Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Are you going to pay the household charge? [Part 1]

Options
1…159160162164165…334

Comments

  • Options
    #4832
    donalg1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 3,513 ✭✭✭donalg1


    dvpower wrote: »
    I'm trying to ascertain the reasons for non paying this tax, that mark it out from other taxes.

    I'm wondering if its just that there is a perception that this tax is easy to evade so tax evaders will attempt to evade any tax they can.

    Well thats exactly it, people wont pay this tax because it wont be collected at source and is self declaration so they see a way of evading it, simple as that.

    There are no moral reasons for non payment, they dont want to part with €100 so they wont its that easy. And the whole reason people are joining the anti charge protests is because they think that if enough people dont pay the charge will be scrapped meaning there will be no consequences for them not paying.


  • Options
    #4833
    Frank Black
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Not everyone needs a dog. Everyone needs a home to live in. But only the ones that bought one, are targeted, as if they in some way use more services, or have more money.


    So, just to be clear - you don't think that people who rent houses will end up paying this tax indirectly?

    Course they will, once the market settles down and a bit of stability returns, the rental price of property charged by landlords will reflect the various charges against said property whether they be second home taxes or property taxes - it's how the market works. It's just easier from an administrative viewpoint to charge the owner.

    Don't worry - it will get passed on.


  • Options
    #4834
    Bullseye1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    It's called the Household Charge not the Homeowner Charge. Since that is the case anyone living in a house whether they own the property or simply renting should be responsible for paying this charge/tax. The person renting the property is also getting the benefit of these so called services we are being told this tax is going to pay.

    When the government eventually does bring in a property tax it should also a the same time bring in an occupation tax. Everyone should pay or no one should pay.

    I'm sure most people are getting sick of all these exemptions. Why should anyone be exempt paying anything?


  • Options
    #4835
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    seamus wrote: »
    The property's existence is continuous. The renter's is not. Therefore it makes more sense to charge the property, not the renter
    Which targets the home owner directly. As in the single property owner, in the home.
    I fail to see the issue. Local services need to be paid for. Which makes more sense - trying to gather a list of people living in an area and charging them individually, or compiling a list of properties and charging the properties directly?


    Again that was the point posters were making, the owners are the easy target. Its a poll tax, but aimed only at the people that are easy to identify. The property has little to do with it really, thats just an identification instrument.

    What is it that home owners have, that makes them more able to pay for the services everyone uses? I suspect its easy identifiction.


  • Options
    #4836
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    black francis wrote: »
    So, just to be clear - you don't think that people who rent houses will end up paying this tax indirectly?

    Course they will, once the market settles down and a bit of stability returns, the rental price of property charged by landlords will reflect the various charges against said property whether they be second home taxes or property taxes - it's how the market works. It's just easier from an administrative viewpoint to charge the owner.

    Don't worry - it will get passed on.

    Renters are not named liable. There is a fair difference there.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4837
    unklerosco
    Registered Users Posts: 7,828 ✭✭✭unklerosco


    I've just quickly read through some posts and I've noticed people saying local councils need the money....

    I live in Swords, there's a recycling centre near me.. Opens for 28hrs a week which is fine, everyone knows when it's open and goes down then to do there bits and bobs.
    From the 8th March it is now open 70hrs a week. This is due to the redeployment of waste collection staff in Fingal.

    Is it just me or does it seem bonkers to increase the weekly opening hours to move people that aren't need in one area to another just for the sake of it... (I understand that the other option is that they may have lost there jobs)

    I was also talking to a woman in the council earlier in the week who worked in childcare for 7yrs and was moved to roads and traffic as there was no funding left for her department.. Her words, "what the F**k do I know about roads", she was using her time in the roads dept to run fund raising events to get funding for childcare.... Madness, her her words...

    So no, I wont be fuelling the waste this gov. creates....


  • Options
    #4838
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    What is it that home owners have, that makes them more able to pay for the services everyone uses? I suspect its easy identifiction.
    Continuous possession. Even an unoccupied property incurs costs to the local authority.

    If you only levy residents, then local authorities with a high volume of unoccupied properties will have insufficient income to cover their costs. From the property owner's point of view this is a bad thing because it means a degradation in the local services, which results in lower property values and reduced rents.


