New Household Tax - Boycott

Fizzlesque

djpbarry wrote: »

They’re not two separate points. You said you reduced your expenditure by 70%. You also said that your efforts were in vain because anything you saved will now be spent on the household charge. If that 70% equates to €100, that would mean you are now only spending about €43 per year (and previously only spending about €143 per year), which is obviously complete nonsense.

They are two separate points. However, I will admit I didn't express them as well as I could, or perhaps, should, have done.

My mention of 70% reduction in my expenditure was in relation to the fact I've had to reduce my expenditure considerably since this recession resulted in my working week being slashed to two days, instead of five. If I can make that kind of a reduction, then surely it's possible for the government to reduce their expenditure too. That was my intended point.

My apologies for what, obviously, looked like I was saying ALL my savings, throughout ALL of this recession, due to these sacrifices, would now be taken from me by the government. Those savings are actually only on-paper savings anyway because I don't have the 'saved cash', I just don't have the expenses any more. There isn't more money in my pocket because of these changes I've made, but nor are there demands for payment arriving in my door because I'm not availing of these services. The 70% reduction didn't happen overnight - it has been a cumulative process over a number of years.

However, in order to stick with your rigid interpretation of my hastily typed post, let me add this: This year, I couldn't afford the 100 euro Greyhound wanted up-front for bin collections so I decided to take on that chore myself (I cycle to the recycle centre, and use a compost bin, and take good care not to bring 'stuff' into my house that will need to be disposed of in one form or another), so, with regard to that particular 'saving', which did happen at the same time as the household charge came into being, yes, the government do want ALL of what I've managed not to spend this year - namely 100 euro.

I've already outlined, in my original post, that I have no problem paying a little extra to fund local authorities, my issue is with it being connected to my house. It's common knowledge the fee will increase considerably in the coming years - regardless of the fact my house doesn't earn an income. If I'm earning more, I'll happily pay more tax, because I'll be able to afford to, but I don't believe my house should be considered a taxable thing.

Fizzlesque

djpbarry wrote: »

Oh and that's not calculus, it's simple arithmetic.

T'was a tongue in cheek response, a jovial nick-name. You're far too serious a chap for me.

john reilly

The Waltzing Consumer wrote: »

Point 1) How is it more decent and selfless to protest something that does not effect you? There has always been a large element of people who are exempt from taxes/charges protesting these issues, not for the moral point, but simply for publicity, good example, the bin charge.

Point 2) They don't give it away, they give it to SF. If this was "honourable", they would return it to the exchequer. Can you explain how if the average wage this TD takes is 36k, how can he claim 31k in explenses for 2011? Is he saying that he spent 31k of his 36k salary on expenses? How does that add up? Only 5k of his salary was spent on everything else? The Evening Herald article says he spends 1k a month on rent, so that is 12k. So these figures do not add up.

Also look at the expense spreadsheet again before you start yapping about troughs. The smaller parties are well able to stick their noses in it and that is backed up by the figures.

Point 3) People do not argue like that but I am sick to death of smaller political parties who try to champion themselves as defenders of "the poor" who are simply liars and have the snout stuck in the trough just as much, if not much, then the larger parties. Again, look at the expenses spreadsheet for 2011.

the famines in africa dont affect me but i still give to charities working there.

Bullseye1

djpbarry wrote: »

I don't understand your point? First of all, the average annual salary in Ireland is around about €36k. Secondly, so what if not every fresh graduate gets €27k - the vast majority do not own property.
€14 billion worth?

As much of that €14 billion as possible. Your entitled to your opinion on where and how taxes are taken. And in principle I have no problem with the proposed property tax. But before I see more significant tax taken out of my disposable income i want to see significant savings in public expenditure. If your spending beyond your means you need to cut back.

The Waltzing Consumer

john reilly wrote: »

the famines in africa dont affect me but i still give to charities working there.

That is very nice

Stheno

I've paid the household charge, partly as I'm going through a marital seperation and don't want it to add to any issues in the final seperation/divorce.

I've also paid it as I feel it's only right to obey the laws of the land

However I do feel a deep resentment that while I consider myself to be a good citizen, this money is going to support a system which signed up to the CPA and yet nothing significant appears to have been achieved as a result of that agreement, the HSE still have thousands of staff in HR, the public sector still appears inefficient etc.

