Value based property tax?

lightspeed

so not sure if there is already a thread on it but ive just seen on rte that the government is introducing a value based property tax. ive also read that they plan a restructuring of motor tax. What bothers me is that ive paid the household charge and yet no action has been taken against those that haven't paid so i've plenty of buyers remorse on that. I thought the popular theory was that this flat tax was only to establish who owns what property so we could establish a fairer value based property tax.

However, ive not heard anything about the household charge. It sounds that this is just a further tax on top of the household tax and along with further water charges on the way. All this austerity to avoid a 2nd bailout.
Such a system is just scientifically impossible. If it was possible for austerity to work at such a pace then surely Greece should be better than it is now. Poor economic performance in the UK due to excess austerity has also choked their economy. How we can carry through such a programme of austerity that has proven each and everytime to be an absolute failure. it is just as remarkable as it is flawed.

Biggins

I got me popcorn ready...

Biggins

Biggins wrote: »

I got me popcorn ready...

I've already eaten mine!

The other threads have already discussed this to death.

lightspeed

Deleted User wrote: »

I've already eaten mine!

The other threads have already discussed this to death.

care to share a link?

ive seen a few threads on the household tax but not on this new value based property tax.

policarp

Sell your house and drink or gamble all your money away.
Go on the dole, then go to the local Co. Co. and look for a council house, medical card and a free buggy. . .
Property tax? What property tax?. . .

Biggins

policarp wrote: »

Sell your house and drink or gamble all your money away.
Go on the dole, then go to the local Co. Co. and look for a council house, medical card and a free buggy. . .
Property tax? What property tax?. . .

I agree with the sentiment - however looking at reality, for many (if they are even lucky), it might and does, take years just to get a council house.
* Medical card? Definitely possible. I'm also (maybe wrongly) assuming that a lot that get them, oft times really do need them.
* Free buggy? I've heard this loads of times - have yet to see evidence of it though in all my years.

kodoherty93

A value based property tax is an another tax on Dubliners

policarp

Biggins wrote: »

I agree with the sentiment - however looking at reality, for many (if they are even lucky), it might and does, take years just to get a council house.
* Medical card? Definitely possible. I'm also (maybe wrongly) assuming that a lot that get them, oft times really do need them.
* Free buggy? I've heard this loads of times - have yet to see evidence of it though in all my years.

It was a facetious comment. . .

Rawhead

kodoherty93 wrote: »

A value based property tax is an another tax on Dubliners

Here here,

just like the septic tank charge and bin charges.

Biggins

policarp wrote: »

It was a facetious comment. . .

Fair enough.

Sadly there is those that do espouse some of those positions though.

eth0

I'll just have to get a caravan, live by the side of the road. Maybe toss the old bag of rubbish into the ditch and annoy some of the locals. Soon I won't be able to push the door of the caravan open in the morning with the heap of keys to free houses the council will have thrown infront of it

Living an 'ordinary' with a normal job, normal house, wife, kids and maybe a couple of cars with tax and insurance outside the door is just getting too expensive. The government and private companies are just out there to fleece you in every way possible.

Tin Foil Hat

lightspeed wrote: »

thought the popular theory was that this flat tax was only to establish who owns what property so we could establish a fairer value based property tax.

I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation of why a value based property tax is fair. The value of someones home is a terrible indicator of their ability to hand over a lump sum of cash to the government on an annual basis.

People can live in the same house for decades, often for their entire adult lives. During this time their circumstances change dramatically. Salaries go up and down, jobs are lost and found. Kids are born, maybe go to creche, go to school, go to college and eventually move out. People retire. Spouses die. Mortgages might be paid from one salary, or from two, or there might not be any mortgage at all.

A value based property tax is bollox, so it is.

Biggins

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation of why a value based property tax is fair. The value of someones home is a terrible indicator of their ability to hand over a lump sum of cash to the government on an annual basis.

People can live in the same house for decades, often for their entire adult lives. During this time their circumstances change dramatically. Salaries go up and down, jobs are lost and found. Kids are born, maybe go to creche, go to school, go to college and eventually move out. People retire. Spouses die. Mortgages might be paid for one salary, or from two, or there might not be any mortgage at all.

