revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

Geuze · 11-03-2013 05:44PM

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.

Revenue aren't valuers, and aren't claiming to be valuers.

You value your own house, using their guidelines.

tayto lover · 11-03-2013 05:55PM

People should refuse to pay this unfair and unjust tax.
Many don't even have enough money to heat the homes they are being taxed on.

For people to say that we are one of only a few European countries without a Property Tax is stupid because we ARE the only country with a USC.

Should the USC be discontinued then ?

Sergeant · 11-03-2013 05:57PM

tayto lover wrote: »

People should refuse to pay this unfair and unjust tax.
Many don't even have enough money to heat the homes they are being taxed on.

For people to say that we are one of only a few European countries without a Property Tax is stupid because we ARE the only country with a USC.

Should the USC be discontinued then ?

How do you suggest that the Government generate revenue to supply the country with the services and structures that we've become accustomed to?

seamus · 11-03-2013 06:00PM

Geuze wrote: »

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.

- LA given powers to set and collect their own LPT

- LPT increases or decreases in line with spending as voted in by LA councillors

The LPT could in fact be the lead in to more local governance that this country has been screaming out for. At present LA councillors are basically wastes of space. If somebody wants to give out about local services, they go to their TD, because the councillors just dance to the local TD's tune.

Give LAs power over their own spending and we may find that more people engage with the local election process and it means we can massively cut down the number of TDs because they only have to deal with national issues, the way it should be.

Well, we can always dream...

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 06:01PM

Geuze wrote: »

Revenue aren't valuers, and aren't claiming to be valuers.

You value your own house, using their guidelines.

I am not an estate agent, not a valuer/assessor.

Revenue using 'guidelines' is a complete joke IMO. Who are they to 'guide'anyone as to what their house is worth? A house is 'worth' what it will fetch on the market, and as my home is not for sale, I've no interest in it's 'worth' to be frank.

I do not trust revenue to value houses, simply because that's not the business revenue is in, likewise I wouldn't trust them to give accurate prices on cars/motorbikes/aeroplanes.

We're on an extremely slippery slope to a dictatorship with this whole process, and I for one will not buy into it.

Geuze · 11-03-2013 06:02PM

tayto lover wrote: »

For people to say that we are one of only a few European countries without a Property Tax is stupid because we ARE the only country with a USC.

Should the USC be discontinued then ?

Note that the USC tax merely replaced two previous levies, it is not a new tax.

It replaced the Health and Income levies.

It is an income tax, in fact I think it should be merged with income tax, too messy at the moment.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 06:02PM

Sergeant wrote: »

How do you suggest that the Government generate revenue to supply the country with the services and structures that we've become accustomed to?

Raise income tax. Even by just one percent/ half a percent.

Simple as.

Geuze · 11-03-2013 06:05PM

SamHall wrote: »

I am not an estate agent, not a valuer/assessor.

Revenue using 'guidelines' is a complete joke IMO. Who are they to 'guide'anyone as to what their house is worth? A house is 'worth' what it will fetch on the market, and as my home is not for sale, I've no interest in it's 'worth' to be frank.

I do not trust revenue to value houses, simply because that's not the business revenue is in, likewise I wouldn't trust them to give accurate prices on cars/motorbikes/aeroplanes.

We're on an extremely slippery slope to a dictatorship with this whole process, and I for one will not buy into it.

If you don't trust them, fair enough.

Then arrive at your own reasonable value, you can use the Property Price Register as a guide.

Their valuations are only guidelines.

tayto lover · 11-03-2013 06:07PM

Sergeant wrote: »

How do you suggest that the Government generate revenue to supply the country with the services and structures that we've become accustomed to?

That's their problem.
My problem is keeping my affairs in order. Feeding my family and paying my mortgage and bills. I am at the end of my tether as it is. I pay for any service I get as it is because the Govt privatized them.
Continuing to hit the same people over and over is certainly not the way.
Perhaps they could hit their rich buddies for a change.

Geuze · 11-03-2013 06:10PM

SamHall wrote: »

Raise income tax. Even by just one percent/ half a percent.

Simple as.

Note that income tax plus USC brings in about 12-15bn.

The fiscal deficit is 12-15bn.

We'd have to double income tax revenue to close the deficit.

"one percent more" - wouldn't come anywhere near closing the gap.

Cumulative+Tax+Revenues+to+December.jpg

oldyouth · 11-03-2013 06:17PM

My parents are in their 80's. They bought their house in 1961. They never sought to value or sell it in the past. They'll never seek to sell it in the future. They are of a generation where they will pay any Government bill that is sent to them. In addition, they would live in fear of consequences if they didn't pay it and I dread to think of the stress it would cause.

