Mickey Dee sells a house!

James Brown

Topgear on Dave wrote: »

Iv no idea.

But if Peter Casey had won the election and done the same tax wheeze, we would never have heard the end of it.

Michael D. did....and we're never hearing the end of it.

coinop

JohnnyFlash wrote: »

There’s some extremely juicy tabloid style stories about Michael D just waiting to be uncovered.

But does anybody on Boards.ie have the chutzpah to post it? When Higgin's little secret does eventually come out, the media talking heads will act like they knew all along. Just like when the Harvey Weinstein story broke, or the Jimmy Saville one, or the Gerry Ryan cokehead one. But nobody has the balls to be the first to break the ice. Mods would probably ban you on here.

ohnonotgmail

bmc58 wrote: »

I am amazed there's not a word of these using of housing loopholes by our "socialist" President.Where is the media in this newsworthy article?

not so much a loophole but a tax scheme created by the government for the exact purpose that higgins used it for.

droimlis

coinop wrote: »

But does anybody on Boards.ie have the chutzpah to post it? When Higgin's little secret does eventually come out, the media talking heads will act like they knew all along. Just like when the Harvey Weinstein story broke, or the Jimmy Saville one, or the Gerry Ryan cokehead one. But nobody has the balls to be the first to break the ice. Mods would probably ban you on here.

The New York Times (I think) did in 2011, but quickly retracted it

Gregor Samsa

coinop wrote: »

But does anybody on Boards.ie have the chutzpah to post it? When Higgin's little secret does eventually come out, the media talking heads will act like they knew all along. Just like when the Harvey Weinstein story broke, or the Jimmy Saville one, or the Gerry Ryan cokehead one. But nobody has the balls to be the first to break the ice. Mods would probably ban you on here.

I'm not privy to any rumours myself, I'm not on twitter or any other boards or sites that would be discussing him other than this.

Are you implying that he is hiding something that is comparable to being a rapist or paedophile?

jammiedodgers

Gregor Samsa wrote: »

I'm not privy to any rumours myself, I'm not on twitter or any other boards or sites that would be discussing him other than this.

Are you implying that he is hiding something that is comparable to being a rapist or paedophile?

The happily married President Michael D Higgins was described as an "acknowledged homosexual" in an article in 'Forbes' magazine, the influential US business bible.

However, within hours of the publication, the author of the piece acknowledged his "terrible" error and apologised to President Higgins.

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/apology-as-forbes-withdraws-homosexual-claim-about-president-michael-d-higgins-29443643.html

ohnonotgmail

jammiedodgers wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/apology-as-forbes-withdraws-homosexual-claim-about-president-michael-d-higgins-29443643.html

is that it? is that the massive secret? have i been timewarped back to the 1980s where such a thing would be a scandal?

Gregor Samsa

jammiedodgers wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/apology-as-forbes-withdraws-homosexual-claim-about-president-michael-d-higgins-29443643.html

Is that it?

If so, I ask coinop the question again: Are you implying that he is hiding something that is comparable to being a rapist or paedophile?

bmc58

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

not so much a loophole but a tax scheme created by the government for the exact purpose that higgins used it for.

Shocking from someone who proffeses himself to be one of us.Where is the media in this.Why is there not a line about on RTE or Newstalk or Virgin media??

suicide_circus

bmc58 wrote: »

Shocking from someone who proffeses himself to be one of us.Where is the media in this.Why is there not a line about on RTE or Newstalk or Virgin media??

because he's a national treasure and a media darling

KiKi III

If it turned out, hypothetically speaking, that Michael D was a gay man who came to an arrangement with his wife many years ago when it wasn’t safe for him to come out, why should that matter to anyone other than his family?

KiKi III

bmc58 wrote: »

Shocking from someone who proffeses himself to be one of us.Where is the media in this.Why is there not a line about on RTE or Newstalk or Virgin media??

Why would there be? “A politician legally sold a house he owned” isn’t much of a story.

martingriff

bmc58 wrote: »

I am amazed there's not a word of these using of housing loopholes by our "socialist" President.Where is the media in this newsworthy article?

