New Dail / New Taoiseach

friendlyfun

I think abolishing the property tax would be a very poor idea.

tobsey

friendlyfun wrote: »

I think abolishing the property tax would be a very poor idea.

It’s a stupid idea from a so called left-wing party. Saving millionaires thousands to save average people 200. Property tax is a wealth tax and supported by every legitimately left-wing party in existence, because it lessens the income tax burden on workers.

It’s the exact same for water charges. SF know if they tell people they’re putting money in people’s pockets it’ll get them votes, even though the shortfall will have to be made up somehow and the easiest way is through income tax. All the parties try and buy votes but SF’s plans seemed the most unachievable of the larger parties.

piplip87

Increasing employer PRSI, bringing everybody upto the living wage, will lead to price hikes as shops, restaurants etc will hike the prices to cover the cost of these rises.

So increasing the dole to 250 a week will do absolutely nothing for anybody.

Scoundrel

charlie14 wrote: »

If we are going to have a carbon tax, then it should be ring fenced for specific purposes with a complete yearly account of how much was collected and where it was spent.

There's two chances of that I'm afraid

Scoundrel

Geuze wrote: »

Note that overall taxes are not high in Ireland.

This issue is a settled issue.

Overall taxes are not high, compared to other EU countries.

The services provided in return for said taxes are absolutely horrendous compared to most other EU countries simply adding more taxes for nothing in return is not the answer.

I'm not against paying tax far from it but simply adding more tax to people who are already being gouged on rent healthcare childcare etc while the government pretends it can do nothing about those issues( e.g no rent control no public childcare) is simply immoral and wrong.

As for the companies are people too nonsense being espoused on here well that just won't cut it hundreds billions of euro in profit from major companies is being funnelled through this country and it should be taxed accordingly.

Geuze

Let's take my parents as an anecdotal example:

They pay 8% direct income taxes on 48k income, yes, just 8%.

(PRSI = 0%, as they are over 66, low USC as they have full GMS cards)

In return for 8% income tax, they get:

two med cards, so no GP fees
two FTP
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their elec bill

They have 500k in financial assets.

Ireland is a very generous country, no other country would give such benefits for just 8% direct income tax on 4k pm income.

And yet you say "The services provided in return for said taxes are absolutely horrendous".

I fully accept that the 50% approx MTR kicks in way too early at 36k, yes, but there are also loads of people like my parents.

CrabRevolution

Geuze wrote: »

Let's take my parents as an anecdotal example:

They pay 8% direct income taxes on 48k income, yes, just 8%.

(PRSI = 0%, as they are over 66, low USC as they have full GMS cards)

In return for 8% income tax, they get:

two med cards, so no GP fees
two FTP
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their elec bill

They have 500k in financial assets.

Ireland is a very generous country, no other country would give such benefits for just 8% direct income tax on 4k pm income.

And yet you say "The services provided in return for said taxes are absolutely horrendous".

I fully accept that the 50% approx MTR kicks in way too early at 36k, yes, but there are also loads of people like my parents.

It's like when people say "I need 2 cars/to drink drive/cheaper fuel because there's no public transport near me".

When what they really mean is "There's no half hourly bus service to all irish cities and all nearby towns and villages that stops outside the door of my one off house sited down a small country road."

Johnboy1951

Geuze wrote: »

Let's take my parents as an anecdotal example:

They pay 8% direct income taxes on 48k income, yes, just 8%.

(PRSI = 0%, as they are over 66, low USC as they have full GMS cards)

In return for 8% income tax, they get:

two med cards, so no GP fees
two FTP
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their elec bill

They have 500k in financial assets.

Ireland is a very generous country, no other country would give such benefits for just 8% direct income tax on 4k pm income.

And yet you say "The services provided in return for said taxes are absolutely horrendous".

I fully accept that the 50% approx MTR kicks in way too early at 36k, yes, but there are also loads of people like my parents.

At a guess, the "500k in financial assets" is mostly tied up in the family home, rather than 500k savings in some financial institution.

Scoundrel

Geuze wrote: »

Let's take my parents as an anecdotal example:

They pay 8% direct income taxes on 48k income, yes, just 8%.

