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

Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 2] *Poll Reset*

Options
1…7071737576…332

Comments

  • Options
    #2162
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    I haven't paid it because I don't own a house, but if I had a house I'd definitely pay it because I'm not an absolute scrub.


  • Options
    #2163
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Sheeps wrote: »
    I haven't paid it because I don't own a house, but if I had a house I'd definitely pay it because I'm not an absolute scrub.

    What is the point in you posting that, you are not paying. How much would you pay if you had to pay? what is too much?


  • Options
    #2164
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    bgrizzley wrote: »
    have you an opinion as to why the family home isnt CGT taxable(asset or not aside)?

    i could have a house worth 5 million, sell it and buy somewhere for 200k.
    4.8m for Pina coladas, thats a lot of CGT

    Not really. There's both CGT and property tax applied to homes elsewhere in europe though - so maybe you should keep schtum?


  • Options
    #2165
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    hondasam wrote: »
    What do I get? this should be good.

    How do you get to your gaff? Accessible by nothing other than helicopter I'm guessing? Your local town - no pavements or lighting there either?


  • Options
    #2166
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    hondasam wrote: »
    What is the point in you posting that, you are not paying. How much would you pay if you had to pay? what is too much?

    I'd pay €100 per house that I own. That's not too much at all. Even to have the street outside my house swept on a regular basis it's worth it, with out even bringing the fire and other emergency services in to it. Also, I live opposite a nice park. I would like people to pay their taxes so that that park is maintained to it's current standards and so that I can continue to enjoy it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2167
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    They factor it into the cost - simple really.

    It does not seem all that simple, as i asked where they get extra money from, to pay this extra tax. I did not ask how will they manage. The have no more money than the non home owner, but must pay extra. So tell me where this extra money comes from that makes home owners more taxable?

    You said they have wealth.

    Ok. A person has 200k in bank account. Next week he buys a 200k house. No more wealthy than last week, but now finds he has to pay extra tax.

    So its not a wealth tax. He has the same worth. So where has this new wealth appeared from? The real fact is, property is simply used as a status to tax people extra. Nothing more.

    And if its a 200k home bought with a mortgage, their net worth has remained the same also.

    A negative equity home owner is financially far worse off than a renter. Their net worth is a large negative figure. But you in your word twisting posts, believe they still have wealth.

    Id find it hard to believe you actually really believe that, but must stick with it in boards land now.


  • Options
    #2168
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    alastair wrote: »
    How do you get to your gaff? Inaccessible by nothing other than helicopter I'm guessing? Your local town - no pavements or lighting there either?

    I agree with this post, yes I use the local town. They do little for the roads out the country.
    Sheeps wrote: »
    I'd pay €100 per house that I own. That's not too much at all. Even to have the street outside my house swept on a regular basis it's worth it, with out even bringing the fire and other emergency services in to it. Also, I live opposite a nice park. I would like people to pay their taxes so that that park is maintained to it's current standards and so that I can continue to enjoy it.

    Enjoy your trolling.


  • Options
    #2169
    Bullseye1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    hondasam wrote: »
    I pay for my own rubbish too, I cannot pass this payment onto anyone. Commercial premises factor rates in the price they charge the customer I would imagine. I'm not having a go at shops, I know how hard it is for them at the moment.

    Absolutely but when people complain about the cost of everything in this country they should remember that retailers pay a large portion of this price in rates to local authorities, VAT to government, Duty/Imports to government, VAT on ESB to government, transportation expenses (substantial amounts to government). If people analysed what they spend and where that mony goes they will see it goes to prop up a corrupt and disfunctional system called government. And god forbid you ever need anything from government including the HSE and you will see how well it's actually spent. Anyone who suggests we should give more money to government is a government shill trying to protect their own interests.


  • Options
    #2170
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    It does not seem all that simple, as i asked where they get extra money from, to pay this extra tax. I did not ask how will they manage. The have no more money than the non home owner, but must pay extra. So tell me where this extra money comes from that makes home owners more taxable?

    You said they have wealth.

    Ok. A person has 200k in bank account. Next week he buys a 200k house. No more wealthy than last week, but now finds he has to pay extra tax.

    So its not a wealth tax. He has the same worth. So where has this new wealth appeared from? The real fact is, property is simply used as a status to tax people extra. Nothing more.

    And if its a 200k home bought with a mortgage, their net worth has remained the same also.

    A negative equity home owner is financially far worse off than a renter. Their net worth is a large negative figure. But you in your word twisting posts, believe they still have wealth.

    Id find it hard to believe you actually really believe that, but must stick with it in boards land now.

    The wealth is in the property. Your notional buyer chose to transfer wealth into the property. Poor choices or misfortune leading to negative equity still doesn't remove the fact that there is still wealth in the asset.

    People everywhere outside this state pay more taxes on the back of property ownership - we did ourselves until relatively recently. It's the norm - not any 'status' issue.


  • Options
    #2171
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    hondasam wrote: »
    I agree with this post, yes I use the local town. They do little for the roads out the country.



    Enjoy your trolling.
    How is that trolling? If the funds that go to maintaining my area are reduced due to people in my area not paying the tax that funds that body, that's a legitimate complaint.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2172
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    hondasam wrote: »
    I agree with this post, yes I use the local town. They do little for the roads out the country.

    So - just to confirm - you have no road leading up to your house, and your local town is indeed devoid of both paths and public lighting?


  • Options
    #2173
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Sheeps wrote: »
    How is that trolling? If the funds that go to maintaining my area are reduced due to people in my area not paying the tax that funds that body, that's a legitimate complaint.

    Not trolling?

    You post here to tell tax payers to pay up for services you want maintained to your satisfaction but you are not paying yourself. You not see anything wrong with that?


  • Options
    #2174
    bgrizzley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭bgrizzley


    alastair wrote: »
    Not really. There's both CGT and property tax applied to homes elsewhere in europe though - so maybe you should keep schtum?


    sounds like a good idea to me. dept of finance reckon they are losing 120 mill a year over the exemtion, thats more than they got from the household tax. phil hogan should have had a look at this


    While the potential Exchequer cost in terms of revenue foregone, estimated at £120 million per annum, is very significant a number of important points must be borne in mind: (i) The abolition of this exemption would be seen as a tax on the family home and would be difficult to introduce without the provision of roll-over relief. (ii) The provision of roll-over relief would significantly reduce the actual revenue raised as the tax liability on the gain from the sale of a principal private residence would be in most cases deferred by purchasing another residence. (iii) CGT levied on the principal private residence would probably disproportionately affect the older sections of the community as they are more likely to trade down. (iv) The introduction of CGT on the sales of private residences would have an impact on the housing market as mobility may be discouraged with consequential adverse implication for house prices generally. Consequently, the introduction of CGT on the principal private residence would, it seems, conflict with a number of other public policy objectives.




    www.finance.gov.ie/viewdoc.asp?DocID=1464


  • Options
    #2175
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    Poor choices or misfortune leading to negative equity still doesn't remove the fact that there is still wealth in the asset.
    So its not the persons financial status thats being taxed then? I thought you said it was a wealth tax?
    People everywhere outside this state pay more taxes on the back of property ownership - we did ourselves until relatively recently. It's the norm - not any 'status' issue.

    But it is a status issue. How valuable the property is to the person is not accounted for at all.


  • Options
    #2176
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    bgrizzley wrote: »
    sounds like a good idea to me. dept of finance reckon they are losing 120 mill a year over the exemtion, thats more than they got from the household tax. phil hogan should have had a look at this

    Keep in mind that the property tax income will be a good deal larger than 120 million soon enough.


  • Options
    #2177
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    So its not the persons financial status thats being taxed then? I thought you said it was a wealth tax?



    But it is a status issue. How valuable the property is to the person is not accounted for at all.

    Again - the wealth is in the property. A millionare with a cheap gaff will only pay what the cheap gaff is valued at.


  • Options
    #2178
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    Again - the wealth is in the property. A millionare with a cheap gaff will only pay what the cheap gaff is valued at.

    So you do indeed believe a home owner with a 200k house and a 300k mortgage, has taxable wealth?

    One of your earlier arguments was that the wealth in a home could be aquired if the owner sells it, and it is this wealth that the tax is based on. Correct? Or have you changed your mind on that too?


  • Options
    #2179
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    alastair wrote: »
    So - just to confirm - you have no road leading up to your house, and your local town is indeed devoid of both paths and public lighting?

    I did say I agreed with you Alastair re the local town.
    As for roads leading to my home, they are poorly maintained. I still do not get the same services for my money as people living in the town or city.


  • Options
    #2180
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    hondasam wrote: »
    I did say I agreed with you Alastair re the local town.
    As for roads leading to my home, they are poorly maintained. I still do not get the same services for my money as people living in the town or city.

