Why has this not been done yet?

ldxo15wus6fpgm

I'm sure most of you are aware of the basic principles of PAYE tax - you get taxed at 20% on the first 36.4k you earn and if you earn more it's taxed at 41%.

Upon reading the numerous comments and reactions to the budget, the general consensus seems to be "the poor are paying the most and we don't like this."

Why is there not a second cut off point of say, 75/80k for taxation at a higher level, say 50 or even 60%? Honestly, why has this not been proposed yet? I'm only guessing but I'd say that any party that put this forward would receive a very positive reaction from the general public, (a quick look at the CSO indicates that the average salary is around 35/40k per year, and people are hardly going to reject a tax on the rich!) possibly enough of a reaction to get themselves a place in government in the next elections!

I'm aware this would have at best a negligible effect on the state of the country but Ireland seems to be a very populist country at the moment and it would pretty much put a halo over someone's head, in the people's eyes, if they pulled it off.

Saila

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I'm sure most of you are aware of the basic principles of PAYE tax - you get taxed at 20% on the first 36.4k you earn and if you earn more it's taxed at 41%.

Upon reading the numerous comments and reactions to the budget, the general consensus seems to be "the poor are paying the most and we don't like this."

Why is there not a second cut off point of say, 75/80k for taxation at a higher level, say 50 or even 60%? Honestly, why has this not been proposed yet? I'm only guessing but I'd say that any party that put this forward would receive a very positive reaction from the general public, (a quick look at the CSO indicates that the average salary is around 35/40k per year, and people are hardly going to reject a tax on the rich!) possibly enough of a reaction to get themselves a place in government in the next elections!

I'm aware this would have at best a negligible effect on the state of the country but Ireland seems to be a very populist country at the moment and it would pretty much put a halo over someone's head, in the people's eyes, if they pulled it off.

this^

Saila

hondasam wrote: »

I earn over 75k* so please take this to the Politics forum where the masses wont discuss it and I wont end up paying more tax.

:P

might, or might not be true

eth0

Why is anyone in the public service getting paid more than 75/80k? If we got rid of those we wouldn't need much for tax increases and most will still show up for work

starbelgrade

Let the €40-50k a year, middle incomers pay for it.

That'll teach them for being underachievers.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

Saila wrote: »

this^

I don't think you get what I'm saying.
Getting back into office is something that motivates politicians, sometimes more so than actually doing the country some good.
The entire country is whinging and moaning about the poor paying for the rich people's mistakes etc.
A politician/political party that puts forward something that might actually make even some people think the country is a bit fairer because of it would be doing themselves a great service.
Why have they not done so yet?

starbelgrade

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I don't think you get what I'm saying.
Getting back into office is something that motivates politicians, sometimes more so than actually doing the country some good.
The entire country is whinging and moaning about the poor paying for the rich people's mistakes etc.
A politician/political party that puts forward something that might actually make even some people think the country is a bit fairer because of it would be doing themselves a great service.
Why have they not done so yet?

Because the vast majority people are stupid and only pay attention to politics a week before the elections. They then make poor voting choices & pay the consequences for the next five or ten years.

They are too stupid to educate themselves or ever ask for real social or political change & expect the government to mammy them when things go wrong.

People get the governments they deserve, so if your government are arse raping you, it's because you put your butt in the air with a sign on it saying "fuck me hard big boy".

bleg

Let's over-tax to pay for our overspending! Genius!

Saila

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I don't think you get what I'm saying.

ditto. the top 5% of the countries earners pay about 50% of the countries total tax. and the top 1% of earners contribute about 25% of the total tax take for the country. in simple terms if you take too much from them they set up business somewhere else really. better to have 50% of **** than 100% of * if you know what I mean

johnr1

Two very simple answers to this one.

1 People who earn over 75k pay 48% of all the income tax paid in this state already. They pay proportionally far far more of their earned income in tax than the rest of us. (I'm not one of them so not defending my own corner btw)
2. They are also the people who have the means to fcuk off oversaes and get probably better money there, if we tax them on to the plane, we'l miss the tax they currently pay. This happened in the eighties when they were effectively paying 62p out of every pound they earned.

Good idea until you look at the numbers OP.

Hard luck, Try again.

edit: Goddam you Saila, you got there first, and I think your figures are better than mine !

Lapin

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I'm sure most of you are aware of the basic principles of PAYE tax - you get taxed at 20% on the first 36.4k you earn and if you earn more it's taxed at 41%.

