I'm sick to death of being taxed to death !

RayCun

Or he could sell this enormously valuable asset to someone else if the life of a farmer is not for him.
And will society be so much worse off for it? No.

Idbatterim

You want someone to get an asset that costs over two million euro, for no work, no money, no tax - nothing of his own merits, just his luck to be born into your family.

who are you are born to is all about luck. How many parents that have a farm or other business etc, may well have been due to working their asses off, is that luck aswell?

NovemberJersey

Idbatterim wrote: »

who are you are born to is all about luck. How many parents that have a farm or other business etc, may well have been due to working their asses off, is that luck aswell?

Ya that's a good point, as a parent who do people think I work hard for, it's not like I do it for the good of society, if I had money for charity I'd have no problem giving to charity but the taxation in this country is mental at this stage

As bad as communism was I don't know was it worse than whats going on here now, i saw in Russia with my own eyes 2 men who looked about 80 years old working one Sunday morning filling a cement mixer at their best, working flat out, although that's obviously unfair on the old men it goes to show that everyone in Russia with communism had to work, there was no such thing there as one family getting maybe €1,000 a week in social welfare and living the dream

Like in communism everyone is suppose to be equal where as in this country if you work your only a complete bollox because I'm working every day of my life and I know fellas who don't work and will never work who have a way better quality of life than I do

Professor Moriarty

NovemberJersey wrote: »

I suppose your not used to counting millions of euros but it's €2,500,000 not "2500,000" as you said.

Was reading through the posts there and your name kept cropping up. I hope you don't take offence but you shouldn't be so narrow minded and hateful. Nobody can make money out of farming at the moment, have a quick look through Google and you'll see that, what are all us farmers suppose to do, are we all suppose to sell our land is it?

Also, what do you work as or am I correct in presuming you don't work? You seemed to have all day long anyway to keep posting on this thread while I was busy working.

Maybe I'm a 'doler' posting from Tenerife? There's nothing hateful in anything I've posted. You haven't been on a plane for a long time. Sell your farm, invest your money and go on that flight.

I feel sorry for blind people living on their own. I feel sorry for addicts sleeping rough. I feel sorry for families in negative equity living in a shoebox. I don't feel sorry for someone sitting on a 2500000 euros asset.

TimeToShine

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Ya that's a good point, as a parent who do people think I work hard for, it's not like I do it for the good of society, if I had money for charity I'd have no problem giving to charity but the taxation in this country is mental at this stage

As bad as communism was I don't know was it worse than whats going on here now, i saw in Russia with my own eyes 2 men who looked about 80 years old working one Sunday morning filling a cement mixer at their best, working flat out, although that's obviously unfair on the old men it goes to show that everyone in Russia with communism had to work, there was no such thing there as one family getting maybe €1,000 a week in social welfare and living the dream

Like in communism everyone is suppose to be equal where as in this country if you work your only a complete bollox because I'm working every day of my life and I know fellas who don't work and will never work who have a way better quality of life than I do

I agree with your general point but there is something horribly wrong if someone has a €2.5M asset and isn't able to afford a holiday.

My only issue is what seems to be gross mismanagement of your asset...which may in turn be leading you to believe the "dolers" have it better than they really do. You may well be exaggerating for effect in which case carry on but be under no illusion, you and your family are far, far better off than 95% of this country.

NovemberJersey

TimeToShine wrote: »

I agree with your general point but there is something horribly wrong if someone has a €2.5M asset and isn't able to afford a holiday.

My only issue is what seems to be your gross mismanagement of your asset...which may in turn be leading you to believe the "dolers" have it better than they really do. You may well be exaggerating for effect in which case carry on but be under no illusion, you and your family are far, far better off than 95% of this country.

Supply of milk all over the world is massive in comparison to the demand that's there so price has gone to ****, we're just about scraping even here but many farmers in Ireland aren't, tillage farming in this country is genuinely on its way out, it's already over for them, beef cattle in this country are a massive loss maker for farmers because the beef trade is locked in by a monopoly of a few big processors… I don't want anyone feeling sorry for me, my point just was that inheritance tax of even 20% would put all us farmers out of business, talk to any farmers, I'm not exaggerating

Blackjack

TimeToShine wrote: »

I agree with your general point but there is something horribly wrong if someone has a €2.5M asset and isn't able to afford a holiday.

