Is the collector general causing regional apartheid?

realitykeeper

Company and Employee taxes in this country are paid to the collector general for distribution by central government.

However, when the government spends and distributes this tax revenue, certain counties feel like they are paying more than their fair share. I know this is a particular bone of contention in Dublin for example.

To resolve this problem, would it be better if all taxes were collected and spent locally. If this were done, even on a trial basis, it would highlight which counties really do genuinely require subvention and which county has been creaming it all this years. The longer the trial, the more accurate the results because it can take years for the infrastructure in a region to really benefit or deteriorate following the change in revenue available for such projects.

To prevent the results of such a trial from being subverted, perhaps it would be worth broadening the scope of it to include revenue paid to all state companies, and this could be done by channeling all locally collected taxes and utility bills through a local authority and these funds would only be released to pay for locally incurred costs.

Would this idea work? Would it prevent certain parts of the country having to subsidize others? Would it end regional apartheid?

Phoebas

realitykeeper wrote: »

Company tax in this country is paid to the collector general for distribution by central government.

However, when the government spends and distributes this tax revenue, certain counties feel like they are paying more than their fair share. I know this is a particular bone of contention in Dublin for example.

To resolve this problem, would it be better if all taxes were collected and spent locally. If this were done, even for a trial period, it would highlight which counties really do genuinely require subvention and which county has been creaming it all this years.

To prevent the results of such a trial from being subverted, perhaps it would be worth broadening the scope of it to include revenue paid to all state companies, and this could be done by channeling all locally collected taxes and utility bills through a local authority and these funds would only be released to pay for locally incurred costs.

Would this idea work? Would it prevent certain parts of the country having to subsidize others? Would it end regional apartheid?

Great idea. But why do it at county level? Why not do it at individual level - that way we could get rid of the overhead of the Revenue Commissioners altogether.

realitykeeper

Phoebas wrote: »

Great idea. But why do it at county level? Why not do it at individual level - that way we could get rid of the overhead of the Revenue Commissioners altogether.

I deduce you think doing it at a county level is too localized. I don`t think it is too local. A broader alternative would be to try it at a provincial level.

Phoebas

realitykeeper wrote: »

I deduce you think doing it at a county level is too localized. I don`t think it is too local. A broader alternative would be to try it at a provincial level.

A broader alternative again is national level. Given that we are a nation state, that does seem to be the better way to base our fiscal system.

By the way, county level is very localised in Leitrim but not nearly as localised in Dublin.

realitykeeper

Phoebas wrote: »

A broader alternative again is national level. Given that we are a nation state, that does seem to be the better way to base our fiscal system.

By the way, county level is very localised in Leitrim but not nearly as localised in Dublin.

That is not fair on Dublin. In any case, an equal playing field would be for every county to take exclusive control for its revenue collection and expenditure. No doubt the Dubs will be all in favour of that since it is contributing so much to the rest of the country.

mikemac1

Wicklow can start charging the councils in Dublin for the Liffey water

Nice little earner for Wicklow

Phoebas

realitykeeper wrote: »

That is not fair on Dublin. In any case, an equal playing field would be for every county to take exclusive control for its revenue collection and expenditure. No doubt the Dubs will be all in favour of that since it is contributing so much to the rest of the country.

How is any more an equal playing field if the Dubs in the leafy suburbs have to pay for other Dubs in the deprived areas?

ninty9er

Had national policy decisions differed from the 1950s onwards Dublin may not have been the economic engine of the country, however as the administrative core would still have been heavily populated.

Dublin's ability to generate tax has come come national policy decisions, therefore Dublin's tax is the nation's tax.

realitykeeper

ninty9er wrote: »

Dublin's ability to generate tax has come come national policy decisions, therefore Dublin's tax is the nation's tax.

Are you saying that Dublin cannot support itself without getting tax income from the rest of the country? I thought Dublin was a net contributor to the rest of the country.

realitykeeper

Phoebas wrote: »

How is any more an equal playing field if the Dubs in the leafy suburbs have to pay for other Dubs in the deprived areas?

That is an internal matter. It is also not unique to Dublin.

Phoebas

realitykeeper wrote: »

Are you saying that Dublin cannot support itself without getting tax income from the rest of the country? I thought Dublin was a net contributor to the rest of the country.

