revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

darkhorse · 10-03-2013 11:21PM

spank_inferno wrote: »

The increase in tax you pay today are to address the current budget defecit that exists.. today!

Who told ya that?

uch · 10-03-2013 11:54PM

I work for Revenue and know we're all ****ed, the system was designed over the last year, and was working in late december

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 12:19AM

uch wrote: »

I work for Revenue and know we're all ****ed, the system was designed over the last year, and was working in late december

Lol, reads like 'revenue employees are all bolloxed' lol.

Chinasea · 11-03-2013 08:59AM

SamHall wrote: »

Lol, reads like 'revenue employees are all bolloxed' lol.

TBH, it is a waste of time even trying to have a debate. Total Mé Féin attitude true and true.

Keep on paying your plumber under the counter and any other dishonest way you can skive out of paying revenue whilst trying to justify it on an open forum where you will have plenty of sheep bah bah back with you, as they too seem totally delirious as how services are paid for other than ranting about the bankers the bankers the bankers.

What is we tell 5 year old's two wrongs don't make a right, but if you think the above little quote that you have seclected is funny I think that further exposes where you are at (or not at tbh).

professore · 11-03-2013 09:07AM

clairefontaine wrote: »

Electricity is one of the highest in the EU.

Phone tax is at 22%. Why is the phone taxed as a luxury in this day and age?

Fuel at the pump is on par with France, but in France they don't pay motor tax on top of what they pay at the pump and they have superb roads.
.

For which you pay 20 or 30 euro toll for each trip. And fuel in france is more expensive than here. The french also pay more tax than us for better services. However our public sector are still pa.id far more than the french across the board. Plus the French have a property tax.

MonkstownHoop · 11-03-2013 09:17AM

Chinasea wrote: »

TBH, it is a waste of time even trying to have a debate. Total Mé Féin attitude true and true.

Keep on paying your plumber under the counter and any other dishonest way you can skive out of paying revenue whilst trying to justify it on an open forum where you will have plenty of sheep bah bah back with you, as they too seem totally delirious as how services are paid for other than ranting about the bankers the bankers the bankers.

What is we tell 5 year old's two wrongs don't make a right, but if you think the above little quote that you have seclected is funny I think that further exposes where you are at (or not at tbh).

wrong side of the bed this morning?

Phill Ewinn · 11-03-2013 09:50AM

uch wrote: »

I work for Revenue and know we're all ****ed, the system was designed over the last year, and was working in late december

You trying to tell me a government service actually works? lol. You'll be outsourcing, redesigning and hiring expensive consultants after week one.

Solair · 11-03-2013 09:54AM

professore wrote: »

For which you pay 20 or 30 euro toll for each trip. And fuel in france is more expensive than here. The french also pay more tax than us for better services. However our public sector are still pa.id far more than the french across the board. Plus the French have a property tax.

A return trip from Bordeaux to Paris works out €115 in tolls alone!!

monkeypants · 11-03-2013 09:55AM

Everytime I see a discussion on the LPT in the media, it's mentioned that we need to broaden the tax base. Doesn't this mean that there should be a corresponding drop in tax elsewhere?

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 10:07AM

Chinasea wrote: »

TBH, it is a waste of time even trying to have a debate. Total Mé Féin attitude true and true.

Keep on paying your plumber under the counter and any other dishonest way you can skive out of paying revenue whilst trying to justify it on an open forum where you will have plenty of sheep bah bah back with you, as they too seem totally delirious as how services are paid for other than ranting about the bankers the bankers the bankers.

What is we tell 5 year old's two wrongs don't make a right, but if you think the above little quote that you have seclected is funny I think that further exposes where you are at (or not at tbh).

You're still to let me know where the 150k house-owners currently in mortgage arrears, and struggling financially will magic this money from?

When you come back with that suggestion to me, we'll debate.

Repeatedly implying I'm selfish for not wanting to pay a yearly tax on a property I provided for myself with no help from the govt, whatsoever, and which I've paid thousands already on stamp duty, doesn't make me selfish.

It makes me a reasonable person for questioning:

Where will I find this extra money from, and what I will need to cut back on if this money, which I can't really afford is forcibly taken from me?

Why have these laws and dail motions been rushed through to enable revenue to forcibly take 3-600 euros from homeowners, yet those that owe then millions aren't being pursued so ruthlessly?

Wibbs · 11-03-2013 10:14AM

Chinasea wrote: »

TBH, it is a waste of time even trying to have a debate.

The thing is CS you've studiously avoided anything approaching a debate. This appears to be your entire "argument";

Total Mé Féin attitude true and true.

Keep on paying your plumber under the counter and any other dishonest way you can skive out of paying revenue whilst trying to justify it on an open forum where you will have plenty of sheep bah bah back with you, as they too seem totally delirious as how services are paid for other than ranting about the bankers the bankers the bankers.

