Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Calls to slash the top rate of tax for Irish workers by a huge 7%

Options
2

Comments

  • Options
    #32
    Halloween Jack
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,658 ✭✭✭Halloween Jack


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The burden of corporation tax mostly falls on the shoulders of workers. If you increase corporation tax then you are just going to reduce wages.



    There are few loopholes in the Irish corporate tax code. Pretty much every MNC here is paying over 10% and close to 12.5% on their Irish profits.

    Both of those points are absolute tripe


  • Options
    #33
    ancapailldorcha
    Moderators, Category Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 37,214 CMod ✭✭✭✭ancapailldorcha


    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    Both of those points are absolute tripe

    Post more constructively please.

    We sat again for an hour and a half discussing maps and figures and always getting back to that most damnable creation of the perverted ingenuity of man - the County of Tyrone.

    H. H. Asquith



  • Options
    #34
    Rightwing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,101 ✭✭✭Rightwing


    Suryavarman wrote: »
    The burden of corporation tax mostly falls on the shoulders of workers. If you increase corporation tax then you are just going to reduce wages.



    There are few loopholes in the Irish corporate tax code. Pretty much every MNC here is paying over 10% and close to 12.5% on their Irish profits.

    Our system is flawed, the Apple case has proven this. It will be taken out of our hands soon, and the sooner the better. We are a very competitive nation so there will be a bit of crying, but we need to more mature in outlook. We don't hold the aces, that should be clear to all.


  • Options
    #35
    Wheeliebin30
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,593 ✭✭✭Wheeliebin30


    Rightwing wrote: »
    Our system is flawed, the Apple case has proven this. It will be taken out of our hands soon, and the sooner the better. We are a very competitive nation so there will be a bit of crying, but we need to more mature in outlook. We don't hold the aces, that should be clear to all.

    Apple pay 12.5% corporation tax on its profits in this country like every other company.

    You're simply wrong.


  • Options
    #36
    jcon1913
    Registered Users Posts: 796 ✭✭✭jcon1913


    Stheno wrote: »
    Who do you think should pay more to offset the liss to the exchequer

    This thread is probably better suited the politics btw i cam move it if you want

    Eh large multinationals. We could

    1. Increase Employers PRSI ti the level of say Czech republic ( 10.75% now to say 25% )

    2. Increase minimum wage with knock on increases throughout the economy to rebalance the share that labour gets versus the share capital gets


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #37
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    jcon1913 wrote: »
    Eh large multinationals. We could

    1. Increase Employers PRSI ti the level of say Czech republic ( 10.75% now to say 25% )

    2. Increase minimum wage with knock on increases throughout the economy to rebalance the share that labour gets versus the share capital gets

    It really would be nice if people proposing these half-baked ideas would get it into their heads that the majority of employers in this country are not large multinationals, and pause long enough to contemplate the effect of their proposals on small indigenous companies.


  • Options
    #38
    Idbatterim
    Registered Users Posts: 17,840 ✭✭✭✭Idbatterim


    we always hear about the benefits of low taxes, corporation tax. So someone tell me, why taxing labour to death at the marginal rate is a good idea! Of course its moronic, but its politically very difficult. Rectifying decades of ****e decision making. Get way more into the tax net, water charges and proper property taxes!

    Remove the outrageous and immoral burden on higher income earners!

    Also I would agree with the 45% as the absolute highest rate, regardless of income!


  • Options
    #39
    Idioteque
    Registered Users Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Idioteque


    Wheeliebin30 wrote: »
    Apple pay 12.5% corporation tax on its profits in this country like every other company.

    You're simply wrong.

    Eh where are you getting that from?...sure the whole case against currently stemmed from..."The executive arm of the European Union concluded that Ireland granted undue tax benefits to the U.S. tech giant, which is illegal under EU state aid rules, allowing Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."


  • Options
    #40
    jcon1913
    Registered Users Posts: 796 ✭✭✭jcon1913


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    It really would be nice if people proposing these half-baked ideas would get it into their heads that the majority of employers in this country are not large multinationals, and pause long enough to contemplate the effect of their proposals on small indigenous companies.

    All companies benefit from services provided by Irish govt

    Labour has taken a smaller share of profits relative to capital in recent years. This would rebalance it.


  • Options
    #41
    Wheeliebin30
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,593 ✭✭✭Wheeliebin30


    Idioteque wrote: »
    Eh where are you getting that from?...sure the whole case against currently stemmed from..."The executive arm of the European Union concluded that Ireland granted undue tax benefits to the U.S. tech giant, which is illegal under EU state aid rules, allowing Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."

    I said in Ireland. They have paid 12.5% tax on profits in Ireland.

    Revenue have verified this. What happens in European countries is not our business.

    And what you quoted is only an allegation. It's going to court.

    So you're wrong.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #42
    Idioteque
    Registered Users Posts: 622 ✭✭✭Idioteque


    Wheeliebin30 wrote: »
    I said in Ireland. They have paid 12.5% tax on profits in Ireland.

    Revenue have verified this. What happens in European countries is not our business.

    And what you quoted is only an allegation. It's going to court.

    So you're wrong.

