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

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

Options
12357…17

Comments

  • Options
    #122
    Murph85
    Registered Users Posts: 1,068 ✭✭✭Murph85


    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..


  • Options
    #123
    lawrencesummers
    Registered Users Posts: 8,501 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    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


  • Options
    #124
    lawrencesummers
    Registered Users Posts: 8,501 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    Wanderer78 wrote: »
    So no taxes on purchases, consumables, infrastructure use, etc, etc, that's interesting, how yea pulling that off?

    Infrastructure?


  • Options
    #125
    Ger Roe
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭Ger Roe


    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.


  • Options
    #126
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 14,149 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    lawrencesummers wrote: »
    I don’t pay tax for owning a car..
    lawrencesummers wrote: »
    Infrastructure?

    Motor tax receipts are paid directly into the local government fund which is ring fenced for local government purposes. Each year the motor tax receipts are supplemented by an exchequer contribution. The fund is used primarily to finance regional and local roads and the general purpose needs of local authorities.

    I suppose the next most obvious tax associated with car ownership is the large proportion of tax on the fuel used to run it.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #127
    Cal4567
    Registered Users Posts: 625 ✭✭✭Cal4567


    I'm familiar enough with our history over rates. There still is an overhang on that. Many feel this is an unfair tax and should be demolished. It's actually quite common to put a national charge on properties but in other countries the message is, this is directly funding local services. While I think that's the case here too, it's just not expressed that clearly by government. Added to that is our 'services' are less than other countries where I have lived. It's still perceived as only having to be brought in because the Troika demanded it.

    Also, why was the 2013 exemption even brought in. Surely, once a property is built, it should be charged. Isn't that the fairest system? 2013 was 8 years ago. Why has it taken this long for it to be dealt with or is that just another example of the 'first gear' a lot of our state infrastructure seems to work to?


  • Options
    #128
    lawrencesummers
    Registered Users Posts: 8,501 ✭✭✭lawrencesummers


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Motor tax receipts are paid directly into the local government fund which is ring fenced for local government purposes. Each year the motor tax receipts are supplemented by an exchequer contribution. The fund is used primarily to finance regional and local roads and the general purpose needs of local authorities.

    I suppose the next most obvious tax associated with car ownership is the large proportion of tax on the fuel used to run it.

    I have three cars, two parked in a garage and I don’t pay any tax on them.

    Motor tax is for road usage.
    Tax on fuel is usage.


  • Options
    #129
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    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


  • Options
    #130
    shesty
    Moderators, Recreation & Hobbies Moderators, Social & Fun Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 6,894 Mod ✭✭✭✭shesty


    Cal4567 wrote: »
    I'm familiar enough with our history over rates. There still is an overhang on that. Many feel this is an unfair tax and should be demolished. It's actually quite common to put a national charge on properties but in other countries the message is, this is directly funding local services. While I think that's the case here too, it's just not expressed that clearly by government. Added to that is our 'services' are less than other countries where I have lived. It's still perceived as only having to be brought in because the Troika demanded it.

    Also, why was the 2013 exemption even brought in. Surely, once a property is built, it should be charged. Isn't that the fairest system? 2013 was 8 years ago. Why has it taken this long for it to be dealt with or is that just another example of the 'first gear' a lot of our state infrastructure seems to work to?


    I would absolutely love to know what the property tax is supposedly covering. The Council - they don't collect bins. If you are in a private estate they don't do any of the maintenance (we are not in a private estate). Do they do street lighting or is that contracted out to the likes of Airtricity, whose vans I see there often enough? Roads are paid for from central government, if I am correct??At some point we will have to pay water charges, so it won't cover those either.

    What does the property tax cover, exactly? Would they not just call it what it is - a tax for central government coffers - and have done with it.



    I expect the 2013 exemption was brought in in a misguided attempt to help the property market and convince people that we weren't really paying that much tax, but it's high time it was got rid of.


  • Options
    #131
    jrosen
    Registered Users Posts: 1,629 ✭✭✭jrosen


    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


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #132
    nibtrix
    Registered Users Posts: 1,305 ✭✭✭nibtrix


    OU812 wrote: »
    Last time the average price of houses sold in the area was €245k I pay my property tax based on that. Looking at it now, I see the average sales price is €340k an increase of 39% which will equate to approx €9 a month extra.

    Actually, due to the changing of the bands it looks like your LPT is actually going to decrease


  • Options
    #133
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    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.


  • Options
    #134
    Newbie20
    Registered Users Posts: 689 ✭✭✭Newbie20


    Am I missing something here? It seems that the costs per band are gone way down and the bands widened. My house when I bought it was previously valued from 2013 at 250-300k. Now it’s 350-400k but it looks like I’ll be paying less tax according to the independent. It also says that just 1 in 10 will have a decrease. I would have thought just based on my own example that there would be a lot more people than that experiencing a decrease?

    If your house was worth €310,000 in 2013 you were paying €585

    If it’s worth €520,000 now you will pay €495

    Surely that will mean more than 1 in 10 experience a decrease even taking into account the new houses paying for the first time?


