Self employed could get welfare safety net - finally!

Kermit.de.frog

I often wondered why those who take the ultimate risk of setting up a business were penalised in the form of no welfare safety net whilst there are people in this country who go on the dole at 18 never having worked a day in their lives with no intention of working and are content to stay there as a life style choice. I think this is LONG overdue.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-plans-to-give-the-selfemployed-same-dole-as-paye-staff-31095630.html

Hopefully if it comes about this encourages more people to to set up their own business in the knowledge they have something to fall back on other than destitution.

Tombi!

Educate me on this. So PAYE gets benefits (basically) depending on how much money they earn? Just like standard means testing.
But if you try to do your own business and do terrible for a few weeks, you're not getting anything from the welfare but the new idea is that both of them can get benefits if they earn under a certain amount of money or something?

The Backwards Man

Woohoo!!

I'd suck off every member of the government cabinet for €188 a week, you PAYE folk don't know you're living.

Tombi!

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Woohoo!!

I'd suck off every member of the government cabinet for €188 a week

Think you have the wrong thread there. :pac:

Kevin McCloud

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Educate me on this. So PAYE gets benefits (basically) depending on how much money they earn? Just like standard means testing.
But if you try to do your own business and do terrible for a few weeks, you're not getting anything from the welfare but the new idea is that both of them can get benefits if they earn under a certain amount of money or something?

Same logic goes for firing out a few children get massive rock and roll, other benefits and a kind slice with €25 repayments per week.

Kermit.de.frog

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

Educate me on this. So PAYE gets benefits (basically) depending on how much money they earn? Just like standard means testing.
But if you try to do your own business and do terrible for a few weeks, you're not getting anything from the welfare but the new idea is that both of them can get benefits if they earn under a certain amount of money or something?

I presume it simply means if you set up a business and it fails there is the safety net there. ATM there in no safety net at all. Which is criminal IMO for people who have a good idea, take huge risks and want to do something creative and meaningful.

Tombi!

So if someone on the dole wants to try their hand at making their own business and makes a mess of it, they'd have to open a new claim and go through all the hullabaloo again? That's terrible. I fully support the new policy.

Kermit.de.frog

The Backwards Man wrote: »

Woohoo!!

I'd suck off every member of the government cabinet for €188 a week, you PAYE folk don't know you're living.

There are two points here - the money is important if you fail, but also the whole principle of someone working so hard to set up a business and employ people and grow being effectively penalised and given extra stress with the knowledge that if they fail they face a bleak future because they would not even have 188 a week, they would have nothing.

Kermit.de.frog

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

So if someone on the dole wants to try their hand at making their own business

You need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to an investor otherwise it's highly unlikely a dole recipient could just set up their own business in fairness.

Kevin McCloud

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to an investor otherwise it's highly unlikely a dole recipient could just set up their own business in fairness.

What about the partnership schemes where a person gets 50% of their tools bought for them, gets various grants etc for setting up a lawn cutting business or window cleaning?

Kermit.de.frog

Kevin McCloud wrote: »

What about the partnership schemes where a person gets 50% of their tools bought for them, gets various grants etc for setting up a lawn cutting business or window cleaning?

That's all well and good but how many people have been put off setting up a business because they fear the consequences of failure? The dole is not much but it is something like a peace of mind for them to go and actually take that step and start a business.

I think it would be good for them to have that safety net.

Tombi!

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to an investor otherwise it's highly unlikely a dole recipient could just set up their own business in fairness.

Ah, no. I understand the basic idea of setting it up. I just meant that normally, AFAIK, if you do go belly up after getting off the dole, you don't need to open a brand new claim which can take months.

Kevin McCloud

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

That's all well and good but how many people have been put off setting up a business because they fear the consequences of failure? The dole is not much but it is something like a peace of mind for them to go and actually take that step and start a business.

I think it would be good for them to have that safety net.

You are giving me a politicians answer there, you said one would need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to set up their own business to which its not.

