Time to tax wealth - Covid cost Solution

enricoh

A lad I know pays e30 a month for his council house, I said e30 a week is it not surely.
I was wrong, he was right!
A mate rents his 3 bed semi income of the most sought after estates near me for e1250 a month, the tenant pays 100 hap pay the rest. He has one nipper that stays with him 2 nights a week.
No house insurance needed, no property tax, no servicing the boiler, no rainy day fund for repairs needed.

I know employers that can only get staff to do 20hrs a week so they keep all the benefits.
It's self defeating- its too attractive to do the same, so more and more will.
Taxing the rich in Ireland is like trying to fill a bucket with a hole in it

twowheelsonly

Shefwedfan wrote: »

The plan was to spend 21.2 billion this year on social welfare before Covid....300 million is Christmas bonus.

Have you ever looked at the breakdown of that spend ?
It's not just all given out to fellas that have no desire to ever work.
The biggest portion of that (37% approx) is Pensions, followed by Illness, Disability and Carers at 20% approx. Plenty of other 'worthy' payments as well - Childrens allowance, FIS, etc. I'd nearly go as far as to say that the dole spongers that we hear about so often are probably get one of the smallest slices of that cake.

---

Back to the OP... How to define wealth ? Is 500k in the bank wealthy or is it 1m ? Or 20m ? The starting line is almost impossible to define. The fella with 1m will be bitter that he's paying the same tax as the fella with 20m who will in turn be biiter that he's paying the same rate as the fella with 100m.

Is my mother wealthy ? She bought her house for 10 grand and it's now worth north of 500k. She's never even held 10k in her hand, not to mind 500k!! That's how assets work. Most 'wealthy' businessmen have all their assets tied up like that.

McGiver

machiavellianme wrote:

I'm not wealthy but I'm taxed a whole lot more than 40%, just like many on here. Especially when you add in vat on many goods after income tax, property tax, motor tax, etc.

You're should really see comparison of taxation in the EU. I've done the analysis, it includes estimated VAT effect too, and Ireland comes 3rd lowest. After, surprise surprise, two tiny tax havens ex-British Cyprus and Malta.

Taxes in Ireland are low overall bar few exceptions.

Income tax is badly structured though, I'd restructure that, probably more bands.
Local Property Tax is too low, needs to be increased, that's the only way to tax wealth.

Capital Gains Tax should be decreased, a lot. And potentially even removed for long term investors. This is way too high and discourages investment.

lawred2

lawred2 wrote: »

Yeah your definition of wealth and mine are a long way apart.

Do you have 40m in assets?

How many people in Ireland have 40m in assets? I mean, people now, not a company's assets. let's make it easier... how many Irish people have 20 million is assets that can be accessed easily (and without losing massively in value)

The truth is that this push to tax the "rich" or the "wealthy" is a drive away from dealing responsibility with the realities of being a small nation. Ireland cannot afford a situation where the poor (and that seems to include a wide range of people) are provided every resource that the rich can avail of. Just as Ireland cannot afford to provide every possible service (and of top quality) to everyone else as part of state benefits (taxpayers).

Ireland is still a small country with limited income streams and a growing cost base. People don't want to accept the realities of the situation. We don't have lucrative natural resource deposits, we don't have a strong industrial base, etc. We have a mainly service economy at a time when service economies are very shaky in terms of economics. Previously profitable but hardly sustainable long-term.

And that's what this all comes down to. Sustainability. Ireland cannot afford to provide all the services it currently provides. Taxing the rich is the easy way out, and just as unreasonable in expecting it to work, for any extended period. Rather than look at/deal with the real problems within our society, and find ways to minimalise them forever, we're expected to believe a fantasy. That Ireland can do what economic giants are struggling to do.

It's time to wake up and stop pretending. Be responsible, and cut the wastage that is driving this nation further towards debt. Stop blaming the rich for issues that they're not responsible for, no more than the middle class are responsible for them. Go back to a degree of capitalism where people have the right not to feel guilty for saving the money they have earned.... and a State that encourages financial personal responsibility.

This push to steal (and yes, I do see it as stealing) from the wealthy to provide for everyone else is too damn close to fraud. I'm not even remotely close to rich or wealthy, but I know that they've paid the same or more taxes that I have. They deserve to enjoy the fruits of their success (or their parents success) without being sent to the gallows, simply because the less fortunate are unwilling to face facts. There will always be inequalities, because every successful economy relies on competition to drive profits/success forward. Taking that away is a recipe for disaster.