    Care to name this strange town that has neither paths or lights? There is no town in your county with either? I'm struggling to place which county that might be.

    You actually get a subsidy in terms of roads from those in cities - the provision of roads in lightly populated areas has a much greater overhead than in urban areas.


  • Options
    #2181
    Sheeps
    Registered Users Posts: 2,762 ✭✭✭Sheeps


    hondasam wrote: »
    Not trolling?

    You post here to tell tax payers to pay up for services you want maintained to your satisfaction but you are not paying yourself. You not see anything wrong with that?
    It's not my responsibility, I don't own a house.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2182
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    So you do indeed believe a home owner with a 200k house and a 300k mortgage, has taxable wealth?

    One of your earlier arguments was that the wealth in a home could be aquired if the owner sells it, and it is this wealth that the tax is based on. Correct? Or have you changed your mind on that too?

    What am I supposed to have changed my mind on - remind me?

    And yes - obviously you can access the wealth in your house by selling it.


  • Options
    #2183
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    Sheeps wrote: »
    It's not my responsibility, I don't own a house.

    Well then, it looks like you are indeed trolling.


  • Options
    #2184
    bgrizzley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭bgrizzley


    alastair wrote: »
    Keep in mind that the property tax income will be a good deal larger than 120 million soon enough.

    if its still there, they are already considering more exemptions, sounds like panic stations to me.:)


  • Options
    #2185
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    alastair wrote: »
    Care to name this strange town that has neither paths or lights? There is no town in your county with either? I'm struggling to place which county that might be.

    For the last time I agreed you were right about the local towns, I avail of these services. Is it that hard to understand? Let it go ffs.


  • Options
    #2186
    bgrizzley
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,641 ✭✭✭bgrizzley


    Sheeps wrote: »
    It's not my responsibility, I don't own a house.

    scrub the kettle, its calling the pot black......:rolleyes:


  • Options
    #2187
    Bullseye1
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,731 ✭✭✭Bullseye1


    Many millionaires will be exempt from the property tax if Brian Hayes has his way.


  • Options
    #2188
    hondasam
    Closed Accounts Posts: 34,419 ✭✭✭✭hondasam


    Sheeps wrote: »
    It's not my responsibility, I don't own a house.

    Why are you in this thread then?

    You think it's mine and every other home owners responsibility to make sure your local park is kept nice for your benefit?

    I live opposite a nice park. I would like people to pay their taxes so that that park is maintained to it's current standards and so that I can continue to enjoy it

    You really not see anything wrong with your post?


  • Options
    #2189
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    alastair wrote: »
    What am I supposed to have changed my mind on - remind me?

    And yes - obviously you can access the wealth in your house by selling it.

    Earlier in the other thread, when asked where the wealth you say people are taxed on, comes from in a home, you said its if they ever sell it. So, based in this, its safe to assume you believe people are paying a tax on a house, because of the potential wealth if they sell.

    Ok so far?

    Right so. The potential to sell and aquire the wealth seems to be the key to your wealth tax idea.

    And maybe now you can, based on this, explain what a negative equity home owners property tax is based on? I wonder can you explain, without mentioning motor tax?


  • Options
    #2190
    Bruthal
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,422 ✭✭✭✭Bruthal


    hondasam wrote: »
    Why are you in this thread then?

    You think it's mine and every other home owners responsibility to make sure your local park is kept nice for your benefit?




    You really not see anything wrong with your post?

    Nicely spotted that that poster is not a home owner:)


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #2191
    alastair
    Registered Users Posts: 19,307 ✭✭✭✭alastair


    robbie7730 wrote: »
    Earlier in the other thread, when asked where the wealth you say people are taxed on, comes from in a home, you said its if they ever sell it. So, based in this, its safe to assume you believe people are paying a tax on a house, because of the potential wealth if they sell.

    Ok so far?

    Right so. The potential to sell and aquire the wealth seems to be the key to your wealth tax idea.

    And maybe now you can, based on this, explain what a negative equity home owners property tax is based on? I wonder can you explain, without mentioning motor tax?

    Geez. Again - The wealth is contained in the asset. Regardless of whether the owner paid 300k for it or not, a property valued at 200k has 200k of wealth stored inside it. Now there may indeed be waivers for some in serious negative equity on the basis of ability-to-pay, but it has nothing to do with the issue of the wealth in the property - which is still 200k.

    Now - what am I supposed to have changed my mind on?


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement