Property tax changes will see 36% face higher tax

Dempo1

So the latest is revenue will be tasked with checking valuations submitted, those found to have deliberately under valued their properties will be forced to pay back taxes owed and penalties. They'll use mapping technology, prices achieved locally etc. On the surface seems logical but impractical in rural locations. Bad enough Rural homeowners get Zero in teturn for property tax and I mean Zero, my humble cottage is surrounded by properties 3 / 4 times the size of mine and with far greater value, will they assume if my neighbours sell their €400k + properties that I've been naughty with my valuation of less than a 3rd of my neighbours?

https://m.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/property-mortgages/revenue-in-property-tax-crackdown-on-low-home-valuations-by-homeowners-40497260.html

This is going to stir up a hornets nest.

Bad enough also over 100k properties built after 2013 tax free until now, I'm just astonished there's not been a legal challenge to this unfair and disgraceful unfairness.

Buddy Bubs

It's a pity the perpetually unemployed don't own their properties, we could send them out rioting on our behalf to stop this madness.

Wanderer78

Nothing like good ould book balancing and tax hikes to do so, shur tis always good for the economy, isn't it!

Dempo1

Buddy Bubs wrote: »

It's a pity the perpetually unemployed don't own their properties, we could send them out rioting on our behalf to stop this madness.

Quite a statement, what makes you believe unemployed people don't own their properties? Encouraging Rioting???

10000maniacs

Mimon wrote: »

Agree with it in principal but can anyone explain why it is paid using already taxed income?

So I am paying a tax with money that I've already payed tax on. Bonkers.

Don't forget the stamp duty of 7% if you bought 10-15 years ago. Triple screwed.

BluePlanet

It's insane that Revenue are asking ordinary people to perform their own house valuations.
When i was in USA and owned a place, the city sent out a person to inspect and value the property after the sale went through.
This was to determine your LPT.
It was just part of the process of buying.

Dempo1

10000maniacs wrote: »

Don't forget the stamp duty of 7% if you bought 10-15 years ago. Triple screwed.

Fair point but isn't stamp duty not applicable for 1st time buyer's? I'm Open to correction

Dempo1

BluePlanet wrote: »

It's insane that Revenue are asking ordinary people to perform their own house valuations.
When i was in USA and owned a place, the city sent out a person to inspect and value the property after the sale went through.
This was to determine your LPT.
It was just part of the process of buying.

I agree but what is the answer, using current property price register would not work in rural locations, there are just too many variables, proorty size, additional land, services indeed property type.

My sense is the Self assessment is more of a catch yeah approach, you make the assessment, your responsibility, your wrong when and if it suits, a very worrying approach.

Aph2016

Many in this thread saying they're fine paying property taxes, good for you, I'd rather not have to pay more taxes considering how our government have zero accountability when it comes to spending taxes; and let's not forget 90% of our public services are a joke.

PommieBast

timmyntc wrote: »

If LPT is supposed to fund services provided by the local authority, then it should be paid based on all adults in the property.

That was basically the idea behind the Community Charge Poll Tax. Worked better in theory than practice.

FileNotFound

Don't see the issue people have with this change really.

Many are basing the current tax on massively undervalued homes (people undervalued them at the time when they were already recession low), those people have been paying low for years, be happy they got away with it this long.

New builds since 2013 were at first way cheaper to buy than now so mass savings v today's buyer already and then in 2017 as prices rose we had the help to buy scheme (was it 30k or 50k people got??) so it's pittance v the savings had already.


Now I say this as someone who will save thanks to these changes, I had an accurately valued property..

Geuze

BluePlanet wrote: »

It's insane that Revenue are asking ordinary people to perform their own house valuations.
When i was in USA and owned a place, the city sent out a person to inspect and value the property after the sale went through.
This was to determine your LPT.
It was just part of the process of buying.

When the LPT was introduced in 2013, it was self-valuation, and self-declaration, with the help of a Revenue estimate.

Geuze

Aph2016 wrote: »

Many in this thread saying they're fine paying property taxes, good for you, I'd rather not have to pay more taxes considering how our government have zero accountability when it comes to spending taxes; and let's not forget 90% of our public services are a joke.

I am 100% fine with property taxes, and carbon taxes.

I am 100% unhappy with a 48.5% marginal income tax rate on average workers on 36k.

I will join any protest against 48.5% marginal income tax rates on average workers.

There never seems to any protest against it, though.


I am also unhappy with the huge waste and overspending in healthcare.

Geuze

Dempo1 wrote: »

So the latest is revenue will be tasked with checking valuations submitted, those found to have deliberately under valued their properties will be forced to pay back taxes owed and penalties. They'll use mapping technology, prices achieved locally etc.

AFAIK, this is happening already.

Geuze

10000maniacs wrote: »

Don't forget the stamp duty of 7% if you bought 10-15 years ago. Triple screwed.

I bought in 2005. Paid zero stamp duty as a FTB.

magicbastarder

you also bought a new build, yeah?
i bought my first house in 2003, FTB, but paid 10k in stamp duty; the house was not new.

meeeeh

It's a typical everyone else but me should pay taxes attitude. Usually from people who wouldn't even blink signing up to another subscription.

Anyway SF will be soon in government and they will provide all services and more by 'taxing the rich'.

osarusan

Jerry Attrick wrote: »

Reggie's no fool - his employer pays the rent.

Well then that renders the whole hypothetical meaningless.


The idea that people are renting to avoid LPT is nonsensical, especially seeing as it gets paid anyway.

Furze99

Deleted User wrote: »

Absolutely. It’s something that most people are comfortable with. It’s a progressive tax on wealth. It’s the type of thing that is a no-brainer for a country ran on social democratic principles. The same would apply on charging for water based on usage.