Again no debate.

So again I ask,
are you liable for this tax?
If you are can you afford this tax and the others coming down the line?
How does someone pay a tax(or anything else for that matter) if they quite simple have no money?

If you keep avoiding the questions like the above I'd be forced to conclude your either a government shill, incredibly naive or very young.

Wibbs · 11-03-2013 10:16AM

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

You trying to tell me a government service actually works? lol. You'll be outsourcing, redesigning and hiring expensive consultants after week one.

To be fair the revenue service in Ireland actually works very well in my experience. It would be lovely if other depts followed their example.

Chips Lovell · 11-03-2013 10:18AM

seamus189 wrote: »

I know it's a bit late in the day to be debating the actual mechanism of the tax but what are people's general opinions on a site-value tax vs. house-value tax? Some people have suggested the debate has been a bit 'swept under the carpet' since a site-value tax would heavily penalise developers with large land banks. Good book on the issue by Emer O'Siochru called 'The Fair Tax' but here's a small amount of the material:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Land_value_tax#Ireland

http://www.independent.ie/opinion/analysis/ronan-lyons-a-sitevalue-tax-rewards-those-who-use-land-well-and-punishes-speculators-and-landhoarders-26892329.html

http://www.irishtimes.com/debate/site-value-tax-easier-to-implement-and-better-for-economy-1.509214?page=2

Also, would people be in favour of hypothecating (i.e. linking) the property tax income to local authority budgets? I know in the UK property rates are one of the main sources of revenue for district councils and depending on how efficiently the council in your area is run, the lower the rate you have to pay on the value of your property.

The site value vs. house value tax was something that was debated prior to its introduction. Labour for one were advocating a site value tax. There was an expert set up to examine that and other issues, a.k.a. the Thornhill report. It concluded that while there was some merit in the site value tax, the house value one would be the better option based on simplicity and transparency.

Re. Development land, they've already introduced a windfall gains tax for rezoned land. There's another recurring tax meant to be on the way for zoned development land. I suspect they haven't introduced that one yet given that a lot of that land is in Nama at the moment.

monkeypants wrote: »

Everytime I see a discussion on the LPT in the media, it's mentioned that we need to broaden the tax base. Doesn't this mean that there should be a corresponding drop in tax elsewhere?

Once the deficit is narrowed, yes that's what you'd hope to see.

Chinasea · 11-03-2013 10:35AM

SamHall wrote: »

You're still to let me know where the 150k house-owners currently in mortgage arrears, and struggling financially will magic this money from?

You have not told me where we shall get the money to pay for services to your door but:

We could drag up of tons of multifaceted minorities, majorities and Skivers and mé féiners who 'can't afford' to pay or live anywhere at any given time. It would be endless. We will always have poor just like we will always have prostitution.

What I won't entertain is wasting any more of my time time dancing around fellow citizens who advocate skiving out of paying badly needed tax for his beloved country, not only by trying to incite mass noncompliance in this case but blatantly advocating employing someone on the black market to do his plumbing etc.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 10:47AM

Chinasea wrote: »

You have not told me where we shall get the money to pay for services to your door but:

We could drag up of tons of multifaceted minorities, majorities and Skivers and mé féiners who 'can't afford' to pay or live anywhere at any given time. It would be endless. We will always have poor just like we will always have prostitution.

What I won't entertain is wasting any more of my time time dancing around fellow citizens who advocate skiving out of paying badly needed tax for his beloved country, not only by trying to incite mass noncompliance in this case but blatantly advocating employing someone on the black market to do his plumbing etc.

I pay income tax on each and every euro I make.
I pay vat on services used, and consumables etc.
I pay over 700€ per year on our family car 'motor tax', and over €300 for my work vehicle.
I put roughly €150 in my work vehicle a week un fuel, prob another 150 in the family car (monthly)
I provide my gas and electric, both taxed, and vat added on.

I have health insurance which must be paid for privately, but I'll still pay the doctor if I need see him, prescriptions on top of that.

I pay for my refuse collection, and will soon pay for my water (and won't complain about it)

I pay book fees for the school.

The above list, thrown together in a few mins while waiting on a customer to arrive in his yard, though I'm sure I could think of many more goods and services I currently pay for, all taxed, most with vat attached.

If were not paying enough, well then raise income tax, but do not place a rent over my home, especially as I've paid a substantial sum on stamp duty already for it, and IMO this 'double taxation' thing has to stop somewhere.

You have it in your head I'm selfish, and want everything provided for free?

Seems legit.

bgrizzley · 11-03-2013 10:59AM

Chinasea wrote: »

TBH, it is a waste of time even trying to have a debate. Total Mé Féin attitude true and true.

