All Homes to be re-valued for Property Tax in November 2021

[Deleted User] wrote: »

Actually it is very fair

The higher the value of your home, the more you pay

I see a lot disagreeing with me in this thread wrt doubling the LPT, and thats fine, people dont like taxes, fair enough.

However everything provided by your national and local govts has to be paid for.

Some say they want to see what they are getting for their money, well here's a short list

• libraries
• schools
• hospitals
• military
• roads
• trains
• ports
• police
• street lights
• street bins
• national parks
• museums
• etc etc etc etc

some may not like it and grumble, thats to be expected, but trust me, the LPT changing is only the tip of the iceberg

• Covid costs have to be paid for
• Reduced excise on fuels needs to be replaced somehow
• Escalation in the costs of implementing a carbon neutral economy
• Higher social welfare costs
• Higher heathcare costs of an aging population
• Higher pension costs and meeting underfunding of existing pensions

There's a lot more pain coming. Regardless of who is in govt all this has to be paid for somehow, the LPT is way overdue for a shakeup and I only hope its updated to properly reflect current prices and funding requirements

LIST]
[*]libraries. I live about 20km from a library
[*]schools Local council doesn't pay for this
[*]hospitals Local council doesn't pay for this
[*]military Local council doesn't pay for this and I live 40km from the nearest Army Barracks in another county
[*]roads Car tax pays for this
[*]trains Local council doesn't pay for this and I have to drive 30km to get a train in another county
[*]ports Local council doesn't pay for this and I'm 70km from a port in another county
[*]police Local council doesn't pay for this and my local Gardai station was sold last year. My nearest Gardai station is now (I **** you not) in another county.
[*]street lights Don't have any within 5km so I'll be knocked down/mugged long before I reach it.
[*]street bins 5km+ to the nearest one.
[*]national parks Local council doesn't pay for this and as far as I can work out the nearest one is in Killarney about 3 counties from where I live
[*]museums 20km to the nearest one
[*]etc etc etc etc
[/LIST]

If that's what my LPT is supposed to be paying for I'm getting robbed blind. It's no wonder my council gets a budget of just over €900 per person and Dublin City gets a budget of nearly €1900 per person.

Allowing for some exceptions, inherited wealth now dwindled and so on, is the value of a particular home, for the vast majority of cases, not actually quite strongly correlated with the income levels therein? It certainly is for homes acquired within the the lifetime of extant mortgages.

For older people on pension incomes, the option remains to partly or wholly defer the tax and let the value of the asset cover the cost after they have passed.

For example, a nice juicy 4 bed semi home in an established suburb like Dundrum or Raheny, built in the early 70s, bought by a couple now retired, family raised and gone. A good average market value today would be €750,000 and on that basis LPT is €1,400 per annum approx. Even if they defer the whole tax for 20 years, thats €30,000 or so with costs of deferral.

That leaves a value of €720,000 to be inherited by the family heirs. But, of course it does not, because that home is not going to be the same value in 20 years, it'll be 1.5 or 2 million quid - and in no sense is LPT keeping up with property values, we are eight years in and still no revaluation!!

Even if 3 or 4 kids inherit, the deferred LPT paid only lowers the amount they have to pay in inheritance tax on the house anyway, so they aren't bothered.

The only unfair aspect of LPT is the exemption from 2013 and that is now being addressed. In future, all homes should become liable for it for the first calendar year after 12 months of occupancy, i.e., if I buy a house tomorrow, my LPT liability kicks in on 01/01/2023.

Ger Roe wrote: »

Fair? Not by a long shot..... It's an increased notional valuation that you have no control over, that has to be paid from the less rising pot of your personal (after tax already paid) income.

Pensioners are paying for the privilege of still living in a house they just about scraped by to pay for over many years, and they are now being hit with increasing taxes in their twilight years because a failed government housing policy that results in increased demand is apparently causing someone else's valuation of their property to rise????

It's not double what it currently is, because there would be riots on the streets and loss of election seats. That's why it's a mess, it was a lip service introduction intended to introduced softly and ramped up later, but no government has had the nerve to do so, because even they know it isn't fair.

Is it fair that pensioners are getting a pension paid by current workers and not by their own contributions?

It's bizarre to refer to increased demand for housing as a failed government housing policy. There wasn't an increased demand for housing when the economy sucked and workers were emigrating.

C14N wrote: »

It is an asset though. Whether you sell it or not, it has that value, which now belongs to you. The gain may not be crystallised yet but you still have access to that wealth through selling it if and when you want to.

The main issue with it that I see is that it taxes the improved value of property, which effectively discourages improving your land. Any improvements that you do yourself (such as renovations or improving efficiency) you should be fully entitled to without tax, it's only the value of the land that acts as a source of unearned wealth and which benefits from increased stabilisation.

The home is not an asset. Some argue otherwise, but it really isn't an asset, it's a liability. Talk to anyone in negative equity. If my house was sold today, it wouldn't pay the mortgage. Yet I still have to pay a tax on the family home, most of which goes to other counties.

lawrencesummers wrote: »

So you go to work.

Your earn money

You pay tax on that money, PAYE, PRSI, USC.

With that money you buy something.

You own it and the government taxes you for owning it.

Seems fair.

No different to owning a car, or a dog.

lawrencesummers wrote: »

I don’t pay tax for owning a car.
.

You kinda sorta do......in a number of if you'll excuse the pun "roundabout' ways

I think modt if the giving out is been done by those with houses built since 2013. If your home was built before 2012 you would have a different opinion. I think its only fair this 2013 loop hole is getting closed.
There are still many households getting away with it due to the ghost estates exemption. The town i grew up in a number of estates fall under this exemption. I presume this classification is going to be reviewed. Esp in larger towns and urban area some of these estates are now finished off or in the process of getting completed

Murph85 wrote: »

They are going to raise taxes, because they sure as hell wont deal with the waste and wasters here...

On that basis, they can do one on expecting workers to pay for it all! Jack up the nearly free motor tax most people pay for a start.. xmas welfare bonus for long term unemployed gone... start actually collecting social housing rents! Start charging e20 minimum for medical card gp visits... reduce current tax on letting out homes when person in nursing home...

I feel property related taxes will and should be used to plug a large gap in the states finances... site value tax etc..

Politician pay cut would go down well with the electorate

Tallaght_Sale wrote: »

No this is not fair as you have not crystallised your "gain" until sold. So if not sold then it's not an asset.

A fairer approach (as if we need ANOTHER tax on the middle working class...) would be a tax based on disposal of the years you had in the place (capped at say 10 years), or tax based on leverage of the asset value (Eg if you remortgaged).

Taxing people based on a non crystallised value is patently unfair.

Exactly, If I speculate and buy shares, they can go up as much as they want and I only get hit when I sell. If I put a roof over my head, I pay every year for an estimate of the gain.... a gain that I may never convert to cash. If the asset is eventually converted by me or my family, it will be taxed again.

It is an unfair tax made up to ensure quicker payment of national bail out debts.

The Independent have a table of the new rates. Most of it is at the upper end. All the post-2013 houses coming into the net may have affected the calculations.


https://www.independent.ie/irish-news/revealed-what-you-will-pay-in-local-property-tax-under-new-hikes-40493850.html

jrosen wrote: »

I was listening to Leo last night and when he said 100% of the money will stay locally for social housing, estate maintenance, pathways etc.
But wasnt that where a portion of the property tax is suppose to go anyway? I see plenty of social housing my my area, not a penny towards the maintenance of my estate, or pathways, community centers, actually other than social housing our locality hasnt really seen the benefit in property taxes.
I would want some accountability as to where the funds are going. Im sick of paying out money and seeing no return that benefits my family

Well, 80% of it does for most councils, some of the LGF is used for areas who don't have population masses. It might also be useful to get councils to collect what they are owed. A lot of them are very slack on that, especially money owed by tenants.

jrosen wrote: »

I would want some accountability as to where the funds are going. Im sick of paying out money and seeing no return that benefits my family

Have a look here:


http://localauthorityfinances.com/

C14N wrote: »

I don't understand this argument. How is property tax regressive? If your property has a higher value, you pay more, and property owners in general are more likely to have higher wealth than non-property owners.

I presently pay €1700 + per annum on Property Tax. I think this is enough. I am on a fixed income. Small private pension plus state pension.

Got a quote to have two patio doors replaced a few years back and it was over €4000. Instead of replacing them I removed rotting wood and filled with wood filler. Job doesn't look great.