Except it is not a loophole it was a scheme which is opened to anyone who bought between those periods. I see nothing he did wrong. People just want something to feint outrage at something they would have done themselves. As for the wage and pension he gets it was not like he set that up himself. As for all the security, of course he gets it he is the bloody president

martingriff

KiKi III wrote: »

If it turned out, hypothetically speaking, that Michael D was a gay man who came to an arrangement with his wife many years ago when it wasn’t safe for him to come out, why should that matter to anyone other than his family?

Ah come on now don't be asking hard question to people who want to be outraged but yes I agree with you who's business is it regardless of there status what there sexuality is

martingriff

jammiedodgers wrote: »

https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/apology-as-forbes-withdraws-homosexual-claim-about-president-michael-d-higgins-29443643.html

So the big secret is he might be gay. Juicy scandal he is gay my god no wonder LGBT people feel people feel that others see them as less then people

suicide_circus

KiKi III wrote: »

If it turned out, hypothetically speaking, that Michael D was a gay man who came to an arrangement with his wife many years ago when it wasn’t safe for him to come out, why should that matter to anyone other than his family?

If, hypothetically speaking, MDH had made a career out of decrying the immorality and dangers of homosexuality and then it turned out he was gay, people would rightly point out a that a certain level of hypocrisy had taken place.

But he has made a career of telling the wealthy they should be paying more tax and then, as a wealthy man, he uses perfectly legal means to reduce his tax bill when selling one of his properties, then people are entitled to point it out.

KiKi III

suicide_circus wrote: »

If, hypothetically speaking, MDH had made a career out of decrying the immorality and dangers of homosexuality and then it turned out he was gay, people would rightly point out a that a certain level of hypocrisy had taken place.

But he has made a career of telling the wealthy they should be paying more tax and then, as a wealthy man, he uses perfectly legal means to reduce his tax bill when selling one of his properties, then people are entitled to point it out.

Assuming MDH is happy to pay more than he currently does in taxes, I don’t see the hypocrisy. He doesn’t set the presidential salary, nor does he set our tax laws. If he had a secret Cayman Islands account, you’d have a point.

Managing his own finances well, in a completely legal and above board way, hardly makes him a hypocrite.

martingriff

suicide_circus wrote: »

If, hypothetically speaking, MDH had made a career out of decrying the immorality and dangers of homosexuality and then it turned out he was gay, people would rightly point out a that a certain level of hypocrisy had taken place.

But he has made a career of telling the wealthy they should be paying more tax and then, as a wealthy man, he uses perfectly legal means to reduce his tax bill when selling one of his properties, then people are entitled to point it out.

Whats he mean to do here take my money. Hell even PBP & Sinn Fein who take "the average industrial wage" do not do that.

In relation to his sexuality and even it was true at the time he was a young person you be sent to jail and god know what if you were gay so I have no problem if anything was done and true the years he decided no one need to know it

suicide_circus

KiKi III wrote: »

Assuming MDH is happy to pay more than he currently does in taxes, I don’t see the hypocrisy. He doesn’t set the presidential salary, nor does he set our tax laws. If he had a secret Cayman Islands account, you’d have a point.

Managing his own finances well, in a completely legal and above board way, hardly makes him a hypocrite.

Not saying it's the crime of the century but ending a tenancy early (during a housing crisis) in order to minimise his tax bill is hardly in keeping with the spirit of what he has preached.

timsey tiger

sabat wrote: »

I think the crux of it is he made some students homeless in the midst of a housing crisis, after rinsing them for rent for several years, in order to make sure he got that tax exemption before it expired.

If as you say they were still students after several years then they deserve a kick up the hole like this, to get their lives started.

But of course, you are just misrepresenting the facts for your own purposes.

martingriff

timsey tiger wrote: »

If as you say they were still students after several years then they deserve a kick up the hole like this, to get their lives started.

