A Question for those who paid the Household Charge

fergiesfolly

The point I was making was that oap's spent their lives paying for the services around them. Normal societal rules would have it, that now society takes care of them. And not to go asking them to bail out the reckless generation that came after.

mmc2010

If I could see a half efficient public sector and health service, I might be enticed to support the property tax. My mother in law is similar to the OP. An extremely law abiding lady who never criticised anyone in her life has decided that no way will she be paying this tax. Her attitude is she provides her own water, she lives in the country where there are no street lights, pays for her bins to be collected and the roads she uses are in a desperate state. What local amenities is she availing of? I, then, will be building a house on a site she gifted to us and will be paying €4.5k for development contribution which again goes to 'local amenities', do I have to pay again for the same thing next year with a property tax?

gosuckonalemon

RATM wrote: »

I was just talking to my pensioner aged mother yesterday and had asked her if she paid the household charge. She said she hadn't and also that she didn't intend to, regardless of fines or penalties. She is a completely law abiding citizen (up until now at least), I remember laughing at how mortified she was at once getting caught speeding for doing 56kph in a 50kph zone. Since then she always has one eye on the speedmeter so it doesn't happen again !

They will probably deduct it from her state pension.

RATM wrote: »

Anyway I asked her why she didn't pay, given that she is not one to go around flouting the law, etc. She said it is not the €100 but that she is worried sick about what is coming down the line. Her situation is probably not unlike that of a lot of pensioners in the country- she lives in a large five bedroom house and now all the kids have moved on. It is home to her (and us) so there is no question of her ever downsizing to a 2 bed apartment or something similar.

If it is home to you and whoever else comes under "us" then perhaps you should contribute?

There is no reason why a woman should live alone in a large 5 bedroomed house.
If she is worried about the tax then she should just sell up, downsize to a bungalow (no stairs for climbing) and keep the excess money to make sure she lives the rest of her years in financial security.

RATM wrote: »

So my questions is specifically to people who have paid the €100 Household Charge. Are you ready and willing to pay a charge (be it next year or thereafter) of €1k-€2k per year ? Or are we going to see even more mass disobedience when those who have paid €100 begin to realise that it is only a small sum compared to what they are expected to pay annually ?

Interested to hear peoples thoughts please.

Yes I am willing to pay a tax on my property as is done the world over.

People need to realize that they can refuse to pay the 100e now but will eventually have to pay it down the line along with accumulated taxes and interest.

I own a small, terraced 2 bed townhouse so I think it is completely just that your mother, who lives in a large 5 bed house pays more.

If she refuses to live in a more appropriate house to her needs then she must pay the price. The Celtic Tiger days are over. People need to live within their means. Particularly old people.

OldNotWIse

NIMAN wrote: »

Your whole argument is based on what you think the household charge will rise to, but its all just guessing.

How do you think that my house in rural Donegal will have the same household tax as a house in central London? Thats based on what exactly?

Nearly every country has some sort of household tax. My own widowed pensioner mother in NI lives in a 4 bed semi and pays £1000 per year.

We are getting off light at €100, believe me.

And clearly you are assuming that there will be some kind of fair method used to determine who pays what. Has the fact that they launched this as a blanket charge in the first place not told you anything? Nobody is right in assuming anything but I would be more inclined towards the OP's assumption (that this is the thin edge of the wegde) than yours (that you will pay less because your house is in a rural area)

OldNotWIse

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

They will probably deduct it from her state pension.



If it is home to you and whoever else comes under "us" then perhaps you should contribute?

There is no reason why a woman should live alone in a large 5 bedroomed house.
If she is worried about the tax then she should just sell up, downsize to a bungalow (no stairs for climbing) and keep the excess money to make sure she lives the rest of her years in financial security.






Yes I am willing to pay a tax on my property as is done the world over.

People need to realize that they can refuse to pay the 100e now but will eventually have to pay it down the line along with accumulated taxes and interest.

I own a small, terraced 2 bed townhouse so I think it is completely just that your mother, who lives in a large 5 bed house pays more.

If she refuses to live in a more appropriate house to her needs then she must pay the price. The Celtic Tiger days are over. People need to live within their means. Particularly old people.