Keep on paying your plumber under the counter and any other dishonest way you can skive out of paying revenue whilst trying to justify it on an open forum where you will have plenty of sheep bah bah back with you, as they too seem totally delirious as how services are paid for other than ranting about the bankers the bankers the bankers.

What is we tell 5 year old's two wrongs don't make a right, but if you think the above little quote that you have seclected is funny I think that further exposes where you are at (or not at tbh).

Have a read of the HHC threads Chinasea(if you have a spare month!), i do not remember one anti HHC poster saying they wouldnt pay any extra tax if they were in a position, definitely no Me Feiners. most issues with this one were either (like mine), not agreeing with taxing the roof over our head, some didnt agree that only home owners have to pay and subsidise everyone else and some just didnt have any more blood left to give
but there were definitely no me feiners.

recind this tax and increase tax on my income and ill pay this and more if necessary (and i can start smoking again:pac:)

Wibbs · 11-03-2013 11:12AM

Chinasea wrote: »

You have not told me where we shall get the money to pay for services to your door

And you've not answered questions re what services we get "to our door" we don't already pay for?

We could drag up of tons of multifaceted minorities, majorities and Skivers and mé féiners who 'can't afford' to pay or live anywhere at any given time. It would be endless. We will always have poor just like we will always have prostitution.

Avoiding the points raised. Again.

What I won't entertain is wasting any more of my time time dancing around fellow citizens who advocate skiving out of paying badly needed tax for his beloved country, not only by trying to incite mass noncompliance in this case but blatantly advocating employing someone on the black market to do his plumbing etc.

Avoiding the points raised. Again.

Again I ask(and this is the third or fourth time),
1) Are you yourself liable for this tax?
2) If you are can you afford this tax and the others coming down the line?
3) How does someone pay a tax(or anything else for that matter) if they quite simple have no money?

If you keep avoiding the questions like the above I'd be forced to conclude your either a government shill, incredibly naive or very young. I'm starting to think of ogres who live under bridges too as surely no one could be this one tracked of thinking and obstinate about it.

ilovesleep · 11-03-2013 11:18AM

bgrizzley wrote: »

i do not remember one anti HHC poster saying they wouldnt pay any extra tax if they were in a position, definitely no Me Feiners. most issues with this one were either (like mine), not agreeing with taxing the roof over our head, some didnt agree that only home owners have to pay and subsidise everyone else and some just didnt have any more blood left to give
but there were definitely no me feiners.

Another arguement, or it's my one anyways is that I believe the government should lead by example. Cut their own incomes in half for example.

Many of us are in the same boat but with different circumstances:
-unemployment,
-1 spouse unemployed, the other just aboat stay afloat, entitled to no help or benefits.
-underemployment
-huge mortgage in contrast to their falling income.

It is also said, working people are the new poor. Where it appears they might or should be well off, it's all going out again in bills that are rising and rising costs.

One thing is for sure -

ilovesleep · 11-03-2013 11:36AM

* incomes have been dramitically reduced for so many people.

Let the government lead by example.

Another arguement is this HHC and property tax is going to fund local services, where there is so much wastage happening within the LAs. Can they become efficient?
- one of the services in LAs, this tax claims to serve is something called Planning and Development. That went well for the past couple of years, didn't it? Allowing planning to go ahead on many developments, many which are now lying empty and idle. Just how qualified are they in the LAs?

mfceiling · 11-03-2013 11:46AM

2 simple questions.

1. What if you do not have the money to pay this tax (as a huge amount of people are literally to the pin of their collar and do not have 3 or 400 euros spare)?

2. What exactly will the local authorities do with this money?

11-03-2013 11:54AM

V_Moth wrote: »

What is interesting is that the Govt have vehemently rejected any Financial Transaction Tax (thanks IBEC!) along with the UK. All other European govts stand to gain 3 to 5 billion each. If this had been implemented in 2009, we could have paid back the majority of the debts by now (4 years x say 5 billion).

I suppose it is much easier to go after 2 million house owners rather than a few dozen companies...

I have to ask you which of these few dozen companies would be coughing up 5 billion, or why you think Ireland would collect as much as France or Germany (14 to 18 times as many people) If it were that easy don't you think it would have been done long ago?

For the record 5 billion wouldn't even cover the current budget deficit - never mind paying back any debt.

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Why is it only homeowners that are hit with this tax? The party line is that it will generate revenue to cover the cost of local services (roads, parks, libraries, etc). Are homeowners the only ones that use these services or what?

How do they justify only charging homeowners?

In other countries the tax is levied on the person in the house.
Here presumably the tax will be reflected in rents in the future.

bgrizzley · 11-03-2013 11:58AM

mfceiling wrote: »

2 simple questions.

