NPPR data mismatches (split from 'Ridiculous NPPR situation' thread)

quadrifoglio verde

maggiep2010 wrote: »

This is what I was curious about, whether revenue would have access to information from other countries…

Yes as there's double taxation treaties

subpar

Is the biggest property owner in the State i.e NAMA paying the NPPR charge and fines if appropriate on in tens of thousands of properties ??????????

quadrifoglio verde

subpar wrote: »

Is the biggest property owner in the State i.e NAMA paying the NPPR charge and fines if appropriate on in tens of thousands of properties ??????????

What's be the point if they even did?
It'd be an accounting matter, moving money from one state entity to anther. At the end of the day, the states take would be the same.

subpar

The point is that the little guy is always hit.

The only money that NAMA have has been provided by you and me and the rest of the tax payers

quadrifoglio verde

subpar wrote: »

The point is that the little guy is always hit.

The only money that NAMA have has been provided by you and me and the rest of the tax payers

And the aim of Nama was to prevent the further collapse in property prices. By them hovering up every potential fire sale asset, it restricted supply meaning that prices weren't going to collapse as much as they should have.
If there was no Nama, you'd have had significant further price falls, increased negative equity and a further fall in spending. The government never wanted property prices to fall, as too many of your "little guys" were caught up in it.

Also the other aim of Nama is to eventually return a profit to you and me the tax payer, which I can see it doing which will benefit you and me the ordinary tax payer.

It was only those who didn't own property or were buying for yield that wanted to see price falling further. The common joe soap who paid a fortune for a 1 bed shoebox in 2006 wants property prices to rise ASAP and there's a lot of them around.

The_Conductor

quadrifoglio verde wrote: »

What's be the point if they even did?
It'd be an accounting matter, moving money from one state entity to anther. At the end of the day, the states take would be the same.

NAMA do indeed pay their due taxes- and yes, it is in effect a book keeping exercise.

When one state agency procures goods or services from an other state agency (or body)- they pay for it- as they would pay for a good or service bought anywhere else. Occasionally there may be reciprochal agreements between bodies- but they are the exception rather than the norm.

The Office of Public Works- gets most of its money from Departments and agencies, other than its home agency. Government Departments have to pay for official passports from the DFA etc etc etc

quadrifoglio verde

The_Conductor wrote: »

NAMA do indeed pay their due taxes- and yes, it is in effect a book keeping exercise.

When one state agency procures goods or services from an other state agency (or body)- they pay for it- as they would pay for a good or service bought anywhere else. Occasionally there may be reciprochal agreements between bodies- but they are the exception rather than the norm.

The Office of Public Works- gets most of its money from Departments and agencies, other than its home agency. Government Departments have to pay for official passports from the DFA etc etc etc

My point was more along the lines of what's the point worrying whether Nama have to pay these kind of taxes, because it makes little if any difference to the government books at the end of the day

ebbsy

I cannot remember did I get a letter regarding this tax before it started, I d'ont believe I did. I do remember getting reminder emails every year after that as I paid.

The councils had not got a rasher what they were doing, the revenue would have had some idea regarding properties and PPS numbers.
A really bad job done there.

The interest being charged would not be out of place alongside payday lenders.

Victor

Can we stick to the topic at hand?

Moderator

Ogham

maggiep2010 wrote: »

I have just found out about this debacle today! Never heard of this tax before..

I emigrated to London in 2010, friends living in my house and paying rent (still not enough to cover mortgage).

I registered for Property tax and have been paying that since last year, now I hear about this!

I haven't received a letter about it yet, and am trying to figure out if the council know i don't live there or not.. don't want to get in touch with them to find out they didn't know i was liable.. any advice?

The fact that you registered for propertytax at your Irish address probably means that Revenue aren't aware of your "nppr" .

quadrifoglio verde

Ogham wrote: »

The fact that you registered for propertytax at your Irish address probably means that Revenue aren't aware of your "nppr" .

Yes but tax treaties between ireland and uk will flag it

filbert the fox

jack_pearse wrote: »

Next thing that will happen with all these people only paying the nppr tax now is the revenue will go and check if they have been receiving rental income on these properties for all these years and not declaring it.

And your point being?