  • Options
    #135
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,119 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    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/


  • Options
    #136
    C14N
    Registered Users Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭C14N


    ...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.

    The home itself is an asset, it's just that for a small number it is outweighed by the mortgage taken out to buy it. But for most people, it is worth more than the debt on it and a big source of personal wealth.
    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?

    Sort of, but for some areas like Dublin that raised more, a portion went to other counties that didn't raise as much. Honestly sort of just think this is just a bit of creative accounting. DCC might not have to "give" the money they raise to Longford CC or wherever, but I imagine it just means the central government has to give DCC less money now and will give more money to Longford CC. Unless the Dublin CCs can be fully funded by their LPT, it won't really likely make much difference.


  • Options
    #137
    Living Off The Splash
    Registered Users Posts: 2,103 ✭✭✭Living Off The Splash


    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.


  • Options
    #138
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    Newbie20 wrote: »
    Am I missing something here? It seems that the costs per band are gone way down and the bands widened. My house when I bought it was previously valued from 2013 at 250-300k. Now it’s 350-400k but it looks like I’ll be paying less tax according to the independent. It also says that just 1 in 10 will have a decrease. I would have thought just based on my own example that there would be a lot more people than that experiencing a decrease?

    If your house was worth €310,000 in 2013 you were paying €585

    If it’s worth €520,000 now you will pay €495

    Surely that will mean more than 1 in 10 experience a decrease even taking into account the new houses paying for the first time?

    The Indo is guessing at bands rather than having real figures; I would assume.


  • Options
    #139
    Ubbquittious
    Registered Users Posts: 6,191 ✭✭✭Ubbquittious


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


  • Options
    #140
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,119 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    shesty wrote: »
    I would absolutely love to know what the property tax is supposedly covering. The Council - they don't collect bins. If you are in a private estate they don't do any of the maintenance (we are not in a private estate). Do they do street lighting or is that contracted out to the likes of Airtricity, whose vans I see there often enough? Roads are paid for from central government, if I am correct??At some point we will have to pay water charges, so it won't cover those either.

    What does the property tax cover, exactly? Would they not just call it what it is - a tax for central government coffers - and have done with it.

    Here are the 2018 accounts of the local councils:
    https://assets.gov.ie/111373/7750e0e0-c042-4064-9f65-94893686d81c.pdf

    Expenditure

    Housing and Building = 1.37bn (this is not capital expenditure)
    Roads = 1 bn
    Water = 357m
    Development Management = 390m
    Environmental services = 675m
    Recreation and Amenity = 433m
    Plus misc.....



    Income

    Central Govt grants = 1.580 bn
    Selling goods and services = 1.355 bn
    LPT = 396m
    Rates = 1.5 bn


  • Options
    #141
    Geuze
    Registered Users Posts: 13,119 ✭✭✭✭Geuze


    ...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.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #142
    is_that_so
    Registered Users Posts: 32,136 ✭✭✭✭is_that_so


    L1011 wrote: »
    The Indo is guessing at bands rather than having real figures; I would assume.
    They might be but the bands they quote are very specific numbers and it is very leakable information.


  • Options
    #143
    awec
    Administrators Posts: 53,459 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    L1011 wrote: »
    The Indo is guessing at bands rather than having real figures; I would assume.

    It would be par for the course for the numbers to be leaked to show that a lot of people are going to end up better off than if the bands hadn't changed.

    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.


  • Options
    #144
    Ger Roe
    Registered Users Posts: 2,111 ✭✭✭Ger Roe


    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.
    awec wrote: »
    It would be par for the course for the numbers to be leaked to show that a lot of people are going to end up better off than if the bands hadn't changed.

    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.

    Is it case of trying to get more people on side and pit us against the richer them? If it is an unfair tax it is unfair for everyone, but dividing and conquering by giving the majority a bit of a break might sugar the pill. At least until you build up the courage/dail majority, to push it all back up again.


  • Options
    #145
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,868 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    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


  • Options
    #146
    Draco
    Subscribers Posts: 1,911 ✭✭✭Draco


    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.
    Think of the nice new build you could get if you sold you €1m+ home. None of those maintenance issues plus you'd probably have cash left over to have an even nicer retirement.


  • Options
    #147
    Furze99
    Registered Users Posts: 10,538 ✭✭✭✭Furze99


    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.


  • Options
    #148
    Triangle
    Registered Users Posts: 960 ✭✭✭Triangle


    Draco wrote: »
    Think of the nice new build you could get if you sold you €1m+ home. None of those maintenance issues plus you'd probably have cash left over to have an even nicer retirement.

    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.

    I know an elderly lady who did similar (moved to an A1 rated house to reduce the bills) and regrets it.


  • Options
    #149
    C14N
    Registered Users Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭C14N


    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.


  • Options
    #150
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 17,728 ✭✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Presumably folk with "forever homes" don't pay property tax?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #151
    C14N
    Registered Users Posts: 2,656 ✭✭✭C14N


    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.


Advertisement