ESRI says we need more "progressive" taxes lol

B2021M

Wanderer78 wrote: »

....the point being, we cant keep playing this game, we re all starting to struggle to run our economies and societies effectively with so much of it occurring, tax avoidance is largely celebrated and encouraged, particularly in relation to wealth

I agree but was the point being made not that influencers may not be declaring all income for tax purposes which is tax evasion

Wanderer78

B2021M wrote: »

I agree but was the point being made not that influencers may not be declaring all income for tax purposes which is tax evasion

oh id say theres a very good chance such marketers certainly are engaging in avoidance and evasion, again, these are encouraged and celebrated in society, but we also must acknowledge other issues many younger generations are currently dealing with, i.e. low wage inflation, increase in precariousness in employment, increase in precariousness of critical needs, property needs etc etc etc

B2021M

Wanderer78 wrote: »

oh id say theres a very good chance such marketers certainly are engaging in avoidance and evasion, again, these are encouraged and celebrated in society, but we also must acknowledge other issues many younger generations are currently dealing with, i.e. low wage inflation, increase in precariousness in employment, increase in precariousness of critical needs, property needs etc etc etc

Yes...but evasion is illegal and avoidance is not.

lisasimpson

B2021M wrote: »

I agree but was the point being made not that influencers may not be declaring all income for tax purposes which is tax evasion

Exactly they should be no different to the rest of us PAYE working. Every collab every AF swipe up is a source of income for them. Its a sector that needs looking into. A lot of people have woken up to the carry on during covid revenue should too. Ive no problem them going declaring self employment once everything is above board. I know GAA players are subject to BIK on sponorsed cars etc same should apply to this industry

Wanderer78

B2021M wrote: »

Yes...but evasion is illegal and avoidance is not.

these facts are indeed correct, but again the facts, we cant keep doing this, particularly towards wealth, my suspicions being, many influencers arent really all that wealthy, id imagine many are just getting by in life, but im sure some are becoming very wealthy

B2021M

Wanderer78 wrote: »

these facts are indeed correct, but again the facts, we cant keep doing this, particularly towards wealth, my suspicions being, many influencers arent really all that wealthy, id imagine many are just getting by in life, but im sure some are becoming very wealthy

But all the point was is that they should pay whatever tax is due.

Unfortunaltely tightening up rules to make avoidance harder may result in fewer jobs in the long run.

Wanderer78

B2021M wrote: »

But all the point was is that they should pay whatever tax is due.

Unfortunaltely tightening up rules to make avoidance harder may result in fewer jobs in the long run.

oh theres no question such taxes should be paid, but again, we must also figure out many younger generations most critical problems, particularly housing, taxing them, and not figuring these issues out, simply wont work.

id have to disagree with you here to some degree, we keep thinking if we increase taxes on wealthy elements in society, such as large corporations etc, they ll leave, but they are actually free to leave as it is, to lower tax jurisdictions, but they dont!

RandomViewer

B2021M wrote: »

Tax avoidance is not tax evasion

So it's not rape if she's drunk?

fliball123

Wanderer78 wrote: »

we do not live on a planet of equal opportunities, we probably never will! reminder, as soon as the wee virus rocked into town, newly 'unemployed' folks found themselves on the dole, this was almost immediately increased to almost double the normal rate for many, why? your tax money does not directly go towards these services, it is used to service the debts that are required to run them!

Of course our tax goes to fund all services . what do you think there is a magic money tree out the back. We have been forced to borrowing 17 Billion to bridge the deficit of what we pay in as apposed to whats paid out. Make no mistake about it the tax payers will have to pay those borrowings as well at some stage. I mean isn't it great the decisions government have made over the last 20 means mine and your kids and grand kids will be paying the debt for us paying over the odds for public servants and people who have absolutely no get up to go to either better themselves or get a job and regardless of the planet being equal or not (Such a lazy excuse there for not working by the way) there is plenty of opertunity out there, you may need educate or reskill but you can then become a member of the tax payers and not tax takers.

