Looks like the USC is going up !

msg11

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1028/labour-universal-social-charge.html

Deputy Joanna Tuffy said the measure would raise €71m and would make other budget cuts more bearable by sending what she called an important signal that those earning more were paying their share.

The proposal calls for a hike of 3% to 10% in the USC on any income earned over the €100,000 threshold.

But a Fine Gael Minister shied away from the proposal saying there had already been hikes in some wealth taxes.

Lucinda Creighton said there was a fine balance to be struck in making Ireland a good place to work and generate wealth which was needed to meet the targets.

She said there have already been hikes in taxes on wealth like Dirt and capital gains tax.

Meanwhile, Sinn Féin called on the Government to go further.

Deputy Aengus Ó'Snodaigh said it was quite strange for Labour to come up with a change to the USC as in his opinion, the better way to do it was by having a third rate of tax for high earners as was Sinn Fein policy.

And speaking on tonight's The Week in Politics programme, Socialist Party TD Joe Higgins dismissed the idea as a "pathetic" move by Labour to raise a "pathetic" amount of money and it amounted to what he called "a cover my rear end tax".

A Labour spokesperson declined to comment on the story and whether the proposal might be Labour party policy.

It is understood the idea was discussed at last week's parliamentary party meeting.

I know from the piece that they talk about high earners, but we all know what these cowboys are up too, another hit in the pay packet for low earners.

For Forks Sake

Can we introduce a ban on people quoting the Sindo as fact please Mods?

GalwayGuy2

And speaking on tonight's The Week in Politics programme, Socialist Party TD Joe Higgins dismissed the idea as a "pathetic" move by Labour to raise a "pathetic" amount of money and it amounted to what he called "a cover my rear end tax".

What a lovely, calm and collected politician.

BensonSlide

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Can we introduce a ban on people quoting the Sindo as fact please Mods?

It wasn't though. Check your facts.

Good to see Joe Higgins is still spewing out the angry rhetoric.

For Forks Sake

BensonSlide wrote: »

It wasn't though. Check your facts.

Bugger, don't know what way I read that. Although my general point still stands.

Edit. It's taken from a Fionan 'Fianna Fail uber alles' Sheehan article in todays Indo, hardly a million miles removed http://www.independent.ie/national-news/labour-pushes-tax-hike-for-rich-as-poll-raises-fears-over-support-3277215.html

Lenin Skynard

Higgins is right, it's an arse-covering measure and doesn't go anywhere near far enough. Tuffy says so much herself by stating that it's to "send a signal". Someone buy her a mobile phone if she wants to send signals.

msg11

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

Tuffy says so much herself by stating that it's to "send a signal". Someone buy her a mobile phone if she wants to send signals.

LOL.. Maybe even a bat signal..

I wasn't quoting the Indo either ?

This is the way the lads in the Dail go about introducing hikes. Always along the same lines, sure the high earners are getting hit with 10% rise sure your getting off lightly with a 3% rise. While a 3% rise for me could wipe 10/15EUR off a 300 pay slip, while 10% to someone on 100,000 is about a 1000 but there still left with 4000/5000 PM. In the longer run of things I am taking a bigger hit and I am more likely to spend my money locally.

Under the radar stuff as usual from the good lads and lasses in the Dail.

MagicMarker

msg11 wrote: »

http://www.rte.ie/news/2012/1028/labour-universal-social-charge.html

I know from the piece that they talk about high earners, but we all know what these cowboys are up too, another hit in the pay packet for low earners.

Can you quote the article that actually says that then please?

Max Power

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Can we introduce a ban on people quoting the Sindo as fact please Mods?

Can we introduce a ban on idiots who post in threads just to complain about a particular newspaper that has been linked. If you don't like it then don't read it. Simple!

Also, it wasn't from the "Sindo" so you have made yourself look like an idiot twice in the one post. Congrats!

Zab

For Forks Sake wrote: »

Bugger, don't know what way I read that. Although my general point still stands.

Edit. It's taken from a Fionan 'Fianna Fail uber alles' Sheehan article in todays Indo, hardly a million miles removed http://www.independent.ie/national-news/labour-pushes-tax-hike-for-rich-as-poll-raises-fears-over-support-3277215.html

Yesterday's rte.ie article was taken from today's Independent article? Even if the timing worked, I don't see what links the two other than that they have the same subject.

msg11

msg11 wrote: »

LOL.. Maybe even a bat signal..

