Household Charge Mega-Thread [Part 3] *Poll Reset*

darkhorse

dvpower wrote: »

So the idea that we could substitute it with an income tax or VAT increase isn't realistic.

Here is a question that I asked several times on this forum:- What is the difference in me paying €10 per week extra income tax from my salary, and paying €500 for a property tax, assuming that is what it would be.

dvpower

Bullseye1 wrote: »

Administrators is where I would start, civil servents, TDs, management. I'm sure we could knock 100,000 out of public employment.

I'm all for private industry employment.

There is a lot of time wasted by Garda stopping people for motor tax when they could be better employed. Computer technology is sufficency advanced to prosecute those driving without motor tax.

Smaller, more efficient state services - I'm all for it. Bring on the privatisation, the outsourcing and the automation - I might make a few quid out of it.

Micky Dolenz

dvpower wrote: »

Half? How many Doctors, Gardai, Teachers and Firefighters do you intend sacking? Do we reduce social protection payments by 50% too?

dvpower wrote: »

No - not not tax at all; - no Property Tax.
What (if anything) do you think should replace the property tax.


So, your argument is against tax increases in general, not the property tax specifically?

What about needless quangos or overpaid consultants? fcik, we just got the finger out and renegotiated drug prices recently. Why didn't the government do this at the start of their term?

Lets talk brass figures here dv. there are loads of places to make savings and cuts.

And you believe the normal,everyday home owner of the Republic Of Ireland is fair game?

I'm not against tax increases as long as it's on a sliding scale.I have always paid high enough tax and if we turn over a lot in a given year I know exactly what we need to pay. This is business. I get that.

What I don't get is hitting the home owner in the Republic of Ireland with a nonsense, no reward "tax". It makes no sense. It's extortion, plain and simple.

Shame on the government

Hijpo

dvpower wrote: »

Ah. Forgive me. I thought you were putting forward a radical cost cutting plan. When really you were just spouting the tired old 'sack the politicians - that'll fix it' silliness.
Sorry about that - I made the mistake of expecting some sense from you.

i put forward a cost cutting plan

dvpower

darkhorse wrote: »

Here is a question that I asked several times on this forum:- What is the difference in me paying €10 per week extra income tax from my salary, and paying €500 for a property tax, assuming that is what it would be.

To an individual in the tax net - not much.
To the state - a big difference. Income tax yields are unpredictable. When a recession comes along the income tax yield falls - just when the state really needs the cash.

A property tax is much broader based (non PAYE people, retired people who don't pay income taxes, people who live on undeclared income, people who live outside the state but own houses here (Germans:eek:), landlords who own multiple properties ...)

dvpower

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

What about needless quangos or overpaid consultants? fcik, we just got the finger out and renegotiated drug prices recently. Why didn't the government do this at the start of their term?

Lets talk brass figures here dv. there are loads of places to make savings and cuts.

I fully agree. We need to continue to cut costs. (funny when the Government actually succeed in making cost savings - e.g. the drugs deal - some people can't bring themselves to acknowledge it as a good thing, but would rather complain that it wasn't achieved soon enough.)

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

And you believe the normal,everyday home owner of the Republic Of Ireland is fair game?

Yes.
The normal everyday worker is 'fair game' for income tax.
The normal everyday car owner is 'fair game' for motor tax.
The normal everyday consumer is 'fair game' for VAT.
The normal everyday property owner is 'fair game' for property tax.
(and so on...)

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I'm not against tax increases as long as it's on a sliding scale.

Good. It will be - based on property price bands.
Glad to have you aboard!.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

I have always paid high enough tax and if we turn over a lot in a given year I know exactly what we need to pay. This is business. I get that.

Property tax will be very predictable - one of its strengths.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

What I don't get is hitting the home owner in the Republic of Ireland with a nonsense, no reward "tax". It makes no sense. It's extortion, plain and simple.

I know how you feel. I pay a small fortune in tax and I don't see the reward.
That's (pretty much all) taxes for you

dxhound2005

dxhound2005 wrote: »

This is an invitation to private property owners to break the law. The people issuing these invitations will not be around to help private property owners if they decide to follow this course and then find that this causes difficulties.

Some people have already lost money by paying late and there will be other consequences like legal problems and extra expence with inheritance when a person dies and the charge is outstanding.

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Scare tactics.

Your government will not be in power over generations. Don't fool yourself in to thinking that.

