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

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

Why are they not releasing the numbers?
They've been promising people that they would provide lawyers to fight any court cases but they haven't indicated how much they have raised for this.
I suspect that their numbers are small and they have no money.

Well, we don't get state coffers to fund the campaign, this is true.

alastair

gerryo777 wrote: »

Yea, it'll be funny to see them try and take 800,000 people to court.

So are you admitting there that if less than 50% pay up that this tax is going to be scrapped.
Interesting admission from one of the pro-tax brigade.

They don't really need 50% by end of the registration deadline, they just need a steady stream over time. Fines and the odd court summons will coax the tardy in.

Bruthal

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Then all the Government has to do is pick one non-payer and make an example of him in the courts and then even more will jump on board.

What example will they make of them, electric chair maybe?

Freddie59

black francis wrote: »

You hear a lot of 'right' and 'moral' talk from the Anti brigade.

I don't really understand how someone comes to this viewpoint. It's impossible to live in a society for a year without paying tax. Why should the fact that the source of some of that tax comes from your property make it immoral?

Can someone explain?

Right. Let's presume you were in a cave for the past four years. The rules of capitalism were changed in order to bail out bankrupt, failed business entities (banks). The ordinary punter (taxpayer) is expected to pay these private debts between private business entities.

In order to do this, savage cuts are implemented; yet our Public Sector continues to enjoy their 'entitlement'.:rolleyes: Roll on the 'household' charge, one of many attempts to subsidise the aforementioned groups and debts.

Even though it is called a 'household' charge, some 160,000 'households' are exempt because they are council tenants.

Yes, immoral doesn't even BEGIN to cover it.

Ghandee

dvpower wrote: »

Why are they not releasing the numbers?
They've been promising people that they would provide lawyers to fight any court cases but they haven't indicated how much they have raised for this.
I suspect that their numbers are small and they have no money.

Why are the govt not releasing the numbers of people who've paid?
They are quick to say how many have registered, but aren't saying how many registered to claim a waiver or exemption.

Shouldn't be difficult IMO, divide the overall sums of money collected this far by 100 & you get the final figure of payments made.

Anyways, its saint Paddy day.

I'm off to do my bit for Ireland, and will gladly spend €100+ in the local pubs and bars economy today!

Lets see Loughile shamrocks and Crossmaglen do it for the six counties in the all Ireland club championships! :pac:

Freddie59

apache6 wrote: »

the landlord has to pay it not the tehant. OK

So the Councils will pay on behalf of their 'tenants' I presume?

gerryo777

alastair wrote: »

They don't really need 50% by end of the registration deadline, they just need a steady stream over time. Fines and the odd court summons will coax the tardy in.

That's in your opinion.
People who haven't registered by the deadline are committed to not paying, why else would they want to subject themselves to fines & court appearances?

Freddie59

steddyeddy wrote: »

Im for a property tax, only if its a fair one. This isnt a fair one. Property taxs in other countries facilitate the redistribution of wealth. This doesnt as one man on vincent browne said last night. The logistics involved in taxing according to property size are not vast and can be easily put in place. He also said he could do it for free.

It is a charge which is being levied on us to pay for private banking debt and the propping up on Public sector 'entitlements'.

alastair

Freddie59 wrote: »

Right. Let's presume you were in a cave for the past four years. The rules of capitalism were changed in order to bail out bankrupt, failed business entities (banks). The ordinary punter (taxpayer) is expected to pay these private debts between private business entities.

In order to do this, savage cuts are implemented; yet our Public Sector continues to enjoy their 'entitlement'.:rolleyes: Roll on the 'household' charge, one of many attempts to subsidise the aforementioned groups and debts.

Even though it is called a 'household' charge, some 160,000 'households' are exempt because they are council tenants.

Yes, immoral doesn't even BEGIN to cover it.

It's a property tax. If you don't own a property, it doesn't apply to you. Not too clear where the morality issue arises there. See dog license etc.

The bank bailout etc is a red herring. There's a revenue shortfall regardless, and we presumably have learned that founding our tax base on stamp duty isn't the cleverest scenario to return to - so where do you suggest we tax other than property?

gerryo777

Freddie59 wrote: »

So the Councils will pay on behalf of their 'tenants' I presume?

