Property Tax (MOD REMINDER: Don't get too personal)

Banjo String · 09-05-2013 01:37PM

Phoebas wrote: »

So you didn't even know you were posting a truncated version of the video where Pat Rabbitte was cut off mid sentence to make it sound like he was saying something he wasn't.
That's bizarre.

Why are you so hung up on where the clip ended?

It was well documented, and weill publicised at the time what pat said tbh.

What do you feel is missing from the line?

Phoebas · 09-05-2013 01:55PM

SamHall wrote: »

Why are you so hung up on where the clip ended?

It was well documented, and weill publicised at the time what pat said tbh.

What do you feel is missing from the line?

The 'isn't that what you tend to do during an election' line is often used as evidence of Pat Rabbitte admitting that he lied in the campaign (including by the person who uploaded the video to youtube).
The information is never included is his qualification that what he means is that during an election they tend only to have the opportunity to give out simple messages without getting into details. Pat Rabbitte, of course, never admitted that he lied, so its a pretty dirty trick for anyone to represent this video as him saying he did.

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 02:42PM

Phoebas wrote: »

You seem to think of manifestos as binding contracts. I see them as aspirational documents and once you enter coalition negotiations, there are bound to be changes.

There you go again, substituting the word lies with aspirational.

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 04:44PM

Phoebas wrote: »

Way to change the goalposts!

Wanna talk about changing the goalposts? When this family home tax was first mooted/legislated for, the government assured the electorate that there would be no changes to the valuations until 2016, am I correct in saying this? In spite of all the arguments/debates on similar threads, whereby I said they will change that, I had it shoved down my throat by the defenders of the Government's imposition of the home tax, that it is in the legislation, and will not be changed for three years. It seems now that the LAs may be empowered to up the rate from Jan 2015, according to the chairman of the revenue. Hard for a goal keeper to know which way the ball is coming.

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 04:52PM

You're confusing valuations and rates. Valuations are fixed until 2016. Rates are fixed until 2015, after which local authorities have the discretion to change their rate by +/- 15 per cent of the national rate.

Hijpo · 09-05-2013 05:32PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You're confusing valuations and rates. Valuations are fixed until 2016. Rates are fixed until 2015, after which local authorities have the discretion to change their rate by +/- 15 per cent of the national rate.

Whats the national rate?
If the council decide to up it by the 15% they are allowed, how much would a house valued at 150,000 pay in LPT per year?

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 05:34PM

National rate is 0.18 per cent for properties valued up to €1 million and 0.25 per cent on excess value over €1 million

Banjo String · 09-05-2013 05:34PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You're confusing valuations and rates. Valuations are fixed until 2016. Rates are fixed until 2015, after which local authorities have the discretion to change their rate by +/- 15 per cent of the national rate.

Upwards only Vladimir.

Can't see any council wanting less from g homeowners.

Can you?

Zubeneschamali · 09-05-2013 05:39PM

SamHall wrote: »

Can't see any council wanting less from g homeowners.

Can you?

You can't see them offering to lower rates to win votes? It'd work on you, right?

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 05:40PM

I guess we'll find out at the next local elections. Some parties might run on a platform of cutting rates in certain local authority areas if they get a majority on a council.

Hijpo · 09-05-2013 05:40PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

National rate is 0.18 per cent for properties valued up to €1 million and 0.25 per cent on excess value over €1 million

And what about my second question, im not the best with the maths you see, and the LPT pushers seem to be well up on it all. Who better to get an answer from eh?

emo72 · 09-05-2013 07:22PM

darkhorse wrote: »

Wanna talk about changing the goalposts? When this family home tax was first mooted/legislated for, the government assured the electorate that there would be no changes to the valuations until 2016, am I correct in saying this? In spite of all the arguments/debates on similar threads, whereby I said they will change that, I had it shoved down my throat by the defenders of the Government's imposition of the home tax, that it is in the legislation, and will not be changed for three years. It seems now that the LAs may be empowered to up the rate from Jan 2015, according to the chairman of the revenue. Hard for a goal keeper to know which way the ball is coming.

thats very sneaky. very sneaky. i was under the impression that the price didn't change. i honestly never copped the difference between "valuation" and "rate". i must be thick.