While I agree that a property tax is inevitable, this system sucks and has all the hallmarks of being designed by incompetent civil servants. Disgraceful to put the onus on people, who have lived in their homes for decades, to establish a market value and threaten them with dire consequences if they get it wrong.

Sergeant · 11-03-2013 06:18PM

SamHall wrote: »

Raise income tax. Even by just one percent/ half a percent.

Simple as.

I've put through a call on the blower to Michael Noonan. I cannot believe the Government haven't considered this. Yet more shambolic and utterly misguided thinking from a shower who obviously haven't the foggiest notion what they're on about.

kidneyfan · 11-03-2013 06:19PM

They can defer the tax until they die when you will be obliged to pay it in probate.

oldyouth wrote: »

My parents are in their 80's. They bought their house in 1961. They never sought to value or sell it in the past. They'll never seek to sell it in the future. They are of a generation where they will pay any Government bill that is sent to them. In addition, they would live in fear of consequences if they didn't pay it and I dread to think of the stress it would cause.

While I agree that a property tax is inevitable, this system sucks and has all the hallmarks of being designed by incompetent civil servants. Disgraceful to put the onus on people, who have lived in their homes for decades, to establish a market value and threaten them with dire consequences if they get it wrong.

tayto lover · 11-03-2013 06:22PM

Sergeant wrote: »

I've put through a call on the blower to Michael Noonan. I cannot believe the Government haven't considered this. Yet more shambolic and utterly misguided thinking from a shower who obviously haven't the foggiest notion what they're on about.

And you probably didn't even have to look up his number.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 06:22PM

Sergeant wrote: »

I've put through a call on the blower to Michael Noonan. I cannot believe the Government haven't considered this. Yet more shambolic and utterly misguided thinking from a shower who obviously haven't the foggiest notion what they're on about.

While you're on that call, ask Michael if he thinks his salary is appropriate considering the state is essentially bankrupt.

Ask him to lead by example by taking a 50 % pay cut.

It wouldn't sound so hypocritical from his mouth if he'd show us all how to get by on far less cash.

username123 · 11-03-2013 06:26PM

kidneyfan wrote: »

They can defer the tax until they die when you will be obliged to pay it in probate.

Could you kindly lay out the details for deferral please? Are you aware that deferral attracts a 4% per year interest rate? And that this makes the government money lenders?

Sergeant · 11-03-2013 06:31PM

SamHall wrote: »

While you're on that call, ask Michael if he thinks his salary is appropriate considering the state is essentially bankrupt.

Ask him to lead by example by taking a 50 % pay cut.

It wouldn't sound so hypocritical from his mouth if he'd show us all how to get by on far less cash.

I propose that all politicians work for nothing. Who wouldn't want to have to deal with an unprecedented economic crisis that forces them to make extremely difficult and unpopular decisions; work extraordinary hours under the constant gaze of the media, have to read/listen to abuse from unthinking mouth breathers; and deal with some constituents who like to blame politicans for everything that happens in their life, whilst still retaining enormous levels of that entitlement complex that is so prevalent around here.

In fact I think you should have to pay to be a politician. That would work.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 06:36PM

Sergeant wrote: »

I propose that all politicians work for nothing. Who wouldn't want to have to deal with an unprecedented economic crisis that forces them to make extremely difficult and unpopular decisions; work extraordinary hours under the constant gaze of the media, have to read/listen to abuse from unthinking mouth breathers; and deal with some constituents who like to blame politicans for everything that happens in their life, whilst still retaining enormous levels of that entitlement complex that is so prevalent around here.

In fact I think you should have to pay to be a politician. That would work.

Don't be silly.

No one expects them to work for nothing.

:cool:

Maudi · 11-03-2013 06:49PM

Sergeant wrote: »

I propose that all politicians work for nothing. Who wouldn't want to have to deal with an unprecedented economic crisis that forces them to make extremely difficult and unpopular decisions; work extraordinary hours under the constant gaze of the media, have to read/listen to abuse from unthinking mouth breathers; and deal with some constituents who like to blame politicans for everything that happens in their life, whilst still retaining enormous levels of that entitlement complex that is so prevalent around here.

In fact I think you should have to pay to be a politician. That would work.

they "work"short hours with long holidays for huge money+expenses+junkets. t.b.h

oldyouth · 11-03-2013 07:48PM

Geuze wrote: »

Revenue aren't valuers, and aren't claiming to be valuers.

