Advertisement
Help Keep Boards Alive. Support us by going ad free today. See here: https://subscriptions.boards.ie/.
https://www.boards.ie/group/1878-subscribers-forum

Private Group for paid up members of Boards.ie. Join the club.
Hi all, please see this major site announcement: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058427594/boards-ie-2026

Tax Changes under a Sinn Féin Government

1356718

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,954 ✭✭✭Tail Docker


    Exactly. If you have the bare faced cheek to venture very far past the breadline, you're in for a hell of a wake up call.

    You'll be grand so. :p


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 2,481 ✭✭✭Barely There


    2011 wrote: »
    Just saw this:

    With the increased popularity of Sinn Féin it is timely to consider their tax proposals. These include a 48% income tax rate on income over €100,000, the introduction of a 1% wealth tax on assets over €1 million and increases in both capital gains and capital acquisitions taxes to 40%. They also propose the introduction of a 15.75% employers PRSI rate on salaries in excess of €100,000 and a reduction in interest relief for landlords from 75% to 40%. They would also restrict tax relief on pensions, section 23 relief and EII to the 20% rate.

    As we know Sinn Féin oppose the property tax and water charges but would reintroduce the non-principal private residence charge at €400. They propose increasing betting taxes which they estimate would yield €114 million.


    It appears to be a reputable source, see link. It is the cut in tax relief that I disagree with the most.

    Any thoughts / comments on the merits of their proposals (not the whole IRA / political thing)?

    Yep, typical Shinner populist ****e with no information on how much these proposals will actually raise.

    I however can help.

    Fcuk all is the answer.

    They'll actually damage the economy.


    So after these amazing proposals how do the Shinners close the 12 billion gab between spending and income?


    Jesus, they're a bunch of economic illiterates and magic bean salesmen.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭Young Blood


    Let's see how employers like it when the government puts a limit on how much they can achieve.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    bubblypop wrote: »
    how this this strange?

    Strange you would welcome something that would apparently (according to you) threaten your livelihood tbh.

    But whatever floats your boat, FG have your back I suppose, just ask Shatter.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Let's see how employers like it when the government puts a limit on how much they can achieve.

    Not every high earner is an employer.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    awec wrote: »
    All this will achieve is to encourage successful people to leave Ireland.
    I'm sure there are plenty of graduates who would be willing to take places
    Phoebas wrote: »
    Replacing successful people with graduates doesn't seem like a great idea.

    Don't you mean wealthy?
    No.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,186 ✭✭✭Kippure


    Jesus, they're a bunch of economic illiterates and magic bean salesmen.


    Just like all the other parties so..


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭michael999999


    Strange you would welcome something that would apparently (according to you) threaten your livelihood tbh.

    But whatever floats your boat, FG have your back I suppose, just ask Shatter.

    Or Garda Wilson!


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭Young Blood


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Not every high earner is an employer.

    As a matter of interest, how many people earn that kind of money a year. Are there any statistics?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,928 ✭✭✭Renegade Mechanic


    You'll be grand so. :p


    :D Anyway If my sources are to be believed, by the time sf are done with you, youll be lucky to be left with a pot to p*ss in!


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Yep, typical Shinner populist ****e with no information on how much these proposals will actually raise.

    I however can help.

    Fcuk all is the answer.

    They'll actually damage the economy.


    So after these amazing proposals how do the Shinners close the 12 billion gab between spending and income?


    Jesus, they're a bunch of economic illiterates and magic bean salesmen.

    I wouldn't even bother FB, you're certain to get banned from this thread too. You just can't contain the vitriol.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭Young Blood


    Phoebas wrote: »
    No.

    'Successful' people! Are there no successful people who earn less than a 100k a year then?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2, Paid Member Posts: 2,356 ✭✭✭Firblog


    Insanity is repeating the same mistakes and expecting different results]

    Here's another quote for ya

    Those who cannot remember the past are condemned to repeat it

    If high tax rates on earning, high PRSI rates for employers, and high capital gains were good for an economy this little island would have been a fecking paradise in the 70's & 80's


  • Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 7,771 ✭✭✭michael999999


    'Successful' people! Are there no successful people who earn less than a 100k a year then?

    Wasn't it the 'successfull' bankers and politicians on 100s of thousands a year that bankrupt our country.

    I'd imagine Bertie ahern was matching every euro he got in wages, with a euro 'won' on 'the horses'


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭Young Blood


    Wasn't it the 'successfull' bankers and politicians on 100s of thousands a year that bankrupt our country.