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 07:30PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

You're confusing valuations and rates. Valuations are fixed until 2016. Rates are fixed until 2015, after which local authorities have the discretion to change their rate by +/- 15 per cent of the national rate.

I'm not confusing anything. The chairperson of the revenue commissioners appeared in front of a dail committee and said that the county councils may be in a position to change the rate at which you will pay the property tax from 2015 instead of 2016. I can't be any clearer than that, unless I actually ask Josephine Feehily to tell you face to face

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 07:31PM

darkhorse wrote: »

I'm not confusing anything. The chairperson of the revenue commissioners appeared in front of a dail committee and said that the county councils may be in a position to change the rate at which you will pay the property tax from 2015 instead of 2016. I can't be any clearer than that, unless I actually ask Josephine Feehily to tell you face to face

Yes, she did. But that has always been the case. Right since budget day when it was announced. It was only the valuation that was fixed until 2016.

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 07:38PM

Hijpo wrote: »

And what about my second question, im not the best with the maths you see, and the LPT pushers seem to be well up on it all. Who better to get an answer from eh?

Well, H, if you are in the band where you have to pay €225, for example, and the council up it by 15%, then that's approx. an extra €34.

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 07:50PM

emo72 wrote: »

thats very sneaky. very sneaky. i was under the impression that the price didn't change. i honestly never copped the difference between "valuation" and "rate". i must be thick.

No, you're not thick. The government just lied to us again, as expected.

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 07:52PM

They didn't lie though. You're confusing two different things, the valuation of the property and the rate of the tax.

emo72 · 09-05-2013 07:57PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

They didn't lie though. You're confusing two different things, the valuation of the property and the rate of the tax.

I know. You are definitely right. I was obviously very confused, because i thought the price was staying the same. it does seem sneaky though, the way it was phrased.

Hijpo · 09-05-2013 07:58PM

darkhorse wrote: »

Well, H, if you are in the band where you have to pay €225, for example, and the council up it by 15%, then that's approx. an extra €34.

I wonder do they anticipate the value of houses to miraculously to rise in 2016?

that would be an extra €34 for the rise in rates and more on top of that if the value creeps into the next band all while peoples financial circumstances stay the same.

:rolleyes:

darkhorse · 09-05-2013 08:03PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yes, she did. But that has always been the case. Right since budget day when it was announced. It was only the valuation that was fixed until 2016.

Ok.

emo72 · 09-05-2013 08:07PM

so in three years the rate could go up by 45%. these things are usually pushed to the max. just so we know in 6 years it would be gone up 90% ? jesus H christ:(

Banjo String · 09-05-2013 08:07PM

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

You can't see them offering to lower rates to win votes? It'd work on you, right?

Nope.

My vote can't be 'bought'.

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 08:09PM

emo72 wrote: »

so in three years the rate could go up by 45%. these things are usually pushed to the max. just so we know in 6 years it would be gone up 90% ? jesus H christ:(

No, that isn't how it's going to work. They can only go a max of 15 per cent over the national rate. They can't add 15 per cent every year.

Banjo String · 09-05-2013 08:16PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

I guess we'll find out at the next local elections. Some parties might run on a platform of cutting rates in certain local authority areas if they get a majority on a council.

Isn't there local elections next year?

They can't up them (or down them) until 2015 I thought.

bgrizzley · 09-05-2013 08:20PM

emo72 wrote: »

so in three years the rate could go up by 45%. these things are usually pushed to the max. just so we know in 6 years it would be gone up 90% ? jesus H christ:(

Hope that in 6 years property prices are not on the rise, or you could also be gone up a band for that 90%...

Chips Lovell · 09-05-2013 08:30PM

SamHall wrote: »

Isn't there local elections next year?

They can't up them (or down them) until 2015 I thought.

Yes, but I can't see what will stop candidates from running on a platform of what they'll do the following year though.

Banjo String · 09-05-2013 08:41PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

Yes, but I can't see what will stop candidates from running on a platform of what they'll do the following year though.

Like our current coalition did:pac:

Ogham · 09-05-2013 08:59PM

Vladimir Kurtains wrote: »

No, that isn't how it's going to work. They can only go a max of 15 per cent over the national rate. They can't add 15 per cent every year.