A value based property tax is bollox, so it is.

One side might argue that if some of those events took place, there might be allowances and/or social adjustments which might be applied for or altered.
Now if one qualifies for them or if you miss out on them for the sake of €1.50 is another thing!

Taking into account that many are originally on POS (point of sale) purchasing because they might have saved up for years for a deposit and got help in cash lumps from ma/da too - does not necessarily mean afterwards they could still later down the road afford its then later taxes either!
(Thats the short version)

There is some sense in a value based property tax - but it HAS to be only only seen to be fair but also administered fair.
Will it?
I have serious doubts!

lightspeed

lightspeed wrote: »

care to share a link?

ive seen a few threads on the household tax but not on this new value based property tax.

The household charge megathread is morphing into the property tax thread.
http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056592766

eth0

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation of why a value based property tax is fair. The value of someones home is a terrible indicator of their ability to hand over a lump sum of cash to the government on an annual basis.

People can live in the same house for decades, often for their entire adult lives. During this time their circumstances change dramatically. Salaries go up and down, jobs are lost and found. Kids are born, maybe go to creche, go to school, go to college and eventually move out. People retire. Spouses die. Mortgages might be paid from one salary, or from two, or there might not be any mortgage at all.

A value based property tax is bollox, so it is.

+1

Also the value of the houses change, I don't know if they are going to re-assess these every few years or increase them all by a few % every year. So the value of your house could go up for whatever reason, while you are quietly minding your own business and not wanting to move. Suddenly the council will be looking for more money off you

nokia69

kodoherty93 wrote: »

A value based property tax is an another tax on Dubliners

not really

the whole point of property tax is to reduce income tax, but in Ireland we will have high income tax and high property tax

also not all property owners will have to pay the property tax, I bet the only people who will be on the hook will be PAYE workers, so IMO its just another tax on the working suckers who pay for everthing in this joke of a banana republic

what we really need is a land value tax, but we will never get it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Henry_George

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progress_and_Poverty

The following excerpt represents the crux of George's argument and view of political economy.[1]

"Take now... some hard-headed business man, who has no theories, but knows how to make money. Say to him: "Here is a little village; in ten years it will be a great city-in ten years the railroad will have taken the place of the stage coach, the electric light of the candle; it will abound with all the machinery and improvements that so enormously multiply the effective power of labor. Will in ten years, interest be any higher?" He will tell you, "No!" Will the wages of the common labor be any higher...?" He will tell you, "No the wages of common labor will not be any higher..." "What, then, will be higher?" "Rent, the value of land. Go, get yourself a piece of ground, and hold possession." And if, under such circumstances, you take his advice, you need do nothing more. You may sit down and smoke your pipe; you may lie around like the lazzaroni of Naples or the leperos of Mexico; you may go up in a balloon or down a hole in the ground; and without doing one stroke of work, without adding one iota of wealth to the community, in ten years you will be rich! In the new city you may have a luxurious mansion, but among its public buildings will be an almshouse."

steamengine

There was a value based property tax years ago. It was called 'rates' - each house had a 'rateable valuation' which acted as a multiplier for the actual 'rate' which was decided annually. When it was abandoned it was supposed to be for ever !!!

This property tax is really a re-introduction of rates by the back door, with a twist though - water (proposed), refuse and septic tank charges will be extra.

Biggins

steamengine wrote: »

There was a value based property tax years ago. It was called 'rates' - each house had a 'rateable valuation' which acted as a multiplier for the actual 'rate' which was decided annually. When it was abandoned it was supposed to be for ever !!!

This property tax is really a re-introduction of rates by the back door, with a twist though - water (proposed), refuse and septic tank charges will be extra.

...As will calling for a fire service?

So what exactly is one paying for?
I suppose thats discussed in the other thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056592766

emo72

Its too much. I'm not gonna pay it. Really don't give a **** anymore. I'm sure I'm not the only onewho feels like this.

Ghandee

You know its a silly idea when auctioneers and valuers don't even agree with it.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/valuebased-property-tax-is-crazy-say-auctioneers-3210001.html

Some of the powers that be really and truly do not have a clue.