RandomViewer

I hear people on about public services but I haven't noticed any,

RulesOfNature

fliball123 wrote: »

Of course our tax goes to fund all services . what do you think there is a magic money tree out the back. .

Thats literally how it works. Read modern monetary theory and money creation.

wHoSe GoNNa PaY FoR It

The government can print money out of thin air. Taxation is to control inflation and centralize control.

Topgear on Dave

I know I LOL'd :pac:

Richard Hillman

Its always about taking taxes and never about reducing spending. In the year of the words Essential/Non-essential, a government taking a cut out of your wage, the spending should be for ESSENTIAL services. Infrastructure, health, law and order.

Things that are not Essential are Party Political PR Spending in handing NGOs money (6bn) and Foreign Aid (1bn) every year. Simon Coveney was quick to hand the WHO cash when Donald Trump said he was defunding them, just to improve his own personal chances for the UN Gig. We gave the EU a net 16bn in the Covid recovery fund to bail out the Mediterranean tourist industry.

Right there we have 23billion of spending on stuff that we could have lived happily without in the space on a year. That's 4.5k for each and every one of us.


But no, they need to take more money off us and businesses to keep on spending more money on ****e we don't need.

View

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Thats literally how it works. Read modern monetary theory and money creation.

wHoSe GoNNa PaY FoR It

The government can print money out of thin air. Taxation is to control inflation and centralize control.

The government can’t print money out of thin air.

The ECB is the only body in the Eurozone which can authorise the various mints to print bank notes (and when to do so and how many etc). The various mints have a bit more flexibility in minting coins but that is still subject to the ECB’s final say on it.

And, lest you suggest it, the ECB is explicitly required to ensure that inflation remains low, so any printing they authorise cannot lead to undue inflation (ie anything beyond minor levels of it).

RulesOfNature

View wrote: »

The government can’t print money out of thin air.

The ECB is the only body in the Eurozone which can authorise the various mints to print bank notes (and when to do so and how many etc). The various mints have a bit more flexibility in minting coins but that is still subject to the ECB’s final say on it.

And, lest you suggest it, the ECB is explicitly required to ensure that inflation remains low, so any printing they authorise cannot lead to undue inflation (ie anything beyond minor levels of it).

Mish-Mash Gobbledeegook. Im simplifying it for that one uninformed person who seem to be under the impression that the government gets money from the people, rather than it being printed literally out of thin air - the magic money tree of the fiat system.

KyussB

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Thats literally how it works. Read modern monetary theory and money creation.

wHoSe GoNNa PaY FoR It

The government can print money out of thin air. Taxation is to control inflation and centralize control.

Yep, with the caveat that you have to be careful with applying it to Euro countries, as - depending on how the ECB and EU is being run - the Euro can operate like a foreign currency, and at other times (like now due to the ECB's current policies) operate like a sovereign currency.

The Euro/EU is an incomplete/partially-pieced-together project. If it switches back to the Euro operating like a foreign currency, the EU will shortly fall apart due to economic crises forcing countries out - so it's trapped now into its current accommodating policies.

KyussB

View wrote: »

The government can’t print money out of thin air.

The ECB is the only body in the Eurozone which can authorise the various mints to print bank notes (and when to do so and how many etc). The various mints have a bit more flexibility in minting coins but that is still subject to the ECB’s final say on it.

And, lest you suggest it, the ECB is explicitly required to ensure that inflation remains low, so any printing they authorise cannot lead to undue inflation (ie anything beyond minor levels of it).

The ECB - despite there being a level of indirection with bond markets - handed governments that power years ago.

That power gets reined in when Eurozone countries reach recovery - yet that is the time that countries don't need to use that ability anymore - and that power gets extended once again when future economic slowdowns cause inflation to stall.