    If a company makes for example €1billion in Ireland but does some accounting trickery to make it €1million in Ireland, technically it pays 12.5% on €1million but that's not the point.

    Back to the op...I think it would be a good thing if they could re-jig top rate of tax somehow but it's a political minefield so I wouldn't hold out any hope


  • Options
    #43
    Wheeliebin30
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,593 ✭✭✭Wheeliebin30


    Idioteque wrote: »
    If a company makes for example €1billion in Ireland but does some accounting trickery to make it €1million in Ireland, technically it pays 12.5% on €1million but that's not the point.

    Exactly it's not the point because that's not what apple did.


  • Options
    #44
    oscarBravo
    Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 28,791 Mod ✭✭✭✭oscarBravo


    jcon1913 wrote: »
    All companies benefit from services provided by Irish govt
    For which we are duly grateful, and for which we pay corporation tax, employers' PRSI, VAT on the margin between sales and cost of sales, and local authority rates.
    Labour has taken a smaller share of profits relative to capital in recent years. This would rebalance it.
    Sorry, but running a business is a pragmatic exercise for me, not an intellectual one.


  • Options
    #45
    jcon1913
    Registered Users Posts: 796 ✭✭✭jcon1913


    oscarBravo wrote: »
    For which we are duly grateful, and for which we pay corporation tax, employers' PRSI, VAT on the margin between sales and cost of sales, and local authority rates. Sorry, but running a business is a pragmatic exercise for me, not an intellectual one.
    Here something for your pragmatic exercise: we'll all be low wage serfs if these multinational companies get their away. They play countries off against each other.

    Low wage workers spend most of their money spending it in local businesses maybe ones like yours.

    "That will make us an uncompetitive country" I hear you cry - that's just part of the MNC schtick to keep us in our place


  • Options
    #46
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    Both of those points are absolute tripe

    Then you'll be well able to provide evidence contradicting those claims I assume?
    Rightwing wrote: »
    Our system is flawed, the Apple case has proven this. It will be taken out of our hands soon, and the sooner the better. We are a very competitive nation so there will be a bit of crying, but we need to more mature in outlook. We don't hold the aces, that should be clear to all.

    The Apple case didn't prove we have a flawed system, it showed that other countries have flawed systems. Apple paid 12.5% taxation (or close to it) on its Irish profits. Ireland's tax system is designed to get 12.5% of all corporations' Irish profits. The Apple case shows that our taxation system is far better than every other country in Europe or the OECD.
    jcon1913 wrote: »
    Eh large multinationals. We could

    1. Increase Employers PRSI ti the level of say Czech republic ( 10.75% now to say 25% )

    2. Increase minimum wage with knock on increases throughout the economy to rebalance the share that labour gets versus the share capital gets

    In the medium to long term the cost of employers PRSI is borne entirely by the employee. All that such a policy would do is reduce wages by ~14%.

    Most evidence on the matter points to the negative effects outweighing the positives when the minimum wage exceeds 50% of the median wage. Ireland's minimum wage is closer to 60% of the median wage.
    Idioteque wrote: »
    Eh where are you getting that from?...sure the whole case against currently stemmed from..."The executive arm of the European Union concluded that Ireland granted undue tax benefits to the U.S. tech giant, which is illegal under EU state aid rules, allowing Apple to pay an effective corporate tax rate of 1 per cent on its European profits in 2003 down to 0.005 per cent in 2014."

    Which is completely irrelevant to Ireland as Ireland only taxes countries based on their Irish profits, America is the only country that taxes companies based on their global profits.


  • Options
    #47
    jcon1913
    Registered Users Posts: 796 ✭✭✭jcon1913


    Survayarman said:

    In the medium to long term the cost of employers PRSI is borne entirely by the employee. All that such a policy would do is reduce wages by ~14%.

    End quote

    Any proof / studies?

    Survarman again:

    Most evidence on the matter points to the negative effects outweighing the positives when the minimum wage exceeds 50% of the median wage. Ireland's minimum wage is closer to 60% of the median wage.

    End quote

    Proof / studies / reports?


  • Options
    #48
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    jcon1913 wrote: »
    Here something for your pragmatic exercise: we'll all be low wage serfs if these multinational companies get their away. They play countries off against each other.

    Low wage workers spend most of their money spending it in local businesses maybe ones like yours.

    "That will make us an uncompetitive country" I hear you cry - that's just part of the MNC schtick to keep us in our place
    Large multinationals pay significantly higher salaries/benefits than other employers in Dublin.


  • Options
    #49
    Permabear
    Closed Accounts Posts: 39,022 ✭✭✭✭Permabear


    This post has been deleted.


  • Options
    #50
    hatrickpatrick
    Registered Users Posts: 17,797 ✭✭✭✭hatrickpatrick


    Tax bands in Ireland are ridiculous. There needs to be at least one extra tier, probably more.


  • Options
    #51
    Rightwing
    Closed Accounts Posts: 8,101 ✭✭✭Rightwing


    FreudianSlippers wrote: »
    Large multinationals pay significantly higher salaries/benefits than other employers in Dublin.