RandomName2

Biggins wrote: »

...As will calling for a fire service?

So what exactly is one paying for?

Yup

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0116/firebrigade.html

We are paying back the bailout with the property tax - it is even stipulated by the Troika that the property tax should be introduced to do so.

I mean, that's fair enough - but they could be a bit more honest about it.

Also a bit more fair! Value based property tax? What do they want us to do? Sell our homes!? I think a poll tax (yes, yes, I know) for a modest sum would be the most fair.

opti0nal

nokia69 wrote: »

not really the whole point of property tax is to reduce income tax,

The idea is to get at the savings of people who are otherwise outside of the income tax net - pensioners for example.

dvpower

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

I have yet to hear a satisfactory explanation of why a value based property tax is fair. The value of someones home is a terrible indicator of their ability to hand over a lump sum of cash to the government on an annual basis.

People can live in the same house for decades, often for their entire adult lives. During this time their circumstances change dramatically. Salaries go up and down, jobs are lost and found. Kids are born, maybe go to creche, go to school, go to college and eventually move out. People retire. Spouses die. Mortgages might be paid from one salary, or from two, or there might not be any mortgage at all.

Net income is only a marginally better indicator but thats what we use for the bulk of personal taxation.

dvpower

Ghandee wrote: »

You know its a silly idea when auctioneers and valuers don't even agree with it.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/valuebased-property-tax-is-crazy-say-auctioneers-3210001.html

Some of the powers that be really and truly do not have a clue.

They're a vested interest. Property taxes will put downward pressure on house prices and they get rich when prices are going through the roof.

dvpower

steamengine wrote: »

There was a value based property tax years ago. It was called 'rates' - each house had a 'rateable valuation' which acted as a multiplier for the actual 'rate' which was decided annually. When it was abandoned it was supposed to be for ever !!!

This property tax is really a re-introduction of rates by the back door, with a twist though - water (proposed), refuse and septic tank charges will be extra.

There was another one after that - it was called Property Tax.

steamengine

Biggins wrote: »

...As will calling for a fire service?

So what exactly is one paying for?
I suppose thats discussed in the other thread: http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056592766

Yes indeed, forgot about the fire service.

I've no doubt that exactly what is being paid for is filling in that big black hole in the Exchequer. We all know by now how that came about and the powerful privileged groups that created it by their combined greed and incompetence. !!!

Biggins

RandomName2 wrote: »

Yup

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/0116/firebrigade.html

We are paying back the bailout with the property tax - it is even stipulated by the Troika that the property tax should be introduced to do so.

I mean, that's fair enough - but they could be a bit more honest about it.

Yep - if they would just be honest (yea... I know!) instead of lying, it would be a good start.

...And on the assumption that the bailouts will be paid off some day - I won't be around to see it I suspect - we might assume then the charge placed upon the public will be done away with?

Some chance!

girl in the striped socks

I don't know about anyone else but I've honestly had enough. You can't take what's not there. A lot of people simply don't have the money.
If we lie down & take all of the proposed increases they are talking about then we may just prepare ourselves to get roasted with further increases down the line.
I didn't see the cost of living go down at all. But yet we're expected to roll over & pay out extra taxes on top of the ones already implemented & on top of wage cuts.
I'm sorry but that's just horse****.
Before the elections every sleazy prick of a politician was lining up to shake our hands & look for our vote.
Where are they all now with their broken promises & false concern?

Tin Foil Hat

dvpower wrote: »

Net income is only a marginally better indicator but thats what we use for the bulk of personal taxation.

It's a vastly better indicator. It's not perfect, I'll give you that, but it's worlds apart from taxing somebody on the notional value of a home that might have been bought last year, six or seven years ago in the height of the boom, or a half a century ago.

A property tax on an owner occupied home serves one purpose and one purpose only - to gouge money out of someone whether they have the means to pay it or not.

Biggins

girl in the striped socks wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else but I've honestly had enough. You can't take what's not there. A lot of people simply don't have the money.
If we lie down & take all of the proposed increases they are talking about then we may just prepare ourselves to get roasted with further increases down the line.
I didn't see the cost of living go down at all. But yet we're expected to roll over & pay out extra taxes on top of the ones already implemented & on top of wage cuts.
I'm sorry but that's just horse****.
Before the elections every sleazy prick of a politician was lining up to shake our hands & look for our vote.
Where are they all now with their broken promises & false concern?