1. What if you do not have the money to pay this tax (as a huge amount of people are literally to the pin of their collar and do not have 3 or 400 euros spare)?

2. What exactly will the local authorities do with this money?

unfortunately the government in their blindness to bully this tax through dont seem to care, judging by their charging interest on a deferral.

the authorities wont do anything with this money, 'cause they dont get it. The government gets the money and uses smoke and mirrors to shuffle it around leaving everything the same except for the publics pockets a little lighter.

ilovesleep · 11-03-2013 12:00PM

mfceiling wrote: »

2. What exactly will the local authorities do with this money?

- Grant some more housing estates building development, more than likely.

Or buy some land claiming to use it for a rubbish dump.

Send out a load of workers, to a dig a hole in the road, just to stand around and look down into it all day, what they call roadworks or fixing a burst pipe or somethings.

Lay down some more footpaths or redo them and fcuk them up so that they're not suitable for wheelchair users.

Fcuk up road markings.

Not bothering to clean glass scattered playgrounds.

For libraries in rural Ireland that might only open for a few hours every week.

Do some road works at xmas time or towards the end of the year to spend their budget, so that they get their budget in the new year.

Digging up good roundabouts and replacing them with junctions.

Decorate roundabouts with some traffic lights and flowers.

Pay themselves.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 12:37PM

Heard a solicitor on the news earlier, questioning revenues accuracy at valuing homes (he gave one example of two identical homes in one town with completely different valuation's)

And also questioned the legality of revenue becoming valuers/assessors. Especially to cover 1.8 million abodes.

Tbh, as has already been stated on thread, they've probably covered loopholes etc,.

Just because its legal, doesn't make it right though.

I envisage lots of court cases/legal challenges and numerous appeal processes.

lost marbles · 11-03-2013 12:59PM

SamHall wrote: »

Heard a solicitor on the news earlier, questioning revenues accuracy at valuing homes (he gave one example of two identical homes in one town with completely different valuation's)

And also questioned the legality of revenue becoming valuers/assessors. Especially to cover 1.8 million abodes.

Tbh, as has already been stated on thread, they've probably covered loopholes etc,.

Just because its legal, doesn't make it right though.

I envisage lots of court cases/legal challenges and numerous appeal processes.

exactly !
had a look at the revenue site yeasterday and my sons house [his estate is divided by a road ] one side is a lower rate than the other for the exact same houses .my own house seems to be over valued according to this map aswell .
then another estate within spitting distance with what was considered a higher price tag .come under the lower rate .
but lets be cautious here ,this might be just a ploy to get people to fill out the forms and get them into the system .

Phill Ewinn · 11-03-2013 01:12PM

Trees add value to your house. Canabis plants don't. Go figure.

bgrizzley · 11-03-2013 01:46PM

Phill Ewinn wrote: »

Trees add value to your house. Canabis plants don't. Go figure.

revenue obviously didnt read the hemp thread...

Pretzill · 11-03-2013 05:21PM

SamHall wrote: »

Heard a solicitor on the news earlier, questioning revenues accuracy at valuing homes (he gave one example of two identical homes in one town with completely different valuation's)

And also questioned the legality of revenue becoming valuers/assessors. Especially to cover 1.8 million abodes.

Tbh, as has already been stated on thread, they've probably covered loopholes etc,.

Just because its legal, doesn't make it right though.

I envisage lots of court cases/legal challenges and numerous appeal processes.

Yeah and there's always the rural/urban divide - services funded from household charge that I won't benefit from, or never have in the past.
No bin collection
No street lighting
No footpaths
No libraries
No parks
not a local service, no public transport, potholes you could swim in - *hey swimming pools! (No don't have them either)

The valuations on revenue are lazy and very general. If I thought I'd get what they valued my house for I'd sell it tomorrow! But they aren't valuers, just like when it comes to my self assessment for tax they don't tell me what I should've earned, merely ask me what I did earn. So my home is officially in band 1 and p.s I earned f-all last year!

Geuze · 11-03-2013 05:40PM

mfceiling wrote: »

2 simple questions.

2. What exactly will the local authorities do with this money?

LA income increases due to the LPT.

But the central Govt grant to LA drops.

So no extra income to LA.

So no extra services.

Same services now being funded more directly.

Central Govt spending falls, deficit falls.

Geuze · 11-03-2013 05:42PM

bgrizzley wrote: »

the authorities wont do anything with this money, 'cause they dont get it. The government gets the money and uses smoke and mirrors to shuffle it around leaving everything the same except for the publics pockets a little lighter.

This is incorrect.

All LPT revenues raised go to local authorities.

But the Central Govt grant to LA will be reduced.

LA won't have any extra income due to the LPT.

revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

Comments