No. I think he's saying that Dublin is an engine because national policy made Dublin an engine. So Dublin shouldn't just ditch the carriages it's pulling.

realitykeeper wrote: »

That is an internal matter. It is also not unique to Dublin.

As are the disparities between, say, Dublin and Leitrim an internal matter. For Ireland.

ardmacha

Phoebas wrote: »

How is any more an equal playing field if the Dubs in the leafy suburbs have to pay for other Dubs in the deprived areas?

Indeed. Many people in the Dublin leafy suburbs would be happy enough to see some subsidy go to remote areas where people are hard working, but hindered by geography, rather than "disadvantaged" districts of Dublin where few work despite being within 15 minutes walk of job vacancies.

Rightwing

This would backfire badly.

Other counties would then demand the right to compete with Dublin & reduce corporation tax for their county. The country is all about corporation tax.

andrew

realitykeeper wrote: »

However, when the government spends and distributes this tax revenue, certain counties feel like they are paying more than their fair share. I know this is a particular bone of contention in Dublin for example.

I've never heard anyone in Dublin mention this, or say that they cared, or complained. Is this actually a thing people do?

Rightwing

andrew wrote: »

I've never heard anyone in Dublin mention this, or say that they cared, or complained. Is this actually a thing people do?

I have read it a few times on this website (not that much can be gleaned from that).

jackofalltrades

ninty9er wrote: »

Had national policy decisions differed from the 1950s onwards Dublin may not have been the economic engine of the country, however as the administrative core would still have been heavily populated.

Dublin's ability to generate tax has come come national policy decisions, therefore Dublin's tax is the nation's tax.

Has Dublin received preferential treatment over the rest of the country?

I think national policy decisions have hindered Dublin as much as they've helped it.
Dublin's ability to generate tax comes mainly from the sustainable fashion in which people live there. (Higher population living in higher densities)

andrew wrote: »

I've never heard anyone in Dublin mention this, or say that they cared, or complained. Is this actually a thing people do?

There seems to be a misconception in this country that rural Ireland subsidies urban Ireland.
It's come up on debates in this forum a couple of times.
So I don't think enough people know how much Dublin subsidies the rest of the country for people to be annoyed about it.
That and there seems to be some kind of shame about having pride in capital city.

The_Captain

andrew wrote: »

I've never heard anyone in Dublin mention this, or say that they cared, or complained. Is this actually a thing people do?

I've heard it a fair bit with regards to the LPT.

Dublin property prices are higher so we pay more tax her head, there's more of us so Dublin City Council collect significantly more tax money than other counties. The money that's supposed to be used to pay for our local services is then sent off to Mayo to pay for the services of people in Enda's constituency can pay significantly less.

Personally I find it galling that someone in Dublin earning say €25,000 a year and living in negative equity could pay a higher LPT than someone in Castlebar earning €50,000 a year with no mortgage.

If would be a completely different story if there was a stable workable property market where a house could realistically be considered an asset, but at the moment it's not.

keane2097

Can someone explain the connection to apartheid?

Rightwing

keane2097 wrote: »

Can someone explain the connection to apartheid?

Must be that Dublin are the blacks of Ireland (to quote Doyle)

realitykeeper

jackofalltrades wrote: »

I think national policy decisions have hindered Dublin as much as they've helped it.


... I don't think enough people know how much Dublin subsidies the rest of the country ...

Which is why Dublin would be better off if every county kept its own revenue.

realitykeeper

Phoebas wrote: »

No. I think he's saying that Dublin is an engine because national policy made Dublin an engine.

By what means did national policy make Dublin an engine? It sounds like it must have been a massively expensive process. Where did all the money come from?

If Dublin is an engine, would it not be in Dublin`s interests to keep all that horsepower for itself and let every other county keep all locally generated revenue for local use?

The Corinthian

The urban areas of Ireland, Dublin in particular, effectively subsidize the rural ones. This should not be a surprise to anyone.

The Republic of Ireland is a very centralized country on most levels. Population is concentrated in the greater Dublin are. So is commerce and industry, and thus tax revenue. And so is political power. It's long been so and the reason why you've seen a constant migration from the countryside to the city over the decades. Some countries, like Greece, are similar to us in this regard. Others, such as Germany, Italy or, at it's most extreme, Switzerland are the opposite and you'll see far greater distribution of wealth, industry, population and political power.