You can only drain a person so much by so many ways.
...And the present lot in power continue to do this draining in any number of ways that they can possibly invent - then increase.

When people have nothing else left to give, what does the government expect!
When people have nothing else left to give business fail, they don't buy homes, they don't buy cars, they don't buy products, they don't buy insurances and further medical coverage plans, they work the black economy just to survive (which in turn has another knock-on effect of taking money out of the tax system).
All this and more happens and for many, they have reached this point some time ago.

Is the government listening? No.
They are going to cut more money going into people pockets.
They are going to more introduce and/or increase present charges.
They are going to further cut services and hike up other chargeable items because the money is not there.

The problem is that austerity prompts strikes and slowdowns, which, in turn, shrink the domestic market, investment and tax receipts. As unemployment spreads and wages fall, mortgage arrears and defaults soar. Property prices have plunged too.

Financial Times

Jeasus... I wonder why the money is not there!
Let me think about that for all of five seconds!

OfflerCrocGod

This is good news. Even better would be to tax capital gains yearly. Wages are less tax efficient method of employing capital in the current system than property which is a nonsense state of affairs for any country to be in. Taxing wealth like property more and bring down employment costs is what we need to do.

John Stuart Mill wrote:

capital may be temporarily unemployed, as in the case of unsold goods ... during this interval it does not set in motion any industry ... Capital is kept in existence from age to age not by preservation, but by perpetual reproduction. ... To set free a capital which would otherwise be locked up in a form useless for the support of labor, is, no doubt, the same thing to the interests of laborers as the creation of a new capital.
Capital ...in unsold goods does not set in motion any industry. Capital may be so employed as not to support laborers, being fixed in machinery, buildings,... locked up in the form useless for the support of labor.
Suppose half (one's capital) effects a permanent improvement. ... He will employ next...year only half the number of laborers

Property == trapped capital.

This is a good blog post that refers to the paper I took the quote from. Having vast amounts of wealth untaxed and frozen in property is not a sensible policy.

lightspeed

I dont believe that a value based property tax can be fair but surely those living in mansions should be paying more than those living in less expensive areas. Of course it is crazy to introduce it now given the state of the property market.
Before that controversial report was pulled by the ERSI, it revealed that 44% of people, particuarlly those with children are financially better on welfare than in employment. How much of a burden can the middle class carry?

When your in the middle bracket, you are the worst affected.
Those who are not working will be exempt almost all of these new crippling taxes.
Those who are on the higher wage bracket will be able to afford these new taxes.
Thos on the middle will be brought to the point that there are finacially worse than those on welfare and forced to pay all these new taxes.
If the Troika think there is unrest in Greece, wait to they see people protesting after their water has been cut off.
Thats when things are going to be beyond the calming PR nonsense of a school teacher.

lightspeed

OfflerCrocGod wrote: »

This is good news. Even better would be to tax capital gains yearly. Wages are less tax efficient method of employing capital in the current system than property which is a nonsense state of affairs for any country to be in. Taxing wealth like property more and bring down employment costs is what we need to do.



Property == trapped capital.

This is a good blog post that refers to the paper I took the quote from. Having vast amounts of wealth untaxed and frozen in property is not a sensible policy.

Sorry where is this vast wealth?
How much is in this alladins cave?
Sure there are many wealthy people in this country. The divide between rich and poor has grown to its largest in decades.
You fail to understand that although plenty of wealthy people who can afford these new taxes, most of the country cant.

We may need to get a 2nd bailout after the austerity introduced to pay for the first has been so toxic to our economy and further increased the number of people defaulting in their mortage.

We are just going in a circle. If we pass more austerity and need a 2nd bailout , there will just be more mortage defaults and banking debt. So what then? More austerity to cover the last 2 bailouts and then a 3rd bailout.
Mortgage defaults = Bank debt = Bailout =Austerity=
Mortgage defaults = Bank debt = Bailout =Austerity= denial, markets crash and further bailouts and a continuation if the above flawed forumula. When the middle class are poorer than the lower class and the above formula continues, expect blood on the streets. Im no armchair rebel and would never advocate violence but history cant or at least should not be ignored.