My only issue is what seems to be your gross mismanagement of your asset...which may in turn be leading you to believe the "dolers" have it better than they really do. You may well be exaggerating for effect in which case carry on but be under no illusion, you and your family are far, far better off than 95% of this country.

that is quite an unfair statement as
1 - the farm is his livelihood - if he sells it, he's probably going to have some form of capital gains or other taxes. if not, what does he do then, go into something else at which he has no experience?
2 - assets in general offer various different returns. Right now, if you have 2,500,000 in cash, you are likely going to have to pay a bank to keep it or place it on deposit. Similarly if you are purchasing either German or Irish Government Bonds that pays 1%, that 2.5Million is only likely to pay you, at best, 25K a year. Before Tax. And good luck trying to get a 1% bond these days.
3 - the farm is a farm. its not a hotel, or a rental property, or an ATM, or a Roulette table. In all likelihood it has a sole designated usage or can be used for little else.

By the way, I've no involvement with farmers or farming. But to accuse someone of Gross mismanagement of an asset based simply on the fact they haven't gone on a holiday is a bit misguided.

K-9

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Also, what do you work as or am I correct in presuming you don't work? You seemed to have all day long anyway to keep posting on this thread while I was busy working.

Mod:
Boards allows posters to post anonymously, nobody is under any obligation to tell anybody their jobs or explain why they post during the day or whatever. Would make it an odd discussion site!

Everybody else, the thread is going great for the most part but less personal attacks in posts please. Also don't take things personally, when somebody outlines their thoughts they aren't having a go at your family!

K-9

TimeToShine wrote: »

I agree with your general point but there is something horribly wrong if someone has a €2.5M asset and isn't able to afford a holiday.

My only issue is what seems to be your gross mismanagement of your asset...which may in turn be leading you to believe the "dolers" have it better than they really do. You may well be exaggerating for effect in which case carry on but be under no illusion, you and your family are far, far better off than 95% of this country.

Well from the outside looking in maybe the asset is over valued? If the income from the farm is say 50k it isn't a great return on investment. I suppose it depends on how much debt is associated with the farm and other factors but on the face of it...

It's a bit like somebody living in a house worth 800k in 2006 but only earning 50k. The value of the asset doesn't have that much relation to the income earned.

Cookie_Monster

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Supply of milk all over the world is massive in comparison to the demand that's there so price has gone to ****, we're just about scraping even here but many farmers in Ireland aren't

that's rubbish and milk prices have risen dramatically this year and are the highest they've been since July 2014
https://www.globaldairytrade.info/en/product-results/whole-milk-powder/

Godge

NovemberJersey wrote: »

There's a lot of talk about inheritance tax going on here… I'm a farmer, I own 250 acres and my farm is worth €2,500,000. My son will eventually go on to get the farm tax free off me once he's under the age of 35 when I sign it over… That farm has been in my family since the 1820's, we held onto it during the famine and many a financial crash in the last couple hundred years and even the Black and Tans never tossed us out onto the road but the economists on this website here want to do exactly that, if even a 20% inheritance tax rate (or CAT if I gave it to him while I was still alive) was slapped on the farm when I handed it to my son he'd have to sell the farm to come up with the money to give to the revenue, everyone thinks farmers are multi millionaires. Sure I've got an asset worth a couple million euro but my son shouldn't have to sell it when he inherits it just so the government can send some dolers on another few sun holidays. The money isn't there in farming anymore - I just wanted to clear that up because people seem to be under the impression that if your a farmer money grows on trees for you and that then makes it okay to tax us out of business.

Inheritance tax and CGT are a sick joke… whats the first thing wealthy people do with their money? They invest it. What do people sometimes like to do with their investments when they increase in value? Sell them. I was just about able to stomach CGT at 20% but 33% is what some would call extortion. I work every day of my life and I haven't been on an aeroplane since 2008, I look around and see tonnes of these people who are living off social welfare touring the world and I often ask myself why do I even bother.