Ultimanemo

Very recently a charter flight from Bulgaria brought in a plane load of fruit pickers
If people apply for those jobs and keep the money in Ireland we don't need any more taxes

Idbatterim

twowheelsonly wrote: »

Have you ever looked at the breakdown of that spend ?
It's not just all given out to fellas that have no desire to ever work.
The biggest portion of that (37% approx) is Pensions, followed by Illness, Disability and Carers at 20% approx. Plenty of other 'worthy' payments as well - Childrens allowance, FIS, etc. I'd nearly go as far as to say that the dole spongers that we hear about so often are probably get one of the smallest slices of that cake.

---

Back to the OP... How to define wealth ? Is 500k in the bank wealthy or is it 1m ? Or 20m ? The starting line is almost impossible to define. The fella with 1m will be bitter that he's paying the same tax as the fella with 20m who will in turn be biiter that he's paying the same rate as the fella with 100m.

Is my mother wealthy ? She bought her house for 10 grand and it's now worth north of 500k. She's never even held 10k in her hand, not to mind 500k!! That's how assets work. Most 'wealthy' businessmen have all their assets tied up like that.

We are aware of this, youd get disability here, as another oister inde out it , for two hairs in your head growing in different directions. 65% of those in social housing dont or have never worked, Eric cartman gave this figure, hopefully he can clarify . The dole sponges getting property with up to 3,000 a month in Dublin paid for in some cases.

The welfare bonus should be scrapped immediately, use it to abolish stamp duty on house sales ... review council " Rents" , deduct at source. Cap child allowance at 3 kids absolute max

McGiver

McGiver wrote: »

You're should really see comparison of taxation in the EU. I've done the analysis, it includes estimated VAT effect too, and Ireland comes 3rd lowest. After, surprise surprise, two tiny tax havens ex-British Cyprus and Malta.

Taxes in Ireland are low overall bar few exceptions.

Income tax is badly structured though, I'd restructure that, probably more bands.
Local Property Tax is too low, needs to be increased, that's the only way to tax wealth.

Capital Gains Tax should be decreased, a lot. And potentially even removed for long term investors. This is way too high and discourages investment.

Ireland is a very expensive place to live in, though. Cost of living here is high. Compare Ireland with similar countries of it's size and 'quality' of services... The cost of living has risen and fallen a few times over the last two decades, but I'm always more than a little shocked whenever I return home for extended periods. And that's without considering (for me) taxes on employment (I pay other Irish taxes)

twowheelsonly

enricoh wrote: »

A lad I know pays e30 a month for his council house, I said e30 a week is it not surely.
I was wrong, he was right!

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

McGiver

aligator_am wrote:

Something else other countries do, including the very left leaning Scandinavians is that they will give very generous unemployment payouts, for a very limited time.

Scandinavians are not that left, that's a misunderstanding. They're more community and consensus based. They understand it's good not to have people dying of cold and hunger.

Regarding unemployment benefits, this is what Ireland should copy from Europe. Most countries on the continent including Scandinavia give % of your last salary (usually capped at some sort of a multiple of average wage) for several months. Then you go to the basic low unemployment benefit. I'm just baffled why this is not the case in Ireland.

In Sweden you get 80% last salary for few months and then 70% salary for another few months, obviously only if you have contributed to the social system from your wages. If you didn't contribute and didn't have long enough employment you don't get paid. After 9 months the benefit goes back to the minimal unemployment benefit. It is very similar in Germany and other countries.

Whereas in Ireland - person who has contributed 5 years PRSI will get the same unemployment benefit as someone who has never worked for example. This is unfair and discourages employment. It must be changed.

