Dublin men to marry to avoid inheritance tax

Dr Brown

This is one of the reasons I didn't vote for same sex marriage.

It was inevitable people would use it to avoid paying tax but anyone who tried to say this around the time of the referendum would been branded a "homophobe" by the PC brigade.

I said at the time that same sex marriage would cost the tax payer millions of euro in lost tax.




https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1215/927697-tax-marriage/

Two men who have been 'best friends' for 29 years have announced they are to get married next month in Co Tipperary.
While that in itself is not an unusual development, the story is made more interesting by the fact neither man is gay.
Michael O'Sullivan has been best friends with his 85-year-old neighbour Matt for almost three decades, and is now his carer.
Speaking on RTÉ's Liveline on Radio 1, Mr O'Sullivan said that Matt told him he was planning on leaving his house in Dublin's Stoneybatter to him when he died.
Mr O'Sullivan said this posed a potential problem as "because of tax reasons I'd have to pay half of that to the Government" in Capital Acquisitions Tax.
However, people who are married or in civil partnerships are exempt from Capital Acquisitions Tax on items of inheritance from their partner.
Speaking on the same programme, Matt said "he's my best friend, we're getting married so whatever I have in my home he can have."
The pair had planned on getting married on 22 December in Co Tipperary, but say that due to weather conditions the nuptials may be postponed until January.

Dr Brown

Dr Brown wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I didn't vote for same sex marriage.

It was inevitable people would use it to avoid paying tax but anyone who tried to say this around the time of the referendum would been branded a "homophobe" by the PC brigade.

I said at the time that same sex marriage would cost the tax payer millions of euro in lost tax.




https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1215/927697-tax-marriage/

Inheritance tax is not right anyway! When you earn your money you pay tax on it and then they want you to pay tax on it again? F**k off

Insect Overlord

Dr Brown wrote: »

I said at the time that same sex marriage would cost the tax payer millions of euro in lost tax.

I would absolutely love to read the reactions you got from other people at the time. That must have been priceless.

kona

Dr Brown wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I didn't vote for same sex marriage.

It was inevitable people would use it to avoid paying tax but anyone who tried to say this around the time of the referendum would been branded a "homophobe" by the PC brigade.]

Are you insane? Lol

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2057820267

_Dara_

Well sure, look, this might happen in a small minority of cases but the same could be said for heterosexual unions. I can’t see this being a widespread issue.

secman

Fair play to them, oh and I voted yes..... and I'm not gay... thinly veined homophobic post IMO.

RayM

Dr Brown wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I didn't vote for same sex marriage.

This was also possible before marriage equality, just not with people of the same sex. If your biggest fear was that people might marry for reasons other than love, then it's curious that you're only opposed to marriage equality and not the institution of marriage itself.

Oh, and yes, I'd say you're almost definitely a homophobe. You've a history of making racist posts, and people like you never just have the one horrible opinion, do they?

Never Say Never Again

a bunch of indian fellas who work in my local gala shop all have wife's from east europe, that must be some sort of scam ?

bucketybuck

I'm no economist, but I would be confident that the amount of revenue lost to the country because of non-gay men getting married is rather insignificant. One example has been linked in the OP without at all making the case that this is anything but an isolated example.

Load of bollocks in other words.

garbeth

And heterosexual marriage doesn’t cost the tax payer anything.

lawred2

Dr Brown wrote: »

This is one of the reasons I didn't vote for same sex marriage.

It was inevitable people would use it to avoid paying tax but anyone who tried to say this around the time of the referendum would been branded a "homophobe" by the PC brigade.

I said at the time that same sex marriage would cost the tax payer millions of euro in lost tax.




https://www.rte.ie/news/ireland/2017/1215/927697-tax-marriage/

What's stopping heterosexual people doing that?

Cordell

One off inheritance tax avoiding stroke, ok, but what if the elderly person were to be of opposite sex? Should the regular-non-gay marriage be banned for this reason?

Dr Brown

RayM wrote: »

Oh, and yes, I'd say you're almost definitely a homophobe. You've a history of making racist posts, and people like you never just have the one horrible opinion, do they?

What are you talking about ?

Sparko

I wonder were they right to publicise their decision? Could Revenue declare their marriage fraudulent and enforce the tax bill?

WHIP IT!

I wonder, can they not be 'done', so to speak, for being so open about this loophole they are taking advantage of? In the same way you hear people having sham marriages for 'Green Card' issues which are investigated. Is the fact they have no problem announcing the fact they are only doing this to avoid a taxt leaving them open to legal challenge?

EDIT: Damn you Sparko and your quicker, more concise typing!

RayM

Dr Brown wrote: »

What are you talking about ?