Tin Foil Hat

OfflerCrocGod wrote: »

This is good news. Even better would be to tax capital gains yearly. Wages are less tax efficient method of employing capital in the current system than property which is a nonsense state of affairs for any country to be in. Taxing wealth like property more and bring down employment costs is what we need to do.



Property == trapped capital.

This is a good blog post that refers to the paper I took the quote from. Having vast amounts of wealth untaxed and frozen in property is not a sensible policy.

This is nonsense. You don't seem to know the difference between a property portfolio and a home. How is my home 'trapped capitol'? It's my home. It serves the only purpose for which it was built - to house people. It was built by men who paid taxes on their earnings and bought by me using money, on which I have already paid tax, to provide shelter for me and my family - the most basic of needs. Btw, I already paid stamp duty equivalent to about 60 years of the current household charge when I did so.

Why should i be forced to pay the government a lump sum on an annual basis, out of already taxed money, because I had the audacity to put a roof over my family's head - whether I have the means to pay it or not? And why should the notional value of the perfectly ordinary semi-D I chose, when my personal circumstances were very different, be used to determine how much that lump sum should be?

dxhound2005

Tin Foil Hat wrote: »

This is nonsense. You don't seem to know the difference between a property portfolio and a home. How is my home 'trapped capitol'? It's my home. It serves the only purpose for which it was built - to house people. It was built by men who paid taxes on their earnings and bought by me using money, on which I have already paid tax, to provide shelter for me and my family - the most basic of needs. Btw, I already paid stamp duty equivalent to about 60 years of the current household charge when I did so.

Why should i be forced to pay the government a lump sum on an annual basis, out of already taxed money, because I had the audacity to put a roof over my family's head - whether I have the means to pay it or not? And why should the notional value of the perfectly ordinary semi-D I chose, when my personal circumstances were very different, be used to determine how much that lump sum should be?

It's been a while since we had one like you in these threads. The "Look at me, I bought a house" types. A feat achieved by only a few million people before you. There is nothing in what you say that makes you entitled to choose which laws you will abide by and there is nothing unique about Ireland to make us so different that we shouldn't have a property tax like the rest of the world.

Cee-Jay-Cee

I'm going to declare myself a traveller. They pay for nothing. I suggest everyone else do the same.

Tin Foil Hat

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It's been a while since we had one like you in these threads. The "Look at me, I bought a house" types. A feat achieved by only a few million people before you. There is nothing in what you say that makes you entitled to choose which laws you will abide by and there is nothing unique about Ireland to make us so different that we shouldn't have a property tax like the rest of the world.

You might try to challenge my points rather that regurgitating a government mantra. Unfair laws deserve to be challenged. Just because most countries do it, doesn't mean it's right or fair.

I'm still waiting for someone to explain how the notional value of my home is a fair indicator of my ability to give the government a lump sum of cash on an annual basis, irrespective of my ever changing circumstances.

eth0

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It's been a while since we had one like you in these threads. The "Look at me, I bought a house" types. A feat achieved by only a few million people before you. There is nothing in what you say that makes you entitled to choose which laws you will abide by and there is nothing unique about Ireland to make us so different that we shouldn't have a property tax like the rest of the world.

Just have a pre-emptive dig at the kind of person you think the poster is. It hasnt been long at all since someone has tried this and the various other ways of passing a snide remark to someone in one of these threads without directly insulting them and getting banned.

There is nothing unique about not paying property tax either. Its not everywhere, it might be a bit of a fad in Europe these days since they are essentially forcing it upon countries like Ireland and Greece in return for bailout money.

There is also no reason why Ireland should be afraid to stand out when every other country does things a certain way. We had a great thing going when you could buy your house and never have to worry about the massive bill from the govt you be getting every year to be allowed keep it.