Arsemageddon

Four years into this government and they finally do something for the self employed. It's both long overdue and welcome, but they can go fvck themselves if they think this is going to make me vote for them.

Kermit.de.frog

Kevin McCloud wrote: »

You are giving me a politicians answer there, you said one would need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to set up their own business to which its not.

Where is the other 50% start up costs going to come from? That's the capital they would need under your assumptions.

I am not wrong, I am absolutely right. In this country, make no mistake, entrepreneurs are punished and not encouraged at an early stage.

FloatingVoter

Does this mean they're going to make me self-employed ?

Children, the mushroom picking is legit and we'll need labels and grants and whathavesya ?

We'll put a roof on the cottage and move back there from our Virginian estates.

Bongalongherb

This is a great implementation indeed without doubt, and should have been this way from day one for the self employed... excellent news.

But this implementation is solely on purpose regarding votes. It's the same strategy used before every election to curry the folk...

Kermit.de.frog

Bongalongherb wrote: »

This is a great implementation indeed without doubt, and should have been this way from day one for the self employed... excellent news.

But this implementation is solely on purpose regarding votes. It's the same strategy used before every election to curry the folk...

And what's the alternative?

Sinn Féin?

What do you reckon they would do for the self employed? We already know they would kill them with tax and this economy.

So where else do you go?

cormie

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

You need some form of capital first or a bloody good idea to sell to an investor otherwise it's highly unlikely a dole recipient could just set up their own business in fairness.

I'd disagree, anyone with a drive to get themselves set up can do it, it may take a while, but it's certainly possible. You may have to start off small and build yourself up, but there's plenty of opportunities out there with a very low investment requisite that can go towards the creation of something much bigger.

There's start up schemes and grants available to help anyone with even the most basic of ideas that have potential to turn a profit to give them a kick start. Other avenues such as bank loans are an option. If the banks won't touch you, integrity can play a part with financial help from friends or family. If none of these work, then it might just take a little longer, but it's definitely possible.

This change is welcome, albeit very late. Hopefully no more stories like my friends dad who had a successful business, employing 13 people which went bust. The 13 people all got their welfare immediately yet the owner who set it all up, gave these 13 people a living for years, paid all sums of taxes, VAT and rates and took all the risk and the weight of the business on his shoulders was left with absolutely nothing.

One eyed Jack

This changes not a whole lot then really, because self-employed people were always entitled to social welfare if they became unemployed?

The lower USC is nice, but if those few measures are what they're hoping to be re-elected on after overseeing many self-employed people's businesses going to the wall in the last number of years, they'll be sorely disappointed.

These measures should have been in place years ago to encourage entrepreneurial spirit in Ireland instead of being so focused on HPSU's and FDI. I'd imagine nobody left in business gives a shìt now what relief the Government gives after riding them sideways the last number of years.

Bongalongherb

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

And what's the alternative?

Sinn Féin?

What do you reckon they would do for the self employed? We already know they would kill them with tax and this economy.

So where else do you go?

We do not know what effect Sinn Féin will have as a government in order.

I will agree to an extent of wonder and worry as to Sinn Féin running the show, as we all know the tactics involved to get votes and the lies all government parties and also independents will allow themselves to ingratiate themselves to their own agenda rather than the betterment of its citizens.

I really don't know who is the better bet for government, but I do know who isn't... i.e - Labour/FG. It's a worrying situation when we have a limited choice regarding fakers/lier's.

The election is a while off yet, but in the mean-time Labour and FG are rolling out sweeteners to relax the folk, and as such will eventually indoctrinate the folk to agree with their brainwashing sailing forward.

A clear mind and focus will see through their lies again as they can lie for a hundred years, but when it comes to an ad nauseam state of drool as we have seen in the past especially from Labour then we know we have to pick/give a chance for independents.

Break it up, and in time we might just accomplish an independent collective of folk that want to put the Irish citizen first before the corruption.

kneemos

Why haven't the self employed lobbied for this instead of whinging about it if it's so important to them?

mickstupp

kneemos wrote: »

Why haven't the self employed lobbied for this instead of whinging about it if it's so important to them?