(PRSI = 0%, as they are over 66, low USC as they have full GMS cards)

In return for 8% income tax, they get:

two med cards, so no GP fees
two FTP
free TV licence
35 pm / 420pa off their elec bill

They have 500k in financial assets.

Ireland is a very generous country, no other country would give such benefits for just 8% direct income tax on 4k pm income.

And yet you say "The services provided in return for said taxes are absolutely horrendous".

I fully accept that the 50% approx MTR kicks in way too early at 36k, yes, but there are also loads of people like my parents.

Good they worked their whole lives paying tax into the system they should be provided for and with respect this is a red herring the vast majority of people are not in the situation your parents are.

The services we get in return for our taxes in areas such as public housing public healthcare public transport and childcare are appalling compared to many other similarly wealthy EU countries.

jm08

friendlyfun wrote: »

I think abolishing the property tax would be a very poor idea.

Can you explain why? (I'm just interested in knowing your thought process).

Geuze

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

At a guess, the "500k in financial assets" is mostly tied up in the family home, rather than 500k savings in some financial institution.

No, I am careful to say financial assets, not property assets.

IAmTheReign

Last Stop wrote: »

Can someone explain to me how SF propose to fund all their policies?
https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2020/SF_GE2020_Manifesto.pdf

Their manifesto includes €22.1bn in additional expenditure over the next 5 years plus €2.4bn in tax cuts while only increasing tax take by €3.8bn.

Surely that leaves a budget deficit of €20.7bn over 5 years or €4.14bn per annum??

Even if they take the €14.3bn from apple, they’re still well short...

And yet they claim they will run a surplus of €3.4bn in 2025

I haven't read their manifesto but when I looked through their alternative budget for 2020 they proposed increasing annual government spending by 3.5 billion and increase tax revenue by 2 billion and would have a surplus of half a billion at the end. Meaning what they are proposing to do was take the 2 billion budget surplus from FG and spend most of it. Clearly this would be unsustainable as the budget surplus for 2020 was based on higher than expected corporation tax receipts which are not expected to continue.

The alternative budget is available here, I'm assuming the numbers are broadly similar to what's in their manifesto.

Geuze

Scoundrel wrote: »

Good they worked their whole lives paying tax into the system they should be provided for and with respect this is a red herring the vast majority of people are not in the situation your parents are.

Yes, they did both work (not both 45 years, one SAHP)

Yes, they did pay tax, including high MTR back in the 80s, yes.

But note that for several years they were paying 4k tax on 72k income, by contributing max possible to pensions. So they paid less than 6% income tax on 72k income.

So they were not paying a lot of tax for several years.

Geuze

Scoundrel wrote: »

The services we get in return for our taxes in areas such as public housing public healthcare public transport and childcare are appalling compared to many other similarly wealthy EU countries.

Yes, although taxes are higher there.

We pay 4% PRSI.

Germans pay 20%.

is_that_so

Fann Linn wrote: »

The op asks a fairly detailed relevant question. And next of all the 'after hours stock answer' is thrown up.

It would be nice to see some proper engagement on the topic.
And 'no' I don't know the answer either.

It actually is the answer, that and the very risky overdependence on CT on MNCs.
That number of theirs is double so-called fiscal space and it does not really factor in possible effects of Brexit.

L1011

is_that_so wrote: »

It actually is the answer, that and the very risky overdependence on CT on MNCs.
That number of theirs is double so-called fiscal space and it does not really factor in possible effects of Brexit.

The end result of that level of spending is that any correction would make the 09-13 budgets look soft in terms of impact.

SFs figures are reliant on being able to significantly increase taxes and levies on things that are mobile/fixable (vacant sites as mentioned here) and assuming they are never going to move or go away. Just like FF were reliant on VRT, VAT and stamp duty.

Geuze

jm08 wrote: »

Can you explain why? (I'm just interested in knowing your thought process).

Property taxes are the most sensible taxes, for several reasons;

(1) very difficult to evade - you can't hide a house
(2) they don't cause distortions - you won't stop living in a house because of them
(3) steady revenue source, not cyclical

The best type is an SVT.

