A Question for those who paid the Household Charge

tayto lover

marienbad wrote: »

yes it does, and considering the situation we are in- doubly so. What do you suggest ?

This is one of the fairest taxes there is- the bigger the mansion the bigger the tax .

What would you suggest ?

I'd suggest a fairer taxation. Listening to Joe Duffy the other day he stated that farmers pay less than 1% of the total tax take. Nobody contradicted his figures and I don't know where he got those figures from but if he's right then the country reeks of favouritism. There are many farmers driving around in 30k plus Mercs. They seem to be getting life very easy. Their children get free education grants etc while they get most of the European grant money.

Hitting the same people for everything will not work. Its time to spread the tax net.

marienbad

tayto lover wrote: »

I'd suggest a fairer taxation. Listening to Joe Duffy the other day he stated that farmers pay less than 1% of the total tax take. Nobody contradicted his figures and I don't know where he got those figures from but if he's right then the country reeks of favouritism. There are many farmers driving around in 30k plus Mercs. They seem to be getting life very easy. Their children get free education grants etc while they get most of the European grant money.

Hitting the same people for everything will not work. Its time to spread the tax net.

and this method is possibly the fairest way of spreading the tax net.

This does not preclude going after farmers or anybody else not paying their fair share- we can do both, we need to do both and more if we are to get out of the mess we are in.

tayto lover

marienbad wrote: »

and this method is possibly the fairest way of spreading the tax net.

This does not preclude going after farmers or anybody else not paying their fair share- we can do both, we need to do both and more if we are to get out of the mess we are in.

Back where we started. It's not fair. Taxing someones home is totally unfair and will never be fair in my opinion. Whats more not every home is being taxed which is also unfair.

L1011

Zamboni wrote: »

That is reverse thinking.
The vast majority of properties were bought before the announcement of the charge.
How the do you budget for something which doesn't exist?
Does that mean renters should start budgeting for the upcoming renters service charge? And if you cannot afford the renters service charge you cannot afford to rent?
I am being facetious because your reasoning is illogical.

If your budgeting to buy a house cannot factor in €2 a week, you aren't going to be able to maintain the house. Ergo, you cannot afford to buy a house.

Hijpo

MYOB wrote: »

Zamboni wrote: »

That is reverse thinking.
The vast majority of properties were bought before the announcement of the charge.
How the do you budget for something which doesn't exist?
Does that mean renters should start budgeting for the upcoming renters service charge? And if you cannot afford the renters service charge you cannot afford to rent?
I am being facetious because your reasoning is illogical.

If your budgeting to buy a house cannot factor in €2 a week, you aren't going to be able to maintain the house. Ergo, you cannot afford to buy a house.

What if you have a few bob left to enjoy yourself during these depressing times? Do we hand over some of the leisure money to pay a bill that will eventually increase to take all your leisure money?

tayto lover

I can't believe that there are people posting here who actually believe that this tax will remain at 2e a week. Also these are posters who stated that WE should have planned ahead.

marienbad

tayto lover wrote: »

I can't believe that there are people posting here who actually believe that this tax will remain at 2e a week. Also these are posters who stated that WE should have planned ahead.

Of course no one belives it will remain at this level and that is the beauty of it, that is if it is applied equitably ( and that is where your protest should be) it is in fact a wealth tax.

tayto lover

marienbad wrote: »

Of course no one belives it will remain at this level and that is the beauty of it, that is if it is applied equitably ( and that is where your protest should be) it is in fact a wealth tax.

No it is a Home Tax. They are taxing your HOME.

marienbad

tayto lover wrote: »

No it is a Home Tax. They are taxing your HOME.

So what, you say HOME as if it sacred, it is just an asset like anything else and whats more one that is not so easy to hide or move offshore.

Long overdue, the ordinary Joe paying 2e per week and Michael Flatley/ tony O'Reilly etc 200+e a week.

L1011

tayto lover wrote: »

No it is a Home Tax. They are taxing your HOME.

they're taxing properties.

A "home tax" would only apply to one property out of all you own.

Hijpo wrote: »

What if you have a few bob left to enjoy yourself during these depressing times? Do we hand over some of the leisure money to pay a bill that will eventually increase to take all your leisure money?

If you're budgeting that tightly, when something happens to/in your house - damage, dead appliance, etc - you're completely screwed.

If you can't afford the charges that come with owning a house, you can't afford to own a house. Its the same as having a car - do you think that we should let people who can afford to buy the bare metal drive it without tax, insurance, or paying for fuel?

tayto lover

marienbad wrote: »

So what, you say HOME as if it sacred, it is just an asset like anything else and whats more one that is not so easy to hide or move offshore.

Long overdue, the ordinary Joe paying 2e per week and Michael Flatley/ tony O'Reilly etc 200+e a week.

It is unfair and unjust to tax someone's home. I will not pay it.
My home is for the benefit of myself and my family. I built it, paid for it over many years and will not be paying for it again.
It is a HOME tax.

tayto lover

MYOB wrote: »

they're taxing properties.

A "home tax" would only apply to one property out of all you own.




If you're budgeting that tightly, when something happens to/in your house - damage, dead appliance, etc - you're completely screwed.

If you can't afford the charges that come with owning a house, you can't afford to own a house. Its the same as having a car - do you think that we should let people who can afford to buy the bare metal drive it without tax, insurance, or paying for fuel?

Pure rubbish. My tax, insurance etc are always paid. I get a service for that. I get nothing for a home tax as I pay for all the service into it already.