The current government, with this tax does not represent the majority of voters. They need to address their stance or they will not have another term.

They are losing voters on a stupid law when they don't need too.

I don't think it is right for a Moderator to accuse a poster of scare tactics if the post is factual which mine is. You can look at the legislation to see the provisions about late payment fees and transfer of property are real and in force.

On your political point you should know that Sinn Fein introduced a bill to repeal the HHC and it was defeated.

Micky Dolenz

dxhound2005 wrote: »

The poll yesterday gave the government parties an increase. Sinn Fein was the biggest loser down 4%. There was a question about property tax which produced a majority against. But I suspect if the question was do you want to increase VAT for instance (or anything that will cost people money) that would produce a similar response.

This is a new tax/charge here but it is common all round the world without society breaking down. It will become part of the mix of taxes here. You needn't be depending on any parties likely to feature in government in the near future to abolish it.

I'm no fool as I suspect you are not either. Or anyone debating this point for that matter,

The fact of the matter is, as a state/country we are leaking money and spending more then we make. Thats the truth of which we all agree.

This needs to be addressed and needs to be addressed in a clear and concise way. It isn't.

We can start by cutting these, We have middle management, a useless senate, overpaid people in positions we vote them into , unworkable government bodies, HSE etc, quangos, the list really goes on and on.

What is happening in Ireland right now is legitimate business being forced into the black market, cash businesses paying cash as they don't want to declare earnings. Then we have grossly overpaid top end civil servant and our leader being paid more per year then heads of super powers.

Address all these issues and we will save billions. Then if we are short, address the residents of Ireland and we'll talk about a small property tax.

IMF should never have absolute say here.

Come on FG , Represent the people who put you there.

Take charge, be our leaders and protectors.

dvpower

dxhound2005 wrote: »

I don't think it is right for a Moderator to accuse a poster of scare tactics if the post is factual which mine is.

Moderators are just posters too - I'm sure Micky will take advise on any moderation decisions he makes while he's actively contributing to the thread.

Anyway, being accused of propagating scare tactics is mild - in the last few days I've been accused of being a government shill, a member of a fascist organisation and of having an adventurous sexual relationship with Angela Merkel.
Only one of these was actually true:mad:

Hijpo

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

Address all these issues and we will save billions.

you shouldnt have said that, now they will want your source/figures/proof etc

Micky Dolenz

.

dvpower wrote: »

Good. It will be - based on property price bands.
Glad to have you aboard!.



Property tax will be very predictable - one of its strengths.



I know how you feel. I pay a small fortune in tax and I don't see the reward.
That's (pretty much all) taxes for you

Big kudos to Mary Harney on her work to the drug reduction plan and the many civil servant who tirelessly pursued it.

You will have to explain how property tax will be predicable please.

Unlike you , I see many returns in my tax paying, not only for me but for my employees.

Tax is a necessity to run a civilized society. Just don't try and con me, aka property tax.

darkhorse

Ghandee wrote: »

It doesn't matter which govt insisted DV, if it was FF decision, that decision should have been made null and void when a new govt was formed.

They promised to burn bondholders before they got into govt, then u-turned when they got in.

Meanwhile the troika tell us the opposite of what both govt's have said.

You may want to watch this clip btw.

Ya know whats ironic. This is just one of a small number of people in D.E. that knows what they are talking about, but would the people that are in charge take advice from someone like Stephen, would they fcuk, they would rather demolish the country.

Micky Dolenz

dxhound2005 wrote: »

I don't think it is right for a Moderator to accuse a poster of scare tactics if the post is factual which mine is. You can look at the legislation to see the provisions about late payment fees and transfer of property are real and in force.

On your political point you should know that Sinn Fein introduced a bill to repeal the HHC and it was defeated.

dvpower wrote: »

Moderators are just posters too - I'm sure Micky will take advise on any moderation decisions he makes while he's actively contributing to the thread.

Anyway, being accused of propagating scare tactics is mild - in the last few days I've been accused of being a government shill, a member of a fascist organisation and of having an adventurous sexual relationship with Angela Merkel.
Only one of these was actually true:mad:

Lets be clear here, I have been in the NO camp since thread one. If your find a post of mine insulting, report it as normal. I never intend to flame or bait anyone, I quite enjoy the exchange of opinion on issues I am interested in.

In the last 20K posts or so I am confident I have not taken sides on a moderation level, if in doubt, you can ask for it to be investigated.

PS, I hear dv, likes to rim Angela Merkel

dvpower

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

.
You will have to explain how property tax will be predicable please.

I think I explained it from the government's pov a few posts up (wider base and less susceptible to underlying economic conditions).

From a tax payers pov it's also very predictable, where - in normal economic conditions - property values are fairly stable. [This obviously hasn't been our experience in the last decade, but a property tax will have the added advantage of dampening property price inflation - which is a good thing all 'round.]

There remains an underlying 'ability to pay' problem - and we'll have to wait and see how that is dealt with in the upcoming legislation. [I expect a deferral scheme]

dvpower

Hijpo wrote: »

you shouldnt have said that, now they will want your source/figures/proof etc

God forbid someone might ask for evidence for a claim. This is AH after all.

dvpower

Micky Dolenz wrote: »

PS, I hear dv, likes to rim Angela Merkel

*Regretting linking my boards account with my LinkedIn account*

Am Chile

dvpower wrote: »

1994 was 18 years ago, not a 'mere few months' ago.

To put it in context - 1994 was also the year of the first IRA ceasefire. Should we hold everyone to the positions they once held a long time ago.



btw, what's the source and context of that second quote?
Originally Posted by Enda Kenny 1994
“If the Government fail to appreciate the passion with which people will defend their rights to own their home and have it looking as well as it should, it is making a serious mistake”

How about this quote from the fine gael manifesto pre election 2011-pg 66

: Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by

2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is
unfair

http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/Fine%20Gael%20Manifesto%20low-res.pdf


Section 8. Taxation of Property and Wealth

Fianna Fail’s proposal, now endorsed by the Labour Party, to introduce by
2014 an annual, recurring residential property tax on the family home is unfair for three reasons:



• The initial flat rate charge means that owners of houses in
standard neighbourhoods will pay as much as the owners of mansions.



• It will be difficult to pay for asset-rich but income poor
households, particularly the elderly and the
unemployed;



• It will be deeply unfair for a young generation that paid
exorbitant amounts of stamp duty and VAT on
the purchases on over-valued
houses, many of whom now find themselves in negative equity.

http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/LessWasteLowerTaxesStrongerGrowth.pdf

btw, what's the source and context of that second quote?

Right here during a dail debate in 1994.

I think this tax was concocted at the midnight hour. It reminds me of
a vampire tax in that it drives a stake through the heart of home ownership,
through enthusiasm and initiative, and sucks the life blood of people who want
to own their own home and better their position.


If the Government fail to appreciate the passion with which people
will defend their rights to own their home and have it looking as well as it
should, it is making a serious mistake. Residential property tax is the one
issue in the budget causing great anxiety to those who come within its
thresholds. It is also causing great stress to those on the verge of the
thresholds who fear they will be sucked into the net next year

http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1994/02/02/00007.asp

FG certainly misled a lot of voters that they were against property taxes from their manifestos pre election last year.

darkhorse

dvpower wrote: »

Yeah - afraid so. Sorry for looking for some evidence for 'facts' you put forward.
Can I take it that you don't have any?


:eek: Break out the tinfoil hats.


Since you don't trust any politician, you should really study the legislation. It's your friend.


It hasn't - not once.
Care to give your take on the question? - it seems that, so far, it can be all things to all men.

Hi, dv, I think it was asked of you before, are you in government, but I for one think that you should be, because you speak more eloquently than any of the people in either party that is supposed to be running our country, also you come across as being more in tune with whats going on in the country than anyone in either of the coalition parties. Also, I have to admit, I am really impressed at how you so much believe in some of the b*ll that you come out with. If you are not already a politician, you should seriously put some thought into running in an election, most probably for one of the present coalition parties.

K-9

Nobody voted based on a FG pledge made in 1994, if they did I suggest withdrawing the vote.

FG and Labour promised certain things in a manifesto, thing is, we've had coalitions for the last 30 years, what we want as voters, doesn't get delivered. Bit like what we want in a sweet shop isn't going to get delivered.

Adults vote, we get a result, politicians sit down to compromise, this is where posters on websites get to claim the moral high ground. They don't have to compromise, just rant away on their chosen subject. How their pet subject didn't get tackled, the Public Service not cut enough for FG disillusioned voters, the wealthy not taxed enough for Labour supporters.

FG hardcore supporters will moan about Public Service pay and Welfare rates. Labour will seek to protect those, the grown ups reach compromises.

The grown ups decided no changes to the Croker agreement, no changes to Welfare basic rates and no increases to income tax rates.

Am Chile wrote: »

How about this quote from the fine gael manifesto pre election 2011-pg 66

http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/Fine%20Gael%20Manifesto%20low-res.pdf

Section 8. Taxation of Property and Wealth

http://www.finegael2011.com/pdf/LessWasteLowerTaxesStrongerGrowth.pdf

Right here during a dail debate in 1994.


[/URL]http://debates.oireachtas.ie/dail/1994/02/02/00007.asp

FG certainly misled a lot of voters that they were against property taxes from their manifestos pre election last year.

Am Chile

K-9 wrote: »

Nobody voted based on a FG pledge made in 1994, if they did I suggest withdrawing the vote.

FG and Labour promised certain things in a manifesto, thing is, we've had coalitions for the last 30 years, what we want as voters, doesn't get delivered. Bit like what we want in a sweet shop isn't going to get delivered.

Adults vote, we get a result, politicians sit down to compromise, this is where posters on websites get to claim the moral high ground. They don't have to compromise, just rant away on their chosen subject. How their pet subject didn't get tackled, the Public Service not cut enough for FG disillusioned voters, the wealthy not taxed enough for Labour supporters.

FG hardcore supporters will moan about Public Service pay and Welfare rates. Labour will seek to protect those, the grown ups reach compromises.

The grown ups decided no changes to the Croker agreement, no changes to Welfare basic rates and no increases to income tax rates.

Only one problem with this analysis was one promise by one Eamon Gilmore on property taxes pre election-so who exactly is comprising the other when both parties pledged opposition to property taxes pre election last year ?

http://www.herald.ie/opinion/eamon-gilmore-the-man-behind-the-mask-2374050.html


(THE man favoured to be the next Taoiseach has promised not to cut social
welfare or raise tax rates.

Instead Eamon Gilmore wants to tax the "high fliers" of the Celtic Tiger
economy in order to rebuild our shattered economy.


But at the same time he has promised:

Not to introduce a property tax on residential homes)

bgrizzley

Am Chile wrote: »

Only one problem with this analysis was one promise by one Eamon Gilmore on property taxes pre election-so who exactly is comprising the other when both parties pledged opposition to property taxes pre election last year ?

http://www.herald.ie/opinion/eamon-gilmore-the-man-behind-the-mask-2374050.html


(THE man favoured to be the next Taoiseach has promised not to cut social
welfare or raise tax rates.

Instead Eamon Gilmore wants to tax the "high fliers" of the Celtic Tiger
economy in order to rebuild our shattered economy.


But at the same time he has promised:

Not to introduce a property tax on residential homes)

queue someone saying "neither party knew how bad the situation was"

dvpower

Am Chile wrote: »

Only one problem with this analysis was one promise by one Eamon Gilmore on property taxes pre election-so who exactly is comprising the other when both parties pledged opposition to property taxes pre election last year ?

http://www.herald.ie/opinion/eamon-gilmore-the-man-behind-the-mask-2374050.html


(THE man favoured to be the next Taoiseach has promised not to cut social
welfare or raise tax rates.

Instead Eamon Gilmore wants to tax the "high fliers" of the Celtic Tiger
economy in order to rebuild our shattered economy.


But at the same time he has promised:

Not to introduce a property tax on residential homes)

The Labour manifesto did contain a property tax.

So Labour wanted one, FG didn't, the state had signed up to one as a condition of the bailout and then we got one.

I'm not seeing the major problem here.

Ghandee

DV is right in what he's saying.

Labour did want a 'site value charge'.

However, they did state that exemptions and special consideration should apply to

• those who recently paid large stamp duty
• those in negative equity

They also stated that they didn't want to introduce any such tax until at least 2014.

I know details haven't been released yet as to what exemptions and leeway may be given to certain cases, we'll have to wait until budget, I think it maybe wishful thinking that negative equity owners (most of the country) and recent stamp duty payers get concessions though.

darkhorse

dvpower wrote: »

To an individual in the tax net - not much.
To the state - a big difference. Income tax yields are unpredictable. When a recession comes along the income tax yield falls - just when the state really needs the cash.

A property tax is much broader based (non PAYE people, retired people who don't pay income taxes, people who live on undeclared income, people who live outside the state but own houses here (Germans:eek:), landlords who own multiple properties ...)