Sam Russell

Geuze wrote: »

Property taxes are the most sensible taxes, for several reasons;

(1) very difficult to evade - you can't hide a house
(2) they don't cause distortions - you won't stop living in a house because of them
(3) steady revenue source, not cyclical

The best type is an SVT.

You cannot hide a house, but you can claim a value below that which it should be.

The push was to get the LPT in place - never mind the yield. That will be sorted next valuation.

The form I got had 90% given to how to pay, and one line to the value, with no advice other than to make a bone fide attempt at valuation. Well, that is what I did, but I could have underestimated by a bit or even by a lot if I was so minded.

I doubt many overestimated.

Princess Consuela Bananahammock

Geuze wrote: »

Property taxes are the most sensible taxes, for several reasons;

(1) very difficult to evade - you can't hide a house
(2) they don't cause distortions - you won't stop living in a house because of them
(3) steady revenue source, not cyclical

The best type is an SVT.

But is the assumption here that if someone has assets, said assets are automatrically generating taxable inflows?

Water John

I think paying €320 for bin collection, not a tax, paying property tax of €360, and a water charge of €250, not done obviously, wouldn't be a bad range, compared with such costs in other countries.
Look at public costs, the nearby national school has a staff of just under 20. That costs €1m/year in wages and student capitation grant. This doesn't take into account regular expansion building works, every few years. These things have to be paid, out of a range of taxes.

Johnboy1951

Geuze wrote: »

Property taxes are the most sensible taxes, for several reasons;

(1) very difficult to evade - you can't hide a house
(2) they don't cause distortions - you won't stop living in a house because of them
(3) steady revenue source, not cyclical

The best type is an SVT.

So what about those people who worked all their lives, and invested all their 'spare' in their home, and are now retired/not working, and living in their comfortable home?
Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.
Should they be required to pay a tax on the present value of their home regardless their actual income?

That is anything but sensible!

L1011

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

So what about those people who worked all their lives, and invested all their 'spare' in their home, and are now retired/not working, and living in their comfortable home?
Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.
Should they be required to pay a tax on the present value of their home regardless their actual income?

That is anything but sensible!

Currently they're not required to pay it; but it will be taken from the property value when they're dead.

Its a very odd setup here. We have possibly the only trotskyites (which is not an insulting term, its an ideology they attest to themselves) in active political positions in the world that virulently oppose property taxation here.

Johnboy1951

L1011 wrote: »

Currently they're not required to pay it; but it will be taken from the property value when they're dead.

I see it more that the prudent, who saved (having paid their share of tax on income) and invested in their property, are to to be taxed again on the same asset, not on any gain they might have made.

efanton

Well it looks like Michael Martin might have screwed his only chance of becoming Taoiseach.

Still refusing to budge on any form of rent control and its looks like the Greens were looking for some form of it.

Martin keeps claiming that FF has legal advice claiming it unconstitutional, yet will not publish this legal advice.
Why is that I wonder? Surely it would be of benefit to ALL parties for that advice to be published especially when this might turn out to be the issue that kills the chances of the Green joining a coalition.

Green's are also looking to scrap the proposed capital investment in roads and instead spend it on public transport.
I cant see the FF TD's in Munster supporting that if the M20 that is desperately needed is cancelled. I think the Green forget there's more than one county in Ireland. Nor can I see FF party members across the country accepting that either.

Looks like FF/FG will dance the two step ( their version of course, one step forward, one step back) for a few weeks before we go back to the polls yet again.

Geuze

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

So what about those people who worked all their lives, and invested all their 'spare' in their home, and are now retired/not working, and living in their comfortable home?
Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.
Should they be required to pay a tax on the present value of their home regardless their actual income?

That is anything but sensible!

If it's not sensible, why does practically every modern society have property taxes for decades?

Could they all be wrong?

No.

Although note that SVT are better than regular property taxes.

Read Mirrlees:

https://www.ifs.org.uk/docs/adam_0311.pdf

Geuze

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

So what about those people who worked all their lives, and invested all their 'spare' in their home, and are now retired/not working, and living in their comfortable home?
Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.
Should they be required to pay a tax on the present value of their home regardless their actual income?

That is anything but sensible!

Read slide 14:

https://www.ifs.org.uk/docs/adam_0311.pdf

Geuze

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.