So an elserly person who has worked and contributed all their lives (and probably raised a large, tax paying family) and seen the country through more hard times than anyone posting on here has probably seen is supposed to sell their fmaily home and move into a one bed flat just because their family has moved on and they have been widowed? That's a little militant isn't it? OK fair enough they should pay the charge but telling us someone should "downsize and live within their means" for the sake of it is a bit harsh

OldNotWIse

We are being told that this charge is to fund upkeep of parks and services etc...how were said services carried out before....

Ronnie Binge

I have paid the Household Charge even though I think that the whole thing is a scam to screw homeowners at the behest of the IMF and Brussels. I don't break laws if I can help it but I don't have to like having to comply with this. The county and town councils have inflated administrations and grotesque castles of buildings housing all the administration staff who are getting a free ride from the tax payer.

I'm familar with Council Tax in England. It would be an interesting exercise to strip out the costs of policing and education from the average UK Council Tax bill. In the last few months while I was living in the West of England I paid £75 per month to the local council to cover those services plus refuse, planning, street lighting and cleaning. Even taking the difference in provision between Irish and English local authorities, any of us will be damn lucky to get away with €100 p.a. in the future. In addition, those who pay will have to subsidise those who don't pay, with costs for the compliant driven up accordingly.

The other surprise for non-home owners is that if the Government implement a tax similar to Council Tax, then the individual householder, whether home owner or not, has to pay. Unlike the Household Charge, tenants do not get a free ride. There is a separate means tested benefit called Council Tax Benefit administered by the local authority for those on Job Seeker's Allowance.

Finally, using the reverse argument to those who blithely accept this additional charge as being something normal or even desirable, can we have VRT scrapped because no other country in Europe has anything similar? Thought not.

Snakeblood

OldNotWIse wrote: »

We are being told that this charge is to fund upkeep of parks and services etc...how were said services carried out before....

With money from the construction industry and stamp duty. That revenue source is gone. Up until the 70s people were paying rates, but Fianna Fail got rid of that in one of their previous bids to ruin the country by promising everything to everyone.

Penny Dreadful

Sparky_Larks wrote: »

I paid the tax. 2 reasons
1) It is the law - If you don;t like the law then abide by it while campaigning to change it
2) It believe that we need a property tax

I think 100 is too low. I am willing for it to go up to more.

If we do not tax property( I believe in site value tax by the way) we have to tax something else.

Could put 1% on vat though that will drive down spending resulting in job losses in the retail sector.

Can increase income tax, but that will affect Jobs.

The question who should contribute more,
a low income pensioner, in central Dublin in a 4- bedroom house worth 650,000 close to bus links and rail links all subsidised by public transport,

or a moderately high earner( say 75,000 joint income), with 4 children living in Kildare , who cannot afford a house that is near to schools, shops buses etc, commuting 2 hours to work every day?

Every report at the moment says that it is the 55 to 75 year old age group ho have the largest disposable income, there for those who can pay most should pay most.

My problem with statements like this (and not just in relation to the household charge) is that the people in this group (thinking of my parents, 68 and 71) have paid a whole lot of tax for all of their working lives and it is IMHO dreadfully unfair that they are expected to pay again.
My parents paid close to 20% interest on their mortgage as was common in the late 70s / early 80s. Dad was hammered on income tax and paid over 50%, again as was common at the time. Rates were charged too as were a variety of other additional taxes.
People in this group have paid their way already, if they have a disposable income now, I think they have earned the right to have it left alone.
Like the OPs mother, my parents have added onto their house over the years, developed a lovely garden, etc and I think it would atrocious for them, as pensioners, to be expected to fork out a large some of money in property tax.

Bullseye1

dudara wrote: »

To me, this is an example of the mé-féin attitude that is partially to blame for the ruined economy of this country. Non-payers of the HC need to find some social responsibility and realise that paying taxes is part of the road to recovery. It's part of being a socially aware and responsible citizen.

You may not like paying taxes, but surely you have the brains to see the benefits in paying taxes.

Oh for God's sake. This type of sanctimonious post is so typical of many of the people who have paid. By all means pour your money into a system which is broke. But don't tell the rest of us who pay their taxes, tv bills, motor taxes etc that we are me-fein. That is complete and utter tosh.