Why are you assuming they haven't? Do you believe the government have the best interests of the citizens in mind? Nah.

I hope this extends to families of those who are self-employed too, or at least makes things a little easier for them. When I first went to college I was unable to get a grant due to my dad being self-employed. Surrounded by people bitching cause they couldn't afford things, while holding a fag in one hand and an O'Brien's coffee in the other. Plenty of students can't get grants or a back to education allowance simply because they live with a self-employed parent.

CiDeRmAn

Regarding the OP, good news.
I work in the public sector but my best mate is self employed.
While I have built in protection in my work place he died not and, during the lean years, had to make massive changes and family affecting choices just to keep his head above water.
Not only this but there were months and years where the next mortgage payment was not guaranteed, and a safety net would have at least given some security had it all gone down the pan, as it could easily have done.

Bongalongherb

kneemos wrote: »

Why haven't the self employed lobbied for this instead of whinging about it if it's so important to them?

Are you serious ?. Many self employed folk tried their best to make things work for themselves and their employees, but when their business failed for whatever reason they were ostracised from eligibility regarding the social welfare, and that was, and still is wrong. They should have had priority.

Just imagine spending years and your own money trying to build your company/business and then it falls to the ground like a small comet explosion and no-where to receive relief ?.

It's about time that these self employed folk got some relief, a bit late for some though, but nonetheless its a good start for these folk.

Geuze

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I often wondered why those who take the ultimate risk of setting up a business were penalised in the form of no welfare safety net whilst there are people in this country who go on the dole at 18 never having worked a day in their lives with no intention of working and are content to stay there as a life style choice. I think this is LONG overdue.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-plans-to-give-the-selfemployed-same-dole-as-paye-staff-31095630.html

Hopefully if it comes about this encourages more people to to set up their own business in the knowledge they have something to fall back on other than destitution.

Please note that self-employed people can apply for JSA "dole" in the exact same way as anybody else.

Newspapers may keep saying that self-employed people can't get the dole, but they can.

They can apply for JSA the same as any other unemployed worker.

Now, as they have paid just 4% PRSI, instead of the 4%+10.75% paid on behalf of employees, then they are not entitled to JSB.

Obviously, if you don't pay enough insurance premium, you won't be insured.

I suggest that self-employed workers be allowed pay full PRSI, and then extend JSB to cover them.

Geuze

cormie wrote: »

This change is welcome, albeit very late. Hopefully no more stories like my friends dad who had a successful business, employing 13 people which went bust. The 13 people all got their welfare immediately yet the owner who set it all up, gave these 13 people a living for years, paid all sums of taxes, VAT and rates and took all the risk and the weight of the business on his shoulders was left with absolutely nothing.

Note that the workers here were insured, after paying 4% + 10.75% PRSI, so they would receive JSB for 9 months.

Do the self-employed want to increase their PRSI insurance payments from 4% to 14.75% so they can be insured against unemployment, and receive 9 months JSB?

kidneyfan

Brutal Deluxe wrote: »

So if someone on the dole wants to try their hand at making their own business and makes a mess of it, they'd have to open a new claim and go through all the hullabaloo again? That's terrible. I fully support the new policy.

No.
There is a scheme called Back to Work Enterprise Allowance that allows people to keep their dole while setting up a business.

Geuze

kneemos wrote: »

Why haven't the self employed lobbied for this instead of whinging about it if it's so important to them?

It may be because they may want to receive JSB, but they don't want to pay 14.75% PRSI, which is an extra 10.75% on top of what is currently paid?

kidneyfan

Everyone is and always has been entitled to pay himself as an employee rather than as a company director.

Bongalongherb wrote: »

Are you serious ?. Many self employed folk tried their best to make things work for themselves and their employees, but when their business failed for whatever reason they were ostracised from eligibility regarding the social welfare, and that was, and still is wrong. They should have had priority.

