Upcoming Irish property tax to cost 'on average' €1000 per house.(can you afford it?)

Dub XV

Put up with all the waste.......and then pay more because it's the law?

alastair

Dub XV wrote: »

Are you being serious there?

Fcuk me.

You're more than welcome to break the law - as long as you recognise that you'll have to pay the price. It's not really an a la carte arrangement.

alastair

Dub XV wrote: »

Put up with all the waste.......and then pay more because it's the law?

You do realise you get to vote your local authority governance in on a regular basis? That's the mechanism for dealing with waste.

dvpower

golden lane wrote: »

just as the taxpayer has to cut down in hard times....so can they....

They have - the local authorities have taken big cuts in funding even before the most recent ones due to tax evasion.

Heroditas

donalg1 wrote: »

?

Electricity? Are they to turn off some of the lights in the offices or maybe disconnect their phones for a few hours each day or their PC's?

Public bodies in this country have been obligated to cut their energy consumption by 33% between now and 2020.
Many of them have already made decent enough inroads.
Water pumping and public lighting make up about 80-90% of most local authorities' energy consumption.
They don't need to do silly stuff like disconnect their phones, what they need to do is replace public lighting with more energy efficient alternatives and ensure their pumping and waste water treatment facilities are running at maximum efficiency (which a lot of them are not).

donalg1

kr7 wrote: »

Regarding waste/bin charges.

Could someone explain why the LA's got rid of their refuse/bin collection services?

Surely if the private companies can make a handsome profit on these services, the LA's could have too.

Or is the fact that PS employees are so overpaid compared to the 'real' world and so entrenched in their unions with a sense of entitlement that making a profit was impossible?

Nail on the head there I'd reckon and it's the same throughout our 'glorious' PS/CS.

Well its simple really the private company can pay the workers minimum wage and could disregard health and safety a bit more than the LA, for example the rubber seal on the back of a truck is broke the LA would take it off the road and repair it the private company probably would wait a while before doing so.


Also then there is the fact that the private company would more than likely have a better collection rate of the fees than the council, because with the prviate company they would simply stop collecting your bin if you dont pay whereas the LA would continue to collect it and try come to some arrangement with you to pay.

A few other reasons too I am sure but those are just the ones I can guess at off the top of my head.

donalg1

Dub XV wrote: »

Are you being serious there?

Fcuk me.

I would rather not thanks if its all the same to you.

Are you saying tax evasion is legal, must have missed that memo.

donalg1

Heroditas wrote: »

Public bodies in this country have been obligated to cut their energy consumption by 33% between now and 2020.
Many of them have already made decent enough inroads.
Water pumping and public lighting make up about 80-90% of most local authorities' energy consumption.
They don't need to do silly stuff like disconnect their phones, what they need to do is replace public lighting with more energy efficient alternatives and ensure their pumping and waste water treatment facilities are running at maximum efficiency (which a lot of them are not).

I was guessing at the disconnecting phones part as there was no clear explanation about what was meant by "electricity". Why havent LA's upgraded public lighting and upgraded their facilities to make sure they are running at maximum efficiency and how much would they save by doing so.

Anyway as for public lighting they are going to turn them off now so that should save a bit.

tayto lover

alastair wrote: »

You're seriously proposing that Louth Co Council isn't struggling financially - because they ****ed up a cycle lane?

The Council pulled in two million in EU funding for the Square redevelopment btw - seems like they're not lacking initiative for a body that 'provide no services', eh?

Yes they won a European prize and the re-vamp of the Square was it. BUT they made a balls of it and the road through the town is constantly being closed while we wait another dig-up and repair or new pipes to be inserted underneath. People are completely fed up to the teeth with it. This latest dig-up and repair has been estimated to cost 450k and apparently it's the councils fault and not the developers. That's 4,500 HHC's for you Al.

golden lane

dvpower wrote: »

They have - the local authorities have taken big cuts in funding even before the most recent ones due to tax evasion.

well, they should do more.....they are spending peoples money.....far too much in my opinion.....

the country is borrowing money to keep them going........money that it cannot afford to borrow....

the taxpayers have their own problems....why should they be burdened by the la's problems as well.......

the managers etc of the la's are well enough paid to do their job.....work within their budgets...

Dub XV

alastair wrote: »

You're more than welcome to break the law - as long as you recognise that you'll have to pay the price. It's not really an a la carte arrangement.