    Correct, apart from the PS, which wants to match and even surpass these salaries which is a serious concern.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #52
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,086 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    Both of those points are absolute tripe

    The only people who can pay CT are one or more of the following:

    shareholders
    workers
    customers

    That is a matter of logic.

    If you call for higher CT, then you are calling for higher taxes on one or more of these groups.


  • Options
    #53
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,086 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Halloween Jack wrote: »
    Both of those points are absolute tripe

    Apple in Ireland did pay 12.5% CT on their profits made in Ireland.

    They did not pay CT on profits generated in California.


  • Options
    #54
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,086 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    Many people pay very low income taxes.

    My parents earn 49k approx, and pay less than 10%.

    That is a very low Average Tax Rate [ATR].

    In return, they get:
    • two med cards
    • two travel passes
    • free TV licence
    • 35 pm off their elec bill


    This is a very generous country, with low to very low ATRs on many earners.

    It's also very true that the top tax rate kicks in far, far too early.


  • Options
    #55
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,086 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    hatrickpatrick wrote: »
    Tax bands in Ireland are ridiculous. There needs to be at least one extra tier, probably more.

    I would go for four rates:

    20, 30, 40, 50

    Merge USC and PRSI.

    PRSI ceiling at 100k.

    50% rate after 100k.


  • Options
    #56
    FreudianSlippers
    Registered Users Posts: 20,397 ✭✭✭✭FreudianSlippers


    Geuze wrote: »
    Many people pay very low income taxes.

    My parents earn 49k approx, and pay less than 10%.

    That is a very low Average Tax Rate [ATR].

    In return, they get:
    • two med cards
    • two travel passes
    • free TV licence
    • 35 pm off their elec bill


    This is a very generous country, with low to very low ATRs on many earners.

    It's also very true that the top tax rate kicks in far, far too early.
    I paid 11% in USC alone last year.


  • Options
    #57
    Old Bill
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 299 ✭✭Old Bill


    Sinn Fein would only Tax people on over 100k.


  • Options
    #58
    Hollister11
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,482 ✭✭✭Hollister11


    Geuze wrote: »
    Many people pay very low income taxes.

    My parents earn 49k approx, and pay less than 10%.

    That is a very low Average Tax Rate [ATR].

    In return, they get:
    • two med cards
    • two travel passes
    • free TV licence
    • 35 pm off their elec bill


    This is a very generous country, with low to very low ATRs on many earners.

    It's also very true that the top tax rate kicks in far, far too early.

    It's not generous, there just low earners.


  • Options
    #59
    Suryavarman
    Registered Users Posts: 2,583 ✭✭✭Suryavarman


    jcon1913 wrote: »
    Survayarman said:

    In the medium to long term the cost of employers PRSI is borne entirely by the employee. All that such a policy would do is reduce wages by ~14%.

    End quote

    Any proof / studies?

    Survarman again:

    Most evidence on the matter points to the negative effects outweighing the positives when the minimum wage exceeds 50% of the median wage. Ireland's minimum wage is closer to 60% of the median wage.

    End quote

    Proof / studies / reports?

    Grueber (1995):
    Despite the growing reliance on payroll taxation worldwide, there is limited evidence on the incidence of payroll taxes. I provide new evidence by examining the experience of Chile before and after the privatization of its Social Security system. This policy change led to a sharp exogenous reduction in the payroll tax burden on Chilean firms; the average payroll tax rate in my sample fell from 30% to 5% over this six year period. I use data from a census of manufacturing firms, which contains information on firm specific tax payments and average wages. I find strong evidence that the incidence of payroll taxation was fully on wages, with no effect on employment. A potential weakness with this approach is that some of the variation in firm-specific tax rates may be spurious, for example due to measurement error in wages. I attempt to surmount this problem by using a variety of different estimators, all of which yield consistent evidence of full shifting.

    Dube (2010)

    A natural target is to set the minimum wage to half of the median full-time wage. This target has important historical precedence in the United States: in the 1960s, this ratio was 51 percent, reaching a high of 55 percent in 1968. Averaged over the 1960–1979 period, the ratio stood at 48 percent.
    Approximately half the median full-time wage is also the norm among all OECD countries with a statutory minimum wage. For OECD countries, on average, the minimum wage in 2012 (using the latest data available) was equal to 49 percent of the median wage; averaged over the entire sample between 1960 and 2012, the minimum stood at 48 percent of the median (OECD 2013).
    Setting the state and local minimum wages close to half the median full-time wage is a well-balanced policy option. Such a target is close to both U.S. experiences during the 1960s and 1970s and to current practice in advanced industrialized countries. While it pushes the minimum wage beyond the experience over the recent period in this country, it does so in a measured fashion


  • Options
    #60
    Stheno
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Science, Health & Environment Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 51,687 Mod ✭✭✭✭Stheno


    Hollister11 wrote: »
    It's not generous, there just low earners.

    So low earners are classed on people on almost 50k?

    Yet high earners are classed as the self employed who pay a marginal rate of 55% once they hit 100k?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #61
    jcon1913
    Registered Users Posts: 796 ✭✭✭jcon1913


    Permabear wrote: »
    This post had been deleted.

    Low wages = serfdom


Advertisement