Please note that this statement is incorrect.

A house delivers housing services to the occupants.

Yes, there are also costs, yes.

It is internationally recognised that houses provide flows of imputed income to their occupants.

Indeed, this imputed income was taxed in Ireland until 1969, and is still taxed in other countries.

is_that_so

efanton wrote: »

Well it looks like Michael Martin might have screwed his only chance of becoming Taoiseach.

Still refusing to budge on any form of rent control and its looks like the Greens were looking for some form of it.

Martin keeps claiming that FF has legal advice claiming it unconstitutional, yet will not publish this legal advice.
Why is that I wonder? Surely it would be of benefit to ALL parties for that advice to be published especially when this might turn out to be the issue that kills the chances of the Green joining a coalition.

Green's are also looking to scrap the proposed capital investment in roads and instead spend it on public transport.
I cant see the FF TD's in Munster supporting that if the M20 that is desperately needed is cancelled. I think the Green forget there's more than one county in Ireland. Nor can I see FF party members across the country accepting that either.

Looks like FF/FG will dance the two step ( their version of course, one step forward, one step back) for a few weeks before we go back to the polls yet again.

Th Rent freeze idea potentially puts two concepts of the constitution up against each other, common good and personal rights and would in all probability end up in court. Commentary here from the ESRI too. The solution as we all know, is improved supply
https://www.thejournal.ie/should-a-rent-freeze-be-introduced-in-ireland-4887837-Nov2019/

This second piece is a balanced legal piece on both sides of the argument.
https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/rent-freeze-4929058-Dec2019/

efanton

is_that_so wrote: »

Th Rent freeze idea potentially puts two concepts of the constitution up against each other, common good and personal rights and would in all probability end up in court. Commentary here from the ESRI too. The solution as we all know, is improved supply
https://www.thejournal.ie/should-a-rent-freeze-be-introduced-in-ireland-4887837-Nov2019/

This second piece is a balanced legal piece on both sides of the argument.
https://www.thejournal.ie/readme/rent-freeze-4929058-Dec2019/

Thanks for that, much appreciated.

So a rent freeze is not unconstitutional but could be challenged.
Being that it is time limited, I couldn't see the courts throwing it out.
Having said that, surely the sensible thing to do is to request that the president tests the bill.


There are two potential ways round this, thinking about it, if the government was not prepared to ask the President to test the rent freeze legislation
All the government need do is add a second tax rate on profits from rent. If rent is more than X amount it is charged at a different rate. If any addition profit is going to get swallowed in tax there would be little or no point in landlords raising rents. Then in a few year time scrap the additional taxation. It would be an extremely clumsy and heavy handed measure though.

The problem really is more to do with existing taxation.
The government is already squeezing the housing market to strangulation point, heavy taxes on house sales and new builds, and heavy taxes on rental income.
The other alternative would be to drop the taxation rate by a small amount with the understanding that rent controls could be introduced.
Better still drop it permanently. We need more housing in the private sector so that there is a reasonable supply for those that wish and can almost afford to buy a home.

Even if the Sinn Fein's home building policy was introduced by who ever forms the next government there is still going to be a two or three year lag for them to have an effect.

The country simply cant continue the way it is.
The current government is spending well over 3/4 billion euros a year at the moment renting private property for social housing use (612 million for HAP, 170 million for emergency housing).
Yet people are having fits that SF wants to spend 250 to 300 million a year building homes. (current home building budget + 6.5 billion proposed spend by SF amortised over 25 year)
Over those 25 years the exist policy of renting private property for social housing use would cost the state close to 19 billion and that's assuming the rental cost to the government never rises. That would work out over 3 times as much as building the 100,000 homes

Johnboy1951

Their home might well be worth €500,000 but does not generate income .... in fact it costs to maintain.

Geuze wrote: »

Please note that this statement is incorrect.

You are incorrect.
There is no generation of income in abiding in one's own property.

The concept of imputing income is logically extensible to any service people perform for themselves, such as cooking their own meals, washing their own laundry, or even bathing themselves.

So I guess there should be extra tax on all persons who perform their own caring functions and do not employ someone else to do them.

Yeah, real sensible and practical.