Good point.

Chucky the tree

robbie7730 wrote: »

What example will they make of them, electric chair maybe?

No, a large fine will do the job. If someone is fined €1,000 and Joe Bloggs get a later in the door saying he has a week to pay or he'll be up in court then he'll give up his martyr act and simple pay the €100.

dvpower

robbie7730 wrote: »

What example will they make of them, electric chair maybe?

Fines, interest and penalties. They've also said that they will be seeking legal costs for any court cases.

alastair

gerryo777 wrote: »

That's in your opinion.
People who haven't registered by the deadline are committed to not paying, why else would they want to subject themselves to fines & court appearances?

Because it's pretty typical - see the numbers who missed the SSIA boat because they long-fingered sorting it out. See the numbers who are late paying their TV licence, motor tax etc. We as a nation tend to respond best to the stick than the timely notice.

gerryo777

alastair wrote: »

It's a property tax. If you don't own a property, it doesn't apply to you. Not too clear where the morality issue arises there. See dog license etc.

The bank bailout etc is a red herring. There's a revenue shortfall regardless, and we presumably have learned that founding our tax base on stamp duty isn't the cleverest scenario to return to - so where do you suggest we tax other than property?

We could invest in our infrastructure here, broadband etc, and get people back to work, you know not drawing the dole and actually paying income tax and having extra cash to spend in our domestic economy.

But I suppose it's easier just to levy a charge and to discriminate against people who own their own homes.

Just a thought!

Ghandee

Chucky the tree wrote: »

No, a large fine will do the job. If someone is fined €1,000 and Joe Bloggs get a later in the door saying he has a week to pay or he'll be up in court then he'll give up his martyr act and simple pay the €100.

And if 'Joe Bloggs' refuses to pay his fine?

Then what?

Haul him into jail?

Then the remaining 800-900k other households that haven't paid either, will they too be brought in front of the court, fined, then jailed for not paying said fine too?

Wake up, wise up, open your eyes........


If the public stand together, (which the vast majority are doing) this unfair charge cannot, and will not survive.

Don't register, don't pay.

Freddie59

alastair wrote: »

It's a property tax. If you don't own a property, it doesn't apply to you. Not too clear where the morality issue arises there. See dog license etc.

The bank bailout etc is a red herring. There's a revenue shortfall regardless, and we presumably have learned that founding our tax base on stamp duty isn't the cleverest scenario to return to - so where do you suggest we tax other than property?

Bollocks. Complete and utter. This has been caused DIRECTLY by the banking "bailout" (where the basic rules of capitalism were changed for an entity). If it is a property tax then why is it labelled a houshold charge? Well?

Revenue shortfall of 400m a week - caused by high levels of 'entitlement' in the Public Sector (including pensions); an overly-generous SW system; and a small group of people calling the shots.

So let's call this for what it is - and not try to dress it up as what it isn't.

alastair

gerryo777 wrote: »

We could invest in our infrastructure here, broadband etc, and get people back to work, you know not drawing the dole and actually paying income tax and having extra cash to spend in our domestic economy.

Just a thought!

A novel one. Spend more money from borrowings and simply ignore our revenue shortfall. That'll work.

Freddie59

gerryo777 wrote: »

We could invest in our infrastructure here, broadband etc, and get people back to work, you know not drawing the dole and actually paying income tax and having extra cash to spend in our domestic economy.

But I suppose it's easier just to levy a charge and to discriminate against people who own their own homes.

Just a thought!

Well said. But you can't be touching the dole or the Public Sector now - can you? The cause the bulk of the €400m we borrow every week.:rolleyes:

Freddie59

gerryo777 wrote: »

We could invest in our infrastructure here, broadband etc, and get people back to work, you know not drawing the dole and actually paying income tax and having extra cash to spend in our domestic economy.

But I suppose it's easier just to levy a charge and to discriminate against people who own their own homes.

Just a thought!

alastair wrote: »

A novel one. Spend more money from borrowings and simply ignore our revenue shortfall. That'll work.