Am Chile

dxhound2005 wrote: »

It's been a while since we had one like you in these threads. The "Look at me, I bought a house" types. A feat achieved by only a few million people before you. There is nothing in what you say that makes you entitled to choose which laws you will abide by and there is nothing unique about Ireland to make us so different that we shouldn't have a property tax like the rest of the world.

This its the law argument is a bit tiring-as if to say all laws or taxes are just and should be followed no matter what-Throughout history to the present day people have fought and resisted unjust laws-Lech Wałęsa resisted unjust laws under soviet rule-women have fought against unjust laws denying them the right in vote-Manal Al-Sharif presently in Saudi Arabia is fighting against unjust laws denying women the right to drive-Gandhi resisted unjust laws under British rule,In Boliva in the late 90s the state passed laws making it Illegal to collect rainwater for use the people fought back and resisted that unjust law,Rosa Parks fought against unjust laws when she refused to give up her seat on a bus for a white person,Il move onto unjust taxes, a lot of people have prob never heard of the Jizyah Tax, as explained.

Jizyah or jizya (جزْي) is the extra tax imposed on
non-Muslims
who live under Muslim rule





the
ruler can impose a taxation on those non-Muslims who will not convert to Islam.

http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Jizyah_(Tax)

I could go on about unjust laws/taxes-but Im sure you get the picture- and people who are boycotting this unjust household/property tax are 100% in the right-

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=276371

I finish by asking you the following questions- If the Irish government were to pass new laws making it Illegal to collect rainwater, denying women the right to drive,for a black person to give up a seat on a bus for a white person, If the Irish government were to bring in a new tax equivalent to a Jizyah Tax on people to try persuade people to convert to a certain religion, do you think people should blinding obey such laws and pay such taxes without question ?

NIMAN

Who exactly will be doing the valuing?

If there are houses around where you live on the market for €x, and they aren't selling, does this mean that your house will be valued at that price or lower?

dvpower

NIMAN wrote: »

Who exactly will be doing the valuing?

If there are houses around where you live on the market for €x, and they aren't selling, does this mean that your house will be valued at that price or lower?

Self assesment most likely. Your assesment will be validated against other assesments and actual prices from the new database of all house sales.

lugha

CJC999 wrote: »

I'm going to declare myself a traveller. They pay for nothing. I suggest everyone else do the same.

Alas, our problems won’t go away. It is possible, though unlikely I think at this stage, that property tax will be abandoned but even if it is, there will be some other tax on something else in its place that will cause every bit as much hardship. I have yet to hear a credible way out of this crisis that would not impact severely on the majority of people.

eth0 wrote: »

We had a great thing going when you could buy your house and never have to worry about the massive bill from the govt you be getting every year to be allowed keep it.

Yes, we structured our tax system so that during the boom we generated and spent massive amounts from temporary property related taxes. That stream has collapsed, which has a lot to do with the bother we are in now. Surely, at least in hindsight, you can see that we really did not have “a great thing going”?

Am Chile wrote: »

This its the law argument is a bit tiring-as if to say all laws or taxes are just and should be followed no matter what-Throughout history to the present day people have fought and resisted unjust laws

But this works both ways. If the law is not absolutely binding then can everyone not decide for themselves what laws the consider just? Many very wealthy people for example genuinely do believe that it is unjust that they are asked to pay more tax that everyone else. Would you pardon them if they decided to evade their tax obligations?

Or what about the small number of politicians who were fingered by tribunals for corruption? They insist they saw nothing wrong with what they were doing. Absolution for them too?

Most of the law-defying examples you mentioned involved situations where people’s basic human rights were been infringed. What we are looking at here, despite all the passion, is the rather ho hum matter of how a democratically elected government structures its taxation system! If the people don’t like what they do, they can vote them out of office next time around.

One of the dafter notions the no side put out was to liken their battle with that against apartheid in SA! Thankfully they seem to have abandoned this nonsense.

Bullseye1

NIMAN wrote: »

Who exactly will be doing the valuing?

If there are houses around where you live on the market for €x, and they aren't selling, does this mean that your house will be valued at that price or lower?

We have no details yet. It would only be speculation to say otherwise. It maybe self assessment or it maybe independently valued. They may start out with self assessment to get the ball rolling and in the coming years employ the same people responsible for assessing rates to assess the market value or simply ask the householder to employ an auctioneer/valuer to produce the figure.

