k' pay it so. Do the rest of us get a waiver though?

You wouldn't happen to have a source for where you read it btw?

Good loser wrote: »

Was helping a LA tenant last week to get her LPT waiver. The good lady smokes 30 fags a day, drinks to excess and drives her own car.

Why does a tenant need a waiver though? The local authority are liable for the lpt, not the tenant.

Good loser wrote: »

If the citizens in every country in Europe can afford this tax we can.
Was in southern India last year - one house paid €200 per annum and another €400 per annum.

Lol tbh.

flutered

darkhorse wrote: »

On that note, just have a look at this clip. Scary, isn't it? Take from it what you will.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=8bfDOGNboE8

have not the goverment doing the same to the poor here in ireland, who got hit first, the disabled and their carers, who got hit the second time the disables, i am talking about the 2012 budget, who got hit after them, the poor, who are being softened up already for the next budget?, the recipents of childrens allowance, who will this hit the hardest?, the poor, as they need it to pay bills by kids necissetys, who will it not really effect, the people who put it in the banke ect for hollidays their kids 3rd level education, one does not need to leave ireland to see this war, also what is happening is the middle class are disappearing, they are being forced in to the poor camp, like the fairy tale once upon a time, they had a steady job, income, they had a reasonablely heavy morgage, this they could manage, now they have no job, with a large morgage, no matter who they try it cannot be repayed, whatever chancee they had is disappearing under more and more new taxes, with more new taxes on the horizon they are now really f----d.

flutered

Phoebas wrote: »

No. The Revenue will take it on transfer after death.

still the same, a guy/girl gets a morgage, has to retire early, works away at the morgage, cannot due to lack of income pay the hc, the gov then takes it on their demeise, so now wey have a new one, i bust my ass all my life to pay for the family home, when i die the goverment sells it, tell you what, in my case i have told the family to give it a slap of a hymac, because i am fooked if them over fed over paid and over mistake ridden shower will get whatever its worth to continue their ways.

Hijpo

Good loser wrote: »

I read there the other day that the average household net wealth in Ireland is over €100,000. The average person should be well able to afford this modest tax. Many houses have more than one income coming in.

Was helping a LA tenant last week to get her LPT waiver. The good lady smokes 30 fags a day, drinks to excess and drives her own car.

If the citizens in every country in Europe can afford this tax we can.
Was in southern India last year - one house paid €200 per annum and another €400 per annum.

Thats priceless, OVER €100,000?
myself and my partner work 74 hours a week between us and bring in around €46,000 per annum combined
Id love to know what jobs the average person has.

Le_Dieux

Hijpo wrote: »

Thats priceless, OVER €100,000?
myself and my partner work 74 hours a week between us and bring in around €46,000 per annum combined
Id love to know what jobs the average person has.

Just to prove just how far amiss from reality these GS's are in FG....

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/former-taoiseach-urges-public-to-tighten-their-belts-in-attack-on-president-29258292.html

And this from the eejit who was leader over the last FG government who tried to put VAT on school shoes, and ended up out of office for 26 years or so.

Will they EVER learn? Guess they don't have to as the damn system we have in this Godforesaken country allowed Bruton to still get a damn pension of €140K/annum

What a effing mess of a country!

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

No. The Revenue will take it on transfer after death.

Only if there is cash to raid in the estate.Maybe they have an argument then for the executor. But how would there be cash if the person couldnt afford it in the first place? If its just the house and a beneficiary that cant afford/wont pay the tax?
No way of getting it off a dead man unless they change the legislation to sell it to discharge debt, (which IMHO will come in time, if this tax is allowed to flourish.) And no way to chase the beneficiary for it because the legislation doesnt allow ownership to be passed with out paying it.
they didnt really think this through did they?:rolleyes:

flutered

bgrizzley wrote: »

Only if there is cash to raid in the estate.Maybe they have an argument then for the executor. But how would there be cash if the person couldnt afford it in the first place? If its just the house and a beneficiary that cant afford/wont pay the tax?
No way of getting it off a dead man unless they change the legislation to sell it to discharge debt, (which IMHO will come in time, if this tax is allowed to flourish.) And no way to chase the beneficiary for it because the legislation doesnt allow ownership to be passed with out paying it.
they didnt really think this through did they?:rolleyes:

or perhaps a relative to get the house by word of mouth, this happened a lot in the old days, as the owner could not afford a solicitor, or even did not thrust any, the banks were not thrusted as can be seen by the way money was hidden and passed on, i know of a case where the occupier is the third occupier in a row without a will or deeds, the last one to be the regestered owner died in the very early 40s, how can the hc be collected from the present occupier, saying all that one or two of kennys advisers is imported from the states, so it is fair to assume that their way of collecting tax will become prelevent.

