Vote for me to go back to Catholic 1950's Ireland.... (No TARDIS involved)

Dades

The only ones who will need to fill out a tax return are the ones claiming the tax exemption. The idea that all of sudden grandparents - either minding for free or for a few quid a month - will be pursued is a nonsense.

Of course, as is apparent from this thread, it's not hard for someone like Theresa Heaney to misrepresent facts to drum up a bit of misplaced hysteria.

robindch

Dades wrote: »

The idea that all of sudden grandparents - either minding for free or for a few quid a month - will be pursued is a nonsense.

I believe that a child minder who's minding up to and including three children (not their own kids) is exempt from income tax for the first €15,000. They are required to report the income, even though it's non-taxable.

It's hard to see what Ms Heany is hyperventilating about - one assumes the heat is more important than the light.

seamus

robindch wrote: »

I believe that a child minder who's minding up to and including three children (not their own kids) is exempt from income tax for the first €15,000. They are required to report the income, even though it's non-taxable.

Yeah. So just to add some clarity on what's happening here:

Childminders minding up to 3 children in their own home are exempt from income tax on the first €15k they earn, provided that they register with the local authority as a childminder and submit an income tax return (form 11). Failure to do so will mean that you are liable for tax on the full amount if you get audited.

This is not a new or even recent rule. It was introduced in 2006 in an attempt to get people out of the black market childminding-wise. It failed. People couldn't be arsed registering with Revenue since they were unlikely to get audited anyway and many people want to stay under the radar of local authorities.

All Revenue did was issue a reminder back in March that this rule exists.

If someone earns less than €15k per year for minding a child in their own home, (unless they're a parent of that child, obviously), then all they have to do is fill out the forms and they're exempt from tax on that amount.

The form in question is a form 11. The entire form is 26 pages long. To apply for this exemption, childminders will have to enter information on five pages. Not fill out five pages, but the boxes they need to tick/fill are contained on roughly five different pages.

Form 11s are easy if you just read them. There's about 10 minutes prep involved in getting your documentation together, and another 10 minutes filling out the form.

In short, Revenue have not introduced any new rules, grandparents will not typically have to pay tax for minding their grandchildren, and nobody will have to fill out 26 pages of any forms.

As mentioned above, this is absolute hysteria over nothing being drummed up by this candidate and some others.

endacl

eviltwin wrote: »

Women like this always baffle me. Surely she is aware and appreciative of the women's movement over the past 100 years or so. She has benefited from that and yet she wants to actively work to undo some of that progress.

Indeed. Utter irony fail. She thinks women should stay at home and breed good little catlicks. Solution? From a woman?

Simple! Apply for a job. In another country.



What am I missing...?

foxy farmer

Well I know her husband does a sideline making wedding videos. I take it that she won't be letting him do same sex weddings based on her beliefs. You shouldn't bit the hand that feeds you and all that. He has 2 jobs as far as I know because she stays home. Heard she was conservative but never realised she was a complete head the ball.

Dades

foxy farmer wrote: »

Well I know her husband does a sideline making wedding videos.

I wonder is that represented on his Form 11? :pac:

shruikan2553

seamus wrote: »

Yeah. So just to add some clarity on what's happening here:

Childminders minding up to 3 children in their own home are exempt from income tax on the first €15k they earn, provided that they register with the local authority as a childminder and submit an income tax return (form 11). Failure to do so will mean that you are liable for tax on the full amount if you get audited.

This is not a new or even recent rule. It was introduced in 2006 in an attempt to get people out of the black market childminding-wise. It failed. People couldn't be arsed registering with Revenue since they were unlikely to get audited anyway and many people want to stay under the radar of local authorities.

All Revenue did was issue a reminder back in March that this rule exists.

If someone earns less than €15k per year for minding a child in their own home, (unless they're a parent of that child, obviously), then all they have to do is fill out the forms and they're exempt from tax on that amount.