In short, it wouldn't work in Ireland. Were the rural counties to become autonomous, they'd also have to stand financially on their own feet, which they would prefer not to. They would also demand greater political control, which Dublin would not like. Indeed, does anyone want to give our county Councillors real power? TD's are bad enough.

So to move towards a more federal, technically cantonal, system would require a seismic economic and demographic shift, not to mention serious political reform. And we're going to be waiting a very long time for something like that to happen.

barneystinson

The Corinthian wrote: »

The urban areas of Ireland, Dublin in particular, effectively subsidize the rural ones. This should not be a surprise to anyone.

The Republic of Ireland is a very centralized country on most levels. Population is concentrated in the greater Dublin are. So is commerce and industry, and thus tax revenue. And so is political power. It's long been so and the reason why you've seen a constant migration from the countryside to the city over the decades. Some countries, like Greece, are similar to us in this regard. Others, such as Germany, Italy or, at it's most extreme, Switzerland are the opposite and you'll see far greater distribution of wealth, industry, population and political power.

In short, it wouldn't work in Ireland. Were the rural counties to become autonomous, they'd also have to stand financially on their own feet, which they would prefer not to. They would also demand greater political control, which Dublin would not like. Indeed, does anyone want to give our county Councillors real power? TD's are bad enough.

So to move towards a more federal, technically cantonal, system would require a seismic economic and demographic shift, not to mention serious political reform. And we're going to be waiting a very long time for something like that to happen.

Hello Corinthian, have you met Realitykeeper? Minor details like your well reasoned analysis above are not going to rain on his parade...

The_Captain

The Corinthian wrote: »

The urban areas of Ireland, Dublin in particular, effectively subsidize the rural ones. This should not be a surprise to anyone.

The Republic of Ireland is a very centralized country on most levels. Population is concentrated in the greater Dublin are. So is commerce and industry, and thus tax revenue. And so is political power. It's long been so and the reason why you've seen a constant migration from the countryside to the city over the decades. Some countries, like Greece, are similar to us in this regard. Others, such as Germany, Italy or, at it's most extreme, Switzerland are the opposite and you'll see far greater distribution of wealth, industry, population and political power.

In short, it wouldn't work in Ireland. Were the rural counties to become autonomous, they'd also have to stand financially on their own feet, which they would prefer not to. They would also demand greater political control, which Dublin would not like. Indeed, does anyone want to give our county Councillors real power? TD's are bad enough.

So to move towards a more federal, technically cantonal, system would require a seismic economic and demographic shift, not to mention serious political reform. And we're going to be waiting a very long time for something like that to happen.

I agree with a lot of that, but I don't see why you think politcal power is greater in Dublin than in other parts of the country. TDs represent their constituency, so power is pretty evenly distributed in that regard across the country.
If you go by pure numbers, 38 of our 166 TDs represent Dublin constituencies, roughly 25% of TDs for roughly 25% of the population.
But due to the way our political system works, that difference is pretty much meaningless. TDs and senators are affiliated by party, not by geography.
Councillors don't have the authority to do anything because deal with local issues in their own community, based on funding and budgets allocated to them, so even if Dublin had 70,000 councillors, it wouldn't give them more political power than West Cork.

Even if we had a system where a Dublin voting bloc was possible, it would easily be outvoted by TDs representing the rest of the country as soon they looked to give Dublin an advantage over other counties.

The Corinthian

The_Captain wrote: »

I agree with a lot of that, but I don't see why you think politcal power is greater in Dublin than in other parts of the country. TDs represent their constituency, so power is pretty evenly distributed in that regard across the country.

TD's may be linked to a community or county, but the organs of government in Ireland tend not to be, they tend to be national and centralized in Dublin (except for those that got shunted off down the country a few years ago).

Where I live I have the opposite situation. Taxes are set and collected by my local Gemeinde (community) which then passes a share up to the Kanton (county) and in turn then to the Swiss Federation. The Kanton can have initiatives (referenda) and set it's own laws, Gemeinde have a huge amount of autonomy and all of them - from Gemeinde through to the Federation - have their own offices to administer all this as well as their own parliments. Finally all are responsible for their own housekeeping, including financial; while the Federal government steps in upon occasion, if my Gemeinde has a shortfall then it has to meet this by raising taxes (which is currently the case).