Phoebas

bgrizzley wrote: »

Only if there is cash to raid in the estate.Maybe they have an argument then for the executor. But how would there be cash if the person couldnt afford it in the first place? If its just the house and a beneficiary that cant afford/wont pay the tax?

There will be no beneficiary if the house value is less than the outstanding tax bill.
The property will be sold, the Revenue will get the cash, the 'beneficiary' will get nothing, and presumably the Revenue will write off any outstanding amount (unless there happens to be anything else left in the estate).
I don't understand what you think isn't thought through - it seems pretty straightforward to me.

Phoebas

Le_Dieux wrote: »

And this from the eejit who was leader over the last FG government who tried to put VAT on school shoes, and ended up out of office for 26 years or so.

This is getting very off topic, but after that FG/LAB government fell in 1982 over the VAT on children's shoes, the next government (FF) only lasted 279 days and FG and LAB were back in power after that, with John Bruton back in a ministerial position.

Phoebas

flutered wrote: »

or perhaps a relative to get the house by word of mouth, this happened a lot in the old days

Seems like an extreme solution to take to evade tax ... but not as extreme as getting someone to demolish your house after your death as was suggested by someone else earlier.

bgrizzley

Phoebas wrote: »

There will be no beneficiary if the house value is less than the outstanding tax bill.
The property will be sold, the Revenue will get the cash, the 'beneficiary' will get nothing, and presumably the Revenue will write off any outstanding amount (unless there happens to be anything else left in the estate).
I don't understand what you think isn't thought through - it seems pretty straightforward to me.

C'mon bud, its been fly by the seat of their pants since April the 1st last year. But if i have what you are saying, our fine government are going to sell homes out from under dead people if they get away with it, they'll be takin' the brass off the coffins next.:rolleyes:

As Flutered said, save yourself the price of a solicitor and just live in it.

darkhorse

Phoebas wrote: »

No. The Revenue will take it on transfer after death.

And this sits alright with you?

darkhorse

bgrizzley wrote: »

bgrizzley E1
Sam Hall E1
LeDieux E1
Darkhorse E1
Phoebas E1
Vladamir E1
Goodloser E699,994


Average E100,000
[/QUOTE]

Somehow, I don't think the pro-LPT people, including government TDs, get this.

cageyeuclid

Phoebas wrote: »

There have been a good few posters who say they will vote for parties who will cut the tax by 100% so I can't see what so far fetched about parties offering to cut it by 15%

Cut by 100% ... no way ... abolish Unfair, Unjust and Cruel LPT if it ever gets going .. and that seems more and more unlikely.

BTW you never answered my post ... so I ask you again

Please explain when will an OAP be better able to afford defered LPT ... are they going to get younger???

How will those on a permanent disability allowance (DA) be able to better afford defered LPT ... do you think they will all get better???

How is it just to defer LPT to special needs offspring on a permanent DA???

Do you think it is just to collect defered LPT from those just getting back to work after the debt build up of long time Soc Wel?

cageyeuclid

Phoebas wrote: »

No. The Revenue will take it on transfer after death.

So this lazy FG and Lab(rat) govt are setting in motion a process where they can appropriate the houses of the poor, ... RESIST .. RESIST.

So according to Phoebas LPT is quite just (and we all must pay), even if this lazy govt raises LPT to €200,000 a year and eventually using this (JUST) LPT grab the house Phoebas lives in, and he wouldn't think it cruel.
Now that would be poetic justice .... LOL

If you think that is farfatched, remember Car Tax (licence) was only IR£ 5 and it is now (for some) nearly 150 times that.

LPT is Unjust, Unfair and Cruel