This to me seems to be contradictory. You say income tax yields fall in a recession, which is understandable. Then you mention that a property tax is broader based method of taxation. But in a recession, lots of people are out of work and on welfare. By the way, there are people out of work that are not on welfare, through non-entitlement, so these figures would'nt show up anywhere. Now, with the exception of people on welfare, as far as I know, everyone pays tax, even retired people. So, there really is not that much of the population that would have much disposable income, by virtue of the fact that between paying increased taxes and increasing utility costs and general cost of living rises, therefore it would'nt make any difference whether a tax(extra tax)was added on top of income tax or was presented as a tax bill that had to be paid in one payment. Anyway, this is all purely academic, because when a property tax is introduced, imo, the majority of the population just wont have any money to pay, whether they want to or not. I know that I wont have it.

Le_Dieux

Demonstrations in London, Glasgow & Belfast today over austerity measures.

I am aware the UK ai't in the Eurozone, so not going to copy and paste except the link if anyone wants to check for reference (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20007496 )

I am referring to a certain paragraph near the bottom of the report which goes:
"More than 2.5 million people are out of work, a further three million are not working enough hours to make ends meet, and wages have been falling every month for the last three years."

It would be interesting to find out what numbers/percentage of the workforce here are also 'not working enough hours to make ends meet', but cannot find that figure anywhere.

Anyone have any insight into it?

Am Chile

dvpower wrote: »

The Labour manifesto did contain a property tax.

So Labour wanted one, FG didn't, the state had signed up to one as a condition of the bailout and then we got one.

I'm not seeing the major problem here.

The labour manifesto might of included a site value tax-but we all know a site value tax isn,t exactly whats planned for next year-we all know a market based value property tax is whats being planned.

Am Chile

In todays Irish Independent we learn

TWENTY-SIX
former politicians who are earning pensions of more than €100,000 a year are
escaping a super tax because of a legal loophole.


Former Fianna Fail ministers Charlie
McCreevy, Dermot Ahern,Noel
Dempsey, John
O'Donoghue, Joe Walsh, Michael
Woodsand Martin
Cullen -- and former
Progressive Democrats leaderMary Harney -- are among those not having to pay
the 20pc tax.


The
loophole arises because the higher rate applies only if a single pension is
worth more than €100,000 but not if the politician is getting a number of
pensions with a combined value above that level.

http://www.independent.ie/national-news/expoliticians-escaping-20pc-tax-thanks-to-legal-loophole-3265683.html

We keep hearing from some people on here, and FG reps in the media we need to raise more money etc, yet they don,t seem to want to close any tax loopholes.

darkhorse

K-9 wrote: »

Nobody voted based on a FG pledge made in 1994, if they did I suggest withdrawing the vote.


FG hardcore supporters will moan about Public Service pay and Welfare rates. Labour will seek to protect those, the grown ups reach compromises.

Agreed, nobody did vote based on the FG pledge made in 1994, as you point out. However, according to their election manifesto, their views re property tax did not change from the view that they held all those years ago, even though we were knee deep in recession, which I am sure they had an idea of said recession.

As regards the compromises that you mention, would a better word not be lies. Speaking of which, it was'nt too long ago that I put up a link that I came across and I was told that I manipulated the truth, no, as a matter of fact I was told I was the biggest liar goin, I actually thought at one stage that people wanted to burn me at the stake.

Le_Dieux

Am Chile wrote: »

In todays Irish Independent we learn




http://www.independent.ie/national-news/expoliticians-escaping-20pc-tax-thanks-to-legal-loophole-3265683.html

We keep hearing from some people on here, and FG reps in the media we need to raise more money etc, yet they don,t seem to want to close any tax loopholes.

Got to be a lie...nobody from Drumcondra mentioned

Le_Dieux

Am Chile wrote: »

In todays Irish Independent we learn




http://www.independent.ie/national-news/expoliticians-escaping-20pc-tax-thanks-to-legal-loophole-3265683.html

We keep hearing from some people on here, and FG reps in the media we need to raise more money etc, yet they don,t seem to want to close any tax loopholes.

This highlights EVERYTHING thats fcuking sicxk about this country. 20% ona 100G PENSION. I work for myself, and need to work nearly EIGHT Years before I match their YEARLY pension, which I, among others, are funding!!!

Just HOW anyone can stand up for that bunch of self centred assholles is beyond me - fcuking fuming!!!!!!!:mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad::mad: