Average salary at €47,000

Bubbaclaus · 16-02-2020 12:59pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

And they pay disproportionately higher indirect taxes.

It's amazing how ignorant people are that they think direct taxation is the be all and end all of taxation.

Do they? No VAT on rent/mortgage, food, public transport etc. Surely that's the vast majority of most peoples spending tax free?

listermint · 16-02-2020 12:59pm

Leland Melted Rumor wrote: »

They pay little or no direct taxes, instead of increasing taxes on higher earners it’s lower earners that should be paying a little more. It’s not a good system that expects a large number of people to be subsidised by another smaller group. There should be either a flat rate tax or else the higher rate of tax should kick in at far higher incomes.

Middle income and higher income households need to be seeing a lot more in their pocket from their gross wage than they currently are. It’s an other idiotic policy by SF cutting USC for lower earners when all they are doing is narrowing the tax base, it’s the higher earners that should be getting the cut.

For someone who goes around giving their opinion on taxes in various threads. Be it tax bands , inheritance tax or CGT. You don't have a breeze about tax spend at all.

Low income earners spend pretty much all their earnings on indirect tax. They don't have means to put into savings, stock gambles or property nor can they get into 'legal' tax avoidance such as as the type you seem to prescribe to.

I would suggest you go an read some of the many research articles put together by various sources on indirect tax take from low earners. It may open your eyes somewhat ..... Well outside of the indo headlines you like to use. Sure these people have a free living.....

Lol

listermint · 16-02-2020 1:00pm

Bubbaclaus wrote: »

Do they? No VAT on rent/mortgage, food, public transport etc. Surely that's the vast majority of most peoples spending tax free?

No vat on what........

Jesus wept.

Absolute farcical knowledge put out as factual.

Bubbaclaus · 16-02-2020 1:02pm

listermint wrote: »

Low income earners spend pretty much all their earnings on indirect tax.

Can you explain this a bit more, considering I would expect accommodation and food to be contained in "spend pretty much all their earnings", neither of which are subject to indirect tax?

Bubbaclaus · 16-02-2020 1:03pm

listermint wrote: »

No vat on what........

Jesus wept.

Absolute farcical knowledge put out as factual.

There isnt any VAT on them. That is a fact. I'm not sure what point you are trying to make here?

Fritzbox · 16-02-2020 1:03pm

listermint wrote: »

Low income earners spend pretty much all their earnings on indirect tax.

Sheer nonsense

I would suggest you go an read some of the many research articles put together by various sources on indirect tax take from low earners. It may open your eyes somewhat ..... Well outside of the indo headlines you like to use. Sure these people have a free living.....

Any minute now your'e going to quote from that 44 page doc from the Nevin institute.

16-02-2020 1:08pm

Arrival wrote: »

I would say being able to share with 1 other person max for a comfortable price should be the standard considered for a living wage because couples should be able to live with each other for their own privacy and growth as a couple without having to break the bank so they can save for their future. The current ridiculous prices are actively inhibiting many couples from settling down and having families when they want to, this is a serious issue if allowed to go on for long enough

When do we say that people need to earn a minimum before investing in a house/apartment, and do we differentiate with regards to quality/locations of such housing?

When I bought my house before the banking crash, it was beyond the means of most people under 30. I had bought a previous cheap house, repaired/redecorated, and resold it for a 30k profit. That gave me the means to put a deposit on my actual house. I was earning higher than the average in salary, and I could afford to get a mortgage earlier than others my own age. Most people i know got their houses in their 30s, I got mine in my late 20s... but I also bought my property in an unpopular area (although it's become popular after a decade of paying my mortgage).

The point I'm making is that these days, it seems like everyone expects to be able to afford a house pretty quickly. That the housing prices are unreasonable even though these people are talking about popular areas, or discussing large houses. There's little interest in buying, selling, buying again, and working up towards their family home. Instead, there's the expectation that they should be able to buy their family home right from the start... Just as they expect to be able to buy a place in a popular residential area rather than finding something in somewhere less popular even though prices are likely to be lower.

I wonder where do we draw the line? I agree with you that people should be able to buy a place to live, but I wonder at your post, because it seems like a blanket statement that everyone should be able to do so... regardless of the considerations affecting price/availability.

16-02-2020 3:06pm

Zebra3 wrote: »

And they pay disproportionately higher indirect taxes.

It's amazing how ignorant people are that they think direct taxation is the be all and end all of taxation.

Middle income and higher earners pay far more direct and indirect taxes, far more. Low income earners pay very little tax either directly or indirectly on essentials.

listermint wrote: »

For someone who goes around giving their opinion on taxes in various threads. Be it tax bands , inheritance tax or CGT. You don't have a breeze about tax spend at all.

Low income earners spend pretty much all their earnings on indirect tax. They don't have means to put into savings, stock gambles or property nor can they get into 'legal' tax avoidance such as as the type you seem to prescribe to.