Couldn't agree more. It's so laughable to see the contortions that the Socialist Party and Sinn Féin have to make, in order to oppose perfectly sound social democratic propositions. They'd cut off their noses and cannibalise each other in the fight to cut themselves a few extra floating votes.

Dempo1

Geuze wrote: »

AFAIK, this is happening already.

I know, I'm pointing out it's going to be used as a tool to question valuations, previous valuations etc in a trawl of under valuations. Self assessment is all fine and dandy but who judges who right or wrong.

Just as an example, my cottage valued at @ €140k, I had an insurance claim last year, successfully approved (1st one ever) in 20 years.

Insurance company determined valuation of property €160 k for the purposes of processing claim and settlement. Based on their assumption as house undervalued, settlement less and direct payment rather than me contracting out works and they settle directly with contractor etc. Actually worked out better for me.

So my point, who's right or wrong in a valuation difference of €20k. I know it's a small example but what happens in a €100k difference?

FileNotFound

Dempo1 wrote: »

I know, I'm pointing out it's going to be used as a tool to question valuations, previous valuations etc in a trawl of under valuations. Self assessment is all fine and dandy but who judges who right or wrong.

Just as an example, my cottage valued at @ €140k, I had an insurance claim last year, successfully approved (1st one ever) in 20 years.

Insurance company determined valuation of property €160 k for the purposes of processing claim and settlement. Based on their assumption as house undervalued, settlement less and direct payment rather than me contracting out works and they settle directly with contractor etc. Actually worked out better for me.

So my point, who's right or wrong in a valuation difference of €20k. I know it's a small example but what happens in a €100k difference?

In Urban areas generalisation is easier for house prices.

I understand the countryside is different, mind you a price could be set per area and if you feel you are overvalues you could apply for correction.

Would probably ensure a fairer system of valuation.

At first I didn't at all like the idea of property tax on top of my high marginal income tax, but I'm ok with it now, and glad to be in a position to pay it. I let a property and of course have to pay property tax on that which is not deductible against the very highly taxed rental income, but accept this as I have my wealth asset, which is what is being taxed. But I do feel sorry for people hard pressed to repay a mortgage as it is just one extra expense if they finding it hard to make ends meet.

Geuze

magicbastarder wrote: »

you also bought a new build, yeah?
i bought my first house in 2003, FTB, but paid 10k in stamp duty; the house was not new.

FTB in 2005, house built in 1970s.

Zero stamp duty.

Geuze

Dempo1 wrote: »

I know, I'm pointing out it's going to be used as a tool to question valuations, previous valuations etc in a trawl of under valuations. Self assessment is all fine and dandy but who judges who right or wrong.

Just as an example, my cottage valued at @ €140k, I had an insurance claim last year, successfully approved (1st one ever) in 20 years.

Insurance company determined valuation of property €160 k for the purposes of processing claim and settlement. Based on their assumption as house undervalued, settlement less and direct payment rather than me contracting out works and they settle directly with contractor etc. Actually worked out better for me.

So my point, who's right or wrong in a valuation difference of €20k. I know it's a small example but what happens in a €100k difference?

For building insurance purpose, the rebuild cost of the house is used, which is very different from the market value.

I found it hard to look at the bank valuers report on my house, with a rebuild value 200k below what I paid for it........:eek::mad::(:(

Dempo1

FileNotFound wrote: »

In Urban areas generalisation is easier for house prices.

I understand the countryside is different, mind you a price could be set per area and if you feel you are overvalues you could apply for correction.

Would probably ensure a fairer system of valuation.

Not a bad idea re rural, I still feel an enormous challenge, its no exaggeration to say that there are so so many variables, house size, land addition, services, etc, tough nut to crack

Dempo1

Geuze wrote: »

For building insurance purpose, the rebuild cost of the house is used, which is very different from the market value.

I found it hard to look at the bank valuers report on my house, with a rebuild value 200k below what I paid for it........:eek::mad::(:(

I hear you and your pain, and yes I get the insurance re build values differ from actual valuation, just giving a sense of one potential complicating factor re self assessment etc

djan

Geuze wrote: »

I am 100% fine with property taxes, and carbon taxes.

I am 100% unhappy with a 48.5% marginal income tax rate on average workers on 36k.

I will join any protest against 48.5% marginal income tax rates on average workers.

There never seems to any protest against it, though.


I am also unhappy with the huge waste and overspending in healthcare.

Fully agreed, it is truly theft (all form of taxation but that amount is madness). Given that the average wage is apparently above the 36k threshold, why has no political party substantially strived to reduce it?

I would propose a flat 15 to 20% tax on all income with some credits available for eg children, healthcare etc. Would be much easier to implement thus less work for revenue and I would argue much less evasion.

tommybrees

What happens if you don't pay?

FileNotFound

tommybrees wrote: »

What happens if you don't pay?

Property Tax?

I think its one of those ones the revenue can pull from wages etc. - Thats just from loose memory mind you so i could be wrong.

You can pay monthly at no extra cost rather than in 1 lump sum.

blanch152

Geuze wrote: »

I am 100% fine with property taxes, and carbon taxes.

I am 100% unhappy with a 48.5% marginal income tax rate on average workers on 36k.

I will join any protest against 48.5% marginal income tax rates on average workers.

There never seems to any protest against it, though.


I am also unhappy with the huge waste and overspending in healthcare.

Pretty much hitting the nail on the head here. Ireland overtaxes income, and undertaxes in relation to charges for services and taxes on other things.

We need water charges, we need more property taxes, not less, we need demand management charges (€5-10) for visiting a doctor that everyone pays (like in most European countries), we need higher social insurance, we need to abolish the floor to social insurance, etc. etc.

Hopefully the Taxation and Social Welfare Commission will address some of these issues.