The form in question is a form 11. The entire form is 26 pages long. To apply for this exemption, childminders will have to enter information on five pages. Not fill out five pages, but the boxes they need to tick/fill are contained on roughly five different pages.

Form 11s are easy if you just read them. There's about 10 minutes prep involved in getting your documentation together, and another 10 minutes filling out the form.

In short, Revenue have not introduced any new rules, grandparents will not typically have to pay tax for minding their grandchildren, and nobody will have to fill out 26 pages of any forms.

As mentioned above, this is absolute hysteria over nothing being drummed up by this candidate and some others.

20 minutes? This is the most vulnerable part of society. We should provide people to fill out these forms so that they dont hurt themselves or accidentally fill in the wrong number.

keane2097

People really don't think much of the elderly in this country.

lazygal

My dad's a pensioner and has been working on computers since the early 1970s. He gets mighty peeved with being painted as vulnerable and technologically illiterate.

What's the plural of tardis? Tardi? Or tardises?

tipptom

keane2097 wrote: »

People really don't think much of the elderly in this country.

Yep,chase the pensioners,thats what was wrong with the finances in Europe all along and the ground swell of people rising up about this problem and force the government to face up to this crises is deafening!!


What a small minded pathetic nation of people we have become if this is what we are reduced to.

lazygal

tipptom wrote: »

Yep,chase the pensioners,thats what was wrong with the finances in Europe all along and the ground swell of people rising up about this problem and force the government to face up to this crises is deafening!!


What a small minded pathetic nation of people we have become if this is what we are reduced to.

Pensioners are amongst the most protected so called "vulnerable" groups in Ireland. By the time I'm a pensioner I won't be getting half of what they currently receive. Why are you fixated on pensioners anyway? I think women who can't avail of abortion services in Ireland are pretty vulnerable.

oscarBravo

seamus wrote: »

Yeah. So just to add some clarity on what's happening here:

Childminders minding up to 3 children in their own home are exempt from income tax on the first €15k they earn, provided that they register with the local authority as a childminder and submit an income tax return (form 11). Failure to do so will mean that you are liable for tax on the full amount if you get audited.

This is not a new or even recent rule. It was introduced in 2006 in an attempt to get people out of the black market childminding-wise. It failed. People couldn't be arsed registering with Revenue since they were unlikely to get audited anyway and many people want to stay under the radar of local authorities.

All Revenue did was issue a reminder back in March that this rule exists.

If someone earns less than €15k per year for minding a child in their own home, (unless they're a parent of that child, obviously), then all they have to do is fill out the forms and they're exempt from tax on that amount.

The form in question is a form 11. The entire form is 26 pages long. To apply for this exemption, childminders will have to enter information on five pages. Not fill out five pages, but the boxes they need to tick/fill are contained on roughly five different pages.

Form 11s are easy if you just read them. There's about 10 minutes prep involved in getting your documentation together, and another 10 minutes filling out the form.

In short, Revenue have not introduced any new rules, grandparents will not typically have to pay tax for minding their grandchildren, and nobody will have to fill out 26 pages of any forms.

As mentioned above, this is absolute hysteria over nothing being drummed up by this candidate and some others.

tl;dr: GRANNY TAX!!!

oscarBravo

tipptom wrote: »

Yep,chase the pensioners,thats what was wrong with the finances in Europe all along and the ground swell of people rising up about this problem and force the government to face up to this crises is deafening!!


What a small minded pathetic nation of people we have become if this is what we are reduced to.

You're not actually reading any of the posts in this thread, are you?

ryan101

lazygal wrote: »

Pensioners are amongst the most protected so called "vulnerable" groups in Ireland. By the time I'm a pensioner I won't be getting half of what they currently receive.

If you keep short sightly attacking them you certainly won't.
Rest assured you'll probably be their age too someday.

lazygal

ryan101 wrote: »

If you keep short sightly attacking them you certainly won't.
Rest assured you'll probably be their age too someday.