Road to recovery your having a laugh.

OldNotWIse

Snakeblood wrote: »

With money from the construction industry and stamp duty. That revenue source is gone. Up until the 70s people were paying rates, but Fianna Fail got rid of that in one of their previous bids to ruin the country by promising everything to everyone.

Money from the construction industry? Really?

OldNotWIse

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Oh for God's sake. This type of sanctimonious post is so typical of many of the people who have paid. By all means pour your money into a system which is broke. But don't tell the rest of us who pay their taxes, tv bills, motor taxes etc that we are me-fein. That is complete and utter tosh.

Road to recovery your having a laugh.

I agree. Makes it sound like those who did not pay have been screwing the system all their lives. Most people I know who did not pay have contributed a lot to society and are simply sick and tired of seeing their tax squandered and having bugger all say in where it goes :rolleyes:

gosuckonalemon

OldNotWIse wrote: »

So an elserly person who has worked and contributed all their lives (and probably raised a large, tax paying family) and seen the country through more hard times than anyone posting on here has probably seen is supposed to sell their fmaily home and move into a one bed flat just because their family has moved on and they have been widowed? That's a little militant isn't it? OK fair enough they should pay the charge but telling us someone should "downsize and live within their means" for the sake of it is a bit harsh

It's a bit harsh, but a reality unfortunately.

I never metioned anything about a one bedroomed flat. Just a more modest, appropriate bungalow in the same areas as she lives.

Yes, elderly people have contributed massively in the course of their lives. However, with advances in medicine and healthcare they are living much longer which has increased demands on the healthcare system which current taypayers are paying.

If the woman can afford to sustain living alone in a large 5 bed house then by all means she should do so. However, I know that if it was me, and I had a choice of living with the costs of maintaining a large house like that or selling up, finding a more appropriate sized home and getting a lump sum it would be a no brainer!

Ronnie Binge

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

It's a bit harsh, but a reality unfortunately.

I never metioned anything about a one bedroomed flat. Just a more modest, appropriate bungalow in the same areas as she lives.

Yes, elderly people have contributed massively in the course of their lives. However, with advances in medicine and healthcare they are living much longer which has increased demands on the healthcare system which current taypayers are paying.

If the woman can afford to sustain living alone in a large 5 bed house then by all means she should do so. However, I know that if it was me, and I had a choice of living with the costs of maintaining a large house like that or selling up, finding a more appropriate sized home and getting a lump sum it would be a no brainer!

Her house, her business, no brainer.

OldNotWIse

Penny Dreadful wrote: »

Sparky_Larks wrote: »

I paid the tax. 2 reasons
1) It is the law - If you don;t like the law then abide by it while campaigning to change it
2) It believe that we need a property tax

I think 100 is too low. I am willing for it to go up to more.

If we do not tax property( I believe in site value tax by the way) we have to tax something else.

Could put 1% on vat though that will drive down spending resulting in job losses in the retail sector.

Can increase income tax, but that will affect Jobs.

The question who should contribute more,
a low income pensioner, in central Dublin in a 4- bedroom house worth 650,000 close to bus links and rail links all subsidised by public transport,

or a moderately high earner( say 75,000 joint income), with 4 children living in Kildare , who cannot afford a house that is near to schools, shops buses etc, commuting 2 hours to work every day?

Every report at the moment says that it is the 55 to 75 year old age group ho have the largest disposable income, there for those who can pay most should pay most.

My problem with statements like this (and not just in relation to the household charge) is that the people in this group (thinking of my parents, 68 and 71) have paid a whole lot of tax for all of their working lives and it is IMHO dreadfully unfair that they are expected to pay again.
My parents paid close to 20% interest on their mortgage as was common in the late 70s / early 80s. Dad was hammered on income tax and paid over 50%, again as was common at the time. Rates were charged too as were a variety of other additional taxes.
People in this group have paid their way already, if they have a disposable income now, I think they have earned the right to have it left alone.
Like the OPs mother, my parents have added onto their house over the years, developed a lovely garden, etc and I think it would atrocious for them, as pensioners, to be expected to fork out a large some of money in property tax.

