Brilliant article. Can clearly see why some young people still vote ffg. Their failures aren't as apparent when mammy and daddy sort out all of your financial issues, including housing...
No, I'm not.
I'm simply asking you how you pay 75k when you don't have rhe cash and can't sell. Or just want to live in it.
What you do with it has nothing to do with my question. The scenarios are meaningless.
Most people have 2 parents, and if they're wealthy enough to be leaving more than 335k per child, they'll likely have used up the full tax free threshold for both parents
Never mind, I was completely wrong on that
In a republic, the citizens are the state.
The vast majority of people never reach that threshold, and of the people who do, they can easily afford to pay that tax.
CAT is one of the few devices we have to redistribute wealth from private individuals back to the state.
The threshold is not per parent though. Once you receive €335k from a parent, that's it, your threshold is fully utilised and you pay 33% on any other balances received from either parent.
Except when it gets passed on again, they're back again for more!
And even then, that's just the marginal rate of tax. All income earned below 1 million a year is taxed at a lower rate
You can't afford to borrow 75k to pay the tax so you can live in a 1 million euro house rent free??
Your question needs to make sense
You are simply avoiding the question because you don't want to say the answer.
That is because your answer is that you are going to cash in and sell the house regardless of whether there is a tax or not. And you simply want to be able to keep your 550k windfall rather than only keep 475k of it.
You basically object to paying less than one-seventh tax on wealth that someone else generated, that you want to live off.
(Actually, on a 550k inheritance the tax would be 70,950, but that is somewhat besides the point. 12.9% effective tax rate)
Believe it or not, but there are countries without any inheritance taxes, and I'd rather live in two of the three that spring to mind. Ireland has the highest inheritance taxes of any country and it doesn't do one iota of good for society or deliver the social benefit socialist minded idiots think it does. One example of a country without is Australia, which has greater social equity than Ireland.
High levels of taxation in Ireland are mostly about transfering wealth from private sector employees to public sector employees, than propping up nere do wells, though there's a lot of that also.
Sorry, you're right
I haven't looked at this in a long time
No offence cnocbui but I'd be asking for sources for any of your tax advice before I'd be acting on them.
On another thread you repeatedly went into great details of your plans to emigrate to New Zealand (If I remember correctly) so that you could cash out your crypto millions without having to pay any capital gains tax. I pointed out to you that a 2 minute cursory google search would have told you that such gains were indeed taxed under the NZ system and not tax free as you had believed.
hahahaha, australia, oh dont worry, their housing bubble is just about to pop, and it wont be pretty....
record high property prices and rents, record number of younger people unable to purchase, struggling to pay rents etc etc.....
...sound familiar.....
and yet here you are spouting on as if you are an authority on the subject?
Ever heard of the following ?
income tax
VAT
CGT
stamp duty
Ah yes, the Oz property bubble about to pop any minute paradigm. The Oz property bubble has not popped in the last 67 years.
But any minute now.
None of which are payable on inherited inter-generational wealth transfers
So ?
the poster stated that inheritance taxes are one of the few ways that government can redistribute wealth
yup, any minute now, and since now we re now moving into an era of higher rates, qt etc etc, it really is any minute now! patience now!
successive Australian governments have been doing everything in their power to inflate their property bubble, with polices such as 'first time buyers grant' etc etc, really sounds familiar, doesnt it! its not gonna end well!
the outcome....graph below, i.e. a significant rise in wealth inequality....
For how many generations do you think that wealth should be allowed to flow unhindered and untaxed while workers pay for the upkeep of the state?
Are you in favour of creating another monarchy? Or at least another aristocracy?
The mechanisms you listed don't redistribute wealth. They are not payable on existing wealth that just sits there.
There wouldn’t be such a focus in inheritance tax if the successive governments managed the money they did get, correctly.
We’re been fed rubbish that motor tax is there for roads upkeep- that’s a joke looking at the quality of our roads.