Idbatterim

twowheelsonly wrote: »

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

A lad I know in the luxury apartments in dundrum is paying e50 a week , it wouldn't even cover the annual management fee! Meanwhile working poor neighbour's win similar apartment in that area, would pay e1900 a month for it , fcuking comedy

McGiver

Deleted User wrote:

Ireland is a very expensive place to live in, though. Cost of living here is high. Compare Ireland with similar countries of it's size and 'quality' of services... The cost of living has risen and fallen a few times over the last two decades, but I'm always more than a little shocked whenever I return home for extended periods. And that's without considering (for me) taxes on employment (I pay other Irish taxes)

Cost of living is irrelevant. The analysis of overall level of taxation is in relative terms i.e. percentage. Cost of living has no bearing on that. There are several countries with higher cost of living than Ireland (Luxembourg, Denmark, Sweden, some places in Germany, Finland, Netherlands) with higher overall taxation.

twowheelsonly

Idbatterim wrote: »

We are aware of this, youd get disability here, as another oister inde out it , for two hairs in your head growing in different directions. 65% of those in social housing dont or have never worked, Eric cartman gave this figure, hopefully he can clarify . The dole sponges getting property with up to 3,000 a month in Dublin paid for in some cases.

The welfare bonus should be scrapped immediately, use it to abolish stamp duty on house sales ... review council " Rents" , deduct at source. Cap child allowance at 3 kids absolute max

I'm guessing that came from a DCC report last year that quoted somewhere around that figure as Housing Applicants
That's a big difference to actual tenants. Many applicants are those who have just turned 18 and apply as a matter of course as it's endemic in 'certain quarters'.
Biggest mistake ever in this country was introducing HAP. That's a far bigger waste of money than building council houses and it goes straight into the hands of sometimes very wealthy landlords and vulture funds.

That's all getting off-topic though and is an entirely different discussion..

enricoh

twowheelsonly wrote: »

He must have the tiniest income in Ireland !!
What are his circumstances that he only pays that much ?

On disability allowance , does a few nixers on the side.

There is an obvious cohort of people in this country who are getting away with murder in terms of how much tax they pay, compared to other European countries.





The low paid.

Taxes should be increased at the lower bands to have those lower paid contribute more and tax credits reduced. The knock-on affect will see those middle and higher incomes pay slightly more as well.

I assume this is fine with you, OP?
Since you feel the wealthy are not paying their share, I'm sure you are as equally outraged at the others not paying their share as well, am I right?

LuasSimon

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

You are extremely wealthy compared to billions of people in the world.

Let's get into the nitty -gritty now, in % terms how much of your wealth do you give away to the poor in the world? I'd hope it's a good 30 or 40%.

antix80

LuasSimon wrote: »

In this like many other countries there is a huge difference between taxing income and taxing wealth .
Is it fair that someone with 40 Million in wealth only pays tax on their income of 100k pays 30k in tax whilst someone with no assets earning 60k pays 15K tax ?

We have many wealth taxes.

We have property tax, inheritance tax, at times pension fund levies, deemed encashment on 8th anniversary of certain investments, close company surcharges, ARF minimum withdrawals.

We also have high income tax.

Rich people tend not to base themselves in countries with aggressive tax regimes. That's how they stay rich. If they don't stick around to pay 50% income tax what makes you think they'll fork over 1% of their wealth on top of that?

Let's say their €40m company made a €1m profit and they withdrew it all as a salary. Income Tax €500k. Wealth tax €400k. Take home pay €100k.
The following year the company makes a loss of €1m. Income tax zero. No liquidity to pay the wealth tax of €390,000.. Umm..

Wealth taxes as a percentage of wealth are unworkable. The only people who the government would have any success in squeezing a wealth tax from are the middle class, and it wouldn't raise a lot of money because there's only so much juice you can squeeze. You won't get anything from the ultra rich because they'll choose not to live in your socialist paradise.

splinter65

Remy Broad Cave wrote: »

As of 2018, there are over 2,200 U.S. dollar billionaires worldwide, with a combined wealth of over US$9.1 trillion (up from US$7.67 trillion in 2017).
According to a 2017 Oxfam report, the 'top 8' richest billionaires own as much combined wealth as "half the human race".

$1,300 for everyone on the planet sure would do a whole massive heap of goodnesss. For many folks (hundred of millions) with only two sticks to rub together, it's likely a near lifetime guarantee of success in health, enterprise, employment, education or some basic housing for a family using the combined 2600usd. If under 18's are included (29% of globe) in the superbonu$money party, that's their higher education paid for in most parts.

For every single (1) billionaire, they're securing a life of prosper or betterment, for 3,181,818 people. Not a bad idea, and not a bad ratio of contribution.

