20% personal tax for SARP executives - "fair"?

CartHorse

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

High flyers place a much greater burden on infrastructrue - they wouldn't be here without the motoways, fibre, airports, a pool of cheap educated workers, functioning security services and judicial system, etc. - all of which were paid for by the Irish people. They also use infrastructure and services such as airports and motorways a lot more.

You have a peculiar freeloader attitude about you.

Anyway, you can argue the benefits of nobility in Irish society to me till the cows come home. Once a politician starts explaining, he's losing. Politicians explaining your rationale to Irish passport holders who are eligible to vote in this country is not a vote-winning strategy.

Now if you want to argue about the benefits of living in low tax economy that rewards individuals for their work and enterprise - a society where individuals are responsible (not "the state") for their own bad decisions, then knock yourself out. At the moment, all the bills of Big Government with Big Ideas are weighted heavily on the people and transient global corporations, with no loyalty to Ireland, and who can leave at the drop of the hat, avail of huge discounts.

Perma-student Boyd Barrett is wetting himself at the prospects of a bumper GE2016.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

conorh91

CartHorse wrote: »

Now, regarding Noonan in 2013... You file your 2012 tax return by October 2013. Therefore, the "most recent figures" would be from 2011. Like you said, new SARP commenced in 2012.

No.

Michael Noonan's figures refer to "new" SARP.

"New" SARP commenced in early 2012.

The figures he produced were deduced from specific SARP returns. They have nothing to do with self-employed/ company director tax returns.

Also, "new" SARP is not dramatically different from the "old" SARP, and the changes that arose from Budget 2012 would not justify an increase from eleven executives per year (on average) rising to your claim of "thousands" of executives per year.

That is not a runner. No matter what the "little birds" are telling you.

So, you're talking about an absolutely tiny minority of individuals, all of whom are associated with generating increased employment, which is the reason this programme exists.

Your posts demonstrate a dogged unwillingness to recognize the benefits of an increase in PAYE employment, contrasted against your gross overestimation of the numbers taking up SARP.

You can't have it both ways. It would be fantastic if there were thousands of new SARP-eligible employers arriving into Ireland, because the employment they would bring would make a huge dent in out unemployment statistics.

Unfortunately for the Irish economy, and for your thread, the evidence indicates that your figures are completely wrong.

CartHorse

conorh91 wrote: »

No.

Michael Noonan's figures refer to "new" SARP.

"New" SARP commenced in early 2012.

The figures he produced were deduced from specific SARP returns. They have nothing to do with self-employed/ company director tax returns.

Also, "new" SARP is not dramatically different from the "old" SARP, and the changes that arose from Budget 2012 would not justify an increase from eleven executives per year (on average) rising to your claim of "thousands" of executives per year.

That is not a runner. No matter what the "little birds" are telling you.

So, you're talking about an absolutely tiny minority of individuals, all of whom are associated with generating increased employment, which is the reason this programme exists.

Your posts demonstrate a dogged unwillingness to recognize the benefits of an increase in PAYE employment, contrasted against your gross overestimation of the numbers taking up SARP.

You can't have it both ways. It would be fantastic if there were thousands of new SARP-eligible employers arriving into Ireland, because the employment they would bring would make a huge dent in out unemployment statistics.

Unfortunately for the Irish economy, and for your thread, the evidence indicates that your figures are completely wrong.

The point of this discussion is "fairness".

You can argue the benefits of "executive talent" and try explaining that to the electrician down in the pub till the cows come home.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.

CartHorse

Permabear wrote: »

This post had been deleted.

Said "talented executives" would pressurise the Irish government to issue visas to a load of Indian electricians thereby putting him out of a job. Tis a global economy we're in after all...

conorh91

CartHorse wrote: »

The point of this discussion is "fairness".

You can argue the benefits of "executive talent" and try explaining that to the electrician down in the pub till the cows come home.

It's absolutely pointless trying to win a debate on "fairness" with you.

I'm disputing the "thousands" of individuals whom you claim avail of SARP, for which there is zero evidence. We have evidence of six.

Permabear

This post has been deleted.