  • Options
    #4839
    Annabella1
    Registered Users Posts: 638 ✭✭✭Annabella1


    I don't see why the Dail just don't leglisate to have it put on your ESB bill like it is done in other countries.This self declaration nonsense goes against the Irish psyche!


  • Options
    #4840
    Frank Black
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Renters are not named liable. There is a fair difference there.

    I'll assume you agree with my main point then, since you've not disagreed with my analysis.

    So are you against this because of an actual moral objection i.e. only owners end up paying for local services?

    Or only because the charge is specifically leveled against the owner, even though in reality it will be passed to the renter?

    TBH, of all the arguments that the 'no' side have put up - this must be one of the weakest yet.


  • Options
    #4841
    mconigol
    Registered Users Posts: 1,583 ✭✭✭mconigol


    black francis wrote: »
    I'll assume you agree with my main point then, since you've not disagreed with my analysis.

    So are you against this because of an actual moral objection i.e. only owners end up paying for local services?

    Or only because the charge is specifically leveled against the owner, even though in reality it will be passed to the renter?

    TBH, of all the arguments that the 'no' side have put up - this must be one of the weakest yet.

    And what exactly are the pro arguments?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4842
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    mconigol wrote: »
    And what exactly are the pro arguments?

    1. The state needs money to pay for everyday costs
    2. Property taxes are one of the most stable forms of income you can have, i.e. they do not vary with the strength of the economy


  • Options
    #4843
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    seamus wrote: »
    Continuous possession. Even an unoccupied property incurs costs to the local authority.

    So home owners are targeted with this tax because of continuing possession, and not because they are the easiest to identify?

    And maybe also because there is this ingrained belief that home owners have wealth that non owners dont maybe. In this country now, its the other way around in many cases.


  • Options
    #4844
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    So home owners are targeted with this tax because of continuing possession, and not because they are the easiest to identify?

    And maybe also because there is this ingrained belief that home owners have wealth that non owners dont maybe. In this country now, its the other way around in many cases.
    It helps that they're easier to identify. It makes it cheaper to collect the tax.
    It's exactly the same reason why management companies charge fees against the unit owner and not against the renter.

    It's got nothing to do with the ability to pay. If you live in your property, then I don't see the problem. If you rent out a property, then you factor this new tax into your rental income


  • Options
    #4845
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    seamus wrote: »
    1. The state needs money to pay for everyday costs
    2. Property taxes are one of the most stable forms of income you can have, i.e. they do not vary with the strength of the economy

    True, because they dont account of peoples ability to pay. Thats why they are seen as a stable income.

    Leave it at €100 and it will still be a stable level of income. But it will in reality be an ever increasing level of income.

    Will taxing their way out of recession work?


  • Options
    #4846
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    black francis wrote: »
    TBH, of all the arguments that the 'no' side have put up - this must be one of the weakest yet.

    Is it a personal contest to you? If it is, then here you are, your dog licence comparison wins the entire thread.


  • Options
    #4847
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    unklerosco wrote: »
    I've just quickly read through some posts and I've noticed people saying local councils need the money....

    I live in Swords, there's a recycling centre near me.. Opens for 28hrs a week which is fine, everyone knows when it's open and goes down then to do there bits and bobs.
    From the 8th March it is now open 70hrs a week. This is due to the redeployment of waste collection staff in Fingal.

    Is it just me or does it seem bonkers to increase the weekly opening hours to move people that aren't need in one area to another just for the sake of it... (I understand that the other option is that they may have lost there jobs).

    Just you?

    Longer opening hours equals more profit in this case as the staff are not extra staff hired. My local recycling too has extended hours and is now accepting general household waste for a charge, thats an extra bit of money for the council plus its suits those who cannot deliver waste during normal office hours.


  • Options
    #4848
    ebbsy
    Registered Users Posts: 6,796 ✭✭✭ebbsy


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    True, because they dont account of peoples ability to pay. Thats why they are seen as a stable income.

    Leave it at €100 and it will still be a stable level of income. But it will in reality be an ever increasing level of income.

    Will taxing their way out of recession work?

    No I d'ont think it will.

    And no amout of tax we pay can get us out of this situation, Ireland is too small a country.