The old days of the Euro crisis and austerity bailouts are over. The ECB will not be going back to the policies of that era.

enricoh

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Its always about taking taxes and never about reducing spending. In the year of the words Essential/Non-essential, a government taking a cut out of your wage, the spending should be for ESSENTIAL services. Infrastructure, health, law and order.

Things that are not Essential are Party Political PR Spending in handing NGOs money (6bn) and Foreign Aid (1bn) every year. Simon Coveney was quick to hand the WHO cash when Donald Trump said he was defunding them, just to improve his own personal chances for the UN Gig. We gave the EU a net 16bn in the Covid recovery fund to bail out the Mediterranean tourist industry.

Right there we have 23billion of spending on stuff that we could have lived happily without in the space on a year. That's 4.5k for each and every one of us.


But no, they need to take more money off us and businesses to keep on spending more money on ****e we don't need.

Where would our poor politicians end up when they get voted out if they did cut that spending Richard! No more plum jobs in Brussels, the u.n , Irish quangos etc..
Sod that- stick up income tax 1 or 2 % and 10c on that dirty petrol instead, much more palatable!

ThunbergsAreGo

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Its always about taking taxes and never about reducing spending. In the year of the words Essential/Non-essential, a government taking a cut out of your wage, the spending should be for ESSENTIAL services. Infrastructure, health, law and order.

Things that are not Essential are Party Political PR Spending in handing NGOs money (6bn) and Foreign Aid (1bn) every year. Simon Coveney was quick to hand the WHO cash when Donald Trump said he was defunding them, just to improve his own personal chances for the UN Gig. We gave the EU a net 16bn in the Covid recovery fund to bail out the Mediterranean tourist industry.

Right there we have 23billion of spending on stuff that we could have lived happily without in the space on a year. That's 4.5k for each and every one of us.


But no, they need to take more money off us and businesses to keep on spending more money on ****e we don't need.

The government paying for people to lobby the government to spend more money, always irritates me

fliball123

RulesOfNature wrote: »

Thats literally how it works. Read modern monetary theory and money creation.

wHoSe GoNNa PaY FoR It

The government can print money out of thin air. Taxation is to control inflation and centralize control.

That would be the case if we had our own currency which we don't so we have absolutely zero control over it. So your modern monetary theory means jack sh1t. Money is being printed at the moment within Europe due to corona, wait till that tap gets turned off there as there will be no chance of France, Germany or any of the super powers in the EU will be listening to us as long as their economy is benefiting. They are also afraid of inflation. Its obvious you dont understand your a$$ from your elbow when it comes to such matters. So instead of trying to simplify things for others try and understand how printing money and the knock on effects impact countries. Ye know the whole picture

Fred Cryton

Richard Hillman wrote: »

Its always about taking taxes and never about reducing spending. In the year of the words Essential/Non-essential, a government taking a cut out of your wage, the spending should be for ESSENTIAL services. Infrastructure, health, law and order.

Things that are not Essential are Party Political PR Spending in handing NGOs money (6bn) and Foreign Aid (1bn) every year. Simon Coveney was quick to hand the WHO cash when Donald Trump said he was defunding them, just to improve his own personal chances for the UN Gig. We gave the EU a net 16bn in the Covid recovery fund to bail out the Mediterranean tourist industry.

Right there we have 23billion of spending on stuff that we could have lived happily without in the space on a year. That's 4.5k for each and every one of us.


But no, they need to take more money off us and businesses to keep on spending more money on ****e we don't need.

Agree with you on NGO's and Foreign Aid. The EU bailout is ultimately in our own interests though as we need the EU economy to recover, and yes that means tourist industry in the Med.



The real scandal is at a time of multi year budget deficits of €20bn+, we are still giving public sector pay RISES. And now they turn around and say we in the private sector should pay more "progressive" tax to fund that. What planet are they living on!

View

KyussB wrote: »

The ECB - despite there being a level of indirection with bond markets - handed governments that power years ago.

That power gets reined in when Eurozone countries reach recovery - yet that is the time that countries don't need to use that ability anymore - and that power gets extended once again when future economic slowdowns cause inflation to stall.