I'd say a lot of people here who want inheritance tax to be up around the 100% mark had parents who potentially through no fault of their own had nothing to pass on which is fine but a lot of them also would've had parents who spent their time sitting up on bar stools drunk while my own father was up at 5am working so he could hold onto our farm and eventually pass it onto me. The main reason I work so hard is for my children so they can gain out of it. It's only fair my children get to gain from my hard work, who do ye want to gain from it, some fella who's never worked, has about 15 children and will use his extra social welfare money to buy a 65' TV instead of the 60' TV he has already?

An asset is only worth something if it can either produce income or gain in value.

If your farm is worth €2.5m on the open market, it is because someone else sees value in it either as an income-generator or because of future capital gains.

NovemberJersey

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

that's rubbish and milk prices have risen dramatically this year and are the highest they've been since July 2014
https://www.globaldairytrade.info/en/product-results/whole-milk-powder/

I've reported you for what you said, its offensive to call what I said rubbish. I don't care what your link there says, it's generally accepted across the entire country that nobody can produce milk for less than 26c/L and in 2016 I've averaged a price of 25c/L, that 26c/L cost price doesn't factor in that the farmer needs to take a wage out of the farm to survive… in 2014 I was getting 40c/L for a good while, prices are down by 1/3 now so the profit margin is gone

holyhead

RayCun wrote: »

So what? If I pay a plumber 500 euro, he pays income tax on that, even though I paid income tax on it when I earned it.

You are getting 300k tax free that you didn't earn, and you are complaining about paying tax on the excess?

Don't see how your example is relevant. Going back my point. Let's say that the money 300k was in a savings account then its ultimately a triple taxation. Income tax, dirt tax, and finally inheritance tax.

Let's say you inherit a business on the passing of a parent. Your exposure to revenue is such that you can't personally meet it. If you, as a director take money out of the company to meet this obligation you are hit with a double whammy. You are taxed on the money you take out to meet your obligation on top of having to pay inheritance tax. Every which way you are nailed to the cross.

Success should be encouraged not penalised.

Cookie_Monster

NovemberJersey wrote: »

I've reported you for what you said, its offensive to call what I said rubbish.

how is it offensive exactly?

you said prices are crap, I simply proved they are not and have rise by nearly 1/3 this year alone.

I don't care what your link there says,

post facts, eh?

NovemberJersey

Cookie_Monster wrote: »

how is it offensive exactly?

you said prices are crap, I simply proved they are not and have rise by nearly 1/3 this year alone.

post facts, eh?

Your actually embarrassing yourself. You think that I'm getting paid 1/3 more now than I was at the start of the year? That graph doesn't represent what our co ops are paying us for our milk, it's like if the price of food increases in shops it's not like the farmer is the one getting the extra money, I wish what you were saying was right though and we were getting paid all this extra money !

Only for the "Single Farm Payment" grant of €47,000 that I get off the EU every year I'd be long gone out of business

Yourself isit

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Your actually embarrassing yourself. You think that I'm getting paid 1/3 more now than I was at the start of the year? That graph doesn't represent what our co ops are paying us for our milk, it's like if the price of food increases in shops it's not like the farmer is the one getting the extra money, I wish what you were saying was right though and we were getting paid all this extra money !

Only for the "Single Farm Payment" grant of €47,000 that I get off the EU every year I'd be long gone out of business

Yeh I was going to ask about that payment. No offence but if the state (any state) is paying you 47k a year you could possibly stop demanding cuts to other sources of benefit (which is what this is) including the child benefit - one of the few middle income benefits. Your original post was a libertarian styled rant. Cut this. Cut that. But you are a net beneficiary from the state.

Not that I am personally opposed to cap but the hypocrisy rankles.

NovemberJersey

Yourself isit wrote: »

Yeh I was going to ask about that payment. No offence but if the state (any state) is paying you 47k a year you could possibly stop demanding cuts to other sources of benefit (which is what this is) including the child benefit - one of the few middle income benefits. Your original post was a libertarian styled rant. Cut this. Cut that. But you are a net beneficiary from the state.