Just imagine spending years and your own money trying to build your company/business and then it falls to the ground like a small comet explosion and no-where to receive relief ?.

It's about time that these self employed folk got some relief, a bit late for some though, but nonetheless its a good start for these folk.

Uncle Ben

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I often wondered why those who take the ultimate risk of setting up a business were penalised in the form of no welfare safety net whilst there are people in this country who go on the dole at 18 never having worked a day in their lives with no intention of working and are content to stay there as a life style choice. I think this is LONG overdue.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-plans-to-give-the-selfemployed-same-dole-as-paye-staff-31095630.html

Hopefully if it comes about this encourages more people to to set up their own business in the knowledge they have something to fall back on other than destitution.

Election looming and FG decides to 'examine' the possibility. I remember in the far off distant past prior to an election the same party promising universal health care. Dream on suckers. As Phat Bunny would say, 'you tend to say these things prior to an election '.

Uncle Ben

Coveney on radio 1 not exactly selling or promoting this story.

bpmurray

Kermit.de.frog wrote: »

I often wondered why those who take the ultimate risk of setting up a business were penalised in the form of no welfare safety net whilst there are people in this country who go on the dole at 18 never having worked a day in their lives with no intention of working and are content to stay there as a life style choice. I think this is LONG overdue.

http://www.independent.ie/irish-news/fg-plans-to-give-the-selfemployed-same-dole-as-paye-staff-31095630.html

Hopefully if it comes about this encourages more people to to set up their own business in the knowledge they have something to fall back on other than destitution.

Definitely - I have friends who have worked running their own small business all their lives, paying tax and all the other charges (including water - despite Brendan Ogle's claims, businesses have paid for water for many years). After they were caught by the downturn created by the PAYE miscreants in the banks, their business failed and they have not been covered by any safety net.

doc11

I wonder how many self employed will be happy to be paying the 15-20% prsi of there income(like Paye) each year for a maximum of 7k benefit.

Self employed currently only pay 5% prsi of their manipulated income and can receive the same means tested jobseekers benefits as everyone else along with the state pension, maternity etc.

One of the reasons people go self employed is to avoid the massive prsi burden.

doc11

bpmurray wrote: »

Definitely - I have friends who have worked running their own small business all their lives, paying tax and all the other charges (including water - despite Brendan Ogle's claims, businesses have paid for water for many years). After they were caught by the downturn created by the PAYE miscreants in the banks, their business failed and they have not been covered by any safety net.

was he better of paying 5% vs 15% prsi for a maximum benefit of 7k

Shrap

cormie wrote: »

There's start up schemes and grants available to help anyone with even the most basic of ideas that have potential to turn a profit to give them a kick start. Other avenues such as bank loans are an option. If the banks won't touch you, integrity can play a part with financial help from friends or family. If none of these work, then it might just take a little longer, but it's definitely possible.

kidneyfan wrote: »

No.
There is a scheme called Back to Work Enterprise Allowance that allows people to keep their dole while setting up a business.

Off the dole, it's looking quite impossible at the moment tbh. Some of you may remember me talking about trying to go ahead with a small business this year, but after a meeting with the social welfare, it's looking like too big a risk for me unless this option comes in.

The back to work scheme used to last for 4 years, with the first year at 100% of your dole plus the small grant available for equipment. Over the 4 years this decreased to 25% by yr 4. Sounded do-able. Now, it's a two year scheme with 100% in the first year, 50% in the next and then you're on your own.

I have 2 kids to support and there's no way I'll be able to match 50% of my dole by the 2nd year, as I can't afford the equipment necessary for my business without the grant, so wouldn't be able to hit the ground running, as I had intended.

At the moment, I am NOT ALLOWED to sell my products as I am not self-employed. I AM ALLOWED to work for an employer up to a certain rate per week, but am not allowed to work for myself. I am NOT ALLOWED to become self employed before I start the back to work scheme. This leaves me between a rock and a hard place because I am NOT ALLOWED to create the market for myself or earn the money from it before I'm only given 2 years to be standing on my own two feet and supporting 2 children from it.