"The question who should contribute more,
a low income pensioner, in central Dublin in a 4- bedroom house worth 650,000 close to bus links and rail links all subsidised by public transport"

Even if a house IS worth this, it is not active income so are you suggesting that people should sell the fmaily home in order to pay? Also, why the positive discrimination against those who live in the city and therefore have access to better services? They paid MORE for their homes in the first place so that they could avail of said services, they've already paid extra!

OldNotWIse

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

It's a bit harsh, but a reality unfortunately.

I never metioned anything about a one bedroomed flat. Just a more modest, appropriate bungalow in the same areas as she lives.

Yes, elderly people have contributed massively in the course of their lives. However, with advances in medicine and healthcare they are living much longer which has increased demands on the healthcare system which current taypayers are paying.

If the woman can afford to sustain living alone in a large 5 bed house then by all means she should do so. However, I know that if it was me, and I had a choice of living with the costs of maintaining a large house like that or selling up, finding a more appropriate sized home and getting a lump sum it would be a no brainer!

Gawd the bare faced cheek of them living longer like that and screwing us poor tax payers :rolleyes: Erm, said advances in medicine mean YOU will live longer too and...you guessed it - your kids will be paying for your healthcare some day. Dont forget we are all heading the same way. Some day you too will be a drain on the system.

gosuckonalemon

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Gawd the bare faced cheek of them living longer like that and screwing us poor tax payers :rolleyes: Erm, said advances in medicine mean YOU will live longer too and...you guessed it - your kids will be paying for your healthcare some day. Dont forget we are all heading the same way. Some day you too will be a drain on the system.

Yes I'm aware we will all live longer, that's why we should all be expected to contribute to this charge.

This whole thing of "a sure they are old and have paid taxes all their lives" doesn't float anymore.

There are only two things certain in life...
1)death and 2) taxes, until you reach no. 1, expect to suffer no. 2

Mr. Presentable

How long have we had stamp duty? Is that not a property tax?

tayto lover

NIMAN wrote: »

I have absolutely no doubt that the HC will increase from €100. Never gonna stay that low.

But I do hope that they are sensible with the rises in future. I think they did a bit of kite flying recently and the figures had a 3 bed semi around he €150 - €200 mark. I honestly think that isn't bad tbh. But with the state of the finances, who really knows where it'll end up?

As for those thinking they are being smart avoiding it, I personally wouldn't be so smug about it. They will get it off you somehow. First off, it is attached to your property and so are the late fees, so if you ignore it now and try to sell in 15yrs time, you'll owe a pretty penny, and it will come out of your house sale.

If you die and leave your house to family, it will come out of your estate.

I also would fear that they will start deducting it from state benefits such as child allowance, dole etc. Thats an extreme measure, but these are extreme times.

Also heard something on the radio today that made me think that it will start people falling out with each other. It was always said that the HC would be for your local council for local use. Many didn't believe this. I heard that there is a possibility that the councils with the highest rate of non-payment may see their budgets for things like arts, entertainment, public parks etc cut. If that happens then you can be sure that those that paid will soon start to turn on those that didn't.

And finally, it is now a law, just like the TV licence. Why is there not the same social disobedience to that?

I can't help feeling that you vote F.G.

OldNotWIse

Ronnie Binge wrote: »

Her house, her business, no brainer.

Exactly, some people seem to be living in some parallel Ireland where we still have a thriving property market. My Gran owns (yes owns she is not mortgaged up to her neck like most of us from the "instant gratification" generation) her own house that her and my Grandad worked all their lives for. Yes it has 4 bedrooms, the cheek of her staying there after her family moved on any my grandad died! This house is maybe worth 150k max - she is supposed to sell this and buy a one bed bungalow and still have a "lump sum"? erm.....

OldNotWIse

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

Yes I'm aware we will all live longer, that's why we should all be expected to contribute to this charge.

This whole thing of "a sure they are old and have paid taxes all their lives" doesn't float anymore.

