TV License attacks again...

markpb

mathepac wrote: »

I'm still waiting to see where on the Revenue site this alleged "lower rate of tax" is detailed.

Apart from being deliberately obtuse, it's hardly relevant, is it?

Red Nissan

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Sigh. Without even reading the article, they were not jailed for not paying their TV licence. They were jailed because they failed or refused to pay the fine, akin to contempt of court.

That's the way it's done, the majority if people jailed over the TV license do so because for whatever reason they fail to pay the court fine.

srsly78

mathepac wrote: »

I am not asking about special reliefs or exemptions or even additional tax credits, all or any of which can vary from job to job or indeed from one person's personal circumstances vs another's.

This is the relevant portion of the original post:

I'm still waiting to see where on the Revenue site this alleged "lower rate of tax" is detailed.

Our systems works via tax reliefs, not via different income tax rates. If you get more tax relief then you effectively pay a lower rate.

For PRSI there are however different rates, a big fat zero for over 65s.

No Pants

paikea wrote: »

And the reason you don't put people on their situation or age in prison is simply for respect. Respect that one day you will want for yourself. So better start working on it now or you won't get it when is your turn.

You're dead right. Can you please tell me the age threshold for when the law can be ignored? I'm 38 now and I'd like to start planning for my outlaw future.

Maura74

If the couple worked all their lives then they would have paid prsi if that is equivalent to N.I in UK they are do not have to pay it when pass retirement age.
If the couple worked all their lives then they would not have paid prsi if that is equivalent to N.I in UK. In UK they do not have to to pay that either when pass retirement age. Tax is payable just like everyone else if go over the personal allowance.

Most elderly people would like to work as they got pride and were not brought up to sponge on benefits. There was not benefit when I was young in Ireland also eldery people would welcome the opportunity to work in charity shops as this would keep them in contact with what is going on in the world and that is good. Also it is a purpose for them to get up in the morning time and give them a bit of independence. I am sure in prison they will be entertainment there for them ie TV and opportunities to take part in activities as I think it is mandatory for prisoners to exercise that is really good.
But we do not know the health of the couple they could have mental problems or other age related medical conditions. It happens to all of us and especially older people when they have passed retirement age and doing manual work, but of course it will not affect the very rich as they will be cushioned against poverty.

skafish

paikea wrote: »

And the reason you don't put people on their situation or age in prison is simply for respect. Respect that one day you will want for yourself. So better start working on it now or you won't get it when is your turn.

Just like the respect they showed to the law of the land and the courts they were jailed for being in contempt of?

Galwayguy35

zenno wrote: »

Don't be a childish begrudger. These people more than likely contributed to paying taxes all of their working lives and are entitled to grow old and relax in peace without that sh!te.

Some of the comments on this thread make me want to puke. The situation all in regards to a bloody rte tv license. Politically correct wasters.

So?

All of us here will have also paid taxes as well during our working life and when we retire in the next 20-30 years will still have to pay our bills.

Nobody likes doing it but if something has to be paid then it must be done.

mathepac

markpb wrote: »

Apart from being deliberately obtuse, it's hardly relevant, is it?

So it seems it's acceptable to make wildly inaccurate statements about taxing older citizens income, challenging posters to substantiate these inaccuracies is now "being deliberately obtuse". Following on from that logical leap all inaccurate post must now remain unchallenged.

srsly78 wrote: »

... If you get more tax relief then you effectively pay a lower rate....

No you don't. You pay at one of the standard rates on a different proportion of your income. So there is no such thing as a different tax rate for older people as the original post alleges.

srsly78 wrote: »

... For PRSI there are however different rates, a big fat zero for over 65s.

I didn't ask as PRSI is not tax.

AlmightyCushion

mathepac wrote: »

So it seems it's acceptable to make wildly inaccurate statements about taxing older citizens income, challenging posters to substantiate these inaccuracies is now "being deliberately obtuse". Following on from that logical leap all inaccurate post must now remain unchallenged.
No you don't. You pay at one of the standard rates on a different proportion of your income. So there is no such thing as a different tax rate for older people as the original post alleges.

The marginal tax rates are the same but the effective tax rate will be different. Given that the guy who originally posted it specifically mentions OAP tax credits and their PRSI rate, it's pretty obvious that he is talking about the effective rate.

As said above, it looks like you are being deliberately obtuse.

Agonist

Putting taxes to one side, if this couple is between 66 and 70 they are eligible for a free TV license unless they fail to satisfy a means test. So they are either younger than that or well able to spare a couple of Euro a week.

http://m.cinfo.ie/en/social_welfare/social_welfare_payments/extra_social_welfare_benefits/household_benefits_package.html

Maura74

Obviously the law is different in Ireland to the UK.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xfHRhXW1hno

Godge

mathepac wrote: »

So it seems it's acceptable to make wildly inaccurate statements about taxing older citizens income, challenging posters to substantiate these inaccuracies is now "being deliberately obtuse". Following on from that logical leap all inaccurate post must now remain unchallenged.
No you don't. You pay at one of the standard rates on a different proportion of your income. So there is no such thing as a different tax rate for older people as the original post alleges.
I didn't ask as PRSI is not tax.

What tax credits do is lower the average/effective rate of tax on your income.

To show you mathematically:

Assume: Tax rate 20%. Two people on an income of €50,000.

Person A: Tax credit of €5,000. The tax they pay is €10,000 - €5,000 tax credit giving them a tax bill of €5,000 giving them an average/effective tax rate of 10%.

Person B: No tax credit. The tax they pay is €10,000 with no deduction leaving them with an average/effective tax rate of 20%.

So the following statement is therefore true:

For any level of income, the availability of the over-65 tax credit means that the average/effective tax rate paid by a person aged over 65 is lower than the average/effective tax rate paid by a person aged under 65 (all other circumstances being equal).

That is really just a long-handed way of saying over-65s pay have a lower tax rate than under-65s. I guess that the original poster assumed a certain level of knowledge about how the taxation system works.

markpb

Godge wrote: »

I guess that the original poster assumed a certain level of knowledge about how the taxation system works.

Or perhaps a lower level of pedantry?