Hopefully, this scheme will allow me to become self employed in the meantime, or if not, at least have the safety net in the second year. Preferably I can become self employed now, so I can earn enough to finish my workshop and then apply to the back to work scheme, but I'm not holding my breath. It's pretty disheartening to be working at making my products without being able to sell them, and with the possibility that I could crash and burn in two years, leaving my kids exposed to all the rigmarole that a new claim brings - will have a college student and another teen still at that stage - grants will be up in the air, etc.

Shrap

bjork wrote: »

That's great, will they get free houses too like the baby factories?

You drinking this early in the morning bjork?

Shrap

bjork wrote: »

Good Morning Shrap


No drink, just trying to flesh out the finer details of what this will entail

Calling the likes of me (single parent) a baby factory is hardly supporting your claim here bjork.

Shrap

bjork wrote: »

If the other "baby parent" is dead, then yes, those "single parents" should be supported. Otherwise the two parents should be paying.

Unless you're going to tell me it was a test tube baby out of stem cells with only one parent?

Paying for what? I'm getting a small rate of maintenance, which is promptly halved by the SW. It goes straight into the credit union where it pays off the loan for the re-plumbing and the loan for the workshop. "Should" is a big word bjork. Don't try telling me I "should" be trying harder than I am.

Also, being judgemental about lone parents is of what relevance to the self-employment question?

cormie

Shrap wrote: »

Off the dole, it's looking quite impossible at the moment tbh. Some of you may remember me talking about trying to go ahead with a small business this year, but after a meeting with the social welfare, it's looking like too big a risk for me unless this option comes in.
.........

Is there no option that allows you work for yourself, even for 2/3 days a week, even if it might cut your social for these days? What if you were to come up with another earner that would give you an instant return that wouldn't need as much investment to start so you could be earning money immediately with very little risk and then put the profits after your family expenses towards the saving for equipment?

Seems a disgrace you're "not allowed" do what you mention above. Is there no workaround or compromising with your local social welfare officer?

Shrap

cormie wrote: »

Is there no option that allows you work for yourself, even for 2/3 days a week, even if it might cut your social for these days? What if you were to come up with another earner that would give you an instant return that wouldn't need as much investment to start so you could be earning money immediately with very little risk and then put the profits after your family expenses towards the saving for equipment?

Seems a disgrace you're "not allowed" do what you mention above. Is there no workaround or compromising with your local social welfare officer?

Apparently not. You have to be working for a registered employer in order to be able to earn anything. There is currently no option to be allowed to work for yourself unless you register as self employed, which I am not allowed to do before I apply for the BTW (if that's what I intend - not sure if it's worth it now).

If this new scheme comes in, I'll register as self employed straight away and forget the BTW altogether. That way, I could potentially earn enough that I don't qualify for the cushioned SW payment, but I would have that cushion and could take the risk in starting my business.

I've applied for a meeting with an SW "case worker" to try and hammer this out with them. But yes, it's a disgrace. Myself and a friend wanted to set up a cleaning business years ago, but couldn't do it as we wouldn't be working for registered employers. They don't trust you to be only working the hours you claim to be, you see. It's your word against theirs.

It's no joke even if you ARE employed part time with a registered employer. Care workers are also in the sh1t here, due to the nature of the job. Say you're doing 1 hr in a home, 3 days a week, and 2 hrs on another 3 days. The SW requires you to say how many days you worked and then docks you 6 full days from your dole even though you may only have earned 10 euro for the hour on 3 days and 20 euros for the 2 hours on the other 3. Many carers have been put back on the dole, unable to work under these circumstances.

cillit_bang

I thought the whole idea is that if you are self-employed and you voluntarily pay PRSI, then you get the welfare benefits? Why should you get the welfare benefits for nothing?

The whole idea of the added risk is also the added reward of setting up a business. That is a decision you take, so if you become rich from it, you fully deserve it. That is the game you decide to play. No one forces you to become self-employed.