Not that I am personally opposed to cap but the hypocrisy rankles.

If right was right they should get rid of the grants for farmers, small farmers get a disproportionately large amount of money when you take into consideration how little food they produce in comparison to someone like me, I know it might seem unlikely but those grants are there to keep food prices low, without the grants the small farmers would be gone for good, then there would be just about the right amount food getting produced and everything would be kept in balance

A good few farmers in Kerry have Single Farm Payments as high as €250,000 a year, very many are in excess of €100,000

RedPandaDan

holyhead wrote: »

Success should be encouraged not penalised.

I don't see how inheriting a business can be considered making a success of yourself.

MeatTwoVeg

The main things I intend to bequeath to my children is a good education a moralistic outlook on life and a strong work ethic.

The idea that people think they should be able to pass on millions of euros of assets to their children tax free, is quite frankly, preposterous.

And I say this as someone far removed from the left of the political spectrum.

NovemberJersey

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

The main things I intend to bequeath to my children is a good education a moralistic outlook on life and a strong work ethic.

The idea that people think they should be able to pass on millions of euros of assets to their children tax free, is quite frankly, preposterous.

And I say this as someone far removed from the left of the political spectrum.

Well I am allowed to hand over millions of euros tax tree, if I'd 10 children, if I'd 10 farms worth €25,000,000 in total I'd be able to give them a farm each, out of that €25,000,000 of assets my children wouldn't have to pay as much as €1 in tax and that's the way it will remain.

FreudianSlippers

Inherently, the problem is that CAT only harms the middle classes.

If I have a massive inheritance, I'm not going to get taxed on it - why? because my family has had the sense and the money to estate plan and to use legal methods to evade CAT.

Poor people tend not to have any inheritance, so they want to punish those that do.

The squeezed middle continue to be the idiots here - without the assets or forethought to engage in aggressive estate planning and without the sympathy of the poor who feel that they're getting a "windfall".

The state of this country is shockingly depressing.

FreudianSlippers

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Well I am allowed to hand over millions of euros tax tree, if I'd 10 children, if I'd 10 farms worth €25,000,000 in total I'd be able to give them a farm each, out of that €25,000,000 of assets my children wouldn't have to pay as much as €1 in tax and that's the way it will remain.

It has been a while since I had to do these calculations, so I could be wrong - but IIRC the Agricultural Relief is only 90% of the estate, so they may have to pay some tax (not in your case in fairness, but in some cases.

IIRC the calculation would be as follows:

€2,500,000 * 0.1 = €250,000
Tax free threshold for your child = €310,000
So no tax due.


But say it was a bumper year at the time of your unfortunate death and you were leaving €3.5m worth of farm to your farmer child:

€3,500,0,00 * 0.1 = €350,000
Tax free threshold for your child = €310,00
So taxable estate is €40,000 * 0.33 = €13,200 tax due



However, if your child does not meet the criteria of "farmer" then it's

€3,500,000 - €310,000 = 3,190,000 * 0.33 = €1,052,700 tax due.

I see no way that your child could continue to run the farm (as a manager) on that level of tax paid to the state for zero reason.

Professor Moriarty

NovemberJersey wrote: »

Well I am allowed to hand over millions of euros tax tree, if I'd 10 children, if I'd 10 farms worth €25,000,000 in total I'd be able to give them a farm each, out of that €25,000,000 of assets my children wouldn't have to pay as much as €1 in tax and that's the way it will remain.

And you take pride in that. Good man.

Professor Moriarty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Inherently, the problem is that CAT only harms the middle classes.

If I have a massive inheritance, I'm not going to get taxed on it - why? because my family has had the sense and the money to estate plan and to use legal methods to evade CAT.

Poor people tend not to have any inheritance, so they want to punish those that do.

The squeezed middle continue to be the idiots here - without the assets or forethought to engage in aggressive estate planning and without the sympathy of the poor who feel that they're getting a "windfall".

The state of this country is shockingly depressing.

The 'middle' is an arbitrary term and very malleable depending on your perspective.

Allinall

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Inherently, the problem is that CAT only harms the middle classes.