The old days of the Euro crisis and austerity bailouts are over. The ECB will not be going back to the policies of that era.

No the ECB did not do that.

Individual governments in the Eurozone do not have the legal authority to print money, so no government can operate a “printing press” model (on an individual basis).

View

Fred Cryton wrote: »

Agree with you on NGO's and Foreign Aid. The EU bailout is ultimately in our own interests though as we need the EU economy to recover, and yes that means tourist industry in the Med.



The real scandal is at a time of multi year budget deficits of €20bn+, we are still giving public sector pay RISES. And now they turn around and say we in the private sector should pay more "progressive" tax to fund that. What planet are they living on!

You are confusing two issues:
1) How we bring in tax revenue (ie on a progressive basis or not), and,
2) The amount of money we spend as a country.

It is perfectly possible to have a fair/progressive tax system and low government expenditure, or, equally an unfair/regressive tax system and high government expenditure

Fred Cryton

View wrote: »

You are confusing two issues:
1) How we bring in tax revenue (ie on a progressive basis or not), and,
2) The amount of money we spend as a country.

It is perfectly possible to have a fair/progressive tax system and low government expenditure, or, equally an unfair/regressive tax system and high government expenditure

I'm confusing nothing. Why do you equate fairness with "progressive". By definition it is unfair. A flat tax would be fair, by definition. Sounds like you're confused.



Any increase in expenditure is also related to this issue because guess who will be paying for it with a higher marginal tax rate.

micosoft

fael wrote: »

That other 30% should be allowed to build up some financial resilience again. I'm working 2 jobs now instead of 1 and I'm still barely able to pay my bills.

Yep. We should do it like the German system. If you pay your PRSI in proportion to your income your supports should be in proportion to your last income for a year and then step down. Say 70%. We have a system in Ireland where some folk are being rewarded for not achieving much whereas others are being crucified due to genuine misfortune. Finally the evidence is highly skilled staff need time to gain a new role which benefits everyone in the medium term and not nonsense like a qualified civil aircraft pilot stacking shelves in Tesco which benefits no-one.

Fred Cryton

Let the absurdity sink in for a moment.

ESRI are saying that we in the private sector should become poorer (by paying more taxes) so that the public sector can become richer (through pay rises).

landofthetree

Chips Lovell wrote: »

When it comes to taxation, it's quite tricky to compare like with like. There's tendency to focus on just income tax rates without taking into account allowances, credits and, the big one, social security contributions. We've a relatively high rate of income tax compared to a lot of countries, but PRSI contributions are fairly low.

According to the latest OECD figures, the tax wedge for the average Irish worker is well below the OECD average.

And that's just the tax on wages. We get off fairly lightly in terms of property and municipal taxes here:

We are competing with UK Auz Canada etc.

That's the option for Irish people. Not living in eurotrash countries.

So Irish people will continue to go these places for better opportunities and lower tax bills.

View

Fred Cryton wrote: »

I'm confusing nothing. Why do you equate fairness with "progressive". By definition it is unfair. A flat tax would be fair, by definition. Sounds like you're confused.



Any increase in expenditure is also related to this issue because guess who will be paying for it with a higher marginal tax rate.

A flat tax is by definition unfair since it would mean that the poorer pay disproportionately for the services that all citizens get. That is why countries use, or aspire to use, progressive taxes.

As for the latter point, that’s a “how much should we spend?” question, which, as I pointed out, is not necessarily linked to the “how do we collect the taxes?” question as you can have high government expenditure while having a highly regressive tax system.

suicide_circus

I know a couple of people (late 20s, early 30s, no kids) who moved to Portugal and the Canaries in order to WFH during lockdown. They aint coming back. Significant jump in quality of life. Not sure what the income tax implications are...

suicide_circus

ThunbergsAreGo wrote: »

I hear Pascal talking about how the pandemic showing we "need more government intervention in lives".

Did he actually say that?