Irish property tax to be shared out

sheesh

http://www.irishtimes.com/news/politics/property-tax-proceeds-to-be-reallocated-to-some-councils-1.1917074

So the the government has decided to share out property tax from richer areas to poorer areas. haven't seen a thread on this (no I didn't look that hard)

I think this is a complete B*ll it is a local property tax and should be spent locally or the amount reduced. I can think of plenty of projects that could be invested in in a city like Dublin that would benefit people living there water infrastructure, drug treatment, education in disadvantaged areas, and loads of others I'm sure.
It annoys me intensely that this has happened while I think that property tax is a cornerstone of sustainable taxation the tax should only be spent where it is collected.

(I don't own property or live in dublin)

Sheldons Brain

I think that property tax is a cornerstone of sustainable taxation the tax should only be spent where it is collected.

So the property tax in Ailesbury Road should be only spent on Ailesbury Road? Or should it be shared with D4, with the Dublin City area, maybe even shared with Tallaght, shared with Tallaght but not Blessington?

n97 mini

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

So the property tax in Ailesbury Road should be only spent on Ailesbury Road? Or should it be shared with D4, with the Dublin City area, maybe even shared with Tallaght, shared with Tallaght but not Blessington?

Just because they're wealthy doesn't mean they don't deserve to see their taxes spent locally.

sheesh

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

So the property tax in Ailesbury Road should be only spent on Ailesbury Road? Or should it be shared with D4, with the Dublin City area, maybe even shared with Tallaght, shared with Tallaght but not Blessington?

shared with the Dublin city area. hell yeah even Blessington (it is still local enough) not with Donegal and Tipperary.

If I need to put a line on it I would say say withing the county boundries but in the case of dublin sprawl something more might be required.

My reasoning is this the property tax is supposed to pay for local services, its a tax so you have to pay it, so you should be getting something for it, that can be anything from nicer parks to better services for drug addicts.

better services in Donegal or Tipperary do not ehance the lives of people in Dublin, Cork or Galway.

timetogo

Does this mean that if one town has a high rate of people not paying that they'll be subsidised by towns where a high percentage paid?

everdead.ie

timetogo wrote: »

Does this mean that if one town has a high rate of people not paying that they'll be subsidised by towns where a high percentage paid?

No as revenue garnish peoples wages who don't pay so everyone pays unless they don't have money in which case they would probably be exempt.

hfallada

Dublin badly needs money to deal with social issues like drug addiction, homeless( even before the property crisis at the moment), urban decay, severe lack of social housing. These are issues that are not really found outside Dublin. Its hard to justify to a Dubliner who is paying a significantly higher property bill in a high density area, that their tax money should be spent in a rural area. Probably on something like maintaining a rural road, which is basically a publicly funded drive way.

Property tax should be spent in the county it was collected in.

Good loser

hfallada wrote: »

Dublin badly needs money to deal with social issues like drug addiction, homeless( even before the property crisis at the moment), urban decay, severe lack of social housing. These are issues that are not really found outside Dublin. Its hard to justify to a Dubliner who is paying a significantly higher property bill in a high density area, that their tax money should be spent in a rural area. Probably on something like maintaining a rural road, which is basically a publicly funded drive way.

Property tax should be spent in the county it was collected in.

Don't think I agree. The Govt gives a block grant to the Local Authorities each year I believe. They need only share this out differently to achieve the same end. I think.

Valetta

Very selfish attitude.

We live in a society where the wealthy subsidies the poor. This is evident everywhere: social welfare payments- social housing- higher income tax rates etc.

In the same vein, less affluent areas (and more importantly less densely populated areas) of the country will have their public services somewhat subsidised by those councils that collect more.

It's the way it should be.

mikemac1

sheesh wrote: »

shared with the Dublin city area. hell yeah even Blessington (it is still local enough) not with Donegal and Tipperary.

better services in Donegal or Tipperary do not ehance the lives of people in Dublin, Cork or Galway.

Well in future years if Dublin wants our Shannon water you better pay for it

jackofalltrades

Valetta wrote: »

We live in a society where the wealthy subsidies the poor. This is evident everywhere: social welfare payments- social housing- higher income tax rates etc.

In the same vein, less affluent areas (and more importantly less densely populated areas) of the country will have their public services somewhat subsidised by those councils that collect more.

This has nothing to do with the rich subsidising the poor.
It has everything to do with people who choose to live in a sustainable way subsidising people who choose not to.

It's ridiculous that there are people paying more in "local" property tax for a 1 bedroom apartment than a 4 bed detached house.

The LPT is basically design to punish urban home-owners while rewarding rural ones.