The irony is how efficient they have been in dealing with setting up a system to cope with the household charge!

neris

Ive gone to pay just now but not paying as it wants my pps number but dont see what a pps number has to do with it im putting in a wrong number which tells me im wrong .. do they think theres a phantom household charge paying fairy going around who might pay random stangers fees just for the fun of it

Stheno

neris wrote: »

Ive gone to pay just now but not paying as it wants my pps number but dont see what a pps number has to do with it im putting in a wrong number which tells me im wrong .. do they think theres a phantom household charge paying fairy going around who might pay random stangers fees just for the fun of it

Eh so the revenue can match you up on your PPS number and the properties you own?

Bullseye1

As far as I know you can click no PPS on the first page so it's not necessary.

ArmaniJeanss

neris wrote: »

Ive gone to pay just now but not paying as it wants my pps number but dont see what a pps number has to do with it im putting in a wrong number which tells me im wrong .. do they think theres a phantom household charge paying fairy going around who might pay random stangers fees just for the fun of it

I love that they make you do two capchas as well.

Clearly stopping all those spam bots registering and paying €100.

FreudianSlippers

zom wrote: »

djpbarry wrote: »

€27k is a pretty good salary for a fresh graduate.

The point is that for some people expect that everyone get €27k straight after graduation and that everyone can easily pay €100 (or even €1000) household charge. There is still people like that (especially in government), absolutely disconnected from reality...

How do people own a house on €27k right after graduation?

FreudianSlippers

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Einhard wrote: »

Honest question here- how do those people who are against the property charge propose to fund the services that the state provides?

Through existing taxes and efficiencies and cuts to social welfare. If working people are expected to take a reduction in take home pay why not people on social welfare and pensions?

That completely fails to realistically consider the budget. There is no way to cut spending to plug the hole. Well, there is; but it would mean ending welfare for the foreseeable future.

Bullseye1

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That completely fails to realistically consider the budget. There is no way to cut spending to plug the hole. Well, there is; but it would mean ending welfare for the foreseeable future.

Spending still needs to be cut. No matter how much it hurts. Expecting people to pay more taxes without change is also unrealistic.

FreudianSlippers

neris wrote: »

Ive gone to pay just now but not paying as it wants my pps number but dont see what a pps number has to do with it im putting in a wrong number which tells me im wrong .. do they think theres a phantom household charge paying fairy going around who might pay random stangers fees just for the fun of it

God forbid the government gets your PPS number and knows not to charge you with a criminal offence of non-payment.

Bullseye1

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Spending still needs to be cut. No matter how much it hurts. Expecting people to pay more taxes without change is also unrealistic.

They are cutting billions off the budget each year, or have you not noticed?

Bullseye1

Rojomcdojo wrote: »

They are cutting billions off the budget each year, or have you not noticed?

Half by tax rises and expenditure on public infrastructure. The low level fruit.

FreudianSlippers

Bullseye1 wrote: »

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

That completely fails to realistically consider the budget. There is no way to cut spending to plug the hole. Well, there is; but it would mean ending welfare for the foreseeable future.

Spending still needs to be cut. No matter how much it hurts. Expecting people to pay more taxes without change is also unrealistic.

I would submit the government has made cuts in line with the amount of the household charge. Not enough. I mean, I'm not disagreeing with you that we need to make serious cuts, but that's no reason to say that the household charge is wrong.

The problem is that everyone is moaning about "austerity". I could go outside this minute and find 5 posters that have that word on them in a 2 minute walk. They don't know austerity and the government cuts thus far are miles away from austerity. We need deep cuts as much as we need te household charge and, in reality, property tax.

Bullseye1

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Half by tax rises and expenditure on public infrastructure. The low level fruit.

FreudianSlippers puts it well, the problem being that half who oppose the household charge oppose it for reasons relating to a lack of significant cuts, while the other half oppose it because they feel that they have been on the receiving end of *too many* cuts.

The rest of us are in the middle somewhere.

Bullseye1

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

I would submit the government has made cuts in line with the amount of the household charge. Not enough. I mean, I'm not disagreeing with you that we need to make serious cuts, but that's no reason to say that the household charge is wrong.

The problem is that everyone is moaning about "austerity". I could go outside this minute and find 5 posters that have that word on them in a 2 minute walk. They don't know austerity and the government cuts thus far are miles away from austerity. We need deep cuts as much as we need te household charge and, in reality, property tax.

I agree with you. I'm just making the point we need to tackle waste while the IMF are still here or we have no chance. When the pensioners took to the street they folded. We cannot afford them to fold on reductions in social welfare and public sector pay and pensions or we are well and truely finished.

