Widening of the tax band and help for renters and bills are the main items by the looks of it.
How will this year's budget affect you?
I never said it was a flat tax (because it isn't and my words reflect that), but it is a significantly flatter method of taxation than vanilla paye payroll taxes. And that's not progressive. Words have meaning.
I nearly spat out my coffee when I read how much the college registration fees are these days, add to that a years rent and split cost of utilities now if they can get a place. I've 10 years at least to go before mine are of college age thank fook. Primary school is expensive enough even with the book scheme in place for us there.
Good rant.
Predictably they gave recommendations to grab even more money from those who work.
Magic money tree economics
yea we ve made a right mess of third level, mate of mine spent 50 grand getting one of his through college, hes graduated a few years now, he was also working throughout his study to....
All correct. But if we started doing unfunded tax cuts in current market conditions like some people want we'll be back in Troika land before Christmas.
May as well bring Michael Noonan and Eamon Gilmore out of retirement for old times sake.
You said it was moving toward renua like flat-tax, when it is anything but. USC is far more progressive a tax than PAYE income tax.
USC has 5 bands, PAYE has 2.
USC has someone earning 70k+ paying a rate 4x higher than someone earning 20k
for PAYE the rate is only 2x higher in that scenario, excluding tax credits which are universal.
Progressive tax systems have tiered tax rates that charge higher income individuals higher percentages of their income and offer the lowest rates to those with the lowest incomes. Flat tax plans generally assign one tax rate to all taxpayers. No one pays more or less than anyone else under a flat tax system.
Now tell me, which of these taxes is more progressive? The one that has increasingly higher rates for higher earners? (USC) or the tax with 2 bands and a very low cutoff point for the lower rate? (paye)
exactly, start making our magic money trees working for all of us, and not just for minorities in order to gain even more wealth....
true enough, our next door neighbors is a perfect example of what not to do right now, scary stuff!
I'm happy with the €1000 reduction in college registration fees - as I'm on a small enough salary of 34k, and the other half is retired and on a small pension of 21k. Other than that we won't benefit all that much.
I think what annoys people is the long term unemployed who never ever worked - I know one or two. I wouldn't like to live like that but seeing them get a €12 increase when those on very minimal wages get damn all is very unfair.
I know someone who is on a disability pension (damn all wrong with them but they know how to play the system) who took far more out of the system than ever paid in. You know the type - very few years of working and cash in hand from the employer etc. That person will go from disability to a FULL contributory pension. I've been working since 18 - 45 or 46 odd years in the workplace by the time I retire and I very likely won't get the full pension.
That's my gripe-we all have similar stories.
Will take 40k off you and throw you a 500euro voucher.
Aren't they generous!
Sad sacks in the media never question any of it.
Who are these special minorities.
The top 20% of income earners pay 77% of income tax and USC collected while the bottom 75% of income earners, contribute just 18%
You mean the higher earners who actually already pay most of the tax?
Ireland already has massive wealth redistribution.
https://www.irishexaminer.com/business/economy/arid-40939709.html
I don't think people are giving out about unemployed people on JSB.
What people don't like is people on JSA long-term, for years and years.
Indeed, most people agree that short-term welfare payments should be made more generous.
Wait until they hit Secondary School. The books are many times more expensive each and there are more of them. The uniforms are more because we're talking adult sizes. The "voluntary contribution" is more. They go on several trips here and there and the parents have to cough up for all of them. Secondary school is far more expensive then primary school. But nothing in the budget for parents with children in secondary school. That will come back to bite the government big time.
Have you heard of tax credits which don't apply to USC?
The posters suggestion of reducing income tax and increasing USC means lower earners would pay a higher proportion of the national tax take (whatever his notional new USC rates) because you've just killed-off PAYE tax credits.
Net effect: congratulations, you've just flattened the tax take across the income distributions.
That's not progressive.
For the umpteenth time, TD did not give themselves a pay rise.
They get the same pay change as all public servants.
Here is the pay deal since Jan 2021.
Oct 2021 = +1%
Feb 2022 = +1%, although not all PS got a straight pay rise, some sectors used it for some grades
Oct 2022 = +1%
So please tell me what is wrong with social houses being built?
We are in the midst of a housing crisis with people screaming for the government to build more?
And when built what's wrong with using newer and greener technology?
Also, 60 -70 years ago councils all over the country for everybody and nobody had an issue with it.
I really don't get the complaint at all. They gubberment would get a lot more criticism if they didn't do this.
Welfare payments and increases should be linked to your contribution to society in the past. If you did nothing you should get nothing. For every year you worked and paid tax you get something. I really think we need to look at the concept of "active citizenship". You don't get the full benefits of being a citizen of this society unless you are active in making a contribution back to society.
I completely agree you should be able to build up some kind of benefit if you are paying tax, the vast majority of those paying the most tax have to pay again for any decent service, case in point private health care.
Poorer people paying more than previous does not equal a flat tax, or a less progressive tax.
USC sees higher earners (70k+) paying substantially more than mid-earners, and way more than low earners. All of whom pay a share, but overwhelmingly more in higher paid brackets. It is by definition a progressive tax.
I totally agree!
Do you think people <36k aren't feeling the cost of living?
Would they not be feeling it like someone on 50,60,70 k etc? All of who got a tax cut .
Public sector got a payrise and tax cut
Middle and High earners got tax cut
Social welfare recipients got raise
People on <36k got nothing.
Once again, I never said USC was a flat tax, I said it was a significantly flatter method of taxation. Which is true.
A move to fuller USC taxation will see greater proportional taxes paid by lower incomes, and lower proportional taxes paid by higher incomes. You've flattened the tax take relative to what we have now. That's not progressive.
Essentially, you (appear to be) arguing to take PAYE tax credits off the table, which are an essential feature of our progressive taxation system.
You can argue that the above is just in your imagined USC leaning tax regime, that's fine, but you can't argue that it's a more progressive tax system than what we have now. Because it absolutely isn't.
Care to point out where I or any other poster advocated for removal of tax credits?
The point is that USC with its many bands is a far more progressive tax - tax reliefs through credits are a sideshow. Higher earners pay disproportionally higher rates of USC compared to lower earners - which is a key feature of progressive taxation.
Tax credits are not a side-show. The defining feature of USC is it's side-stepping of tax credits which has a flattening effect on tax take across the income distribution.
And that was the intention of USC. It was designed that way.
That's not progressive, and you can't dress it up as such.
If as the other poster suggested the government loaded up on USC take and slashed PAYE taxes, you've made our taxation system radically less progressive and a radically flatter. That can't be seriously disputed. So calling USC 'the most progressive tax' because you're tricked by the number of bands is rather silly stuff.
Make the argument for it on other grounds if you wish, but you can't credibly make the argument on it being progressive.
It's a roundabout argument for tax cuts for upper income deciles and tax increases for lower. And it's pretty obvious.
Bingo card to score with Pearse’s follow-up theatrics later. Result is null and void if he doesn’t shout, wave paper and point his finger. The level of shouting expected is high.
Meh.
No good
Here we go
The Dublin bay south Young Fine Gael WhatsApp group as busy as bees as ever I see.
Where do they get the time between holding up the sky and being all-round clever boys to come up with this stuff?
Funny, the last time the IMF were in town it wasn't because the government of the day reduced the top rate of tax, it was because (partly) we hollowed out the tax base on the lower side.
You make a good point though about increasing the tax burden for those on lower incomes however. ;)
This is your query
Hear these anecdotes all the time and usually not true and exagerrated. Can you give me the address of these free houses so I can view the solar panels and heat pumps on google maps?
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w8.vanillicon.com/v2/892f365931e5cb4ba5c9d4ce2c7da299.svg)
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/0c95fbacfd3f8db330cceee65321bca3.svg)