L1011

tayto lover wrote: »

Pure rubbish. My tax, insurance etc are always paid. I get a service for that. I get nothing for a home tax as I pay for all the service into it already.

The state is running a major deficit. Services are not being paid for.

Zamboni

marienbad wrote: »

So what, you say HOME as if it sacred, it is just an asset like anything else and whats more one that is not so easy to hide or move offshore.

Long overdue, the ordinary Joe paying 2e per week and Michael Flatley/ tony O'Reilly etc 200+e a week.

Tax income, tax interest earned, tax winnings, charge for services.
But don't tax ownership. It is double taxation.
Household charge and pension levy are not wealth taxes.
Where does it stop? Why not tax private bank deposits?

It is insidious.

L1011

Zamboni wrote: »

Where does it stop? Why not tax private bank deposits?

I think you'll find the political parties most opposed to property taxation support that concept.

Zamboni

MYOB wrote: »

I think you'll find the political parties most opposed to property taxation support that concept.

What they think is of no concern to me. They are not in power.

L1011

Zamboni wrote: »

What they think is of no concern to me. They are not in power.

Well, you've got a choice of parties who will impose property taxes; or parties who want to impose generic "wealth taxes" on bank accounts, investments, etc, but don't seem to accept property as wealth.

You decide.

Zamboni

MYOB wrote: »

Well, you've got a choice of parties who will impose property taxes; or parties who want to impose generic "wealth taxes" on bank accounts, investments, etc, but don't seem to accept property as wealth.

You decide.

There is another choice but sourcing funds for a new political party would be quite a task.

Hijpo

Zamboni wrote: »

MYOB wrote: »

Well, you've got a choice of parties who will impose property taxes; or parties who want to impose generic "wealth taxes" on bank accounts, investments, etc, but don't seem to accept property as wealth.

You decide.

There is another choice but sourcing funds for a new political party would be quite a task.

What about levys on home insurance? Will that be scrapped if they bring in the property tax? Or will we have to pay two charges concerning your home?

Everyone saves for a rainy day incase appliances fail etc should we not save now aswell? I would pay the 2 euro if it was staying at 2 euro but the fact that its going to increase and nobody knows how much so it doesnt allow me to budget properly for the future either. I didnt stay out of financial difficulty by leaping blindly into situations.

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

No im saying that the taxes collected wont be fairly spent, D4 (or any other upper class locality) will be favoured over a smaller town.

Where is the evidence that 'upper class' areas get more council resources than elsewhere? I would think that councils spend more money proportionally on poorer areas.

Obviously small sparsely populated areas will get less resources than densely populated areas areas, which is perfectly reasonable.

Jogathon

dvpower wrote: »

Where is the evidence that 'upper class' areas get more council resources than elsewhere? I would think that councils spend more money proportionally on poorer areas.

QUOTE]

I agree. Everyday I see money being pumped into designated disadvantaged areas, new amenities vandalised and destroyed, trees broken and any positive step destroyed by a few gurriers. Put a lesser amount of money into a well off area and it is maintained and still looks attractive ten years on.

Hijpo

Jogathon wrote: »

dvpower wrote: »

Where is the evidence that 'upper class' areas get more council resources than elsewhere? I would think that councils spend more money proportionally on poorer areas.

QUOTE]

I agree. Everyday I see money being pumped into designated disadvantaged areas, new amenities vandalised and destroyed, trees broken and any positive step destroyed by a few gurriers. Put a lesser amount of money into a well off area and it is maintained and still looks attractive ten years on.

Your local council is in charge of what they spend the funding on, if they spend it on trees to be broken thats up to them. I read (cant find the text) a paragraph writen about the charge and it basicly states that just because you pay the charge to help your locality the the government will give as much money as they see fit to your council. Obviously they will favour there own towns/upper class localities over others, lets be honest about it.

Victor

Zamboni wrote: »

That is rich coming from a poster who regularly plays the poverty stricken card here.

Play nice.

Graces7

Victor wrote: »

Play nice.

Victor; thank you.. I think the person is harking back to the first winter I was down here when, because of the cock-up by the CWO I was left with literally about E7 a week after paying the rent. For food and heating above the solid feul allowance when that kicked in. Not poverty as I always have had a roof over my head. But on that thread there were some difficult posts saying that anyone on welfare should have the absolute bare necessities and no more.

Difference between refusing to pay a tax and seeking what is entitlement to have some kind of a life... This is something we hear so much on these threads.

Graces7

tayto lover wrote: »

It is unfair and unjust to tax someone's home. I will not pay it.
My home is for the benefit of myself and my family. I built it, paid for it over many years and will not be paying for it again.
It is a HOME tax.

Stamps his wee foot!;)

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

Obviously they will favour there own towns/upper class localities over others, lets be honest about it.

Claptrap.
Show me the evidence.

tayto lover

Graces7 wrote: »

Stamps his wee foot!;)

Size 11 is not wee :rolleyes:

marienbad

tayto lover wrote: »

Size 11 is not wee :rolleyes:

Still smaller than the jackboot that will descend on you for not paying

mikom

Roll on the next budget and I hope ta fuck they put this tax up to 500 euro a house.
I still won't be paying, and I will have the comfort of not having to listen to those who gobbled up Endas line of shite about "2 Euro a week".

Enright

has anything been done to the people who haven't paid yet? it a bit unfair to expect people to pay it again when such a large amount have yet to pay it once.

And yes i expect it to go up