Shrap

bjork wrote: »

Why should the state pay for you bad decisions?
It would be terrible if you had to sell a few acres to pay for your children :rolleyes::rolleyes:

*Ignores* Had enough of reading your vitriolic, entirely unhelpful and baseless comments.

Shrap

cillit_bang wrote: »

I thought the whole idea is that if you are self-employed and you voluntarily pay PRSI, then you get the welfare benefits? Why should you get the welfare benefits for nothing?

The whole idea of the added risk is also the added reward of setting up a business. That is a decision you take, so if you become rich from it, you fully deserve it. That is the game you decide to play. No one forces you to become self-employed.

You shouldn't get welfare benefits for nothing. You should get SW if you are not in a position to support yourself and your family. Not sure what you mean here.

I would welcome the opportunity to start a business and make it work. There's no way I could take the risk to do this if I think there's any chance I wouldn't be earning enough p/w to support my kids in the same fashion I can now (which is minimal, btw). Nobody IS forcing me to be self employed at all, quite the opposite.

cillit_bang

Shrap wrote: »

You shouldn't get welfare benefits for nothing. You should get SW if you are not in a position to support yourself and your family. Not sure what you mean here.

I would welcome the opportunity to start a business and make it work. There's no way I could take the risk to do this if I think there's any chance I wouldn't be earning enough p/w to support my kids in the same fashion I can now (which is minimal, btw). Nobody IS forcing me to be self employed at all, quite the opposite.

Well the way I understand the social welfare is that a normal PAYE person has to be working a certain time to actually get the dole. So it isnt for nothing, during that whole time that worker would of had to pay PRSI.

I fully agree with you, but you can't make it totally level. This would be a total disincentive for becoming a PAYE employee. If it is made totally level, then a ferocious amount of people would start becoming self-employed. Why become a permanent employee? Just become a contractor, now that you have SW protecting you.

Shrap

cormie wrote: »

What if you were to come up with another earner that would give you an instant return that wouldn't need as much investment to start so you could be earning money immediately with very little risk and then put the profits after your family expenses towards the saving for equipment?

Sorry, didn't reply to this enough! This is exactly what I'm trying to do, but am unable to earn from my products to save for the equipment. Hopefully the SW will allow me to become self employed immediately so I can do this.

OldNotWIse

One eyed Jack wrote: »

This changes not a whole lot then really, because self-employed people were always entitled to social welfare if they became unemployed?

The lower USC is nice, but if those few measures are what they're hoping to be re-elected on after overseeing many self-employed people's businesses going to the wall in the last number of years, they'll be sorely disappointed.

These measures should have been in place years ago to encourage entrepreneurial spirit in Ireland instead of being so focused on HPSU's and FDI. I'd imagine nobody left in business gives a shìt now what relief the Government gives after riding them sideways the last number of years.

Were they??

SEPT 23 1989

cillit_bang wrote: »

Why should you get the welfare benefits for nothing?

Income Tax
VAT generator for the state
Employers contributions for staff
Council Rates
Water Rates

nothing indeed

Shrap

cillit_bang wrote: »

Well the way I understand the social welfare is that a normal PAYE person has to be working a certain time to actually get the dole. So it isnt for nothing, during that whole time that worker would of had to pay PRSI.

I fully agree with you, but you can't make it totally level. This would be a total disincentive for becoming a PAYE employee. If it is made totally level, then a ferocious amount of people would start becoming self-employed. Why become a permanent employee? Just become a contractor, now that you have SW protecting you.

I think we're misunderstanding each other. I don't want to be anyone's employee, I want to be self employed. I'm not looking to level with anybody here except my current one parent family payment. If I drop below that, I can't support my kids, but under the current schemes available, if I don't make the business work to that extent within 2 years then I will have to go back on the dole. I'd be hoping that this safety net would allow me to take the risk with my kid's futures.

Shrap

OldNotWIse wrote: »

Were they??

Only since last year actually.

OldNotWIse

Shrap wrote: »

Only since last year actually.

Thanks, that's what I thought.