  • Options
    #4849
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Leave it at €100 and it will still be a stable level of income. But it will in reality be an ever increasing level of income.

    Less than a tenner a month for your services, that's a bargain you should grab right now!


  • Options
    #4850
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    gurramok wrote: »
    Less than a tenner a month for your services, that's a bargain you should grab right now!

    So my other taxes are gone once i pay that €10 a month?


  • Options
    #4851
    Frank Black
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Is it a personal contest to you? If it is, then here you are, your dog licence comparison wins the entire thread.


    You're the one who seems obsessed with the dog license at this stage. I've almost started to think of it as your dog license comparisson.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4852
    mikom
    Closed Accounts Posts: 16,391 ✭✭✭✭mikom


    gurramok wrote: »
    Less than a tenner a month for your services, that's a bargain you should grab right now!

    You may as well say the first five syringes of heroin are available at 50c a piece......... that's a bargain you should grab right now!

    Place your mouth on the hook for me little fishy.


  • Options
    #4853
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    black francis wrote: »
    You're the one who seems obsessed with the dog license at this stage. I've almost started to think of it as your dog license comparisson.

    You said the exact same thing about the motor tax yesterday, and brought it up again yourself today. Be good francis.


  • Options
    #4854
    Stiffler2
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 1,536 ✭✭✭Stiffler2


    Is there any websites that shows current / Live statistics of how many people have paid the charge so far ?

    I will base my decision on how many people have and have not paid.


  • Options
    #4855
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Will taxing their way out of recession work?
    It can, if it's done properly.

    The problem is that governments usually end up increasing the unstable forms of tax such as VAT. This then results in people reducing their spend on these taxes, which results in hardship for business, and pushes the economy further into the mire.

    But if taxes are rebalanced to use stable taxes and actually reduce unstable tax rates, this can result in an overall increase in tax take. You can slot in a property tax while reducing (for example) income tax and VAT. This results in no net change to the tax take, but what it does is create an effective increase in disposable income because products and services are now cheaper.

    Reducing taxes to bring in more income is a little counter-intuitive, but the same effect actually works with product pricing. If you sell something at €10 profit per unit, you might sell 100 of them and walk away with €1,000. But if you reduce your profit to €2 per unit, you can sell 1,000 of them.

    This has the effect of increasing the tax take via the unstable taxes and increasing consumer spend in the economy, improving the health of the economy. If the economy dives again, you still have your stable taxes coming in.

    If a country has been working off unstable taxes for a while (like we have). then there is a transition period where it seems like everyone's getting utterly screwed by taxes all over the place. That's where we are right now.


  • Options
    #4856
    Frank Black
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,296 ✭✭✭Frank Black


    Stiffler2 wrote: »
    I will base my decision on how many people have and have not paid.


    A 'free-thinker' has entered our midst.


  • Options
    #4857
    gurramok
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,992 ✭✭✭✭gurramok


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    So my other taxes are gone once i pay that €10 a month?

    Do you expect to get your services for free? Freeloading is not nice.


  • Options
    #4858
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    donalg1 wrote: »
    There are no moral reasons for non payment, they dont want to part with €100 so they wont its that easy. And the whole reason people are joining the anti charge protests is because they think that if enough people dont pay the charge will be scrapped meaning there will be no consequences for them not paying.
    I wonder how many people opposing the charge are people who own large, expensive houses and know that once the full property tax is introduced, they will be hit with large tax bills.


  • Options
    #4859
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    gurramok wrote: »
    Do you expect to get your services for free? Freeloading is not nice.

    So the services are not €10 a month, you said we can get our services for €10 a month a couple of posts back. #4849


  • Options
    #4860
    dvpower
    Closed Accounts Posts: 9,183 ✭✭✭dvpower


    unklerosco wrote: »
    So no, I wont be fuelling the waste this gov. creates....
    Are you going to start evading your other taxes too?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #4861
    mconigol
    Registered Users Posts: 1,583 ✭✭✭mconigol


    seamus wrote: »
    1. The state needs money to pay for everyday costs
    2. Property taxes are one of the most stable forms of income you can have, i.e. they do not vary with the strength of the economy

    They are arguments for a general property tax. Not valid arguments for the justification of this specific charge.

    Actually in general they are piss poor anyway.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement