schmittel wrote: » Here's an idea - the purchase price?
Ger Roe wrote: » Because it has no relationship with your ability to pay. It is a notional value should you want to sell your house and would be OK if you paid it then. But .... my wages have not increased and I don't see how I need to pay more tax because my neighbours have sold their houses and apparently raised the value of my house at the same time. I am not selling and it is already costing me more of my supposedly disposable (after tax income) to maintain it and now I have to pay more tax because someone else decides to value my house at a higher rate???? Anyway, I bought and paid for my house with my own money... without needing or getting any help from government, in fact I saved them money by doing so.... why then do I have to be punished for that achievement? I was told at school that tax has to be fair and seen to be so, this is not. Tax the sale price, if you have to... not the estimate.
NIMAN wrote: » Yet they ask homeowners whose houses have Mica and are falling down, to pay it.
L1011 wrote: » People would be arguing that they should be paying based on what the purchase price notionally could have been at the last valuation date - cause thats the date everyone else is paying for. Legislation would have to be quite strong on that to avoid challenge. Basically it was meant to be every 3 years, which could be argued for on the basis of development levies paid as part of the house cost - but its somehow turned in to 8.
Jerry Attrick wrote: » You have the option to defer the LPT if your income is too small, although the interest rate payable is very high.
Geuze wrote: » The LPT is not new income to the councils, it replaces previous income. So there won't be any new service provided specifically due to LPT income.
Ace2007 wrote: » But if you bought the a semi D house just after the last crash - you could be paying far less than your neighbor under the same roof who bought it just before the crash. - Would that be fair?
touts wrote: » Fully agree with property tax to pay for services but it should be based on those services not on some fictional valuation of the house. Start with a base of say €20 Connected to public sewer. €20 Street lighting outside your house €5 Footpath outside your house €5 Within 5km of a motorway €5 Within 5km of a Library. €5 Within 2km of a School €5 Within 1km of a public transportation link €5 And so on Basically add up every service in your area that the tax is supposed to pay for and pay a small contribution to that service. Those services generally add to the value of the house anyway but this way people can see what their tax is paying for. People benefitting the most from state services pay the most .
Ace2007 wrote: » Sure it's only going to be for a few year - SF are totally against it - so when they get in power it'll be scraped:rolleyes:
schmittel wrote: » They plan to replace it with a wealth tax. A lot of Revenue to be raised from the never SF voters.
Geuze wrote: » http://localauthorityfinances.com/ Pick your local authority here and have a look.
Ace2007 wrote: » Oh i know - but i would love to see what they do for the people who are asset rich but cash poor. If you think that Ireland has 78000+ millionaire for instance - how many of them are millionaires because of their private residence?
schmittel wrote: » They claim they have this covered.https://www.sinnfein.ie/files/2013/WealthTaxProposalsWeb.pdf If your house is worth 1.1m but you're short of cash, this is not really going to have much impact on you.
Dempo1 wrote: » Just in response I have my own waste plant I recycle most things but pay for Refuse when required. I have Solar Power but have an ESB connection as back up and pay government levy for the luxury I have my own water well I live in the middle of Nowhere What services am I paying for exactly? The Road outside is supposed to be partly covered by the Motor Tax I pay Yes I'm be pedantic but not every house has the luxury of services you mention, just a humble opinion
touts wrote: » If you get no services you should only pay the basic lowest fee.
Dempo1 wrote: » Are you offering to pay mine? What kind of statement is that?
tjhook wrote: » I wish they'd fix the redistributive element of LPT. A county shouldn't receive LPT funding from other counties until it has maximised it's own ability to raise funds - i.e. set it's LPT rate at the +15%. As it is, there are instances where some counties have their own high LTP rates funding other counties that have lower rates. E.g. Galway county sets the standard rate and is a recipient of redistributions. Next door, Clare has the +15% rate but is a nett contributor to the system.
[Deleted User] wrote: » Its being realistic Taxes are needed to fund the country and pay for covid expenses, they just are. This is one of the more fairer taxes but it is laughably low, it really should be at least double of what it currently is. While they are at it, they should look at how they can bring in water charges so we are not diverting existing funds to pay for Irish Water. That alone would free up several billion in existing taxes which could be used to fund any number of services