    I'd imagine Bertie ahern was matching every euro he got in wages, with a euro 'won' on 'the horses'

    Too right it was. Scumbags every last one of them.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    'Successful' people! Are there no successful people who earn less than a 100k a year then?

    Of course there are. What are you getting at? :confused:


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 393 ✭✭Young Blood


    Phoebas wrote: »
    Of course there are. What are you getting at? :confused:

    What you said, it's just incredibly stupid. ''All the successful people will leave the country''.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    Wasn't it the 'successfull' bankers and politicians on 100s of thousands a year that bankrupt our country.

    If only we could rid the country of 'successful' people - then we'd be a success.:eek:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    What you said, it's just incredibly stupid. ''All the successful people will leave the country''.

    I didn't say that. You just made up that quote. :mad:


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Phoebas wrote: »
    If only we could rid the country of 'successful' people - then we'd be a success.:eek:

    Where are we getting rid of successful people? I know several bright people who couldn't afford to stay in college. It's more like we're trying to prevent people coming successful.


  • Advertisement
  • Administrators Posts: 56,572 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    'Successful' people! Are there no successful people who earn less than a 100k a year then?

    100k a year is not that rare. People who earn 100k a year are very much "normal" people. They are not the elite. They are not super wealthy. They are not rich.

    I would imagine it's a single digit percentage of people who earn over 100k - but I don't think it's very fair that someone earning 110k a year is going to have to pay 48% on a portion of their salary (well in the unrealistic situation where this actually happens).


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    Where are we getting rid of successful people? I know several bright people who couldn't afford to stay in college. It's more like we're trying to prevent people coming successful.

    I didn't say we were. I only said it wouldn't be such a good idea to want to replace successful people with graduates.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    Phoebas wrote: »
    I didn't say we were. I only said it wouldn't be such a good idea to want to replace successful people with graduates.

    No it wouldn't but we won't have to.


  • Moderators, Education Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators Posts: 35,351 Mod ✭✭✭✭AlmightyCushion


    awec wrote: »
    100k a year is not that rare. People who earn 100k a year are very much "normal" people. They are not the elite. They are not super wealthy. They are not rich.

    I would imagine it's a single digit percentage of people who earn over 100k - but I don't think it's very fair that someone earning 110k a year is going to have to pay 48% on a portion of their salary.

    Currently they are paying more than 48%. Everything a person earns over €33,000 is taxed at 52% (income tax, USC and PRSI). The 48% Sinn Fein want doesn't include USC or PRSI.


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 3,377 ✭✭✭Smithwicks Man


    Increased betting taxes would only affect the shops, online betting companies like PaddyPower are based and regulated from areas outside of Ireland such as the Isle of Man and Gibraltar


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 14,380 ✭✭✭✭Banjo String


    Currently they are paying more than 48%. Everything a person earns over €33,000 is taxed at 52% (income tax, USC and PRSI). The 48% Sinn Fein want doesn't include USC or PRSI.

    I reckon they're not that impressed by USC tbh.
    “The abolition of the Universal Social Charge is an issue which demands the full support of each elected representative in the Dáil. It is little more than a tax on the working poor.

    “This tax needs to be abolished and instead the Government should work on building a fairer tax system by creating a progressive tax base that taxes fairly and equalises wealth.
    http://www.sinnfein.ie/contents/20382


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 9,373 ✭✭✭Phoebas


    steddyeddy wrote: »
    No it wouldn't but we won't have to.
    Its pretty inevitable that raising more taxes on higher earners will make Ireland less attractive for those higher earners, so we need our taxation system to be competitive.
    At what point we should optimally set the marginal income tax rate is debatable, but i'd say that when you're paying more of your earnings to the state than you're getting to keep yourself then something is askew.


  • Administrators Posts: 56,572 Admin ✭✭✭✭✭awec


    What does "equalises wealth" even mean in that context?


  • Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 27,565 ✭✭✭✭steddyeddy


    awec wrote: »
    What does "equalises wealth" even mean?

    It's not something I personally believe in. I do think everyone should have an equal opportunity to acquire wealth though.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3,780 ✭✭✭Frank Lee Midere


    Currently they are paying more than 48%. Everything a person earns over €33,000 is taxed at 52% (income tax, USC and PRSI). The 48% Sinn Fein want doesn't include USC or PRSI.

    Yeah. I assumed people here would know that, but apparantly some think that the total rate of 48% is all there is and it's too high. People on 34k pay more marginally. Already.

    What do the shinners feel about inheritance, gifts etc? Or are they worried about the farmer vote?


Advertisement
Advertisement