Fine Gael don't want to annoy their loyal rural supporters any further.

everdead.ie

jackofalltrades wrote: »

This has nothing to do with the rich subsidising the poor.
It has everything to do with people who choose to live in a sustainable way subsidising people who choose not to.

It's ridiculous that there are people paying more in "local" property tax for a 1 bedroom apartment than a 4 bed detached house.

The LPT is basically design to punish urban home-owners while rewarding rural ones.

Fine Gael don't want to annoy their loyal rural supporters any further.

Well surely living sustainably is well farming and taking goods from the farms of Ireland to the urban areas of Ireland is pretty important.

sheesh

Valetta wrote: »

Very selfish attitude.

We live in a society where the wealthy subsidies the poor. This is evident everywhere: social welfare payments- social housing- higher income tax rates etc.

In the same vein, less affluent areas (and more importantly less densely populated areas) of the country will have their public services somewhat subsidised by those councils that collect more.

It's the way it should be.

I don't think so, there are other taxes for that and I don't have a problem paying them. could we not have a simple clear tax system that just 'does what it says on the tin' just.this.once. Some clarity in the tax system would be better for everything.

look at VRT, look at motor tax, all these taxes are collected officially to do something specific but over the years they have been just absorbed by revenue into a massive blob of money and doled out as they see fit. It looks like they take as much money from you as they can get away with and then decide what they will spend it on. It appears like they they have no long term plans for any of the money they collect.
It looks like they don't know how much it costs to run a department of health even though they have been doing it for years!

sheesh

mikemac1 wrote: »

Well in future years if Dublin wants our Shannon water you better pay for it

I'm not from Dublin.

as an example of something that could be done with the money the water system in the dublin city region is ancient and needs to be replaced. that would be a great example of a local property tax paying for local services.

So Dublin would not need to pipe water from the shannon.

Good loser

jackofalltrades wrote: »

This has nothing to do with the rich subsidising the poor.
It has everything to do with people who choose to live in a sustainable way subsidising people who choose not to.

It's ridiculous that there are people paying more in "local" property tax for a 1 bedroom apartment than a 4 bed detached house.

The LPT is basically design to punish urban home-owners while rewarding rural ones.

Fine Gael don't want to annoy their loyal rural supporters any further.

That makes no sense at all.

Surely a property tax must be based on Market Value.

If you were selling a 1 bed apt in Dublin, or a 4 bed detached in the country there would be no comparison between the values. Either one could be a multiple/fraction of the value of the other. All they have in common would be the currency.

The LPT comes from the Troika plus the fact it is fiscal commonsense - Ireland growing up eventually.

markpb

Good loser wrote: »

That makes no sense at all. Surely a property tax must be based on Market Value.

The property tax was sold as a way of paying for local services. Why would the value of your house be important - shouldn't be it decided by the cost to the local authority of providing those services to you? The alternative is that councils like DCC and DLR who have a lot of people and a lot of high value properties would take in a lot of money leaving councils like Donegal and Leitrim not taking in enough to cover their costs.

johnnyskeleton

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

So the property tax in Ailesbury Road should be only spent on Ailesbury Road? Or should it be shared with D4, with the Dublin City area, maybe even shared with Tallaght, shared with Tallaght but not Blessington?

Didnt fingal vote to reduce the LPT? Its one thing if two council areas pay the same rate of tax but get a subvention from thdir neighbour, its another if some places can pay a lower rate and get more from others!

Icepick

All other centrally collected taxes already subsidize rural areas.

L1011

johnnyskeleton wrote: »

Didnt fingal vote to reduce the LPT? Its one thing if two council areas pay the same rate of tax but get a subvention from thdir neighbour, its another if some places can pay a lower rate and get more from others!

Only councils making a surplus can reduce their rate. I could see the worst basket case like Sligo having to increase theirs before being allowed more cash too

Bucklesman

everdead.ie wrote: »

Well surely living sustainably is well farming and taking goods from the farms of Ireland to the urban areas of Ireland is pretty important.

If everyone who lives down a boithrín in in the country was a farmer, that might make sense, but they're not. Today, just one in fifteen Irish households are involved in farming -- but one in three people live in rural areas. A quarter of Ireland's housing stock is one-off housing. The government allowed far, far too much of it to be built.

For a young couple starting a family, building a home in the country is initially cheaper than buying in a town or city. It removes them from urban problems like anti-social behaviour, noise, and school waiting lists. There's one trade-off: it's impossible without a car, which needs a road to run on. Every service costs more to provide, from policing to broadband. The ESB, for instance, uses three tiems as much transmission circuit per customer as the UK. All of these costs are transferred to others through taxes and bills.

The other problem with one-off housing is it is exempt from contributing to social and affordable housing under Part V of the Planning and Development Act. That leaves a bill for everyone else to pick up. I don't think it's fair to expect urban dwellers to swallow social problems and higher bills to subsidise a pastiche of Dev's countryside 'bright with cosy homesteads' -- but only for some.

shootermacg

Good loser wrote: »

That makes no sense at all.

Surely a property tax must be based on Market Value.

If you were selling a 1 bed apt in Dublin, or a 4 bed detached in the country there would be no comparison between the values. Either one could be a multiple/fraction of the value of the other. All they have in common would be the currency.

The LPT comes from the Troika plus the fact it is fiscal commonsense - Ireland growing up eventually.

What has the price of the bloody house got to do with the price of turnips?
A semi detached in Goatstown is the same as a semi detached in Tallaght. Why should I pay more just because the government think I can cough up more cash??? ?

Larbre34

shootermacg wrote: »

What has the price of the bloody house got to do with the price of turnips?
A semi detached in Goatstown is the same as a semi detached in Tallaght. Why should I pay more just because the government think I can cough up more cash??? ?

They arent the same. In any era the equivalent house in Goatstown would cost much more. A site value tax would deliver a proportionately similar result.

You seem to be suggesting a Poll Tax. We dont want or need a Poll Tax.

sheesh

Good loser wrote: »

That makes no sense at all.

Surely a property tax must be based on Market Value.

If you were selling a 1 bed apt in Dublin, or a 4 bed detached in the country there would be no comparison between the values. Either one could be a multiple/fraction of the value of the other. All they have in common would be the currency.

The LPT comes from the Troika plus the fact it is fiscal commonsense - Ireland growing up eventually.

The property tax was supposed to be used to pay for local services how does the price of the property in any way effect the cost of providing those services? The only defense of using property prices is that it is simple to do.
It just means that if a famous person moves into your road your property tax might go up.

I'm not arguing against property tax. you pay for local services, now I don't know what those services are.... we pay for electricity, we pay motor tax presumably they must go towards maintaining roads and street lights, we will be paying for water soon, the guards are payed via our other taxes,

I pay a private company for rubbish collection, I cut the council grass on the road outside my house myself.

sarumite

sheesh wrote: »

we pay motor tax presumably they must go towards maintaining roads and street lights, we will be paying for water soon, the guards are payed via our other taxes,

Your presumption is actually wrong. It is deliberately called motor tax and not road tax. It is effectively a carbon tax and it goes directly to the central tax pool as opposed to being ring fence for roads.

everdead.ie

Bucklesman wrote: »

If everyone who lives down a boithrín in in the country was a farmer, that might make sense, but they're not. Today, just one in fifteen Irish households are involved in farming -- but one in three people live in rural areas. A quarter of Ireland's housing stock is one-off housing. The government allowed far, far too much of it to be built.

For a young couple starting a family, building a home in the country is initially cheaper than buying in a town or city. It removes them from urban problems like anti-social behaviour, noise, and school waiting lists. There's one trade-off: it's impossible without a car, which needs a road to run on. Every service costs more to provide, from policing to broadband. The ESB, for instance, uses three tiems as much transmission circuit per customer as the UK. All of these costs are transferred to others through taxes and bills.

The other problem with one-off housing is it is exempt from contributing to social and affordable housing under Part V of the Planning and Development Act. That leaves a bill for everyone else to pick up. I don't think it's fair to expect urban dwellers to swallow social problems and higher bills to subsidise a pastiche of Dev's countryside 'bright with cosy homesteads' -- but only for some.

You are right but I just don't think its right to call rural life unsustainable some things are more expensive, things like power and communications.

Personally I don't have a problem with putting some back into the pot to make other places services better but that's just me.

Good loser

shootermacg wrote: »

What has the price of the bloody house got to do with the price of turnips?
A semi detached in Goatstown is the same as a semi detached in Tallaght. Why should I pay more just because the government think I can cough up more cash??? ?

Your last sentence is the basis for a lot of taxes. Those with higher incomes pay more income tax. Those that consume more pay more VAT.

Those with more valuable houses are considered richer and able to pay more LPT. Just like those with bigger cars pay more road tax.

It's a basic form of wealth tax.

FreudianSlippers

Good loser wrote: »

Your last sentence is the basis for a lot of taxes. Those with higher incomes pay more income tax. Those that consume more pay more VAT.

Those with more valuable houses are considered richer and able to pay more LPT. Just like those with bigger cars pay more road tax.

It's a basic form of wealth tax.