.

I'm struggling to see how anyone is harmed?

If the CAT rate was 90% anyone would still be better off having received a free gift or inheritance.

Stealthfins

I wonder what's the next tenner a week the government will rob off us?

MeatTwoVeg

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Poor people tend not to have any inheritance, so they want to punish those that do.

So poor people have an advantage because they've no money to have tax applied to?

Interesting way of looking at it.

lawred2

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

So poor people have an advantage because they've no money to have tax applied to?

Interesting way of looking at it.

yeah but that's not really what was said was it?

RayCun

holyhead wrote: »

Don't see how your example is relevant. Going back my point. Let's say that the money 300k was in a savings account then its ultimately a triple taxation. Income tax, dirt tax, and finally inheritance tax.

Suppose I get paid a thousand euro, and pay income tax on that
Then I pay my accountant 800 euro, and he pays income tax on that.
Then he pays his solicitor 600 euro, and she pays income tax on that.
Then she pays her dentist 400 euro, and she pays income tax on that.
Then she pays her interior decorator 300 euro, and he pays income tax on that.
Then he pays...
And she pays...

OMG, the same money has been taxed 7 or 8 times! What a scandal!
But it's okay, because this is magic money - the same thousand euro has managed to pay for 3-4 thousand euro worth of services. Amazing!

This is clearly silly. The money is not being taxed, people and transactions are being taxed. And in situation of inheritance, you are only paying tax once.

Your parents may have paid income tax when they earned money, and they may have paid DIRT tax on savings, or property tax on a house.
But you didn't. You are only paying tax once (and only on the excess of 300k)

Let's say you inherit a business on the passing of a parent. Your exposure to revenue is such that you can't personally meet it.

So you inherit a business that is worth 500k, and you have to pay 66k in tax.
Then get a loan from the bank.

Nailed to the cross? Overnight, you have become over 400,000 euro better off. Not because of your hard work, brilliant mind, or fantastic contribution to society. No, this money just dropped into your lap.

holyhead wrote: »

Success should be encouraged not penalised.

What success? What have you done to earn this money? What is society encouraging by letting you have it all tax-free?

RayCun

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

Inherently, the problem is that CAT only harms the middle classes.

If you are inheriting over 300,000 euro - money you didn't earn, money that has nothing to do with your contribution to society - you don't get to whine about being part of the "squeezed middle"

NovemberJersey

RayCun wrote: »

Suppose I get paid a thousand euro, and pay income tax on that
Then I pay my accountant 800 euro, and he pays income tax on that.
Then he pays his solicitor 600 euro, and she pays income tax on that.
Then she pays her dentist 400 euro, and she pays income tax on that.
Then she pays her interior decorator 300 euro, and he pays income tax on that.
Then he pays...
And she pays...

OMG, the same money has been taxed 7 or 8 times! What a scandal!
But it's okay, because this is magic money - the same thousand euro has managed to pay for 3-4 thousand euro worth of services. Amazing!

This is clearly silly. The money is not being taxed, people and transactions are being taxed. And in situation of inheritance, you are only paying tax once.

Your parents may have paid income tax when they earned money, and they may have paid DIRT tax on savings, or property tax on a house.
But you didn't. You are only paying tax once (and only on the excess of 300k)



So you inherit a business that is worth 500k, and you have to pay 66k in tax.
Then get a loan from the bank.

Nailed to the cross? Overnight, you have become over 400,000 euro better off. Not because of your hard work, brilliant mind, or fantastic contribution to society. No, this money just dropped into your lap.



What success? What have you done to earn this money? What is society encouraging by letting you have it all tax-free?

I've a farm worth a few million euro that I'm going to pass on tax free and I don't think society will fall apart over it or anything

MeatTwoVeg

lawred2 wrote: »

yeah but that's not really what was said was it?

It's called an implication dear boy.

The middle class were portrayed as the most disadvantaged regarding inheritance tax.

I'm sure given the choice however, a poor person would choose to pay some tax on something than no tax on nothing.

Caliden

L1011 wrote: »

Your home which requires council provided services to be of any value. Not going to sell without a road, for starters.