Tackle the revenue shortfall being caused by the PS and SW. That WILL work.

alastair

Freddie59 wrote: »

Bollocks. Complete and utter. This has been caused DIRECTLY by the banking "bailout" (where the basic rules of capitalism were changed for an entity). If it is a property tax then why is it labelled a houshold charge? Well?

Revenue shortfall of 400m a week - caused by high levels of 'entitlement' in the Public Sector (including pensions); an overly-generous SW system; and a small group of people calling the shots.

So let's call this for what it is - and not try to dress it up as what it isn't.

We aren't paying our way even if you remove the bank bailout from the equation - that's a simple fact - doesn't even need the capitalisation.

It's called a household charge because it's selectively applied to domestic residences - rollercoasters are exempt. Nonetheless it's a property tax.

gerryo777

alastair wrote: »

Because it's pretty typical - see the numbers who missed the SSIA boat because they long-fingered sorting it out. See the numbers who are late paying their TV licence, motor tax etc. We as a nation tend to respond best to the stick than the timely notice.

That's a lovely view you have of your fellow citizens!
Maybe we should get the brits back to keep us in order.

Happy Paddy's day to ya.......

alastair

Freddie59 wrote: »

Tackle the revenue shortfall being caused by the PS and SW. That WILL work.

No it won't. How do you imagine it could?

gerryo777

alastair wrote: »

A novel one. Spend more money from borrowings and simply ignore our revenue shortfall. That'll work.

Typical from the pro-tax brigade.

alastair

gerryo777 wrote: »

That's a lovely view you have of your fellow citizens!
Maybe we should get the brits back to keep us in order.

Happy Paddy's day to ya.......

The facts are there if you choose to see them.

jack67

black francis wrote: »

The charge against your property will continue to rise, as will the interest and late penalties.

omg im doomed:D

alastair

gerryo777 wrote: »

Typical from the pro-tax brigade.

You prefer the pixie dust solution? Running a country requires taxation. Even jolly free-market cheerleaders like the US apply property taxes.

Chucky the tree

Ghandee wrote: »

And if 'Joe Bloggs' refuses to pay his fine?

Then what?

Haul him into jail?

Then the remaining 800-900k other households that haven't paid either, will they too be brought in front of the court, fined, then jailed for not paying said fine too?

Wake up, wise up, open your eyes........


If the public stand together, (which the vast majority are doing) this unfair charge cannot, and will not survive.

Don't register, don't pay.

Yes into jail if that's what it takes. Either that or take it directly from his social or pay cheque. Like dominos they will all fall, human nature.

bbam

I think a progressive residential property tax is ok.
Provided it is based on a decent criteria AND ability to pay. Forget about local services, that's a smoke screen excuse.
The tax take isn't enough to run the country. Stable tax revenues are needed so we can remain above a second world standard of living.

Houses don't go away so they are a reliable source of income.

People should be putting efforts into drawing the government out on decent job creation measures and stimulating the economy so we can all afford to pay our way. Such huge efforts into avoiding contributing to the running of our country and then there'll be another thread moaning about school class sizes and hospital closures.

Before canvassing to avoid taxes look around and decide what type of country you want to live in.

For those who complain about inefficiencies and money wasting by government.. I too cringe when I see it going on and every effort should be made to stop it and run things as efficiently as possible... However the reality is that waste will always happen, if we minimise it we would be doing well.. But the fact remains that taxes need to be paid to maintain a standard of living and society..

The focus should be on getting people earning money not avoiding taxes.

Bruthal

alastair wrote: »

It's a property tax. If you don't own a property, it doesn't apply to you. Not too clear where the morality issue arises there. See dog license etc.

so where do you suggest we tax other than property?

Just tax people`s existance. Thats what a property tax is, except selective, because a property is seen as some sort of wealth indicator by some, even if its just their home.

Or put dog licences up to €500, since some here see them as similar.

Ghandee

Chucky the tree wrote: »

Yes into jail if that's what it takes. Either that or take it directly from his social or pay cheque. Like dominos they will all fall, human nature.

Hi chucky.

Have you any idea what the cost of incarcerating someone would be?

Put it this way, if the govt even attempted to jail say five percent of liable houses, even for a month, it would probably break the country at the minute.

The cost of jailing someone would be far greater than the tax/fines imposed.