Fizzlesque

I'd like to ask the posters who are perfectly happy to pay a property tax, and (seemingly) have plenty of money to do so, a few questions:

1. What figure/amount would you consider appropriate for this tax?

2. What figure/amount would the tax need to reach for it to be difficult for you to manage to pay?

3. Do you think this tax should rise every year?

4. Do you think those who can't afford to pay it should sell their houses in order cease to be liable for the charge? Or should there be waivers for those who don't have the money - if yes, do you believe the charge should accumulate until they're earning more money, if that happens in the future, and be paid in full then or start at the beginning then?

5. What do you truly believe the money from this tax will be spent on?

6. What do you think is the fairest method of assessing how much each household should be charged? [I know that's very similar to question 1, but I mean method rather than amount].

FreudianSlippers

Fizzlesque wrote: »

I'd like to ask the posters who are perfectly happy to pay a property tax, and (seemingly) have plenty of money to do so, a few questions:

1. What figure/amount would you consider appropriate for this tax?

2. What figure/amount would the tax need to reach for it to be difficult for you to manage to pay?

3. Do you think this tax should rise every year?

For this tax, the household charge? €100 is fine. When this is replaced by the property tax, I suggested a 10 year fixed tax of 0.1% per annum of the value of your property (either appraised right now or based on future sales) on the owner of the property.

So if your house is worth €150,000 on the market on a set date by the legislation, say 1st January 2013, then for 10 years you pay €150/year. If you sell that house for €200,000 then the new buyer would pay €200/year and you buy a house for €500,000 you pay €500/year. The percentage rate does not change until a review in 2022 to be implemented in 2023 (with the understanding at least that it should stay under 0.5% ish).

There is also flat €50 per annum "household charge" for renters.

4. Do you think those who can't afford to pay it should sell their houses in order cease to be liable for the charge? Or should there be waivers for those who don't have the money - if yes, do you believe the charge should accumulate until they're earning more money, if that happens in the future, and be paid in full then or start at the beginning then?

As it stands it levels a charge against the house. Nobody is being forced to sell their house - however, if you cannot afford the €100/year perhaps home ownership is generally a poor choice for you at the moment.

5. What do you truly believe the money from this tax will be spent on?

Local governmental services.

6. What do you think is the fairest method of assessing how much each household should be charged? [I know that's very similar to question 1, but I mean method rather than amount].

I touch on this in the beginning of the post. I suppose the only fair way to do it is to have each household appraised by an independent group of people that calculate based on the size of your home, the area and comparable listings/sales in the area for the first "valuation". Then after that it's based on the actual purchase price of the home in future sales.

oldyouth

Fizzlesque wrote: »

I'd like to ask the posters who are perfectly happy to pay a property tax, and (seemingly) have plenty of money to do so, a few questions:

1. What figure/amount would you consider appropriate for this tax?

2. What figure/amount would the tax need to reach for it to be difficult for you to manage to pay?

3. Do you think this tax should rise every year?

4. Do you think those who can't afford to pay it should sell their houses in order cease to be liable for the charge? Or should there be waivers for those who don't have the money - if yes, do you believe the charge should accumulate until they're earning more money, if that happens in the future, and be paid in full then or start at the beginning then?

5. What do you truly believe the money from this tax will be spent on?

6. What do you think is the fairest method of assessing how much each household should be charged? [I know that's very similar to question 1, but I mean method rather than amount].

I paid the tax and can answer you as follows.

1. I don't think any figure is appropriate, it is not a well thought out tax
2. It wasn't too difficult to pay it at €100, but my circumstances are changing shortly, so even that amount will be a challange when it increases next year
3. I don't think it should but I think it will
4. I don't care what other people do as long as those liable to pay, like me, do so.
5. The tax will be used to pay off the National Debt, I'm under no illusions about that
6. A property tax based on the size of the house they live in (not value) including those in local authority housing

Fizzlesque

FreudianSlippers wrote: »

For this tax, the household charge? €100 is fine. When this is replaced by the property tax, I suggested a 10 year fixed tax of 0.1% per annum of the value of your property (either appraised right now or based on future sales) on the owner of the property.

So if your house is worth €150,000 on the market on a set date by the legislation, say 1st January 2013, then for 10 years you pay €150/year. If you sell that house for €200,000 then the new buyer would pay €200/year and you buy a house for €500,000 you pay €500/year. The percentage rate does not change until a review in 2022 to be implemented in 2023 (with the understanding at least that it should stay under 0.5% ish).

There is also flat €50 per annum "household charge" for renters.


As it stands it levels a charge against the house. Nobody is being forced to sell their house - however, if you cannot afford the €100/year perhaps home ownership is generally a poor choice for you at the moment

Thanks for your reply, Freudian Slippers. I can't figure out how to choose portions of a post to quote - so sorry for having to lump the whole thing together instead of responding to selected sections.

If the charge was to remain as small as 150 for ten years, and then reviewed in ten years and only increased a small amount (or decreased) I'd be less nervous about it. I don't like the idea of my house being taxed because it means I'll be paying for it forever instead of only until the mortgage is paid off - which kind of defeats some of the purpose, for me.

However, if it was to remain a small and manageable sum, I'd be less inclined to fight it. I have visions of thousands upon thousands being demanded in a few year's time - and I simply don't have that kind of money. When I bought my house, I was living in a bedsit and paying almost as much in rent as I ended up paying for my mortgage, so it made (and still makes) good sense to become a home owner.

At no point during this entire fiasco has any effort been made to calm people's fears of an extremely high tax eventually being the case. I mentioned in an earlier post that when I bought my house, I made sure to take a reasonable and affordable mortgage out, I didn't borrow huge sums of money, but I didn't factor in a property tax. I've never missed a payment even though I've been on short time for three years now, I take my financial responsibilities seriously. I live alone and pay the mortgage alone; and a forever increasing property tax scares me. Much more than the possibility of increased interest rates on my mortgage. At least I was aware of the possibility of increased rates when I made the decision to buy.

It would be nice to have some reassurance I won't be hit with a 2,000+ bill every year for the rest of my life, on top of every other living expense. I know how to live frugally, I'm very good at managing on very little, but everything has its limit. I don't want to become Old Mother Hubbard with her totally bare cupboard while handing over huge swathes of cash to be thrown into a black and endless hole of Ireland's badly managed finances.

When you say 'local government services' can you be a bit more specific please?

Fizzlesque

oldyouth wrote: »

1. I don't think any figure is appropriate, it is not a well thought out tax
2. It wasn't too difficult to pay it at €100, but my circumstances are changing shortly, so even that amount will be a challange when it increases next year
3. I don't think it should but I think it will
4. I don't care what other people do as long as those liable to pay, like me, do so.
5. The tax will be used to pay off the National Debt, I'm under no illusions about that
6. A property tax based on the size of the house they live in (not value) including those in local authority housing

Thanks for your reply, oldyouth.

Do you think, if the tax had been better thought out, there would be an appropriate figure, or do you not consider taxing someone's property to be appropriate?

The tax being used to pay off the National Debt (which I also believe) makes it frighteningly likely the tax will increase enormously every year - and, like yourself, I don't think that should be the case.

One reason (among many) I decided not to buy an apartment was because of the management fees - although I'm very happy I bought a house instead of an apartment (again, for many reasons) this tax reminds me of those management fees I wanted to avoid.

FreudianSlippers

Fizzlesque wrote: »

Thanks for your reply, Freudian Slippers. I can't figure out how to choose portions of a post to quote - so sorry for having to lump the whole thing together instead of responding to selected sections.

If the charge was to remain as small as 150 for ten years, and then reviewed in ten years and only increased a small amount (or decreased) I'd be less nervous about it. I don't like the idea of my house being taxed because it means I'll be paying for it forever instead of only until the mortgage is paid off - which kind of defeats some of the purpose, for me.

However, if it was to remain a small and manageable sum, I'd be less inclined to fight it. I have visions of thousands upon thousands being demanded in a few year's time - and I simply don't have that kind of money. When I bought my house, I was living in a bedsit and paying almost as much in rent as I ended up paying for my mortgage, so it made (and still makes) good sense to become a home owner.

At no point during this entire fiasco has any effort been made to calm people's fears of an extremely high tax eventually being the case. I mentioned in an earlier post that when I bought my house, I made sure to take a reasonable and affordable mortgage out, I didn't borrow huge sums of money, but I didn't factor in a property tax. I've never missed a payment even though I've been on short time for three years now, I take my financial responsibilities seriously. I live alone and pay the mortgage alone; and a forever increasing property tax scares me. Much more than the possibility of increased interest rates on my mortgage. At least I was aware of the possibility of increased rates when I made the decision to buy.

It would be nice to have some reassurance I won't be hit with a 2,000+ bill every year for the rest of my life, on top of every other living expense. I know how to live frugally, I'm very good at managing on very little, but everything has its limit. I don't want to become Old Mother Hubbard with her totally bare cupboard while handing over huge swathes of cash to be thrown into a black and endless hole of Ireland's badly managed finances.

When you say 'local government services' can you be a bit more specific please?

The thing about property tax is that it must be, at its core, an ad valorem tax. That is, it must be based on the value of the property - which is why a percentage rate is the most fair. In my scenario, if you own a €100,000 home you pay €100/year and if you live in a €1,000,000 home you pay €1,000/year.

An annual tax on a €100,000 home that came to €2,000/year would be a 2% annual tax which would be considered amongst the highest taxes in the world on property on a site value. But do we have justification to presume or assume or jump to any sort of conclusion as to what our government (elected by us) will do regarding a rate?
I could have missed it but I don't see any conclusive reports on what will be in the future property tax at all.

As for local government services, I don't know. Keeping the street lights on and the roads paved and all that sort of stuff. I really wish we had more transparency in our taxation system, but what can you do!?

djpbarry

Fizzlesque wrote: »

If the charge was to remain as small as 150 for ten years, and then reviewed in ten years and only increased a small amount (or decreased) I'd be less nervous about it.

The tax levels that FreudianSlippers has given are in the same ball park as what the Commission on Taxation advised (€188 per annum for properties worth up to €150k). The government is looking to raise about €1.2 billion per annum with the property tax – that’s a pretty modest amount. Claims that the tax will be increased to thousands of Euro per property are completely baseless.

Fizzlesque wrote: »

I don't like the idea of my house being taxed because it means I'll be paying for it forever...

But you’ll be paying other taxes forever too?!? What makes the property tax so different?

Fizzlesque wrote: »

At no point during this entire fiasco has any effort been made to calm people's fears of an extremely high tax eventually being the case.

That’s really not true – the government have been pretty open about how much they intend to raise with the property tax. The problem has been that left-wing extremists have claimed the tax will rise inexorably upwards. But what gets me is that there plenty of other taxes that people already pay, yet I don’t see the SWP claiming that we should stop paying VAT, because the government’s going to jack it up to five million per cent in a few years.

Fizzlesque

djpbarry wrote: »

T
But you’ll be paying other taxes forever too?!? What makes the property tax so different?

First things first, what's the procedure for selecting parts of a post to quote, as opposed to clicking 'quote' and ending up with the entire post you're replying to being reposted?

What makes a property tax different is:

(a) I bought a house because I didn't want to pay rent for the rest of my life; I wanted to own a property so I'd have somewhere to live that didn't remain as costly as renting for the duration of my life. Rent will always be X amount, no matter how long I've lived in said rented accommodation, but as a mortgage reduces, so does the monthly repayment, eventually becoming very little or nothing at all. If, as I've been lead to believe, and you're telling me isn't the case, a property tax continues to rise, it means I'll never be able to live without needing to find money to pay for my accommodation.

(b) tax on income will be dependent on me having an income; as long as I am earning, I don't mind paying tax on my earnings, and VAT depends on me purchasing whatever goods or services come with VAT. I can choose not to purchase a product, or avail of a service if the tax is too much or I'm a bit broke at that time, I can't do that with my home. I have to live somewhere, that's not really negotiable.

Fizzlesque

djpbarry wrote: »

T
That’s really not true – the government have been pretty open about how much they intend to raise with the property tax. The problem has been that left-wing extremists have claimed the tax will rise inexorably upwards. But what gets me is that there plenty of other taxes that people already pay, yet I don’t see the SWP claiming that we should stop paying VAT, because the government’s going to jack it up to five million per cent in a few years.

Can you give me a link (or two) regarding this openness of the government as to how much they intend to raise the property tax? I've read a ridiculous amount of articles and comments on this subject and haven't had my mind put at ease in relation to the eventual cost. I've read plenty of snidey remarks from politicians telling us we'd better pay up or else, but nothing to stop the worry of ending up with a tax bill that continues to grow and grow year after year. I'd love to read some literature that tells me this isn't their long term plan.

blahfckingblah

john reilly wrote: »

the famines in africa dont affect me but i still give to charities working there.

and you are being forced to do so? and charged more if you dont? and told that you are a true patriot for doing so?

Denerick

This controversy is really irritating me. Ireland is one of the few developed nations without any kind of property tax. We are in a complete fiscal mess and we need to raise revenue. A property tax is not ideal as it does not take account of your income, but it is an important revenue stream. At one hundred euro per household it is not exorbitant. People really need to get a life and see the bigger picture.

The crusties on the far left like to convince us that we can magically balance the books by charging 99% tax on millionaires but the reality is that we need to expand our revenue base, and this includes taxes on property.

The most odious element of Irish politics is the tendency of its citizens to deny reality. This fabricated outrage is another manifestation of that.