There are only two things certain in life...
1)death and 2) taxes, until you reach no. 1, expect to suffer no. 2

I'm not talking about letting anyone off the hook, I am making the point that people on here who are so quick to penalise OAP's for living longer seem to forget how much they have contributed, and I certainly do not agree with the suggestion that they sell their family homes because their family has moved on and their spouse may be no longer with them.

gosuckonalemon

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Exactly, some people seem to be living in some parallel Ireland where we still have a thriving property market. My Gran owns (yes owns she is not mortgaged up to her neck like most of us from the "instant gratification" generation) her own house that her and my Grandad worked all their lives for. Yes it has 4 bedrooms, the cheek of her staying there after her family moved on any my grandad died! This house is maybe worth 150k max - she is supposed to sell this and buy a one bed bungalow and still have a "lump sum"? erm.....

No, she isn't supposed to do anything.

However she needs to realize that a property tax is imminent and she will be expected to pay based on the size of the house.

Zamboni

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

No, she isn't supposed to do anything.

However she needs to realize that a property tax is imminent and she will be expected to pay based on the size of the house.

And what if she doesn't pay?
And incurs fines and interest.
And still doesn't pay.

Seriously, what is the worst they can throw at her?

Snakeblood

Zamboni wrote: »

And what if she doesn't pay?
And incurs fines and interest.
And still doesn't pay.

Seriously, what is the worst they can throw at her?

They take the fees out of the estate, eventually, I'd guess. No one wants to lock up OAPs.

gosuckonalemon

Zamboni wrote: »

And what if she doesn't pay?
And incurs fines and interest.
And still doesn't pay.

Seriously, what is the worst they can throw at her?

They will take it from her pension. Also the house cannot be sold/transferred to children until all taxes and fines are payed.

Snakeblood

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Money from the construction industry? Really?

Yep. 2.1 billion over the first National Development plan, and 2.7 was anticipated over the second one.

username123

Snakeblood wrote: »

They take the fees out of the estate, eventually, I'd guess. No one wants to lock up OAPs.

That is exactly what they will do.

My own parents had a judgement against the property, a lien on the house.

It was to do with some tax evasion in the 80s, the original sum was around 5k. It would be taken out of any sale proceeds including interest and penalties. My father never sold the house in life. After their deaths myself and my sibling sold the property. The solicitor contacted revenue in relation to the judgement and the amount due including interest and penalties was now just over 12k. BUT, because 12 years had passed and the person the judgement was against was dead, they agreed to settle for the original 5k.

So in short, if I was a pensioner, Id not be worried about judgements against the property.

Besides, pensioners successfully got the government to u turn on medical cards, if anyone could fight the property tax its them.

OldNotWIse

gosuckonalemon wrote: »

No, she isn't supposed to do anything.

However she needs to realize that a property tax is imminent and she will be expected to pay based on the size of the house.

She did pay, and I am sure she will pay regardless of how much it goes up. I am finding it difficult to think of a way to make a tiered charge fair. It seems ok to say someone should pay more based on the size of their house but a large house outside of a city may still be worth less than a small one in a city. Then again those who bought in cities paid more already.. it's a tough one to call. I suppose it would have to be based on size AND location to make it fair, if it can ever be?

OldNotWIse

Snakeblood wrote: »

They take the fees out of the estate, eventually, I'd guess. No one wants to lock up OAPs.

That might be what a lot of people would do. I certainly wouldnt mind my parents doing this. My Dad is not fit for work however he slaved his whole life from 14 to 64 to build the house of his dreams. I would have no problem with him putting the fees against my inheritance. It's his to enjoy, not mine, and I would rather he didnt have to fork out money he can ill afford and enjoy his retirement than try to pay something that could just be written off against the property after he goes.

gosuckonalemon

OldNotWIse wrote: »

That might be what a lot of people would do. I certainly wouldnt mind my parents doing this. My Dad is not fit for work however he slaved his whole life from 14 to 64 to build the house of his dreams. I would have no problem with him putting the fees against my inheritance. It's his to enjoy, not mine, and I would rather he didnt have to fork out money he can ill afford and enjoy his retirement than try to pay something that could just be written off against the property after he goes.

Well if you were smart then you should offer to pay.

If he doesn't pay you will just pay eventually, plus interest and fines!