Local, Kantonal, through to Federal, politicians are also affiliated by party here, BTW.

None of these organs and structures, let alone checks and balances, exist in Ireland. Or were you thinking that TD's could do all this at their constituency clinics?

The_Captain

Well if these things don't exist in Ireland, how is that evidence of Dublin having more concentrated political power than the rest of the country?

We don't have a federal set up, everyone in the country has to avail of the same service from the same office, so having child benefit processed in Donegal, Dept of Transport offices in Leitrim and Motor Tax processed in Dublin is all incidental.

The Corinthian

The_Captain wrote: »

Well if these things don't exist in Ireland, how is that evidence of Dublin having more concentrated political power than the rest of the country?

We don't have a federal set up, everyone in the country has to avail of the same service from the same office, so having child benefit processed in Donegal, Dept of Transport offices in Leitrim and Motor Tax processed in Dublin is all incidental.

Do you understand what the difference between centralized and de-centralized power is?

We have power concentrated in the capital, Dublin, precisely because we do not have any kind of federal system. Child benefit may be processed in individual cases in Donegal, but the rates are decided in Dublin. Motor tax may be processed in individual cases in Leitrim, but the power to set those tax levels are in Dublin, not Leitrim.

TBH, there must be some misunderstanding here, because I don't know how anyone could claim anything other than the fact that in Ireland political power is concentrated in Dublin.

Caveat: While I say Dublin, some government ministries and other offices were moved to other parts of the country, but ultimately the decisions that matter are still largely made in Dublin.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

The_Captain wrote: »

I've heard it a fair bit with regards to the LPT.

True, although in general discourse I think people are more likely to argue the other way. You're more likely to hear people say stuff to the effect that taxes are gathered all over the country and spent in Dublin - even though that's actually the opposite of how the financial flows actually work.

The_Captain wrote: »

Well if these things don't exist in Ireland, how is that evidence of Dublin having more concentrated political power than the rest of the country?

I think that's a sound question. There's really no evidence of "urban" concerns dominating the political agenda. It's, if anything, the opposite.

I'm thinking of reviews of that book published by a recent political advisor to the Minister for Education, who says it was impossible to get the need to rationalize rural one-teacher schools on the political agenda (with a cost-benefit study on the topic being suppressed) and that attempts to include land and other farm assets in third level grant assessments was similarly ruled out of order.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

The Corinthian wrote: »

I don't know how anyone could claim anything other than the fact that in Ireland political power is concentrated in Dublin.

I think the issue is equivocation. Political power might be exercised in Dublin; that's quite different to saying that Dublin, as a region, is particularly empowered.

Which is it that you mean?

The Corinthian

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I think the issue is equivocation. Political power might be exercised in Dublin; that's quite different to saying that Dublin, as a region, is particularly empowered.

That's a fair point.

Balmed Out

realitykeeper wrote: »

Company and Employee taxes in this country are paid to the collector general for distribution by central government.

However, when the government spends and distributes this tax revenue, certain counties feel like they are paying more than their fair share. I know this is a particular bone of contention in Dublin for example.

To resolve this problem, would it be better if all taxes were collected and spent locally.

Would this idea work? Would it prevent certain parts of the country having to subsidize others? Would it end regional apartheid?

How would this work? A lot of multinationals may be based outside of Dublin for the bulk of their business but maintain offices in Dublin from where all company cars are bought, wages paid from etc etc. Any figures would be massively scewed in Dublins favour.
.......
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-mcwilliams/david-mcwilliams-multinationals-must-help-nurture-the-communities-that-give-them-so-much-29959273.html

According to the IDA in 2011, the south-west region accounted for 36.2pc, or €36.7bn, of Irish industrial output. Dublin as a region produced 18.9pc, or €19.2bn, worth of industrial gross output in 2011. Dublin as a region had the lowest proportion of Irish-owned industrial units in 2011 at 14.5pc. The south-west region, with a much, much smaller population, accounted for 15pc of Irish-owned industry.