I'm talking about the fact that you're a racist and, as it now appears, also a homophobe.

shivermetimber

Is it possible for my Dad to divorce my Mam so I can then marry him before he dies? If so I'd do it to get out of the moronic inheritance tax that's in place.

Dr Brown

RayM wrote: »

I'm talking about the fact that you're a racist and, as it now appears, also a homophobe.

How am I "racist" ?

Cordell

Sparko wrote: »

I wonder were they right to publicise their decision? Could Revenue declare their marriage fraudulent and enforce the tax bill?

Why will it be fraudulent? They are good friends, one cares for the other, good grounds for marriage. Who is to say that a marriage needs to involve sexual activities between grooms?

RayM

Dr Brown wrote: »

How am I "racist" ?

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105196742&postcount=6

Will I Am Not

RayM wrote: »

I'm talking about the fact that you're a racist and, as it now appears, also a homophobe.

You seem to enjoy calling everyone racist? Is that even allowed?

Sparko

Cordell wrote: »

Why will it be fraudulent? They are good friends, one cares for the other, good grounds for marriage. Who is to say that a marriage needs to involve sexual activities between grooms?

Revenue take tax avoidance very seriously - if they just got married and kept their head down it probably wouldn't be an issue, but they've clearly stated they're trying to avoid tax.

Odhinn

lawred2 wrote: »

What's stopping heterosexual people doing that?

Absolutely SFA.

WHIP IT!

Cordell wrote: »

Why will it be fraudulent? They are good friends, one cares for the other, good grounds for marriage. Who is to say that a marriage needs to involve sexual activities between grooms?

Seriously?

They have openly admitted they are only doing it to avoid tax.

secman

This is actually a heterosexual marriage as both men have declared thst they are straight, so it's the same as all the other heterosexual marriages ..... just a bit different.

King of Kings

allowing gay marriage with diminish the sanctity of marriage - they said.
bollocks - the others said.

now this...I guess the holy-joes were right.

I wish I considered this scenario during the referendum - I'd have got top trolling out of it

Cordell

shivermetimber wrote: »

Is it possible for my Dad to divorce my Mam so I can then marry him before he dies? If so I'd do it to get out of the moronic inheritance tax that's in place.

Probably not, but: get your dad divorced, then have him marry me. When he dies I'll marry you, then when I die you get all minus what I manage to spend, hopefully less than the tax.

RayM

The Fake Sheikh wrote: »

You seem to enjoy calling everyone racist? Is that even allowed?

Dunno if it's allowed or not, but in the case of "Dr Brown" I'd love to see someone trying to deny it.

WHIP IT!

Can only assume he has a fantastic solicitor on retainer. Throwing out the slander here.

mikemac2

garbeth wrote: »

And heterosexual marriage doesn’t cost the tax payer anything.

Back in the day the tax year used to start in April.
Might have been Charlie McCreevy who changed it to a calendar year or maybe a minister before him, ah it was a long time ago

No tax credits back then but you had the tax free allowance

April was the peak month for weddings as it was the start of the tax year and the non working wife could transfer their allowance. And the reason I say wife is we know it was most cases and if she was a civil servant she was forced to resign! Though the civil service bar is decades ago, not recent history

OP, tax avoidance all legal was going on 50 years ago. Anyone who pays more tax than they have to is a fool

Dr Brown

RayM wrote: »

https://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showpost.php?p=105196742&postcount=6

I still don't see any proof that anything I said was "racist".

Some people just see "racism" everywhere.

RayM

Dr Brown wrote: »

I still don't see any proof that anything I said was "racist".

Some people just see "racism" everywhere.

Some seem to see it nowhere at all. Same with homophobia.

shivermetimber

Cordell wrote: »

Probably not, but: get your dad divorced, then have him marry me. When he dies I'll marry you, then when I die you get all minus what I manage to spend, hopefully less than the tax.

A ****, that's a bit too much work. I'll just get him to marry my partner instead. Not believing in marriage might have its tax benefits after all :pac:

server down

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Seriously?

They have openly admitted they are only doing it to avoid tax.

Is getting married to avoid tax actually evasion though?

rgace

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Inheritance tax is not right anyway! When you earn your money you pay tax on it and then they want you to pay tax on it again? F**k off

You won't be paying it, whoever inherits it will pay tax on it.

WHIP IT!

mikemac2 wrote: »

Back in the day the tax year used to start in April.
Might have been Charlie McCreevy who changed it to a calendar year or maybe a minister before him, ah it was a long time ago

No tax credits back then but you had the tax free allowance

April was the peak month for weddings as it was the start of the tax year and the non working wife could transfer their allowance. And the reason I say wife is we know it was most cases and if she was a civil servant she was forced to resign! Though the civil service bar is decades ago, not recent history

OP, tax avoidance all legal was going on 50 years ago. Anyone who pays more tax than they have to is a fool

How many of these marriages involved people who went in the paper to declare their sole reason for getting hitched was to avoid tax?