Nope my "out of context" poster

Dub XV

donalg1 wrote: »

I would rather not thanks if its all the same to you.

Are you saying tax evasion is legal, must have missed that memo.

"Not an invite memo for Donal"

So amusing

Ghandee

I thought this article was interesting.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/opinion/household-charge--incitement-to-break-law-of-the-land-204394.html

The controversy over the household charge of €100 is rumbling on amidst the continuing posturing. There is no real sign of resolution.

For some people, in the current economic climate €100 is a lot of money, and if members of the Government do not realise this, they are just demonstrating that they are out of touch with reality, which is certainly not a prescription for good government. For a great many people, the charge amounts to a relatively small tax, but that is beside the point, because the whole idea seems so grossly unfair.

Nobody would argue that the charge is transparently fair. The rich person living in a castle is being asked to pay the same amount as the poor individual living in a one-room cottage, even though the amount of services that each uses may be essentially incomparable

Fair points.

Then we have this....

The State, which is responsible for collecting the charge, is now warning that those who have not paid will receive a second warning letter. Paul McSweeney, the chief executive of the Local Government Management Agency, has expressed a reluctance to take action against people who are non-compliant. His organisations are anxious to provide services, not to take people to court and prosecute them. But, if necessary, they will do so.
"Certainly we would expect that, after three letters, some action is going to need to be taken," Mr McSweeney warned.

After three letters! Well, it seems that people are being invited to assume the second letter is just puffing on top of huffing. There will be another letter in due course if the charge is not paid.

This sounds a bit dodgy tbh, what with the majority of non payers not actually receiving a 'first' letter?

Which is why this part makes sense.

Campaigners against the charge contend that many people have not yet received even a first warning. They are offering to provide legal advice and support for anyone prosecuted for not paying the charge. This is naked incitement to violate the law.

If the law is not worth implementing, it should never have been introduced in the first place. The Government should have the intelligence to realise this.

Shambles, total shambels.

alastair

Dub XV wrote: »

Nope my "out of context" poster

No to what exactly?

alastair

tayto lover wrote: »

YThis latest dig-up and repair has been estimated to cost 450k and apparently it's the councils fault and not the developers. That's 4,500 HHC's for you Al.

Estimated by whom? Any links to support these 'apparent' claims?

Heroditas

donalg1 wrote: »

I was guessing at the disconnecting phones part as there was no clear explanation about what was meant by "electricity". Why havent LA's upgraded public lighting and upgraded their facilities to make sure they are running at maximum efficiency and how much would they save by doing so.

Anyway as for public lighting they are going to turn them off now so that should save a bit.

Public sector energy bill is about €500m a year.
The reason they haven't invested in a lot of these projects is because paybacks are typically greater than a year.
Budgets are only allocated on a yearly basis so it's extremely hard for an energy manager in a public sector organization to free up funds to retrofit energy-efficient equipment when the money has to come out of his budget for the bills. It's only when the equipment needs to be replaced that the money is then made available to invest.
It's one of the biggest problems with the public sector - they operate off yearly budgets and if they don't use up all the money, they're in danger of having their budget cut the following year.
The easiest way to do it is to enter into energy performance contracts with facilities management companies and allow them to handle everything - something that has been looked at closely for quite a while.

kr7

alastair wrote: »

They became unaffordable within their level of funding.

You mean they couldn't afford them because LA's aren't run like a 'real' business.

Fingal county council's bin men used to work around 4 hours a day.
They had to collect 2 lorry loads a day and then they were finished.
FACT.
My father in law used to work there, he had a second job for the afternoon, self employed.
He was a shop steward, the type of fella that would start a row in an empty house!
If they were asked to do an extra run, or god forbid, a Saturday, the unions would cause mayhem.

That's what your dealing with in the PS/CS.

Intransigence is all around.........

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

They have - the local authorities have taken big cuts in funding even before the most recent ones due to tax charge evasion.

FYP.
You like that, don't you?

kr7

donalg1 wrote: »

Well its simple really the private company can pay the workers minimum wage and could disregard health and safety a bit more than the LA, for example the rubber seal on the back of a truck is broke the LA would take it off the road and repair it the private company probably would wait a while before doing so.


Also then there is the fact that the private company would more than likely have a better collection rate of the fees than the council, because with the prviate company they would simply stop collecting your bin if you dont pay whereas the LA would continue to collect it and try come to some arrangement with you to pay.

