Budget 2018 - Mod note in post #1

pilly

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means works get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

Edit: I missed where the 5% rate was being reduced to 4.75%. That still means people on low less than 20K a year have gotten less out of this budget than people working.

Leo is not looking for votes from people on social welfare. He's looking after the people who get up in the morning, remember?

ednwireland

VinLieger wrote: »

Much like the MUP on alcohol, it has nothing to do with health either

or sugar tax all about raising revenue nothing to do with health.

Boy this threads quiet. Best thing about the gov at the moment is they had no scope for f***ng around so more is left alone . Although they are trying there best to mess things up.

pilly

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means works get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

Edit: I missed where the 5% rate was being reduced to 4.75%. That still means people on low less than 20K a year have gotten less out of this budget than people working.

People on less than 20k per year will be on a social welfare payment if they have family.

TheDoc

LeinsterDub wrote: »

This isn't about deserving it it's about a progressive tax policy. 250k PA 100% tax free would not be progressive it would be regressive. And if the proposed 100% on off bonus PA was introduced it would be abused like above.

Progressive and regressive really doesn't come into it when it comes to workers bonus payments. By definition it's a bonus, not guaranteed income, and a reward. It should be exempt from the typical tax theory and mindset.

In terms of "abuse", I'd call the likes of guaranteed bonus structures in various public sectors, to be an abuse, since there is no grading or markings for it, it's just given. But I wouldn't begrudge anyone a bonus, I just get thick when 51% of mine gets whipped, as it's a totally performance related bonus, not guaranteed each year that I work hard towards.

Anyway it's a tangent, like I said, no politician or party would go near even discussing it

NinjaTruncs

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means workers get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

Edit: I missed where the 5% rate was being reduced to 4.75%. That still means people on low less than 20K a year have gotten less out of this budget than people not working.

Someone has to pick up the water charges bill, those working

Donal55

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means workers get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

Edit: I missed where the 5% rate was being reduced to 4.75%. That still means people on low less than 20K a year have gotten less out of this budget than people not working.

So much for getting out of the bed early in the morning. Would probably be better off pulling up the blanket and turning over.

Assetbacked

LeinsterDub wrote: »

So the old, young and the sick?
http://www.publicpolicy.ie/where-does-your-tax-go/#middle-link

This is silly to simplify categories into "old, young and sick". That is not how these categories should be defined. The parameters around what entitles an aging person or a sick person to obtain assistance need to be refined. For example, just because one is old does not mean they should get a state pension.

LeinsterDub

TheDoc wrote: »

Progressive and regressive really doesn't come into it when it comes to workers bonus payments. By definition it's a bonus, not guaranteed income, and a reward. It should be exempt from the typical tax theory and mindset.

I worked for company for many years with a guaranteed bonus. You're suggesting writing a massive loop hole into our tax law.

I start a company they give me a bonus of 80% of my annual wage when I start , tax free! The other 20% is paid monthly and isn't taxed because it's so small.

Net result 100% tax free.

Hitman3000

Augeo wrote:

Someone has to pick up the water charges bill, those working

Working people also protested against water charges. Just for clarity sake.

myshirt

I am disappointed they did not increase taxes on welfare to the baby boomer middle class. Most of this section of middle class have seen property prices and passive income increase hand over fist since they first bought the house, and at no expense to them.

I would have liked to see this taxed, especially since the younger workers now pay for this. Public borrowing is taxation delayed, as we know. One generation benefited from direct government intervention. The other didn't. One now pays for the loan. The other doesn't.

CAT thresholds should have came down, CAT rates up, Property tax up, and adjustments to the PPR exemption on capital gains.

Need to tax work less, and tax passive income more, especially inherited wealth to ensure we don't perpetuate inequality from the outset.

LeinsterDub

Assetbacked wrote: »

This is silly to simplify categories into "old, young and sick". That is not how these categories should be defined. The parameters around what entitles an aging person or a sick person to obtain assistance need to be refined. For example, just because one is old does not mean they should get a state pension.

I'm more than willing to engage in that discussion ,perhaps on a other thread?

However some like to wave fingers at the social welfare budget and make it seem like it's all going to some waster sitting at home. The fact unemployment benefit and benefits to the unemployed represent a small party of the state's spending.

Hitman3000

myshirt wrote:

I am disappointed they did not increase taxes on welfare to the baby boomer middle class. Most of this section of middle class have seen property prices and passive income increase hand over fist since they first bought the house, and at no expense to them.