Correct

Phoebas · 09-05-2013 09:05PM

darkhorse wrote: »

Wanna talk about changing the goalposts? (...) Hard for a goal keeper to know which way the ball is coming.

You need to keep your eye on the ball. Here's what they said on budget day.

. Rates
• For the first 18 months (up to 31 December 2014) the
national central tax rate will be 0.18% up to €1 million and 0.25% on excess
value over €1 million.
• From 1 January 2015 local authorities will
have discretion to vary the LPT rates by +/- 15% of the national central
rate.
• The national central rate will not be increased for the
lifetime of the Government.

Am Chile · 09-05-2013 11:56PM

Things are not running as smoothly in Revenue as we are often led to believe-I know someone might say ah sure its just facebook-bear in mind the union in revenue the cpsu is affiliated with the campaign against the property tax-someone is always bound to leak something out.

'Information from a reliable senior source in Revenue that things are not running as smoothly as they put out in the media. Up to last Friday, they claim that over 400,000 forms had arrived in Limerick , but Limerick cannot cope and van loads are being driven to Dublin. This figure is just the number of envelopes: it does not mean compliance. A large proportion are not filled in. Many have abusive comments or simply ‘return to sender’. Others have things like ‘I have no more to give’ and ‘Do your best’. Many in Revenue are unsure how to proceed with non-compliants, whether homeowners ignore the form (as the Campaign recommends) or attach an ‘Axe The Tax’ label or other comments. This is new territory for Revenue and exactly how to apply the law is still in question and will be tested. For example, employers, who face a € 3,000 fine for not complying, have asked Revenue will they pay their legal fees if employees sue them for deductions without permission or compensate them for any industrial unrest. Revenue have yet to reply. Similarly, many bank customers are instructing their bank not to allow deductions and when you think how difficult and exacting it is to set up a direct debit, one wonders how Revenue will negotiate bank security to raid your account.

However if Revenue are successful in getting over all hurdles, non-compliant people may face penalties. Penalties are not automatic and are at the discretion of Revenue. Most people boycotting have taken this into account and are prepared to run the risk of a penalty of a few hundred Euros in order to bring about the abolition of the unfair tax and save many thousands in the long term. The attitude that ‘they are going to get it anyway’ is being met with resistance. Making the government work and struggle every step of the way to get at your money, rather than handing it over and making it easy for them is preferable.

Whatever method you choose to resist this tax, The Campaign recommends that you do not sign the declaration as this is an admission of liability and consent.

Minister Phil Hogan once again put his foot in it by saying that they had got just over 20 million Euro. However if you do the maths, that is an average of just 50 EURO per home and the average is believed to be 200 for the first 6 months. This indicates that as much as 75% of forms contained no payment. It caused much cringe inducing embarrassment for both the government and Revenue.

In the case of children and adult children of homeowners receiving the forms, it is highly unlikely that the Revenue will pursue under 18 year olds. For adults the Campaign recommends ignoring the form. However some are returning it stating that they don’t know the owner. Many family members genuinely do not know who owns the house or are estranged from their parents. Revenue cannot prove that children know the owner. Some parents have taken the initiative and corrected the form, releasing the child of any obligation, and then boycotting the form on their own terms.

The numbers of people boycotting will not be known until after June and when all the envelopes are opened. Anecdotal evidence suggests that many who registered and paid the Household Charge are not paying the tax and there is a new level of anger about how it is being implemented. Threats and bullying is the main tactic of this government and together we can resist them.

We should take heart from the Waterford Crystal workers who won their pension rights in the European Court of Justice, contrary to legal advice from the state. Of the original 400 plaintiffs, only 18 took the case to Europe. The remainder had been bullied and convinced by state lawyers that they had no legal basis and no hope of success and yet this landmark case was a triumph for workers’ rights.

News from an IBEC conference is also heartening. The Irish Business and Employer’s Confederation, a body representing employers of 30 people or more and mostly representing the retail trade, had wanted property tax set at 0.25% instead of the current 0.18%. However a senior delegate from Penney’s said that more taxes on people were hurting the retail trade and causing high street traders grave concern'

https://www.facebook.com/CAPTADublinWest/posts/512799772088707

Property Tax (MOD REMINDER: Don't get too personal)

Comments