The Cork region has the highest industrial wages in Ireland. This may come as a surprise to some but average industrial wages in the Cork region are €44,800, while the Dublin region is next highest at €44,700.
......
Were a tiny country and everything in inter dependent. Cork, Galway etc all benefit from Dublin which benefits from them in turn.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Balmed Out wrote: »

<...>
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-mcwilliams/david-mcwilliams-multinationals-must-help-nurture-the-communities-that-give-them-so-much-29959273.html
<...>

I don't enjoy McWilliams stuff normally, but I like his understated comment in that article

<...>So the multinationals are making on average €1,180,000 per employee and they are paying each employee €44,800.<...>

It's off topic to this debate, but it does bring home the extent to which much of our "economy" only makes sense when seen as a region of someone else's.

realitykeeper

Balmed Out wrote: »

How would this work? A lot of multinationals may be based outside of Dublin for the bulk of their business but maintain offices in Dublin from where all company cars are bought, wages paid from etc etc. Any figures would be massively scewed in Dublins favour.

It would work by negating the need for an office in Dublin, thereby making Ireland a cheaper place to run their operations. The multinationals would pay their taxes locally because they would be liable to pay their taxes locally (regardless of whether or not they kept an office in Dublin). Local sheriffs seize the assets of tax dodgers and the multinationals would naturally not want that to happen.

If they wanted to pay twice their tax obligation by paying a second time in Dublin then I`m sure nobody would object.

Dannyboy83

Balmed Out wrote: »

How would this work? A lot of multinationals may be based outside of Dublin for the bulk of their business but maintain offices in Dublin from where all company cars are bought, wages paid from etc etc. Any figures would be massively scewed in Dublins favour.
.......
http://www.independent.ie/opinion/columnists/david-mcwilliams/david-mcwilliams-multinationals-must-help-nurture-the-communities-that-give-them-so-much-29959273.html

According to the IDA in 2011, the south-west region accounted for 36.2pc, or €36.7bn, of Irish industrial output. Dublin as a region produced 18.9pc, or €19.2bn, worth of industrial gross output in 2011. Dublin as a region had the lowest proportion of Irish-owned industrial units in 2011 at 14.5pc. The south-west region, with a much, much smaller population, accounted for 15pc of Irish-owned industry.

The Cork region has the highest industrial wages in Ireland. This may come as a surprise to some but average industrial wages in the Cork region are €44,800, while the Dublin region is next highest at €44,700.
......
Were a tiny country and everything in inter dependent. Cork, Galway etc all benefit from Dublin which benefits from them in turn.

I'm not sure if he meant the IDA or the CSO.

Anyway, the CSO stats are here:
http://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/ciprcd/censusofindustrialproduction-localunitsregionalandcountydata2011/#.VF5yAPmsV8E

(Had to dig them up for the Cork Airport thread anyway so said I'd paste them)

Icepick

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

I don't enjoy McWilliams stuff normally, but I like his understated comment in that article It's off topic to this debate, but it does bring home the extent to which much of our "economy" only makes sense when seen as a region of someone else's.

So the multinationals are making on average €1,180,000 per employee and they are paying each employee €44,800

Disingenuous comment by McWilliams.
They don't create €1,180,000 of value.

GCU Flexible Demeanour

Icepick wrote: »

Disingenuous comment by McWilliams.
They don't create €1,180,000 of value.

Indeed, and you are right that, disingenuously, McWilliams picked his words very carefully. We all know what he's really saying.

carpejugulum

GCU Flexible Demeanour wrote: »

Indeed, and you are right that, disingenuously, McWilliams picked his words very carefully. We all know what he's really saying.

People should talk to their managers about pay rises?

GCU Flexible Demeanour

carpejugulum wrote: »

People should talk to their managers about pay rises?

Sure, if they can generate over €1.1 million of value, they should surely be telling their managers to stuff it and go out on their own.

That kind of productivity makes John Henry look like a welfare scrounger.

n97 mini

Phoebas wrote: »

How is any more an equal playing field if the Dubs in the leafy suburbs have to pay for other Dubs in the deprived areas?

Those in the leafy suburbs are subsidising rural middle classes as well as those in deprived areas. Plenty of people in good jobs with nice houses living in unsustainable rural locations, relying on subsidies from other areas to pay for services.