At this moment in time we simply don't know.

dxhound2005

Am Chile wrote: »

This its the law argument is a bit tiring-as if to say all laws or taxes are just and should be followed no matter what-Throughout history to the present day people have fought and resisted unjust laws-Lech Wałęsa resisted unjust laws under soviet rule-women have fought against unjust laws denying them the right in vote-Manal Al-Sharif presently in Saudi Arabia is fighting against unjust laws denying women the right to drive-Gandhi resisted unjust laws under British rule,In Boliva in the late 90s the state passed laws making it Illegal to collect rainwater for use the people fought back and resisted that unjust law,Rosa Parks fought against unjust laws when she refused to give up her seat on a bus for a white person,Il move onto unjust taxes, a lot of people have prob never heard of the Jizyah Tax, as explained.


http://wikiislam.net/wiki/Jizyah_(Tax)

I could go on about unjust laws/taxes-but Im sure you get the picture- and people who are boycotting this unjust household/property tax are 100% in the right-

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=276371

I finish by asking you the following questions- If the Irish government were to pass new laws making it Illegal to collect rainwater, denying women the right to drive,for a black person to give up a seat on a bus for a white person, If the Irish government were to bring in a new tax equivalent to a Jizyah Tax on people to try persuade people to convert to a certain religion, do you think people should blinding obey such laws and pay such taxes without question ?

Would you have the same concerns for our fellow citizens across the border who are living under an administration which has a party trying to get into power in this country. This is what happens under their watch if you don't pay your property tax there.

http://www.nidirect.gov.uk/what-happens-if-i-don-t-pay-my-rates

If you don't pay your rates

If you do not pay your rates or contact LPS to make an arrangement to clear your account, you will be taken to court. This will mean:
•additional costs
•your credit rating could be affected, and as a result you may not be able to apply for credit or a loan
•you could be made bankrupt
•your home could be repossessed

In 2011 - 12 court action was taken against 45,902 ratepayers for non-payment of rates.


You are living in a democracy, not a muslim caliphate or a communist dictatorship. Not only was the law introducing the HHC passed with a large majority but a bill intoduced by its opponents to have have repealed was also soundly defeated. This is democracy and the rule of law in action and if the campaign of illegality against it suceeds we are in big trouble.

http://www.thejournal.ie/bill-to-repeal-household-charge-to-be-debated-in-the-dail-tonight-492626-Jun2012/

Bullseye1

lugha wrote: »

Most of the law-defying exaFor example: small bubbles, scuffs, etc. should be considered normal for chromed figures. If you are a highly selective collector, we caution you keep this in mind before placing your order. So if you're bothered by small imperfections…PLEASE DO NOT ORDER THIS STATUE. IT'S NOT FOR YOU BUB. SAVE YOUR MONEY FOR SOMETHING THAT WILL HAVE A BETTER CHANCE OF MEETING YOUR EXPECTATIONS.mples you mentioned involved situations where people’s basic human rights were been infringed. What we are looking at here, despite all the passion, is the rather ho hum matter of how a democratically elected government structures its taxation system! If the people don’t like what they do, they can vote them out of office next time around.

One of the dafter notions the no side put out was to liken their battle with that against apartheid in SA! Thankfully they seem to have abandoned this nonsense.

When was the last time you recall a new government being elected on a clear mandate to reverse or call a halt to the actions of the previous government and following through on their mandate? Many people elected FG in with their promise to stand up to the EU/IMF and the banks. No more money to BR pumped into the banks, bond holders to be burnt....etc. The fact of the matter is once they introduce a tax (household charge is not a tax but a charge) it is here to stay. The USC and levy on pensions will no doubt be here to stay yet we were told it was only for a number of years. The USC is a rise in income tax. They argue that a rise in income tax hurts our opportunity to protect employment yet they rise VAT on professionals fees from 21 to 23%. How is that protecting the self employed professionals?

FG was also elected in to take on the public sector unions and the first thing they do is bring Labour in (they could have made up the numbers with independents). This meant they were never interested in taking on the unions when they told bare face lies at the doorstep.

