Indo giving landlords tips on how to be profitable

Sheep Shagger

handlemaster wrote: »

Hard to believe

Only going on what the agent tells me.

Don’t care anyway, got out with a small profit and no more headaches being a landlord. Huge weight off shoulders and housing scum bags who screw the system can be someone else’s problem (unless you have ever been on the receiving end can’t see how anyone can comment).

The_Conductor

Villa05 wrote: »

Can a taxpayer bring a robust legal challenge against that. Isn't their criteria that taxation must fall under.

I'm not aware of any specific 'criteria' it has to fall under- it just has to be legal- as this sham is. The Revenue Commissioners do actively state that they aim to mitigate any losses to the exchequer by entities engaging in either tax avoidance or tax evasion measures (obviously one is wholly legal, though morally dubious- the other is illegal). Measures like this- stink to high heaven- but *are* legal- and were specifically introduced to enable the government to offload AIB- and allow them reflect in the glory of a successful offloading of the states holding in the company. The taxpayers of tomorrow- bedamned- they're someone else's problem. Its yet another- mortgage on the people of tomorrow- but the political elite of today- to get a few touchy feely headlines about how good they are- and aren't they brilliant for offloading AIB- and look, we're getting the money we pumped into AIB back again (obviously ignoring the 20 billion in foregone tax from future years- because it doesn't suit the pot of gold at the end of the rainbow crap they're trying to sell).

It was Leona Helmsley who coined the term- 'Only the little people pay taxes, sweetie'......... Well, unfortunately- it appears to have been on the featured reading list of quite a few of our political elite. She was, akin to Al Capone, eventually sent to prison on conviction income tax evasion. Our politicians have turned a quite staggering income tax evasion- into an entirely legal income tax avoidance con.

Its hard not to be cynical- when you know that you- as an individual- really don't matter- but AIB, or some other entity such as the REITs- can have our tax law completely rewritten to bolster their bottom lines.....

Villa05

The_Conductor wrote:

Its hard not to be cynical- when you know that you- as an individual- really don't matter- but AIB, or some other entity such as the REITs- can have our tax law completely rewritten to bolster their bottom lines.....

Is it a facility that is only available to AIB or have all bailed out banks been given this permission to dodge tax. Could it be challenged under competition law. I'm assuming KBC do not have this facility and they got hit hard in the crash also

Browney7

The_Conductor wrote: »

And the icing on the cake- the property losses suffered by the banking sector in the implosion 10 years ago- can be carried as an asset on their balance sheets- so as to shelter the banks from paying tax for a very long time. AIB told prospective shareholders on their UK roadshows- that the revised taxation of debt- and the removal of the time limits on claiming the debts as a credit- are an asset valued at over 20 billion- wholly aside from any other factor.

I.e. the current government in addition to recapitalising the banking sector- have allowed them crystalise the same losses as an asset- and sell them a second time- to a new batch of investors, so the Irish consumer gets to pay for the same debt twice over..........

This was a policy introduced by the current government- abolishing the length of time over which a company had to amortize debt as a taxable cost- and allowing them to carry the debt as an asset in the first instance- despite the fact that it was the taxpayer who took the debt onboard.

Its actually a massive swindle, no matter how you look at it- but- its entirely legal- and vastly profitable- and its why AIB is so valuable to prospective investors- because they can shelter any profits by writing them against historic debt- indefinitely- despite the fact that the taxpayer paid for them..............

You couldn't make it up.

Do you not think that's reflected in the current Market Cap of AIB though and the potential proceeds the taxpayer can recoup through any further sale of equity?

Villa05

Browney7 wrote:

Do you not think that's reflected in the current Market Cap of AIB though and the potential proceeds the taxpayer can recoup through any further sale of equity?

No,
look back at the crisis bank bonds were selling for a fraction of their value on the market despite the Government guarantee. They were purchased by the likes of Roman Abramovich who made massive profits on the transaction

hmmm

We have too many quick fix and half baked solutions in this country, with politicians trying to please everyone. Building regulations massively increased, which naturally leads to higher prices. Rent controls introduced, and landlords leave. Taxes on landlords increased to satisfy the lefties, no-one can figure out why supply has now dropped. Homeless people moved to the top of the queue, suddenly we have thousands of "homeless".

I'm not sure what the answer is, but I know you can't please everyone. We need a government with a bit of bravery to stand up and set out a clear path in one direction or another, e.g. "we want massive apartment building in the city centre, and we want professional landlords to run them. Here's a tax break to encourage this."