I need a new boiler. Quote €1k.

Outside house needs to be painted €4k.

Carpets a bit frayed on stairs....need to be replaced.

Plus a few other jobs.

I would much rather spend my €1700 per annum on my home keeping it nice than paying tax for something I have already paid tax on.

I cannot even get Dun Laoghaire Rathdown to clean out the storm drain outside my house that has some rather interesting green foliage growing from it.

Great. Everyone loves more property tax. That warm fuzzy feeling from paying every year to live in your own house

...Ghost... wrote: »

The home is not an asset. Some argue otherwise, but it really isn't an asset, it's a liability. Talk to anyone in negative equity. If my house was sold today, it wouldn't pay the mortgage. Yet I still have to pay a tax on the family home, most of which goes to other counties.

There should be very few people in negative equity, as a decade has passed since the house price crash.

Prices have recovered, and mortgage balances are being paid down.

awec wrote: »

Basically if your house is worth less than ~1.3million your 2021 rate is going to be lower than if you were assessed against the 2013 rate, in many cases significantly lower.

The Indo just didn't continue the old chart over 1m - probably because they copied it from Citizens Information - if the rate has changed as such everyone will be paying less if their property hasn't significantly increased in value

Above 1m the rate increases as can be seen from the bigger increase per band; this is likely why the presumably 'borrowed' from somewhere else first column doesn't go over 1m

Ubbquittious wrote: »

Great. Everyone loves more property tax. That warm fuzzy feeling from paying every year to live in your own house

It's about paying for local services. Not everything can or should come from central taxation. It'd be even better if we had sensible charges for public water & sewage, related to usage. Lots of people (not necessarily you) expect too much for 'free' in this country, some magic money tree that the likes of Sinn Féin & Paul Murphy think can be shaken down when needed.

What I'd like to see stopped is the unfair provision that LAs can reduce LPT year or year, principally done to curry electoral favour.

Living Off The Splash wrote: »

I presently pay €1700 + per annum on Property Tax. I think this is enough. I am on a fixed income. Small private pension plus state pension.

Got a quote to have two patio doors replaced a few years back and it was over €4000. Instead of replacing them I removed rotting wood and filled with wood filler. Job doesn't look great.

I need a new boiler. Quote €1k.

Outside house needs to be painted €4k.

Carpets a bit frayed on stairs....need to be replaced.

Plus a few other jobs.

I would much rather spend my €1700 per annum on my home keeping it nice than paying tax for something I have already paid tax on.

I cannot even get Dun Laoghaire Rathdown to clean out the storm drain outside my house that has some rather interesting green foliage growing from it.

No offense, but you have a house worth over €900k based on the normal tax bands, I would swap places with you in a heartbeat and so would most people in this country. If the house is in that bad of a condition that it needs so many things fixed and I was on my pension, I likely wouldn't keep it. I'd sell it, pocket the profit, and use it to buy somewhere that's slightly cheaper (although by no means would it have to be cheap given what your current property is worth), keeping the difference as cash to pay for expenses.

Of course most people would rather keep money from whatever tax they pay and spend it on themselves instead. I'd love to keep all the income tax I pay, or the VAT on all goods and services, or my car tax, but tax needs to be raised somewhere, and a more diverse tax base is preferable to having one that relies on only a few sources. On top of that, taxes on land (and to a lesser extent property) do not carry the same negative incentives that other taxes do, making them more economically efficient than things like income taxes or sales taxes that negatively distort behaviour.

Triangle wrote: »

That's the most condescending thing I've read in a long while.

That house may have been bought in the 60s for 5000 for all you know (and the owner not a multimillionaire - possibly) family house with all the momories attached and friendships in the locality. Saying they need to move out because it's now worth 1m and has a hefty lpt bill attached to it is a bit short sighted.

Right, and if that was true then they would have made 200 times their original investment back over that time. This means that they are a millionaire, based on a very small but fortunate original investment. Being a millionaire (or billionaire) doesn't mean you have a million in the bank, it means that is your net worth.

Nobody said anything about moving out of the locality away from friends and family (although only a few days ago young people were considered extremely entitled for wanting a world in which their first house was in the locality with their friends and family). I can't imagine too many localities are out of reach to someone spending €800k in cash on a property.