A few other reasons too I am sure but those are just the ones I can guess at off the top of my head.

You mean a private company can operate in the 'real' world, but the PS don't / won't / can't!

dvpower

gerryo777 wrote: »

FYP.
You like that, don't you?

Tax ~ Charge.
All the same to me.

donalg1

golden lane wrote: »

well, they should do more.....they are spending peoples money.....far too much in my opinion.....

the country is borrowing money to keep them going........money that it cannot afford to borrow....

the taxpayers have their own problems....why should they be burdened by the la's problems as well.......

the managers etc of the la's are well enough paid to do their job.....work within their budgets...

Well they are doing more, they are introducing a property tax and domestic water charges, which will go a long way towards funding LA's well into the future.

donalg1

Heroditas wrote: »

Public sector energy bill is about €500m a year.
The reason they haven't invested in a lot of these projects is because paybacks are typically greater than a year.
Budgets are only allocated on a yearly basis so it's extremely hard for an energy manager in a public sector organization to free up funds to retrofit energy-efficient equipment when the money has to come out of his budget for the bills. It's only when the equipment needs to be replaced that the money is then made available to invest.
It's one of the biggest problems with the public sector - they operate off yearly budgets and if they don't use up all the money, they're in danger of having their budget cut the following year.
The easiest way to do it is to enter into energy performance contracts with facilities management companies and allow them to handle everything - something that has been looked at closely for quite a while.

So the reason they cant do it is because of a lack of funding. Well is that not what the HHC and propert tax are for? Property taxes and water charges will help the LA's budget better as they wont be so reliant on Government funding.

alastair

kr7 wrote: »

You mean a private company can operate in the 'real' world, but the PS don't / won't / can't!

And there was me thinking you wanted the local authority to collect your rubbish. My mistake. You should be a happy camper with your efficient private collection service then?

Ghandee

donalg1 wrote: »

So the reason they cant do it is because of a lack of funding. Well is that not what the HHC and propert tax are for? Property taxes and water charges will help the LA's budget better as they wont be so reliant on Government funding.

This all comes back to the basic issue of where their original funding has been syphoned off to?????


To pay the bail out!

golden lane

donalg1 wrote: »

Well they are doing more, they are introducing a property tax and domestic water charges, which will go a long way towards funding LA's well into the future.

i take you believe that the hard pressed taxpayers should just keep dipping into their pockets.....and the government should ignore the taxpayers budgets.....

punish some citizens......to reward the incompetant......

is ireland a democracy...????

gerryo777

dvpower wrote: »

Tax ~ Charge.
All the same to me us in FG.

Fixed that for you too.

alastair

Ghandee wrote: »

This all comes back to the basic issue of where their original funding has been syphoned off to?????


To pay the bail out!

95% plus of actual taxation spend is on anything but the bank bailout. All state spending has been cut back on the back of the deficit - local authority funding included. We're simply getting back to the logical taxation model that includes a property tax, in order to try and build a sustainable revenue system.

The bank bailout is a huge burden, but it's in the tuppeny place when compared with the rest of our problems.

donalg1

golden lane wrote: »

i take you believe that the hard pressed taxpayers should just keep dipping into their pockets.....and the government should ignore the taxpayers budgets.....

punish some citizens......to reward the incompetant......

is ireland a democracy...????

The hard pressed taxpayers that have been getting free water for decades you mean? Do you not think that maybe they should be paying for this service?

You remember the last general election dont you, which would indicate that yes it is a democracy. Why do you ask anyway?

Heroditas

donalg1 wrote: »

So the reason they cant do it is because of a lack of funding. Well is that not what the HHC and propert tax are for? Property taxes and water charges will help the LA's budget better as they wont be so reliant on Government funding.

No, it's because their budgets are allocated on a yearly basis.
If the budgets were allocated for energy over, say, a three year timeframe they would be able to carry out a lot of the work themselves.
They had plenty of money back during the boom but still weren't investing in energy efficient equipment even back then.

donalg1

Ghandee wrote: »

This all comes back to the basic issue of where their original funding has been syphoned off to?????


To pay the bail out!

A lot of their funding has been syphoned off by the green party and their wonderful carbon based emissions motor tax bands. Then there is the lower collection rates of rates due to the economic crisis and the difficulties businesses face as a result of said crisis.