Upon reading the numerous comments and reactions to the budget, the general consensus seems to be "the poor are paying the most and we don't like this."

Why is there not a second cut off point of say, 75/80k for taxation at a higher level, say 50 or even 60%? Honestly, why has this not been proposed yet? I'm only guessing but I'd say that any party that put this forward would receive a very positive reaction from the general public, (a quick look at the CSO indicates that the average salary is around 35/40k per year, and people are hardly going to reject a tax on the rich!) possibly enough of a reaction to get themselves a place in government in the next elections!

I'm aware this would have at best a negligible effect on the state of the country but Ireland seems to be a very populist country at the moment and it would pretty much put a halo over someone's head, in the people's eyes, if they pulled it off.

You obviously weren't around in the 80s.

billybudd

Maybe because those who earn over 80,000 euro have the ambition, skill and education to earn that much and have the tools to create jobs other than their own and if you strangle that ambition then you cost lower paid jobs. 41% tax seems fair enough when you consider the other taxes on top of this.

Chuck Stone

Saila wrote: »

ditto. the top 5% of the countries earners pay about 50% of the countries total tax. and the top 1% of earners contribute about 25% of the total tax take for the country.

This is wrong.

johnr1 wrote: »

1 People who earn over 75k pay 48% of all the income tax paid in this state already.

This is probably right.

They pay proportionally far far more of their earned income in tax than the rest of us

This is wrong.

You guys are ignoring VAT and other charges such as the TV licence which are essentially flat taxes.

Richard Hillman

a higher tax rate is morally wrong. You shouldn't be punished for how hard you've worked and successful you are. Everyone should be on the same rate. It must be very demoralising to have half your income taken away just because you busted your balls to get where you are.

Logical Fallacy

Saila wrote: »

ditto. the top 5% of the countries earners pay about 50% of the countries total tax.

Figures????

I also don't think you mean total tax do you?

I ask because it's a bit off from the Pareto principle...and for some weird ****ing reason that is nearly always applicable to just about everything.

Chuck Stone

Logical Fallacy wrote: »

Figures????

I also don't think you mean total tax do you?

According to this PDF a total of ~34Bn was collected of which ~14.1Bn was income taxes and ~10.2Bn was VAT.

I've looked online before for studies done on how much people pay on tax as a percentage of their income (all taxes).

There's literally nothing. I guess they don't want middle income earners to realise how much they're being fleeced.

mconigol

Chuck Stone wrote: »

This is wrong.



This is probably right.



This is wrong.

You guys are ignoring VAT and other charges such as the TV licence which are essentially flat taxes.

High earners don't pay VAT or the TV licence? News to me.

I'm sick of the begrudgery directed at people who do well for themselves. That's all it is.

cosanostra

The rich will leave the country if we raise their taxes! No word on the hundereds of thousands of less well off people leaving though

Chuck Stone

mconigol wrote: »

High earners don't pay VAT or the TV licence? News to me.

What? Where did I say that?

I'm sick of the begrudgery directed at people who do well for themselves. That's all it is.

Relax. It a discussion on tax. Nobody's gonna steal your potatoes.

starbelgrade

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Relax. Nobody's gonna steal your potatoes.

What a great line!

sbsquarepants

cosanostra wrote: »

The rich will leave the country if we raise their taxes! No word on the hundereds of thousands of less well off people leaving though

Exactly.
This is a bullshít waffle answer spewed out by the very ones earning this kind of money. Only a very tiny proportion of people will up pegs and leave the country so they can pay less tax. People usually emigrate out of financial neccesity, if they were earning a good living here most wouldn't even consider it.

MrThrifty

cosanostra wrote: »

The rich will leave the country if we raise their taxes! No word on the hundereds of thousands of less well off people leaving though

That's BS re: the rich people, though often quoted. Do you really believe that someone who earns even 70k after tax is going to be bothered too much by a reduction in take home pay to say 68k. Not a chance.

However, politicians generally being the greedy, self-interested fools that they are would be bothered by such a reduction. Heard some of them on the radio a few weeks ago talking about not penalising the middle-class in society who are on salaries of under 100k! 100k?! Get real...

smash

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

Why is there not a second cut off point of say, 75/80k for taxation at a higher level, say 50 or even 60%?

So where's the incentive to start earning big money?