You are aware I take it that mortgage interest rates hit 13% on the same people you are contemptuous of. People sacrificed to pay their mortgages decades ago. Your post sounds like absolute begrudgery.

pilly

Assetbacked wrote: »

This is silly to simplify categories into "old, young and sick". That is not how these categories should be defined. The parameters around what entitles an aging person or a sick person to obtain assistance need to be refined. For example, just because one is old does not mean they should get a state pension.

So now the suggestion is to throw the old people to the wolves as well? I've heard it all now. :eek:

PokeHerKing

NinjaTruncs wrote:

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means workers get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

But do people on the scratcher even vote..?

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Working people also protested against water charges. Just for clarity sake.

If folks on the scratch weren't expected to pay there would have been no protests, just for clarity sake.

Assetbacked

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I'm more than willing to engage in that discussion ,perhaps on a other thread?

However some like to waving fingers are the social welfare budget and make it seem like it's all going to some waster sitting at home. The fact unemployment benefit and benefits to the unemployed represent a small party of the states spending.

Okay, let me just get my notes;

https://images-na.ssl-images-amazon.com/images/I/71GV79NPpZL._UL1500_.jpg
http://heritageaction.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Strawman.jpg

c6ysaphjvqw41k

This post has been deleted.

BoatMad

NinjaTruncs wrote: »

Has anyone worked out how much the changes in tax bands and USC work out at? I've calculated that the Tax band change is worth €150 PA and the USC change is worth €51.8. If these are right it means workers get between €1 to ~€4 a week while those on the social get €5... a ****ing disgrace if that's the case, Leo must really think there is going to be an election next year.

Edit: I missed where the 5% rate was being reduced to 4.75%. That still means people on low less than 20K a year have gotten less out of this budget than people not working.

Blame that on FF.

Hitman3000

Augeo wrote:

If folks on the scratch weren't expected to pay there would have been no protests, just for clarity sake.

Again you are wrong. 600k households ( they're not all on welfare) refused to engage with IW since its inception. Last reply on the topic.

Cyrus

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Again you are wrong. 600k households ( they're not all on welfare) refused to engage with IW since its inception. Last reply on the topic.

doesnt prove him wrong

cruizer101

So anyone under 34k which would include nurses and gardai on first few levels of payscale and many other entry level professional roles will get €78 extra a year or €1.50 a week while social welfare goes up €5 per week. Definitely something wrong there.

Hungrycol

I'll be €5.71 worse off* each month on my wages, never mind the hidden stealth taxes we haven't see yet. Thanks Pascal, squeezed middle squeezed some more.

*25% reduction in Mortgage Interest Relief kills any USC, TC or SRC changes.

Hitman3000

Cyrus wrote:

doesnt prove him wrong

Or right. ; )

Hitman3000

Hitman3000 wrote: »

Again you are wrong. 600k households ( they're not all on welfare) refused to engage with IW since its inception. Last reply on the topic.

I thought you meant people who protested against water charges, not those who didn't pay. As that's what you said

Hitman3000

Augeo wrote:

I thought you meant people who protested against water charges, not those who didn't pay. As that's what you said

Non payment was the more effective protest. Really have to leave it at that now. Don't want to go off topic anymore.

Donal55

A bit rich of Joan Burton to be moanin about this budget when not so long ago she was quite happy to stand over more regressive budgets.



Maybe its not hair shirt enough for her.

TheDoc

LeinsterDub wrote: »

I worked for company for many years with a guaranteed bonus. You're suggesting writing a massive loop hole into our tax law.

I start a company they give me a bonus of 80% of my annual wage when I start , tax free! The other 20% is paid monthly and isn't taxed because it's so small.

Net result 100% tax free.

I didn't claim to be a tax expert, god forbid some people with expertise in this area could work in some controls?

s3rtvdbwfj81ch

Oh my god, will Joan Burton ever learn some manners. Nobody spoke over her, but she's on there shrieking over another speaker.

Same old, same old with her.

Bob24

Kiith wrote: »

This is always something that drove me mental. I burst my bollox working for a year, get a bonus, and the government take 51% of it? As you say, bonuses up to a certain amount (10k or something like that) should be completely tax free.

This doesn’t really make sense. Your bonus is part of your income and should be taxed as such (so is mine).

If there was a 10k tax free allowance for bonuses many employers/employees would reduce monthly payments and turn them to a bonus. So eventually it would be the same as introducing a 10k tax free allowance.

Hitman3000

Sandra Noisy Sergeant wrote:

Oh my god, will Joan Burton ever learn some manners. Nobody spoke over her, but she's on there shrieking over another speaker.

Trying to be relevant, failing miserably.