You value your own house, using their guidelines.

If they are not valuers, how are they in a position of competence to produce a guideline. They either know what they are doing in this regard, or they don't

oldyouth · 11-03-2013 07:56PM

kidneyfan wrote: »

They can defer the tax until they die when you will be obliged to pay it in probate.

I never mentioned inability to pay, or unwillingness to pay. Quite the opposite in fact. My point is that many elderly people, who have owned their homes for decades and will never sell them, are being frightened by this scheme. The language being used in the event of an incorrect assessment of value is disgraceful. I know that my folks are going to pay for a valuation to get it right, so they will sleep easier at night. Yet another expense

Up to now, politicians have never gone after the elderly citizens of this country, as they are fervent voters come election time. I think ALL the established parties have had their day next time around

Bullseye1 · 11-03-2013 07:58PM

It's a ploy to scare those people afraid to question Revenues valuation to employ a valuer/auctioneer. Guess what Phil Hogan is???

mfceiling · 11-03-2013 08:15PM

Geuze wrote: »

Revenue aren't valuers, and aren't claiming to be valuers.

You value your own house, using their guidelines.

To be really honest they shouldn't have bothered with that poxy website of theirs giving "valuations of homes".....may as well have coloured in each house with the caption "who likes fish" and "doesn't like fish" for all the good it seems to be doing.

Guidelines my arse.....not even realistically close for the majority of people. I noticed down the country where a one size fits all band applies - one house is a 6 bed mansion from the boom times and one is farmer joe's one bed farm house.....sure it's only a guideline - why the f*ck bother at all then?

darkhorse · 11-03-2013 08:16PM

Sergeant wrote: »

Who wouldn't want to have hours under the constant gaze of the media, and deal with some constituents who like to blame politicans for everything that happens in their life.

Good spiel, but you left out, Lie through their teeth to the people that vote them into power, and make promises to some of the most vunerable people, then break them once aboard the gravy train, but, as a prominant politician would say, but sure that's what you do. Anyway, glad to be of help to ya, as ya probably just genuinely forgot the rest of the facts.

tayto lover · 11-03-2013 08:30PM

Geuze wrote: »

Note that the USC tax merely replaced two previous levies, it is not a new tax.

It replaced the Health and Income levies.

It is an income tax, in fact I think it should be merged with income tax, too messy at the moment.

So which other European countries have Health and Income levies then?

darkhorse · 11-03-2013 08:38PM

Geuze wrote: »

It is an income tax, in fact I think it should be merged with income tax, too messy at the moment.

I agree with you. In fact, I think they should take every penny that we earn, and call it all income tax, and just give us an allowance, but give the politicans and plebs the same amount.

bgrizzley · 11-03-2013 09:08PM

Sergeant wrote: »

How do you suggest that the Government generate revenue to supply the country with the services and structures that we've become accustomed to?

how do you suggest our houses generates revenue to pay this tax?

Yitzhak Rabin · 11-03-2013 09:50PM

People who are refusing to pay this are the same people who protest about the USC, the health levy, the household charge, septic tank charges and every and any other scheme the government has used to raise revenue.

Each and every time they've been on the end of their tether too?

You don't hear them complaining about the government giving them mortgage interest relief too often. They're also fairly quiet when it comes to offering up areas to cut (with the exception of course of the usual calls to TAX THE RICH!!!11 and CUT POLITICIANS WAGES!!)

Lots of 'not my problem' merchants when it comes to the awkward question of where to get the money to pay for services.

Banjo String · 11-03-2013 10:04PM

Yitzhak Rabin wrote: »

People who are refusing to pay this are the same people who protest about the USC, the health levy, the household charge, septic tank charges and every and any other scheme the government has used to raise revenue.

Each and every time they've been on the end of their tether too?

You don't hear them complaining about the government giving them mortgage interest relief too often. They're also fairly quiet when it comes to offering up areas to cut (with the exception of course of the usual calls to TAX THE RICH!!!11 and CUT POLITICIANS WAGES!!)

Lots of 'not my problem' merchants when it comes to the awkward question of where to get the money to pay for services.

Where will the money come from, from the families already bordering on poverty?

Not the politicians problems, is it?

Yitzhak Rabin · 11-03-2013 10:08PM

SamHall wrote: »

Where will the money come from, from the families already bordering on poverty?

Not the politicians problems, is it?

There are very very few families bordering on poverty in Ireland.

revenue issues threat to every homeowner in the country.

Comments