60%? are you off your fúcking head?

mconigol

Chuck Stone wrote: »

Relax. It a discussion on tax. Nobody's gonna steal your potatoes.

Damm right! Don't live in Ireland so not skin off my nose anyway.

Absurdum

we should all just get paid €50 a week to pick spuds in a field, that'd be the best thing for us

MrThrifty

smash wrote: »

So where's the incentive to start earning big money?

60%? are you off your fúcking head?

Why so? Isn't 60% close to the tax every Tom, Dick and Harry pay on petrol?! It's a misconception that you can't tax more than 50%.

smash

MrThrifty wrote: »

Why so? Isn't 60% close to the tax every Tom, Dick and Harry pay on petrol?!

That's a whole lot different than income tax ffs.

thomasm

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I'm sure most of you are aware of the basic principles of PAYE tax - you get taxed at 20% on the first 36.4k you earn and if you earn more it's taxed at 41%.

Its 20% on the first €32,800 if you are single with no dependent children and and €36,800 if you have dependent kids. After that its 41%.

Also intersting to comapre us to other countires in terms of when you hit the higher rate

Income level at which top tax rate is hit (single person)

Single Person
US (Boston) $373,650 40.3%
Germany €250,731 45%
Spain (Madrid) €175,000 44.9%
UK £150,000 50%
France €70,830 41%
Ireland €32,800 48%

Adelina Drab Ruby

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

Why is there not a second cut off point of say, 75/80k for taxation at a higher level, say 50 or even 60%?

Will you go home out of that, 60% tax for people who have worked hard to get themselves a higher paying job? Where is the incentive for people to work in these jobs then, why would people do them. 41% is already a crazy amount of money to have to hand over as it is and you expect people to pay more.

Why would people put up with the pressures and responsibilities, long hours, more than likely extra years of education when they are earning little or nothing. some people haven't got a clue its drives me insane when I see crap like this expecting people who have worked hard to do better for themselves only to have to hand it all over in bloody tax.

Higher earners also spend more which means they contribute more to vat, they usually have more expensive cars therefore contribute more through vrt etc. But of course some people are incapable of understanding this.

MrThrifty wrote: »

That's BS re: the rich people, though often quoted. Do you really believe that someone who earns even 70k after tax is going to be bothered too much by a reduction in take home pay to say 68k. Not a chance.

I would, if you took 50 euro of me I be bothered, never mind 2k. Your not a bloody millionaire if your earning 70k per year, 2k is still a significant amount of money for a person on that level of salary.

The people earning higher amounts of money are paying much more tax anyway. They are already paying out a fortune of their salary after, mostly, working much much harder to earn it. Why bother your arse working so hard if you are only penalised even more for it. I can't put into words how much this issue bugs me.

And I don't pay the higher rate at all by the way as I don't earn that much.

MrThrifty

thomasm wrote: »

Income level at which top tax rate is hit (single person)

Single Person
US (Boston) $373,650 40.3%
Germany €250,731 45%
Spain (Madrid) €175,000 44.9%
UK £150,000 50%
France €70,830 41%
Ireland €32,800 48%

Given that you have deliberately misled folk with at least some of the above selective stats, the info should all be treated as questionable. E.g. Top tax rate in UK is 50%, BUT a fair comparison to us should have considered their 40% rate which applies to amounts over 35k, much like here eh, putting exchange rates aside?!

Edit: aghh, so you're saying we're 48% here and not 41% or whatever? Have you then taken all levies and secondary taxes into account for other countries as well as differences in tax free allowance systems and amounts?!

K-9

thomasm wrote: »

Its 20% on the first €32,800 if you are single with no dependent children and and €36,800 if you have dependent kids. After that its 41%.

Also intersting to comapre us to other countires in terms of when you hit the higher rate

Income level at which top tax rate is hit (single person)

Single Person
US (Boston) $373,650 40.3%
Germany €250,731 45%
Spain (Madrid) €175,000 44.9%
UK £150,000 50%
France €70,830 41%
Ireland €32,800 48%

PRSI type taxes are high in the likes of France and Germany though.

1.71% of cases earn 150k + and pay 29.43% of income tax with 13.95% of the income..

Over 75k account for 10.22% of cases, 35.68% of income and pay 61.78% of taxes.

http://www.revenue.ie/en/about/publications/statistical/2010/income-distribution-statistics.pdf

VAT tends to affect the lower paid more but the higher paid would pay plenty of VAT in discretionary spending, new car, that type of thing.