But of course, you are just misrepresenting the facts for your own purposes.

Ah now you have no reasons why they were still students. Maybe they were going back to college to retrain for work

timsey tiger

martingriff wrote: »

Ah now you have no reasons why they were still students. Maybe they were going back to college to retrain for work

I'll spell it out for you since you don't seem able to do it for your self.

I and the poster I was replying to, have no reason to believe that the students were in the house for several years. That would not be the normal pattern for students. This several years stuck was just made up to make MD sound bad.

timsey tiger

timsey tiger wrote: »

I'll spell it out for you since you don't seem able to do it for your self.

I and the poster I was replying to, have no reason to believe that the students were in the house for several years. That would not be the normal pattern for students. This several years stuck was just made up to make MD sound bad.

Whether they are or are not students. There’s no denying they were tenants. And during the time when the housing crisis was front and centre of the news, he served them a notice to quit.

Allinall

suicide_circus wrote: »

If, hypothetically speaking, MDH had made a career out of decrying the immorality and dangers of homosexuality and then it turned out he was gay, people would rightly point out a that a certain level of hypocrisy had taken place.

But he has made a career of telling the wealthy they should be paying more tax and then, as a wealthy man, he uses perfectly legal means to reduce his tax bill when selling one of his properties, then people are entitled to point it out.

When has he said that the wealthy should pay more tax?

martingriff

timsey tiger wrote: »

I'll spell it out for you since you don't seem able to do it for your self.

I and the poster I was replying to, have no reason to believe that the students were in the house for several years. That would not be the normal pattern for students. This several years stuck was just made up to make MD sound bad.

See the second paraghraph would have been enough for me to say my bad no need for the 1st sounds a bit d£$&ish

ohnonotgmail

suicide_circus wrote: »

Not saying it's the crime of the century but ending a tenancy early (during a housing crisis) in order to minimise his tax bill is hardly in keeping with the spirit of what he has preached.

he gave the required notice and even extended the notice period when they had difficulty finding alternative accommodation. he didnt turn them out at the side of the road. it really is something when "man acts entirely legally" is supposed to be a news story.

martingriff

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Whether they are or are not students. There’s no denying they were tenants. And during the time when the housing crisis was front and centre of the news, he served them a notice to quit.

So no one is allowed to sell a house now!!! How about those who bought it they now have there own home.

tobefrank321

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

he gave the required notice and even extended the notice period when they had difficulty finding alternative accommodation. he didnt turn them out at the side of the road. it really is something when "man acts entirely legally" is supposed to be a news story.

The timing doesn't look great though. It does look like he's trying to avail of a tax break to save some money. He probably hoped it would fly under the radar as well.

As a private citizen he's entitled to do as he wants, but as a public figure whose made a career out of advocating well funded public services, it doesn't look so good.

It almost looks like he expects the rest of us to pay more tax so he can get paid more, but he doesn't mind paying less tax. A strong whiff of hypocrisy, as there is with all the champagne socialists, both here and in the UK.

ohnonotgmail

tobefrank321 wrote: »

The timing doesn't look great though. It does look like he's trying to avail of a tax break to save some money. He probably hoped it would fly under the radar as well.

As a private citizen he's entitled to do as he wants, but as a public figure whose made a career out of advocating well funded public services, it doesn't look so good.

It almost looks like he expects the rest of us to pay more tax so he can get paid more, but he doesn't mind paying less tax. A strong whiff of hypocrisy, as there is with all the champagne socialists, both here and in the UK.

that is exactly what he was doing. there is no mystery. there is nothing hidden. I have no idea what the sale of a house has to do with the funding of public services.

Topgear on Dave

ohnonotgmail wrote: »

I have no idea what the sale of a house has to do with the funding of public services.

Did he evict his tenants and time the sale to maximise his 100,000 euro profits and avoid having to pay tax on them?

The tax that pays his and every other public servants wages!

Entirely legal. But cheeky if he comes out to lecture PAYE mugs like myself that we need to fund public services. :pac: