OAP & Corporation Tax in the budget

bbam

I can fully understand that the coming budget must have a whole raft of cutbacks in public spending, we will have to face a few years of low or no investment in our public services..
I even understand that the tax base needs to be broadened to be less reliant on any one sector...

The two things that I can't understand or stomach...

1. Cutbacks in the OAP, is it not bad enough that people will be expected to work longer but they will also receive less when they do retire... The national pension reserve fund has been dipped into like petty cash alrerady, surely that is enough..

2. Why can we not increase the corporation tax even by 1%, it's not like the treasured multinationals are on the brink of going broke, many are making obsene sums of money.. Maybe a 1% levi for 3 years would be appropriate,

KerranJast

We're taking in 2003 tax levels so everything needs to go back to 2003 levels of spending that includes the OAP. The Govt should fast track a central means testing agency though (run by Revenue preferrably who seem to be the most effective PS body) to handle all means testing matters. That way any shortterm cuts to OAP, imposition of shortterm flat rate property and water taxes can be restored to those who can't afford it.

MaceFace

bbam wrote: »

I can fully understand that the coming budget must have a whole raft of cutbacks in public spending, we will have to face a few years of low or no investment in our public services..
I even understand that the tax base needs to be broadened to be less reliant on any one sector...

The two things that I can't understand or stomach...

1. Cutbacks in the OAP, is it not bad enough that people will be expected to work longer but they will also receive less when they do retire... The national pension reserve fund has been dipped into like petty cash alrerady, surely that is enough..

Maybe because the OAP in this country is very generous and considering we are essentially broke, why should any one group be immune?

bbam wrote: »

2. Why can we not increase the corporation tax even by 1%, it's not like the treasured multinationals are on the brink of going broke, many are making obsene sums of money.. Maybe a 1% levi for 3 years would be appropriate,

It may be increased, but considering this is one of the things the Tiger was built upon, increasing it now will have foreign companies who are thinking of either setting up or expanding here, think twice about their plans. If it goes up 1% now, will it go up another 1% next year?

The only way we will get out of this mess is by growth so personally I would loath to touch anything that would dampen the prospects of that.

ei.sdraob

bbam wrote: »

..

2. Why can we not increase the corporation tax even by 1%, it's not like the treasured multinationals are on the brink of going broke, many are making obsene sums of money.. Maybe a 1% levi for 3 years would be appropriate,

explained in detail here

tl:dr
* raising corporation tax to 15% would bring in only 640 million (in short term)
* medium to long term it will push existing companies (Intel) to move and/or not invest anymore in this country or not locate here anymore (greener fields elsewhere), this will mean job losses in the only sector of the economy that actually generates real wealth and is the only hope this country has left

Le King

Problem is, form a Public point of view is that the Government won't touch the Corporations instead they will hit the people who are working but only earning €200 per week.

Cut the dole for people who have been on it before the end of the Celtic Tiger. Far to many spongers still out there. Cut the thing by at least half. It's a disgrace that people have been able to sponge off the state for 5+ years without even attempting to get a job.

ei.sdraob

Le King wrote: »

Problem is, form a Public point of view is that the Government won't touch the Corporations instead they will hit the people who are working but only earning €200 per week.

the corporations are a major direct and indirect employer that actually create products and services that the world needs, therefore creating valuable REAL wealth, none of this housebuilding ****e (oh only if we could export shoebox apartments ).

hit them and Ireland looses the only unique selling point it has left and overtime more joblosses and less job creation, therefore more money spent on dole.

Le King wrote: »

Cut the dole for people who have been on it before the end of the Celtic Tiger. Far to many spongers still out there. Cut the thing by at least half. It's a disgrace that people have been able to sponge off the state for 5+ years without even attempting to get a job.

A staggered welfare insurance system like rest of continent would be a lot "fairer" and reasonable. (eg: if lost job then full amount your salary first few months then reducing at intervals once unemployed)

irishh_bob

bbam wrote: »

I can fully understand that the coming budget must have a whole raft of cutbacks in public spending, we will have to face a few years of low or no investment in our public services..
I even understand that the tax base needs to be broadened to be less reliant on any one sector...

The two things that I can't understand or stomach...

1. Cutbacks in the OAP, is it not bad enough that people will be expected to work longer but they will also receive less when they do retire... The national pension reserve fund has been dipped into like petty cash alrerady, surely that is enough..