I'm sorry but the motor tax scheme and VRT are effectively a scam. I'm surprised the people who are so vehemently against the water charges aren't against motor tax for the same reason - there is already a boatload of tax on fuel. motor tax (whether by engine size or CO2) is true double-taxation. Same with paying both VAT and VRT on cars.

But then again, I don't believe in wealth-based taxes being the be-all-and-end-all of taxation models. The economy gets greater benefit from more disposable income being spent; income tax would be lower per individual, but it would mean more jobs and more people paying income tax, which would level it out somewhat. Plus there is a correlative benefit to VAT (accepted it isn't as much because Irish people are traditionally savers), but that's an interest argument rather than a taxation argument IMHO.

_Kaiser_

Ultimately all these local taxes, charges, levies and what not are an illusion as nothing is ring-fenced and it all goes into the same pot anyway (even if that's not how it was sold initially).

I for one am sick to death of the "death by a thousand cuts" strategy used by this government under the guise of fairness and while they bleat about how they haven't increased income tax.

Just slap 2/3% tax on the rates (but adjust the bands as the idea that €32k or thereabouts dumps you onto the top rate is ridiculous) and be done with it. At least then people would know where they stand.

FreudianSlippers

We need a complete rebuild of the taxation system in this country, that much is clear. Start from scratch and build a transparent and consistent model. Part of that needs to be clarity on where our tax money goes: if we have VRT, what does that do that Motor Tax does not and vice versa; what does tax on fuel go to and is there a difference in tax on automotive fuel and heating fuel; what is the point of the local property tax? (etc.)

I just fail to understand why we introduced a LPT and are now going to redistribute local money outside of the local areas. It also means that the whole concept of allowing local areas to reduce their tax rate is completely bogus, as we will always have to raise more to plug the gaps elsewhere in the country.

If we want to subsidise rural areas, why did we even bother with the LPT?

Geuze

All motor tax is ringfenced, and goes into the Local Govt Fund.

All LPT goes to Local Governments.


Every country has some form of redistribution between regions - that is totally normal.

We had redistribution between counties before, and we continue to have it - totally normal.

If every county kept 100% of their LPT, then Ros/Leitrim/Longford, etc. would have much less income and DLR would have lots of income.

There has always been a mechanism to redistribute across counties.

jackofalltrades

Good loser wrote: »

Those with more valuable houses are considered richer and able to pay more LPT.

The LPT make no differentiation between a house that is valuable because of the house itself and a house that is valuable because of the land that it sits on.
This means that it is inherently biased against home owners in urban areas.
Which means that it goes against the principle canon of taxation that those with more means pay more.

The tax actively encourages the construction of large houses on cheap land.
Which in turn increases the tax burden on more sustainable urban dwellers.

The LPT was also sold as a tax to pay for local services and not as a wealth tax.

Just like those with bigger cars pay more road tax.

If I went and spent €90,000 on a brand new Mercedes Benz S class, I'd almost half what I'm paying in motor tax overnight.
Our current motor tax system rewards those who have the money to buy new cars.

markpb

Geuze wrote: »

All LPT goes to Local Governments.

True but the way it was explained was that it was for local services, not local authority services. Perhaps they meant the latter but they definitely inferred the former.

Geuze

I'm not sure what exactly you mean.

But what is/will happen is as follows:

• Central Govt grant to LA cut
  
• LPT replaces that income
  
• LA have same income as before, just from different sources.

Central Govt spend less

Fiscal deficit falls

People pay more tax

Same services as before

Geuze

markpb wrote: »

True but the way it was explained was that it was for local services, not local authority services. Perhaps they meant the latter but they definitely inferred the former.

Local services are provided by the councils.

Parks, libraries, recreation, local roads, etc.

Remember - not extra services, the same services, paid for by a new LPT source of income, replacing Govt grants,

jackofalltrades

Geuze wrote: »

Every country has some form of redistribution between regions - that is totally normal.

Someone living in an urban area, who only has a 1 bedroom apartment, is paying the same as some who has a 5 bedroom detached house in a rural area in some cases.

Looking at the facts of a situation like this:

It cost more to provide the services to the rural house.
The house in the rural area costs a lot more to build.
The home owner in the 5 bedroom has significantly more means in most cases.

And yet it is the owner of the small apartment who ends up subsidising the much larger home owner.

I've nothing against cross subsidisation of rural areas.
But this should only happen after rural home owners start paying considerably more property tax, to take into account the higher expense in providing them with services.

markpb

Geuze wrote: »

Local services are provided by the councils.

Parks, libraries, recreation, local roads, etc.