Ok. Let’s go along with this. You believe that there’s a way of getting $1400 to each person on the planet without any overhead costs and without any government or NGO stealing it (despite the fact that for many years
$ billions are given in charity every year and it not reaching them) .
You believe that this money will last them a life time.
Do you believe this once of redistribution of wealth will get rid of world poverty forever?

Wanderer78

We can start with a land value tax!

Wanderer78

splinter65 wrote:

Ok. Let’s go along with this. You believe that there’s a way of getting $1400 to each person on the planet without any overhead costs and without any government or NGO stealing it (despite the fact that for many years $ billions are given in charity every year and it not reaching them) . You believe that this money will last them a life time. Do you believe this once of redistribution of wealth will get rid of world poverty forever?

Money creation is easy, getting 1400 to every human would be relatively easy, particularly those with bank accounts

rgace

I'm always surprised by how many people are against these ideas. Just because you side with the billionaire class doesn't mean you are one or will ever be one.

The only point of debate for me is where you draw the line, one person having billions is clearly morally wrong to me but what about 100 million and so on.

raze_them_all_

Your right. Bill Gates doesn't deserve his money. Its not as if more people use his os. Same with amazon he doesn't deserve his money. People shouldn't be allowed to use amazon

Wanderer78

raze_them_all_ wrote:

Your right. Bill Gates doesn't deserve his money. Its not as if more people use his os. Same with amazon he doesn't deserve his money. People shouldn't be allowed to use amazon

How much of their wealth was created by productive means, and not financial wizardry? How many jobs were in fact destroyed by this wizardry?

Wanderer78

Wanderer78 wrote: »

How much of their wealth was created by productive means, and not financial wizardry? How many jobs were in fact destroyed by this wizardry?

Gates started his work with a single computer.

To get where he is today, I'd say he was very productive indeed.

antix80

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Money creation is easy, getting 1400 to every human would be relatively easy, particularly those with bank accounts

At that scale money creation wouldn't be wealth redistribution, it would be wealth destruction.
The currency would be worthless, as would any bank balances or loans or assets denominated in that currency. The economy would cease to function and we'd be starting from whatever assets we have to hand. So you could probably sell a bag of rice to a starving person for their $1400 if you had the means to deliver it.

After a period of barter, people would begin using precious metals until banks were set up to issue notes and coins.

fingerbob

antix80

rgace wrote: »

I'm always surprised by how many people are against these ideas. Just because you side with the billionaire class doesn't mean you are one or will ever be one.

The only point of debate for me is where you draw the line, one person having billions is clearly morally wrong to me but what about 100 million and so on.

I'm against the idea because the billionaire won't be paying the wealth tax, and neither will the millionaires, and neither will the poor.. It will be the squeezed middle. It's another tax, and like all taxes in ireland it will hit workers the hardest.

As for your second sentence.. Just look at bernie sanders. For decades going on about the millionaires and the billionaires. Then he wrote a book, the first thing he created in his entire life, and people bought it! and he became a millionaire!

Now, he gives out about the billionaires!

From his twitter: "How many yachts do billionaires need? How many cars do they need? Give us a break. You can't have it all."

He has 3 houses.

SO back to your second sentence.. You'll move the goal posts to suit your own narrative and your own situation. Right now you could feed a lot of people just by making a few cutbacks in your every day life.. Or you could maybe work an extra day a week knowing the money you raise could feed 4 African families for a month.you choose not to. That's fine. Just don't expect the government to fix those problems through taxation.

KyussB

Focusing on taxing wealth, in order to fund spending, is a losing argument OP. Central banks are, more and more, increasingly ready to near-directly fund spending, now that monetary policy has been stretched as far as it can go, in fighting deflation.

You tax wealth, to fight inequality. Focus on that alone.

The best long-term wealth tax, is to cap inheritances, past e.g. €10 million (or some other appropriately high number, which will only affect a very small percentage of people) - with 100% tax after that point.

End massive inter-generational transfers of wealth, and you help to put a time limit on massive wealth inequality.

fingerbob

fingerbob wrote: »

I know capitalism's fantastic isn't it.

Even by doing nothing, with smart investments you can have additional sources of income.

splinter65

enricoh wrote: »

On disability allowance , does a few nixers on the side.

If he was only on DA then his LA rent would be €20.60 per week so €89 per month.

blackbox

I don't see why people should be taxed on wealth that they have created, but unearned wealth (i.e. inheritance) is a different matter.