Are people really having this much difficulty understanding why these two chaps may have put themselves in a difficult legal position by making the statements they have?

Canis Lupus

Lol, I can just see the op ticking the no box in the vote whilst muttering 'they'll only be using it for tax evasion, I won't allow it'

riffmongous

I wonder if they actually are gay and this is an excuse

server down

WHIP IT! wrote: »

How many of these marriages involved people who went in the paper to declare their sole reason for getting hitched was to avoid tax?

Are people really having this much difficulty understanding why these two chaps may have put themselves in a difficult legal position by making the statements they have?

So back to my question - has there ever been a case where a marriage was declared sham for tax reasons. Is that even within the power of revenue?

Cordell

Sparko wrote: »

Revenue take tax avoidance very seriously - if they just got married and kept their head down it probably wouldn't be an issue, but they've clearly stated they're trying to avoid tax.

Seriously now, people do actually get officially married for the added benefits, including tax. So if they do it for tax reasons between other reasons revenue have no grounds to call their marriage a fraud. They can always say that they are actually deeply in love and they said that just as a joke and publicity stunt as they share their love of quirky humor.

server down

Dr Brown wrote: »

Biased on what ?

Report them and move on. They’re fouling up the thread.

padd b1975

secman wrote: »

This is actually a heterosexual marriage as both men have declared thst they are straight, so it's the same as all the other heterosexual marriages ..... just a bit different.

riffmongous wrote: »

I wonder if they actually are gay and this is an excuse

They were on Liveline earlier this afternoon, the older guy definitely "bakes a light cake" as they say in polite company.

WHIP IT!

server down wrote: »

So back to my question - has there ever been a case where a marriage was declared sham for tax reasons. Is that even within the power of revenue?

I really don't know, that's why I asked the question. I don't see what they have gained from going public with this.

Cordell wrote: »

Seriously now, people do actually get officially married for the added benefits, including tax. So if they do it for tax reasons between other reasons revenue have no grounds to call their marriage a fraud. They can always say that they are actually deeply in love and they said that just as a joke and publicity stunt as they share their love of quirky humor.

Ah yeah, I'm sure the Revenue Inspector would absolutely take that at face value and tip on down the road whistling away to himself.

It's all a very cute story, lads. Gave me a giggle and I abhor the very idea of inheritance tax.... but is this really any different than someone collecting social welfare while working on the side a couple days a week? It's effectively robbing money from the Exchequer... this reminds me of the Monorail episode of the Simpsons - these guys have the catchy song so everyone is fine with it!

server down

Googling “bakes a light cake”.

server down

Feeling hungry now.

WHIP IT!

server down wrote: »

Googling “bakes a light cake”.

Reminds me of being in work one day a few years back. The phrase "confirmed bachelor" was used in a newspaper article and I was the only one who didn't know that it was a coy way of saying someone was gay... every time I'd seen "confirmed bachelor" I always thought it meant the divil was ridin' all around him! :D

server down

WHIP IT! wrote: »

I really don't know, that's why I asked the question. I don't see what they have gained from going public with this.



Ah yeah, I'm sure the Revenue Inspector would absolutely take that at face value and tip on down the road whistling away to himself.

It's all a very cute story, lads. Gave me a giggle and I abhor the very idea of inheritance tax.... but is this really any different than someone collecting social welfare while working on the side a couple days a week? It's effectively robbing money from the Exchequer... this reminds me of the Monorail episode of the Simpsons - these guys have the catchy song so everyone is fine with it!

My guess is no. There’s no tax sham here. Citizens at least can get married, if not bigamous, for any reason they want. The state doesn’t enforce love, sexual relations, length of time they were together. Nothing.

RayM

server down wrote: »

Report them and move on. They’re fouling up the thread.

Trollception. What we need now is another rereg to come along and start trolling Thundering Kunt.

mikemac2

WHIP IT! wrote: »

Reminds me of being in work one day a few years back. The phrase "confirmed bachelor" was used in a newspaper article and I was the only one who didn't know that it was a coy way of saying someone was gay... every time I'd seen "confirmed bachelor" I always thought it meant the divil was ridin' all around him! :D

Does it???

I thought confirmed bachelor was a playboy who would never settle down

Actually I still think it does

WHIP IT!

mikemac2 wrote: »

Does it???

I thought confirmed bachelor was a playboy who would never settle down

Actually I still think it does

Well f*ck me, if you're right, I've got some phone calls to make to an office-full of smug pr*cks I used to work with! :D:D