Remember - not extra services, the same services, paid for by a new LPT source of income, replacing Govt grants,

I'm quite clear on all that. What I meant was that the politicians explained it as a tax to pay for _your_ local services, not the local services of Donegal and Leitrim county councils. I'm quite happy for VAT, income tax and all my other taxes to be put into a central fund because they're levied by the central government. I'm less happy with a tax labelled the _local_ property tax to be put into a central fund.

Bucklesman

everdead.ie wrote: »

You are right but I just don't think its right to call rural life unsustainable some things are more expensive, things like power and communications.

Personally I don't have a problem with putting some back into the pot to make other places services better but that's just me.

Believe me, the way 'Rural Ireland' does rural living is about as unsustainable as it gets, seeing as you can't even go to the shops without getting your car keys. As for putting extra in the pot? Redistributing wealth to improve social conditions has never been a strong suit of Irish governments -- rather they're good at catering to narrow sectional interests with strong lobbyists. 'Rural Ireland' isn't short of people to fight their corner.

sheesh

Another thing that annoys me about the property tax is this isn't the property tax meant to be like rates for private dwellings? why haven't the Rates for shops gone down on the back this huge extra income or at least lower the rates in places where there a lot of empty shops a couple of minority interest shops would be nice to have around the place. It is just annoying that government is so blatantly using the whole thing as a way to get extra money out of a tax payer dept of finance just does not do fair tax system.

during the boom banks were telling home owners to unlock the money tied up in their home now the government is doing it.

n97 mini

Bucklesman wrote: »

'Rural Ireland' isn't short of people to fight their corner.

Urban Ireland is, unfortunately.

nice_guy80

Roscommon tax payers might finally get to drink their tap water, using money from the taxes collected elsewhere.

rural areas need investment too.

I'd like the broadband issue sorted. That is THE biggest issue holding back rural Ireland right now.

Godge

nice_guy80 wrote: »

I'd like the broadband issue sorted. That is THE biggest issue holding back rural Ireland right now.

It will never be sorted. Providing fibre-optic cable to the top of mountains is too expensive. Really fast broadband will only be available to areas that could get cable television.

sheesh

nice_guy80 wrote: »

Roscommon tax payers might finally get to drink their tap water, using money from the taxes collected elsewhere.

rural areas need investment too.

I'd like the broadband issue sorted. That is THE biggest issue holding back rural Ireland right now.

water should be taken care of by Irish water (but thats a discussion thread)

And yes rural areas need investment too but this property tax is not the way. there are plenty of other taxes for that. This is a new tax which is not based on income of the property owner but on a fixed asset that they have in their possession now and and cannot get rid of very easily and may have Loans attached to it.

Rightwing

This property tax is just another rip off. Tell the people its for local services and they'll be pleased. What local services? We're getting less of them. I would imagine its for our local politicians and councils pay & bonuses.

Important to have cash for this type of stuff:

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/politics/councillors-share-12m-payoff-after-losing-seats-30586775.html

Dannyboy83

Sheldons Brain wrote: »

So the property tax in Ailesbury Road should be only spent on Ailesbury Road? Or should it be shared with D4, with the Dublin City area, maybe even shared with Tallaght, shared with Tallaght but not Blessington?

I would have said it can be spent anywhere in the jurisdiction covered by the Local Authority it was paid to.

I thought that was the reason why it was local, i.e. designed to compliment commerical rates but I don't keep up with the political sideshow in Ireland anymore so maybe my info is out of date

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/chamber-calls-for-proper-funding-to-avoid-rates-rise-248477.html
Business leaders in Cork have called on the Government to ensure local authorities are properly financed so they don’t have to increase rates.

The call has been made by Cork Chamber in response to a comment by county manager Martin Riordan that he may have to introduce a rates hike next year as the cash-strapped local authority isn’t getting the financial support it needs from the Government to allow it balance its books.

Cork Chamber chief executive Conor Healy said the Government must introduce a proper “funding model for local government to reduce dependence on business-related charges and guarantee that revenue from the Local Property Tax (LPT) will be fairly distributed to local authorities and spent at a local level.”

http://www.corkindependent.com/20131128/news/no-funding-to-fix-roads-S76265.html
Budget woes were a sore spot at City Hall on Monday night and councillors discussed non-existent funding needed for traffic calming measures, lighting fixtures and potholes across the city.

http://www.irishexaminer.com/ireland/29m-local-government-funding-is-peanuts-254560.html
Angry scenes are expected at next Monday’s Cork County Council meeting after it emerged the local authority only got a fraction of what other counties got from the Government to run its services.

Standing orders are expected to be suspended at the meeting by Fianna Fáil after it emerged the council only received €2.9m from the Local Government Fund (LGF) — nearly eight times less than Tipperary.