Who is attacking pensioners, exactly? And rest assured when I retire it won't be at the age currently prescribed for retirement and I'll be getting far less from the state.

tipptom

oscarBravo wrote: »

You're not actually reading any of the posts in this thread, are you?

Yes I am, and just because you and your mates says its right to harass pensioners with stupid forms for doing a favour for their children, it does not mean you can harangue me in to agreeing with you,its bullying behaviour on easy targets for no gain whatsoever and its downright shameful.


We have become a sick society forced in to turning on each other.

lazygal

tipptom wrote: »

Yes I am, and just because you and your mates says its right to harass pensioners with stupid forms for doing a favour for their children, it does not mean you can harangue me in to agreeing with you,its bullying behaviour on easy targets for no gain whatsoever and its downright shameful.


We have become a sick society forced in to turning on each other.

How are pensioners being treated differently to anyone else earning money by minding children?

tipptom

lazygal wrote: »

Who is attacking pensioners, exactly? And rest assured when I retire it won't be at the age currently prescribed for retirement and I'll be getting far less from the state.

No need to be so bitter about about what you wont getting by encouraging the government to go after the current pensioners who dealt with a lot of harsher times than you have done and who are giving time of their retirement to look after their grandchildren so their kids can try to service the mortgage they have been saddled with.

lazygal

tipptom wrote: »

[/B] No need to be so bitter about about what you wont getting by encouraging the government to go after the current pensioners who dealt with a lot of harsher times than you have done and who are giving time of their retirement to look after their grandchildren so their kids can try to service the mortgage they have been saddled with.

How are pensioners being treated any differently to any other groups earning money minding children? What does their previous experience, harsh or otherwise, have to do with paying tax now?

legspin

lazygal wrote: »

What's the plural of tardis? Tardi? Or tardises?

Tardises. Or so the Doctor has said himself.

oscarBravo

tipptom wrote: »

Yes I am, and just because you and your mates says its right to harass pensioners with stupid forms for doing a favour for their children...

I'm harassed by the same stupid forms for having the temerity to own a business. I don't make any money whatsoever other than the salary the business pays me, and which I pay tax on through PAYE (and am denied a PAYE tax credit, because apparently, as an employer, I don't deserve one) but I still have to file a Form 11 every year explaining to Revenue that no, I don't owe them any money.

...it does not mean you can harangue me in to agreeing with you...

I'm not trying to harangue you. I'm pointing out another side of the argument. On, y'know, a discussion forum.

...its bullying behaviour on easy targets for no gain whatsoever and its downright shameful.

How the effing jebus is asking someone to fill out a form "bullying behaviour"? You're not making any sense.

Unless your point is that you spontaneously become exempt from the requirement to have any dealings with Revenue once you have grandchildren, I'm not actually clear what you're arguing for.

Turtwig

Totally offtopic but depending on how a form is worded and the level of details required, they are a kind of coercion. By strategically placing questions in the right places, using a long list of options and wording questions properly you can steer people towards the answers you want.

Yay science!

Hey, I said it was off topic. :P

endacl

lazygal wrote: »

What's the plural of tardis? Tardi? Or tardises?

legspin wrote: »

Tardises. Or so the Doctor has said himself.

Not tardi anyway. Unless the on board clocks are running slow.

Which could be compensated for by using a tardis, anyway. Once the timelord on board was aware of the discrepancy. Which of course brings into play the whole objective/subjective experience of time and relative dimensions in space vis a vis inside/outside the tardis.

My brain hurts.

Cabaal

tipptom wrote: »

,its bullying behaviour on easy targets for no gain whatsoever and its downright shameful.

So form filling is bullying eh?

It most be awful filling out forms to get medical cards, free travel, free energy allowance,

We must stop this harassment and instead just give things things to people that claim they meet all the requirements....even if they don't know the requirements because they are old and can't read simple lists or tick simple boxes.

You seriously seem to think that old people are thick as hell and panic at the sign of any sort of admin work, you do know most retired people previously worked for several decades right?