So while it is all very nice to say we can elect someone else in this country the fact is they are all the same lying scum.

dvpower

@Bullseye
Why don't you stand for election?
If its true that they are all 'lying scum', surely you'd be a shoe in.

Bullseye1

@dvpower I see your only interested in personal attacks to cover your lack of knowledge. Consider yourself ignored and reported.

sarkozy

I think there are two separate but interrelated points here.

On the first issue, I agree, a house is a home, but it's also an asset. However, if a house is the only one in one's possession and is providing its primary purpose, it should not be considered a pure wealth asset. However, as David Harvey points out, houses are not 'ordinary commodities' because they can, while providing their primary function in the short and medium-term, also provide a wealth asset. The balance needs to be struck here.

The second issue is taxation. Let's recap: taxation is a method of the state to raise revenues to provide security and services to citizens. In more recent history, and in the context of capitalism, taxation is also a method to shift wealth between groups in society for 'progressive' or 'regressive' purposes. Lesson over. In other countries, a property tax is levied to promote social equity and to pay for local services. Those countries have a real local government system where local governments are truly accountable for the quality of services they provide or do not provide. With our dysfunctional system of governance, all taxes are in effect central taxes (with the exception of local service charges). Speaking personally, I would be content paying a local tax or property tax if and only if it was linked to local service delivery so that I, and we all, could hold those responsible to account. We need a local/national tax split where we can be clearly informed where the money is going, empowering us to hold whoever is responsible to account. This kind of thing has been rolled out in the jungles of Uganda, why can't we have it?

Will I pay this tax. Yes, because I value my liberty. Do I think it's right as proposed. I don't know because we don't have the detail. Speaking for myself, I'm about to get the keys for a house. My wife and I have saved prodigiously over the past ten years - always working on very modest and unstable salaries. We will be moving into a modest Dublin house, and our incomes will continue to be modest. I am worried that, with a property tax based on value rather than size, we will be unable to pay through no fault of our own and lose our home which we grafted hard to be able to afford - but through the fault of property speculators.

And here's an anecdote. My stepmother knows a very old lady in America. She lived in a beautiful, modest home on a scenic part of the Maine coastline. She lived there all her life, before any real-estate boom. She raised her family there. Her husband died, her kids moved out. She was a pensioner. Because property tax there was value-based, she could not pay and there were no waivers. Heartbroken, she was forced to leave her home of over 50 years.

I just cannot trust the government or the IMF when it comes to taxation. I've read too much about what the IMF does to impoverish the poorest of the poor in developing countries. The same beast is at work here.

ilovesleep

girl in the striped socks wrote: »

I don't know about anyone else but I've honestly had enough. You can't take what's not there. A lot of people simply don't have the money.
If we lie down & take all of the proposed increases they are talking about then we may just prepare ourselves to get roasted with further increases down the line.
I didn't see the cost of living go down at all. But yet we're expected to roll over & pay out extra taxes on top of the ones already implemented & on top of wage cuts.
I'm sorry but that's just horse****.
Before the elections every sleazy prick of a politician was lining up to shake our hands & look for our vote.
Where are they all now with their broken promises & false concern?

That's right. Theres a huge imbalance of income and wealth. Some people have money, others don't. Then we have the ones in the middle - working, earning a wage, but everything going on outgoings mortgage commitments, bills. They may struggle to find money for a doctors appointment. I'm sure they made adjustments to their bills and spendings to try and save but now there are extra outgoings. These people do not have SW or a medical card to fall back on. They are called the new poor.

It's going to go around in circles. Take money away from those that have little, the less they have to spend in the local economy which would equal more unemployment which will equal more people on SW which is more strains on the SW system and the deficit will still remain. Which will mean - raise more taxes.

The government is going about it wrong in my opinion. We have so many problems that money is just thrown at in the country instead of change and reform. FG are 18 months+ in office and they are not doing it. They are doing mickey mouse changes just to be seen to do something.

sarkozy

Why doesn't the government just tax the rich?

Bullseye1

sarkozy wrote: »

Why doesn't the government just tax the rich?

They would say they already do tax the rich and that the rich contribute the majority of the tax intake.