Geuze wrote: » Note that the USC tax simply replaced two previous levies - it is not an extra tax. the Health levy the Income levy Some people who didn't pay the previous levies do have to pay USC, yes that's true, as it has a broader base. So most people (not all) do not pay any more due to the USC, they pay more or less the same as they previously paid in the two levies. Some people may even pay less in USC than the two previous levies. Most people think that it is a new tax. It is, in some sense, as the name is new, but it simply replaced two previous levies.
NuckingFacker wrote: » You really don't get how careful with money many Tourists are. There's a psychological impact of €103.99 over €99.00. Also, USC, will it be there forever? Probably, but chances are it will slowly creep up in size. Low tax economy? Who started that joke off?
Del2005 wrote: » No. It was to replace excise duty on new vehicles, which the EU banned. VRT was just a tax made up to keep the revenue from new cars to the wasters in the dail pumping the pump in the parish. They will never get rid of the USC. We didn't pay enough tax to run the country. Removing it would require even more cuts in spending.
Akrasia wrote: » If they paid the 12.5% that they were supposed to, they'd be paying 12.5billion a year to the exchequer
Del2005 wrote: » €4 extra on a €100 bill isn't going to kill tourism.
jester77 wrote: » It still is low tax in comparison to other EU countries, especially for low earners. Someone earning 10k a year in Ireland will have an extra €170 a month in their pocket, and better benefits, compared to the same person in Germany.
Bullseye1 wrote: » Would you rather have German public transport, health system or are you happy with ours?
Playboy wrote: » Anyone know how Ireland's tax regime fares against otherm western European countries? Its obviously less than places like Sweden but it would be intersting to compare and contrast with the UK, France, Holland etc.
jester77 wrote: » I've no problem paying high taxes for what I get. But I always hear people in Ireland giving out about the services they get for their tax. You have to look at it realistically, when you pay low taxes then you can't expect high quality services.
Cuttlefish wrote: » Yes two previous Levies that didn't exist until the Banking crisis. We are all paying €4B more in tax than 5 years ago and as other posters have said it will increase
Akrasia wrote: » Or, we could collect tax from corporations Multinationals in ireland pay an effective tax rate of 2.5% (according to David McWilliamshttp://www.davidmcwilliams.ie/2013/10/14/lets-talk-about-tax If they paid the 12.5% that they were supposed to, they'd be paying 12.5billion a year to the exchequer
Geuze wrote: » Incorrect - these levies long precede the banking crisis. Note that Govt revenues are fairly stable at 55-56bn. See here, table 1:http://www.cso.ie/en/media/csoie/releasespublications/documents/economy/2013/gfsa2013.pdf
Cuttlefish wrote: » My comment was meant to read that we are paying €4Billion more in tax due to the USC or whatever it was called before that. One thing for sure this was not on my pay packet before the banking crisis!
K-9 wrote: » Maybe it should have been on your pay packet before the crisis? All the parties engaged in auction politics over who could cut taxes most, even SF and Labour. We'd a situation when nearly half the population paid little or no income tax at all, but apparently we were still a high tax country. The problem is we cut income taxes too much, and expected German like services, and now we are highering taxes to pay for cutting them too much. People don't release that cutting income tax too much was a cause of the whole economic mess. It was an unpopular view to argue in a country that wants Boston type taxes but Berlin levels of Health and Education.
Cuttlefish wrote: » What level of Health and Education do we have? So inflated house prices was not a problem? or the mad dash by ordinary people and not so ordinary people to become landlords! I mean to say it is less than 100 years since the landlords from across the water were evicted and we only replaced them with our own!! People buying property they never even saw! I heard that there was a section on the "Today" with SOR in which a developer, Gerry Gannon, bankrupts a coffee shop coz they owe him €10K and he himself had debts that were taken over by NAMA. At the height of the boom you had to battle through hard sell operators trying to get you to buy property in Hungary or wherever. Where are they now? The USC charge is to pay for the property crisis that the greedy got the Irish people into.
SafeSurfer wrote: » More people in Ireland are employed in the domestic tourism industry than by multi nationals. Yet the 12.5% corporation tax is a sacred cow which almost all political parties refuse to consider increasing. Tomorrow the vat rate on our tourism industry will be increased despite the creation of 15,000 jobs in the sector as a result of the imitative. Corporate profits have escaped any charge on their profits despite the application of a "universal" social charge on the incomes of all citizens. Why are ordinary Irish workers continuing to subsidise the multi million euro profits of multi national corporations which are largely repatriated to their already wealthy shareholders.
yopy wrote: » I received a reply from Michael Noonans PA stating that the USC was never supposed to be a temporary tax. See reply below... I would point out that revenues raised through the tax system for the Exchequer are fundamental to enable expenditure on public services including the Health Service, Welfare and the Justice system.
Delivering on a commitment in the Programme for Government, the USC was reviewed by the Department of Finance in the lead up to Budget 2012. The report is available at www.finance.gov.ie. As a result of the review of the USC, the Government decided in Budget 2012 to increase the entry point to the Universal Social Charge from €4,004 to €10,036 per annum. It is estimated that this removed almost 330,000 individuals from the charge.
However,such Public Debate,in current Irish terms,doubtless centre upon the State taking away badly needed supports from the needy etc etc. We have to remember that the Irish electorate voted continually,in great numbers,for those household political names who year after year declared in their budget speeches the intention to remove "X,000 People from the Tax-Net"....That sort of policy,if stated to a German,might have sparked a suspicious response along the lines of.."But,Herr Minister,who will then pay for all the Free-Stuff for the others ?"....We however,lapped it all up.... In my own area of operation,the situation with the DSFA Free Travel Scheme is of note whereby c.748,000 persons out of an adult population of c.3,000,000 are deemed to merit Free Travel on Public Transport Nationwide,a figure to which must be added a further 300,000 Spouse-Partner/Companions,giving a total legitimate figure of c. 1.100,000 or approximately One Third of the Adult Population. The merits or otherwise of the Free Travel Scheme are not of concern IMO,but rather whether any thought whatever has gone into any analysis of how such largesse can be realistically funded. I guarantee that,very rapidly after a first post on such a topic,we will have a response pointing towards Bankers......