2. Why can we not increase the corporation tax even by 1%, it's not like the treasured multinationals are on the brink of going broke, many are making obsene sums of money.. Maybe a 1% levi for 3 years would be appropriate,

i truly despair at the mushy headesness of people in this country when i have to constantly listen to the cries of how the elderly in this country are poor , they are not , on the contary , they are the least indebted and among the wealthiest section of society

you cannot be poor while bringing in 218 ( non contributary ) or 232 ( contributary ) while having no expenses bar food , more or less everything else is paid for by the state and the above figures only apply to non public sector workers and those who bought private pensions

spank_inferno

Quite true.
genuinely poor pensioners are few and far between.

All options should be on the table for cuts.

bladespin

KerranJast wrote: »

We're taking in 2003 tax levels so everything needs to go back to 2003 levels of spending that includes the OAP. The Govt should fast track a central means testing agency though (run by Revenue preferrably who seem to be the most effective PS body) to handle all means testing matters. That way any shortterm cuts to OAP, imposition of shortterm flat rate property and water taxes can be restored to those who can't afford it.

Most have already paid their property tax, can't see that one getting anywhere.
Water rates may be on the way but you can't impose a flat rate, wouldn't be fair, the roll out of metering will (as always) take years.
Totally agree on the means test being carried out by the revenue, still can't figure out how applying it to child benefit is so difficult that welfare can't do it.

bbam

I don't think OAP's are particularly well off and why should we begrudge them to be comfortable. Any OAP's I know are managing to get by by tight budgeting and help out's from their families..

Companies like Intel worry as much about gas and electricity costs than the Corpo Tax, decisions in investments are also as much Political than purely economical..

I do take the point on them stimulating any real future growth here, god knows I dont see where else it can come from...

Riskymove

OAPs are part of what is sometimes referred to as 'the deserving poor'

the spin is usually hard-working, working class types who paid all their stamps and would freeze/starve etc without the OAP

Other categories like the dole and single parents are usually viewed in a different light


in both cases reality is varied.....for example peoplewho are on welfare all their lives eventually get some sort of OAP yet people dont often see that aspect

Geuze

Why cut the COAP of 230 pw?


We should start first with typical public sector pensions of 700pw.

PS workers took 2 pay cuts, but their retired colleagues did not.

The pensioners got index-linked rises on the way up, but did not take a cut in line with the workers.

Plus they pay 0% tax up to 750 pw.

First, cut public service pensions by 5-10-12%.

Also, at the moment, a retired couple on 1200-1300 pw get medical cards. Surely that's too generous?

Also, once one spouse is over 70, they get the Household Benefits Package, even if they earn huge incomes.

I know plenty of retired people, on 1000-1200-1400 pw, with:

• medical cards
• free travel
• free TV licence, subsidised elec and telecom (over 70)
• Paying NIL income tax

Cutting the COAP should be further down the list.

Riskymove

Geuze wrote: »

We should start first with typical public sector pensions of 700pw.

I'd love some stats on that...700 'typical'??

PS workers took 2 pay cuts, but their retired colleagues did not.

true

The pensioners got index-linked rises on the way up, but did not take a cut in line with the workers.

actually no they did not...their increases were linked to public sector pay rises not index-linked

if they had have been index linked they woul;d actually be lower

Plus they pay 0% tax up to 750 pw.

same as everyone else?

rumour

bbam wrote: »

decisions in investments are also as much Political than purely economical..

The ONLY concern of an investor is return on his investment, otherwise the capital is stagnant or being defalted by other pressures.
That does involve political considerations but the sole focus is return return return.
The rest is just spin to keep factory workers happy.

Geuze

Riskymove wrote: »

I'd love some stats on that...700 'typical'??

OK, I am referring to typical teachers, APOs, plenty of local authority officials, Garda sarge / inspectors

I accept that plenty of public servants, e.g. COs will not get pensions of 700pw.

Howver, I still feel that thousands will

actually no they did not...their increases were linked to public sector pay rises not index-linked

OK, that's what I meant.

if they had have been index linked they woul;d actually be lower



same as everyone else?

No, once one spouse over 65, then up to 40k = zero tax.

..

Scofflaw

The OAP is politically hard to cut, because pensioners nearly all vote, and they're more likely to vote for the major parties. The only really well-attended protest we've had was against the removal of the non-means-tested medical card.

cordially,
Scofflaw

Riskymove

Geuze wrote: »

No, once one spouse over 65, then up to 40k = zero tax.
..

I meant that PS pensioners are treated the same as private sector pensioners for tax purposes

johnboy_123

OAPs should be means tested and taxed accordingly. Everyone has to share the pain