Hmmm I wonder what they did before property tax...I guess we didn't have roads until a few years ago according to your logic.

holyhead

Raycun this may come as a big shock to you but it is generally the aim of each successive generation of a family to leave those coming along better off than what they were themselves. So in doing this the state punishes those who leave something behind for the next generation.

RayCun

holyhead wrote: »

Raycun this may come as a big shock to you but it is generally the aim of each successive generation of a family to leave those coming along better off than what they were themselves. So in doing this the state punishes those who leave something behind for the next generation.

Yeah, and my parents worked so that I would live in a nice area, go to a good school, go on holidays abroad, go to college, have some help getting started in a house, etc, etc and so on, all the things that I do for my own kids.

And when they die, my parents will leave me and my siblings an inheritance, and we will receive up to 300k each tax-free and only pay tax on anything more than that - so my parents will be leaving plenty behind for the next generation, just as I will do for my kids.

But why is it in the interests of the state or society that, as well as all the advantages I had growing up because of my parents, my inheritance, no matter how much it is, should be tax-free?

It isn't.

RedPandaDan

holyhead wrote: »

So in doing this the state punishes those who leave something behind for the next generation.

How so? They won't pay a penny of tax, nevermind the fact they are dead!

johnnyskeleton

RayCun wrote: »

So you inherit a business that is worth 500k, and you have to pay 66k in tax.
Then get a loan from the bank.

Nailed to the cross? Overnight, you have become over 400,000 euro better off. Not because of your hard work, brilliant mind, or fantastic contribution to society. No, this money just dropped into your lap.

That's if you look at things purely from an individualistic point of view. Looking at it from the family point of view, surely a person can want to leave the product of their hard work to their children? If they can't, i.e. if they will be taxed significantly on it, then why would they bother working hard beyond the requirement to meet their own personal expenses?

FreudianSlippers

RayCun wrote: »

If you are inheriting over 300,000 euro - money you didn't earn, money that has nothing to do with your contribution to society - you don't get to whine about being part of the "squeezed middle"

I'm actually not complaining; I'm fortunate to be in a position to be able to afford extensive estate planning within the confines of the law.

FreudianSlippers

MeatTwoVeg wrote: »

It's called an implication dear boy.

The middle class were portrayed as the most disadvantaged regarding inheritance tax.

I'm sure given the choice however, a poor person would choose to pay some tax on something than no tax on nothing.

The evidence supports that the middle classes continue to be hit hardest vis-a-vis all taxation.
The middle is also a fairly clearly defined income group; so I also reject the contention that it's all about perspective.

RayCun

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

That's if you look at things purely from an individualistic point of view. Looking at it from the family point of view, surely a person can want to leave the product of their hard work to their children? If they can't, i.e. if they will be taxed significantly on it, then why would they bother working hard beyond the requirement to meet their own personal expenses?

Let's remind ourselves what "taxed significantly" means here

Every child can receive 300,000 euro - that's almost ten times the average industrial wage - completely tax free.

If you have four kids, you can pass on over a million euro in assets before any tax is paid.

The median value of a household main residence in Ireland is 150k.
The median level of household savings is about 5k.
The mean net wealth per household is 218k, and the mean is 102k (which says a lot about the distribution of wealth in Ireland.

FreudianSlippers

RayCun wrote: »

Yeah, and my parents worked so that I would live in a nice area, go to a good school, go on holidays abroad, go to college, have some help getting started in a house, etc, etc and so on, all the things that I do for my own kids.

And when they die, my parents will leave me and my siblings an inheritance, and we will receive up to 300k each tax-free and only pay tax on anything more than that - so my parents will be leaving plenty behind for the next generation, just as I will do for my kids.

But why is it in the interests of the state or society that, as well as all the advantages I had growing up because of my parents, my inheritance, no matter how much it is, should be tax-free?

It isn't.

To follow your logic on this thread: you got the benefit of education (etc.) which was of no benefit to your parents, therefore the cost of education was your "income" and you should have to pay tax on that money.

Oh, just FYI as well, the "help" you got from your parents in buying your house will be deducted from your €310k allowance, as would any "gift" given to you by each parent over €3,000 in any given year.
So, your inheritance allowance will now be significantly lower than €310,000.

Professor Moriarty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

The evidence supports that the middle classes continue to be hit hardest vis-a-vis all taxation.
The middle is also a fairly clearly defined income group; so I also reject the contention that it's all about perspective.

Define 'middle class' in an Irish context.

Professor Moriarty

NovemberJersey wrote: »

I've a farm worth a few million euro that I'm going to pass on tax free and I don't think society will fall apart over it or anything

I'm not sure you understand the concept of 'society'. Or perhaps you're a Thatcherite.

FreudianSlippers

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Define 'middle class' in an Irish context.

http://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/inbrief_39__household_income_distribution_in_the_republic_of_ireland.pdf

FreudianSlippers

Professor Moriarty wrote: »

Or perhaps you're a Thatcherite.

I take it you're meaning that as an insult, but I happen to agree with the economic policy.

RayCun

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

To follow your logic on this thread: you got the benefit of education (etc.) which was of no benefit to your parents, therefore the cost of education was your "income" and you should have to pay tax on that money.

I'm well aware of how much I have benefited from the work of my parents, and the advantages it has given me in my life.

People often argue against taxation - even in this thread - by saying that society should not be taking away from those who work hard, that it should reward success. The people making this argument often like to imagine that their own success is simply based on merit - that they have worked harder and been smarter than other people, and that is why they deserve what they have (and how dare anyone try to take it away in tax!)

I know that I have worked hard, that I have been smart, but I also know that I had the conditions where that would be rewarded, and that I didn't have to work hard and be smart all the time, that sometimes I was carried. There are plenty of people who work as hard or harder than me, but have less. There are plenty of people who are as smart, or would be as smart if they had the opportunities that I've had.

So I think any society that takes the idea of meritocracy seriously should takes steps to address starting inequalities. To ensure that kids born without should still get support and opportunities, and that kids born into wealth can't just coast on that luck.

Which means paying for good public schools, and good public hospitals, and good public housing, so everyone gets a decent start. And that means raising money through taxation. And one of the absolute fairest ways to raise money through taxation is to tax inheritance, since that is money that was in no way earned by the people receiving it.

Professor Moriarty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I take it you're meaning that as an insult, but I happen to agree with the economic policy.

Well, the comment wasn't directed at you. Even it was, your assumption is wrong. In fact, I used 'Thatcherite' in the context of her famous quote about society, i.e. "There is no such thing as society".

NovemberJersey

You'd hear some people complaining about paying tax, they're probably only in the lower income tax bracket anyway, then just because you've got well off parents those same people expect you to pay inheritance tax which would equate to more than the income tax they'd pay over their lifetime

Professor Moriarty

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

http://www.nerinstitute.net/download/pdf/inbrief_39__household_income_distribution_in_the_republic_of_ireland.pdf

If you're going to post a link to a document, at least read it first.

Professor Moriarty

RayCun wrote: »

I'm well aware of how much I have benefited from the work of my parents, and the advantages it has given me in my life.

People often argue against taxation - even in this thread - by saying that society should not be taking away from those who work hard, that it should reward success. The people making this argument often like to imagine that their own success is simply based on merit - that they have worked harder and been smarter than other people, and that is why they deserve what they have (and how dare anyone try to take it away in tax!)

I know that I have worked hard, that I have been smart, but I also know that I had the conditions where that would be rewarded, and that I didn't have to work hard and be smart all the time, that sometimes I was carried. There are plenty of people who work as hard or harder than me, but have less. There are plenty of people who are as smart, or would be as smart if they had the opportunities that I've had.

So I think any society that takes the idea of meritocracy seriously should takes steps to address starting inequalities. To ensure that kids born without should still get support and opportunities, and that kids born into wealth can't just coast on that luck.

Which means paying for good public schools, and good public hospitals, and good public housing, so everyone gets a decent start. And that means raising money through taxation. And one of the absolute fairest ways to raise money through taxation is to tax inheritance, since that is money that was in no way earned by the people receiving it.

Excellent post.