Also you've been proven wrong already with your knee jerk "its awful Joe" reaction, form 11 has existed for almost 10 years...its nothing new!

robindch

tipptom wrote: »

[...] just because you and your mates says its right to harass pensioners with stupid forms for doing a favour for their children [...]

If you take the time out from your busy schedule to read what people have actually written, you will find that your summary is both wrong and offensive.

Being wrong, however, isn't a problem here in A+A. But being offensive certainly is, so tone down your rhetoric or you'll be facing some kind and gentle moderating.

seamus

Cabaal wrote: »

Also you've been proven wrong already with your knee jerk "its awful Joe" reaction, form 11 has existed for almost 10 years...its nothing new!

To clarify, Form 11 has existed for a hell of a lot longer than that. It's a standard self-declaration form that everyone who earns non-PAYE income is required to use to declare that income.

Paid childminders have always (for all intents and purposes) been required to declare this extra income.
What happened in 2006 is that they could apply for an exemption on the first €15k. Filling out the form improves people's financial position.

Pherekydes

All this stuff begs a question:

If I mind my grandchild(ren) for free would their parents be required to pay benefit-in-kind? :pac:

Un Croissant

Surely older people are better able to fill out forms. Sure wasn't it all forms back in d'olden days. No computers back then.

Going Strong

Back on topic.

I got a leaflet from the Catholic Democrats yesterday. I noticed no mention of abortion on it at all. Their website's got plenty to say on the matter though.

Whoever did the text for their website sure loves bold text, Random capitals, oddball emphasis and exclamation marks!!!!!!

Mr. CooL ICE

Father Ted: Are you up to your old tricks, Tom?
Tom: No, Father. It's my money. I just didn't want to fill out the forms.

SpaceTime

I'd love to know how her policy on 'Women in the Home' fits with being a busy MEP ?

She'll love spending time in Belgium too, with its extremely liberal and progressive laws on gay rights and it's openly gay Prime Minister.

Hopefully, people will see past the clouds of rage against the major parties and actually do some analysis before protest voting for obscure parties with views like this, or at least do some analysis and pick forward-looking independents.

Pherekydes

Going Strong wrote: »

Whoever did the text for their website sure loves bold text, Random capitals, oddball emphasis and exclamation marks!!!!!!

Reminds me of one of our regulars!!!!

SpaceTime

I'd just say one thing : I know we're all rather apathetic and angry with the political system at the moment, but these kinds of candidates show why you absolutely need to vote, even if it's for the candidates you dislike the least rather than someone you actually want to to see elected.

If the turnout's very low, we end up with the most vocal voters (often people with quite extreme views) making the decision for everyone else who didn't bother to show up.

Cabaal

SpaceTime wrote: »

Hopefully, people will see past the clouds of rage against the major parties and actually do some analysis before protest voting for obscure parties with views like this, or at least do some analysis and pick forward-looking independents.

ah now, you're expecting too much out of the avg voter

Sure they protest voted against FF & Greens by voting for FG & Labour,

They didn't bother to read FG's manifesto where FG said very clearly they would be introducing water charges, so when FG did introduce water charges people cried about it :pac:

People never bother with the actual details, for any party...even members of the party in most cases, I've seen it with every party from FF to FG to SF, its pretty disturbing.
:rolleyes:

jank

Nodin wrote: »

....at the end of the day, nobody here proposes enacting laws that directly affect her. The reverse, however, is not true.

Well seeing as she is running to be an MEP of course that is true, along with everyone else running for Europe, why else run for office.... however the only two people that are being discussed in regards these elections are those with strong Christian moral values and to be honest neither of them are going to be elected. Daily updates on what 'da enemy' is doing or saying is in my opinion unhealthy and only creates divisions rather than understanding.


However, I would be all ears to hear who everyone else is going to vote for? I imagine many people will be voting for the Shiners, so can we start a thread on them and their history/justification in murdering people to further political aims? So whatever about the god squad, their hands are not wet with blood as those like Adams and McGuniness... The god squad was never involved in a group that planted bombs that killed children. Can we have the same outrage at that?

/#Can of worms opened#/

lazygal

The God squad got all huffy about the unborn, yet the rape and abuse of the born was just a minor bump they got the state to pay for. No shortage of blood, metaphorical or otherwise, from Catholic corners.

jank

lazygal wrote: »

The God squad got all huffy about the unborn, yet the rape and abuse of the born was just a minor bump they got the state to pay for. No shortage of blood, metaphorical or otherwise, from Catholic corners.

Are you equating planting a bomb in a Warrington shopping centre on a busy Saturday to being a lay person heavily involved with the RCC?

lazygal

jank wrote: »

Are you equating planting a bomb in a Warrington shopping centre on a busy Saturday to being a lay person heavily involved with the RCC?

No. Are you saying the God squad didn't facilitate the mass cover up of rape and abuse of children worldwide while also seeking to protect the unborn at all costs? Are you saying no children died in questionable circumstances in the care of religious orders?

keane2097

jank wrote: »

Are you equating planting a bomb in a Warrington shopping centre on a busy Saturday to being a lay person heavily involved with the RCC?

How have you come to the conclusion that anyone here supports atrocities carried out by the IRA from reading a thread that has essentially been about why elderly people should or shouldn't fill out tax forms?

This is just too bizarre for words.

seamus

More whataboutery, really jank? I thought you wouldn't bother with that.

Can't we be equally outraged by bomb planters and child abusers without saying that one crime is worse than the other?

Sinn Féin, to be fair to them have been doing their best to shed their terrorist past, but they won't really be able to shake it until Gerry and his contemporaries step down and are replaced with new socialists like Mary Lou. The stink of fertiliser and gunpowder still hangs around the SF old guard and thus still hangs around SF.

I'll be going with Eamonn Ryan, personally. He's always been a man of principle and despite the Greens "enabling" FF to fnck up the economy, I wouldn't pin any of the blame on them. For a party with just 6 TDs in the coalition government, they used their position as kingmakers to push through a lot of their manifesto, practically none of which was populist or self-serving in any way.

jank

lazygal wrote: »

No. Are you saying the God squad didn't facilitate the mass cover up of rape and abuse of children worldwide while also seeking to protect the unborn at all costs? Are you saying no children died in questionable circumstances in the care of religious orders?

Did I said this did not happen? I am glad you and me both agree that however unseemly the Christian right are they never planted Semtex in shopping centres to further their political aims.

I was merely drawing other political parties into this discussion and adding some realism to it. Many will go on endlessly about the RCC and their supporters yet with it comes to Sinn Fein and its past, well cognitive dissonance is the order of the day.

How have you come to the conclusion that anyone here supports atrocities carried out by the IRA from reading a thread that has essentially been about why elderly people should or shouldn't fill out tax forms?

Sinn Fein are going to be the historic winners of this election, yet not so long ago their own supporters were literally blowing people up to further their own aims. Id take a few leaflets shoved in the letter box to be used as fire lighters from the likes of Ronan Mullen's over that any day.

jank

seamus wrote: »

Can't we be equally outraged by bomb planters and child abusers without saying that one crime is worse than the other?

Absolutely, yet one would forget the former given the volume of discussion on they latter, especially given who successful Sinn Fein are going to be. Nobody from the Christian right are going to be elected. The same cannot be said about Sinn Fein...

Regarding the Greens, didn't they want to trade their support for NAMA/the bailout in exchange for anti-hunt legislation. This at a time of economic crisis circa late 2008?
Eamon Ryan is probably the best of them but who can forget Gormley going back to sleep when the banks were twisting the arm of the government for their bailout. The Greens were not ready for power and it showed. They should stick to their fringe issues.

same ol sh1te

seamus wrote: »

I'll be going with Eamonn Ryan, personally. He's always been a man of principle and despite the Greens "enabling" FF to fnck up the economy, I wouldn't pin any of the blame on them. For a party with just 6 TDs in the coalition government, they used their position as kingmakers to push through a lot of their manifesto, practically none of which was populist or self-serving in any way.

His National Broadband Scheme was a real success, delivered nobody broadband, gifted a rural network to Three that they were going to build anyway (and were actually under contractual obligation to build anyway). A fourth mobile phone network to go alongside the 3 we already had, with no stipulation put in place for future sharing of infrastructure. Will we find out about backhanders in future, it's up there with Lowry/Denis O'Brien for corruptness

Cabaal

jank wrote: »

Absolutely, yet one would forget the former given the volume of discussion on they latter, especially given who successful Sinn Fein are going to be. Nobody from the Christian right are going to be elected. The same cannot be said about Sinn Fein...

errr,
You understand what this forum is right?

Of course discussion here are going to revolve around christian related TD's as people see the dangerous when it comes to trying to move forward in society when backward religions people get into positions, if people wanted to discuss SF and the like we'd go to the politics forum.

Unsure why you keep bringing SF and the iRA here, this is not the topic behind this thread that i started so I'd like for you to make some attempt not to derail this thread please.

jank

Cabaal wrote: »

errr,
You understand what this forum is right?

Of course discussion here are going to revolve around christian related TD's as people see the dangerous when it comes to trying to move forward in society when backward religions people get into positions, if people wanted to discuss SF and the like we'd go to the politics forum.

Unsure why you keep bringing SF and the iRA here, this is not the topic behind this thread that i started so I'd like for you to make some attempt not to derail this thread please.

I think this is exactly the reason why one should discuss other things rather than perpetual 'those Christians at it again' type threads. It seems people are not actually interested in discussing actual 'politics' but rather than treating this forum like an online version of Joe Duffy and getting whatever the god squad is annoying you off your chest perhaps we could broaden the horizon a tad?

Cabaal

jank wrote: »

I think this is exactly the reason why one should discuss other things rather than perpetual 'those Christians at it again' type threads.

Thats grand,
Boards is a big place with loads of different forums, that cover loads of different topics. People should pick the most suited forum to their subject interest.

It seems people are not actually interested in discussing actual 'politics'

Yeah, thats because this isn't the politics forum in fairness,

If i wanted to discuss sf and Green policy's in detail I'd go to a different forum...the politics forum maybe?? , I don't expect to see Green policy's being discussed in this forum as these policy's have shag all to do with religion or atheism.

we could broaden the horizon a tad?

So your way of doing that is to bring up different topics in threads to derail them? Great job!

Whats next? Are you going to start dragging threads off topic by discussing the best value Toyota people should buy?

After all, people should broaden their horizons so this is ok based on your logic.
:rolleyes:

robindch

jank wrote: »

It seems people are not actually interested in discussing actual 'politics' but rather than treating this forum like an online version of Joe Duffy [...]

It's odd to see you complaining about this since that's what you're doing yourself.

/shakes head

Turtwig

Enough! For a forum that discusses kidney stone disease, cystic fibrosis, ethics of veganism, biscuits, EU treaties, Abortion, Climate Change, Taxation,Economic Theory, Biblical Exegesis, Sports, Medieval History, Feminism, Music, Education, any topic and thread is welcome -within reason.

If you want to discuss SF and the election or whatever else then start a thread on that. Don't derail a thread that is patently about one bizarre Candidate and er, 'granny taxes'.

Cabaal

Speaking of granny tax, I actually got a leaflet through the door today from this silly person, its a different type to the leaflet I found on google.

She even quotes the pope on it!



How to you oppose the "introduction" of something that's already existed for a number of years?:rolleyes:

Pherekydes

Cabaal wrote: »

Speaking of granny tax, I actually got a leaflet through the door today from this TD, its a different type to the leaflet I found on google.

Eh, she's not, nor ever will be, a TD!