As for health, education etc they’re all crumbling at the seams- this is just another dream up tax to shore up mistakes made and cost over runs elsewhere.
It’s easy pickings
resources, including public resources, such as public monies, are being directed towards maintaining the status quo of 'continual asset price (re)inflation', and its working!
At lower rates of tax you pay ~26% of your earnings, 40% above certain thresholds. Whats left over gets taxed at 23% when you buy stuff. Therefore, 26%+23% = 49%, at least.
Everything except food is taxed. Everything.
That 100k house - materials and labour were taxed to build, the mortgage was taxed, the property itself taxed since ~2009, the maintenance of said house was taxed.
If it increases in value to 500k that's not my fookin problem because of ba$tard speculators.
...and public polices that are also helping this along, i.e. new cb lending rules etc etc
Australia has greater wealth and income inequality than Ireland does
It's good if you're one of the wealthy ones, not so good if you're everyone else
First of all, 23% VAT does not mean that 23% of the final selling price of a product is VAT. That is bad maths. That's below JC level maths.
Second, there is no such 26% specific effective tax rate on earnings.
[Note here I am discussing effective rates, not marginal rates]
Effective direct tax rates range from 0% to approx 50%.
Hundreds of thousands of earners pay 0% effective tax rate.
As earnings rise, effective tax rates tend to rise.
It would be very difficult to suggest or establish a mean effective direct tax rate.
I suppose you could state the effective tax rate on median earnings, or on mean earnings.
PRSI, USC, Income tax. Tax on your transport to and from work - and if it happens not to be public transport you're milked for the "privilege" of owning a car. Tax on your lunch if you stop by a deli.
As I said, everything is taxed. Everything. There are only two certainties in life, taxes and death and the greed of the government is taxing death via inheritance taxes.
Yes it is 23%.
If I buy a €1,000 TV the government mandates that the TV costs me, the purchaser, €1230. That is €230 of my money gone.
The business now has €230 in it's till, some of that €230 will go to the revenue, some of that €230 will go to the supplier/manufacturer of the TV who will pay their share to the revenue.
Eitherway, all of that €230 ends up with revenue.
there were 33k deaths in ireland in 2021, and i think €178m in category A inheritance tax receipts collected (and yes, i know, the deaths and receipts don't necessarily occur in the same calendar year).
i don't know what percentage of the deaths would have resulted in wills being executed, but let's say approximately half (figure simply plucked out of the air). if that's the case, the average gain to the exchequer per will executed is approx 10k.
i would assume that the guess of half is much more likely to be higher than the actual figure, rather than lower.
@Donald Trump So, your answer to "what do you do if you don't want to sell?" is that they "are going to cash in and sell the house regardless"?
Ok then - that's you refusing to answer and using projection to blame me for asking the question.
In answer to your question, you pay tax on the sale of the house and I've REPEATEDLY said I have no problem with that.
My entire line of question is based on NOT SELLING - remember?
@Akrasia - firstly, no guarantee you can move into it if there are other siblings involved, and secondly - why should you be penalised for inheriting by being forced to take out a massive loan...? On top of which you're assuming the person has the income to pay off said loan? Living rent free has nothing to do with it - the house is still going to require maintanance and you can't just phone a landlord and get them to do it, so if your suggestion is to use the rent to pay off the loan, then they're being forced into a worse financial situation than before the inheritance.
Same mistake as Donald - assuming the recipient has incomes and disposable cash already; and not knowing the difference between a disposable income and a fixed tangible asset and believing that because one has the later the most therefore also have the former.
You haven't explained what you want to do. Just some handwaving guff
You've only said that you might not want to sell. It might not be up to you. You and a sibling have inherited it so in the absence of you saying what you want to do with the property, I'm going to assume that your sibling does want to sell. Therefore the property will be sold.
![Photo of [Deleted User]](https://w0.vanillicon.com/v2/04cbf1b64e8b0e561c543c5b1091ba30.svg)