The self employed earning over 100k also pay 3% extra Social Levy.

I suppose the top 1% paying all the taxes would be very popular though!

thomasm

MrThrifty wrote: »

Given that you have deliberately misled folk with at least some of the above selective stats, the info should all be treated as questionable. E.g. Top tax rate in UK is 50%, BUT a fair comparison to us should have considered their 40% rate which applies to amounts over 35k, much like here eh, putting exchange rates aside?!

Edit: aghh, so you're saying we're 48% here and not 41% or whatever? Have you then taken all levies and secondary taxes into account for other countries as well as differences in tax free allowance systems and amounts?!

Not misleading, it is a list of when a tax payer hits the highest tax rate compared to other countries.

The___________

mconigol wrote: »

High earners don't pay VAT or the TV licence? News to me.

I'm sick of the begrudgery directed at people who do well for themselves. That's all it is.

Vat and other non income linked taxes are called regressive taxation for a reason, they penalise the poorest in society by a proportionally greater amount than they affect the richest.

An extremely simplified example would be:

A person earning 20k a year who pays a total of 4k a year in VAT and other indirect taxes- this takes 20% of their total income

Whereas a person earning 200k a year may well pay only 15k a year in such taxes meaning it accounts for only 7.5% of their income.

The proposed water charges or property taxes will further increase indirect taxation which always hurts the poor more than it affects the more affluent.

MrThrifty

thomasm wrote: »

Not misleading, it is a list of when a tax payer hits the highest tax rate compared to other countries.

Since when was our highest rate officially 48%?! :rolleyes:

Ellis Dee

The explanation probably has a lot to do with the golden rule:

The bastards with the gold make the rules

:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

The___________

You'd also have to consider that the incomes of many of those charged with implementing such tax reforms would be comfortably within any new higher tax band.

Turkeys voting for Christmas and all that....

endabob1

The___________ wrote: »

Vat and other non income linked taxes are called regressive taxation for a reason, they penalise the poorest in society by a proportionally greater amount than they affect the richest.

An extremely simplified example would be:

A person earning 20k a year who pays a total of 4k a year in VAT and other indirect taxes- this takes 20% of their total income

Whereas a person earning 200k a year may well pay only 15k a year in such taxes meaning it accounts for only 7.5% of their income.

The proposed water charges or property taxes will further increase indirect taxation which always hurts the poor more than it affects the more affluent.

VAT is the greatest tax, it's cheap and easy for the government to collect and administer.
It taxes consumption, the more you spend the more you pay;
It encourages thrift
If VAT is designed properly it will not punish the poor, ie essentials (basic food stuff, educational materials etc..) are VAT free, luxury items are heavily taxed with a high VAT rate.

ldxo15wus6fpgm

I'd like to clarify something, for the third time now.

I AM NOT SAYING THIS TAX WOULD BE A GOOD/BAD IDEA.

I am simply asking why none of our politicians have put it forward to ease the grumblings of the masses.

As for the idea of this tax being morally wrong... well...
First of all, those affected would still be earning plenty more than the average worker. Just not so much that they can squander money without consequence - isn't that the way it should be?
Secondly it would possibly close the gap a little between social classes, at times (like these) a needless source of much hatred among our own people.

Finally, for those whining about the fact that people who earn more are harder workers, why should they be punished, etc. you are essentially saying that anyone who earns under 75k a year is simply not working hard enough. Give it a rest.

smash

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

I am simply asking why none of our politicians have put it forward to ease the grumblings of the masses.

Do you ever watch TV? SF have been banging on about this for years.

starbelgrade

smash wrote: »

Do you ever watch TV? SF have been banging on about this for years.

Sinn Fein have been banging on about a lot of populist policies for years. It's one of the main reasons they've increased their seat numbers in the Dail each election term.

However, if they ever got into power, they would soon realise that half the stuff they would like to see done either makes no economic sense or is simply not feasible.

Having said that though - they at least for the most part have their hearts in the right place. If they stopped banging on about Republicanism they might even get some real power in the Oireachtas.

Adelina Drab Ruby

Adelina Drab Ruby wrote: »

Finally, for those whining about the fact that people who earn more are harder workers, why should they be punished, etc. you are essentially saying that anyone who earns under 75k a year is simply not working hard enough. Give it a rest.

People are not necessarily saying they are harder workers but they would almost certainly have more responsibility which leads to a more stressful job, and often have more important decisions which may have implications for a lot of other people etc. Pay has to reflect this or people wont do the work.