I wasn't quoting the Indo either ?

This is the way the lads in the Dail go about introducing hikes. Always along the same lines, sure the high earners are getting hit with 10% rise sure your getting off lightly with a 3% rise. While a 3% rise for me could wipe 10/15EUR off a 300 pay slip, while 10% to someone on 100,000 is about a 1000 but there still left with 4000/5000 PM. In the longer run of things I am taking a bigger hit and I am more likely to spend my money locally.

Under the radar stuff as usual from the good lads and lasses in the Dail.

10/300 = .033
1000/5000 = .2

msg11

bluewolf wrote: »

10/300 = .033
1000/5000 = .2

Here look, I wasn't getting down and dirty in the figures. My main problem is there under the radar style budget introduction never straight to the point.

MagicMarker

msg11 wrote: »

Here look, I wasn't getting down and dirty in the figures. My main problem is there under the radar style budget introduction never straight to the point.

It's so under the radar that they tell us all on national telly just exactly what they're going to do every year.

msg11

MagicMarker wrote: »

Can you quote the article that actually says that then please?

It dose not say it in the article that my problem, it's the way they do it every budget. Dance around the subject, see they start with this and come closer to the time it will be talk of hiking all the bands.

msg11

MagicMarker wrote: »

It's so under the radar that they tell us all on national telly just exactly what they're going to do every year.

That is not my point. It is this feeding us bits and pieces up to the budget like we are ****ing morons. If there going to do something in the budget like raise the USC then say to us we are raising the USC, not treat us like morons.

TheChizler

msg11 wrote: »

Here look, I wasn't getting down and dirty in the figures. My main problem is there under the radar style budget introduction never straight to the point.

Hopefully the people setting the budget get "down and dirty" in the figures. Just a bit confused, you say 3% of 300 is more than 10% of 100,000/52? I might not be picking you up correctly, but either absolutely or relatively speaking, the latter is the greater hit.

MagicMarker

msg11 wrote: »

That is not my point. It is this feeding us bits and pieces up to the budget like we are ****ing morons. If there going to do something in the budget like raise the USC then say to us we are raising the USC, not treat us like morons.

They do say it to you, when they announce the budget.

bgrizzley

sure, they cant announce it for definite till they run it by the Bundestag...

gurramok

€100,000 is just a few grand over what a TD earns. We can't levy a higher tax on TD's, they work too hard like us joe plebs so no higher USC charge then for TD's! :rolleyes:

melekalikimaka

i'm happier with these cross the board increases over hikes on certain pay brackets, government growing a pair and thinking a bit clearer it seems

tayto lover

Lenin Skynard wrote: »

Higgins is right, it's an arse-covering measure and doesn't go anywhere near far enough. Tuffy says so much herself by stating that it's to "send a signal". Someone buy her a mobile phone if she wants to send signals.

I thought Darth Vader would have special powers.

Cian92

If only they increased it from 2% on the first to 10036 to about 10% it would make alot more sense as those earning lower wages don't pay any PAYE and should pay their way more.

The dole should be cut though too so not to disincentivise working.

Bannasidhe

Cian92 wrote: »

The dole should be cut though too so not to disincentivise working.

Can we please also ban statements like this?

It's not like the 400,000 plus on 'the dole' are refusing to work due to the lavish payments they receive now is it - it's more a matter of a serious lack of jobs.

Bannasidhe

Bannasidhe wrote: »

Can we please ban also ban statements like this?

It's not like the 400,000 plus on 'the dole' are refusing to work due to the lavish payments they receive now is it - it's more a matter of a serious lack of jobs.

In fairness, you do get people posting "I've just been offered a job but I'm better off on the dole so I might/will turn it down"

Bannasidhe

bluewolf wrote: »

In fairness, you do get people posting "I've just been offered a job but I'm better off on the dole so I might/will turn it down"

Not 400,000 plus.

Sweeping statements like 'cut the dole' do not take into account the thousands of people who actually do get just the basic 188 euro a week dole - it's the extra allowances (which everyone does not get) that push it up.
So perhaps it would be better to say 'cut the extra allowances' rather than the dole...