They would also be more of an expectation for working longer hours, especially working on in the evening etc with no overtime being paid so the higher salary often reflects an expectation that the person will be working longer hours than your average worker but wont be receiving any additional pay.

Temptamperu

billybudd wrote: »

Maybe because those who earn over 80,000 euro have the ambition, skill and education to earn that much and have the tools to create jobs other than their own and if you strangle that ambition then you cost lower paid jobs. 41% tax seems fair enough when you consider the other taxes on top of this.

Bullshít, why arent they creating jobs then? this is just as much a cop out as saying you cant pay politicions less because of coruption and bribes, they are all bullshít answers as a way to make the layman go "alright I suppose your right"
The Rich should pay more tax instead of leaving it up to the middle class to foot the bill for everyone.

smash

Temptamperu wrote: »

Bullshít, why arent they creating jobs then?

Maybe they work for themselves. Maybe they've had to downsize their companies. Maybe they are creating jobs. Maybe they're not actually rich any more.

Temptamperu wrote: »

The Rich should pay more tax instead of leaving it up to the middle class to foot the bill for everyone.

They earn more, so they already pay a lot more tax.

And put things into perspective here. You can guarantee that the "rich" as you call them are there because they worked for it and their outgoings are going to be a lot higher than the average person in a 3 bed semi.

billybudd

Temptamperu wrote: »

Bullshít, why arent they creating jobs then? this is just as much a cop out as saying you cant pay politicions less because of coruption and bribes, they are all bullshít answers as a way to make the layman go "alright I suppose your right"
The Rich should pay more tax instead of leaving it up to the middle class to foot the bill for everyone.

How is it bull****? Before levies, prsi and usc is taken into account it s 41 cents from the euro that is taxed? I am not talking about the super rich, a person on 100,000 or less a year is not what one would consider super rich, if the alternative is tax them 50% plus whatever taxes are on top of this then all you are doing is making people less ambitious as what they achieve would just be taxed the ****e out of, is communism along the lines of what you think is the way forward? Doctors and shelf stackers on equal rates of pay? So why become a doctor, years of study, years of training only to be maybe a bit better off than someone whom stacks shelves.

And further more people are creating jobs; small business caters for just under one million of our work forceAs for politicians,

I agree they are paid far too much, I remind them of this fact every time I meet them, do you?

Temptamperu

When they where touting for votes this year at my door yes I asked everyone why they havent taken a pay cut... I didnt get one straight answer.

billybudd

Temptamperu wrote: »

When they where touting for votes this year at my door yes I asked everyone why they havent taken a pay cut... I didnt get one straight answer.

So did i, they did take a pay cut, just not a big enough one.

The___________

Surely the laughably generous pension entitlements afforded to politicians would merit a further reduction in their basic pay during their time in office? A reduction to 70k per annum for an ordinary TD would hardly leave them facing economic hardship.

K-9

Temptamperu wrote: »

Bullshít, why arent they creating jobs then? this is just as much a cop out as saying you cant pay politicions less because of coruption and bribes, they are all bullshít answers as a way to make the layman go "alright I suppose your right"
The Rich should pay more tax instead of leaving it up to the middle class to foot the bill for everyone.

Depends on what's middle class, from the statistics I'd say from about 30-75k.

The top 10% are paying 60% of the taxes so it's the upper classes footing most of the bill. The idea seems to be, I think I pay enough taxes, if there is going to be new taxes let the rich pay.

Tbh I think the Government would be better giving incentives to people to invest money in industry and business start ups, creating employment.

fungun

Including all taxes a person on 100k probably contributes over 60k in tax. So say you chuck an extra 2k tax on them, great. All it takes in 1 in 30 of these people to leave (and they tend to me the ones capable of leaving) to make this negative for the country.

Its a balancing act, taxing them as much as possible without making it attractive for them to leave

Robdude

The world is becoming awfully global.....it's easy for people to relocate. Particularly people who would be in your highest tax bracket. Countries go out of their way to make it *easy* for these people to immigrate (including Ireland).

Countries want them.

A lot of people aren't going to stick around and pay taxes in Ireland when they can relocate somewhere else and have the same employement opportunities (or more) and pay less taxes while still recieving the same level of personal benefits.

Of course, I'm talking about skilled labour - I don't know that politicians are in demand in other countries. Why not tax them/pay them less?