I would suggest you go an read some of the many research articles put together by various sources on indirect tax take from low earners. It may open your eyes somewhat ..... Well outside of the indo headlines you like to use. Sure these people have a free living.....

Lol

Rubbish from start to finish, what are they spending money on that’s contributing so much tax?

Salary Negotiator · 16-02-2020 8:46pm

Leland Melted Rumor wrote: »

Middle income and higher earners pay far more direct and indirect taxes, far more. Low income earners pay very little tax either directly or indirectly on essentials.

Rubbish from start to finish, what are they spending money on that’s contributing so much tax?

Fags and booze.

Geuze · 16-02-2020 10:38pm

Bob24 wrote: »

Income tax in Ireland is already on par with many European countries through. The State doesn’t have as much budget but this is because other taxes (for exemple corporate tax) are much lower. I understand that lowering taxes supported by companies (especially large ones) is the model Ireland has chosen to attract FDI,

Although the CT rate is low, the CT yield is huge.

You seem to suggest that the CT yield is low, this is false.

Geuze · 16-02-2020 10:42pm

Note that this thread suggests average FT salary is 47k.

To be clear, it's average FT earnings that are 47k, not salary.

You could be on a basic of 42k, then you get overtime, bonus, etc.

Earnings included overtime and bonus, etc.

beggars_bush · 16-02-2020 11:58pm

Geuze wrote: »

Note that this thread suggests average FT salary is 47k.

To be clear, it's average FT earnings that are 47k, not salary.

You could be on a basic of 42k, then you get overtime, bonus, etc.

Earnings included overtime and bonus, etc.

Most workers don't have serious overtime or bonuses

bilbot79 · 17-02-2020 12:04am

DellyBelly wrote: »

Im a bit surprised by that figure. Thought it might be a little higher. Suppose that includes outside cities because if it doesn't I'd say the average wage is closer to 55 - 69 k. Definitely in Dublin anyway

69k average wage in Dublin. Magicked up figures.

ILoveYourVibes · 17-02-2020 1:22am

It should take into account more than your salary. Your other income assets etc.

If your salary is all you have ..that's tougher than some other people earning the same amount.

purifol0 · 17-02-2020 1:54am

Posters need to realise the difference in public sector and private sector take home pay.

Private sector PAYE workers simply do not have the option of doubling their money by working overtime or Sundays. Gardai and Nurses are the two groups that massively increase their take home pay by these methods.

Indeed as Eddie Hobbs pointed out it took the private sector nearly 20 years to catch up with the public sector average salary! Imagine that! In 2000 the avg public sector worker earned as much as the private sector one got in 2018.

The reason taxes are so high and cannot be lowered (even if Varadkar knew he'd win a tonne of votes by keeping that particular promise he still couldn't do it) is because the country is paying public servants and their retired members an absolute fortune.

This is the end result of Bertienomincs and "benchmarking" the public sector several times during the boom and not once during the bust.

Redneck Reject71 · 17-02-2020 2:00am

beggars_bush wrote: »

Most workers don't have serious overtime or bonuses

I work in the equestrian field, my typical work day is 9 to 12 hours a day with 1 day off. I've never been paid overtime and a bonus is a pipedream,heh.And I don't make no where 47k.heh.

dartboardio · 17-02-2020 2:15am

Hang on, €47 k being the average is not a high amount or shocking?

By the time you are taxed it's much less than that.

When they say the 'richer' should be taxed more I'd be thinking more along the lines of the people on €90k/100k upwards.

€47k is an understandable average salary. People on that salary aren't exactly flush once all the bills are paid!

for low paid workers maybe the average is 30k.

Sheeps · 17-02-2020 2:24am

Your effective rate of tax on that €47k is about 25%. That's sweet **** all compared to what some people pay. Aside from that, the median salary is lower, which is a far greater representation of what most people earn.

Geuze · 17-02-2020 10:38am

dartboardio wrote: »

Hang on, €47 k being the average is not a high amount or shocking?

I don't think anybody is saying that the mean earnings for FT workers being 47k is "high or shocking".

It is what it is.

Ireland is a high productivity, high cost country.

Geuze · 17-02-2020 10:41am

DellyBelly wrote: »

Im a bit surprised by that figure. Thought it might be a little higher. Suppose that includes outside cities because if it doesn't I'd say the average wage is closer to 55 - 69 k. Definitely in Dublin anyway

Here is a look at household incomes around the country:

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-gpii/geographicalprofilesofincomeinireland2016/incomeinireland/

(Note that income is not the same as earnings)

Here is a look at earnings around the country:

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-eaads/earningsanalysisusingadministrativedatasources2018/

B.A._Baracus · 17-02-2020 10:41am

There's no way the average salary is 47,000 a year.
You'd be lucky to half of that working in retail, warehouses, security etc.

Geuze · 17-02-2020 10:43am

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

There's no way the average salary is 47,000 a year.
You'd be lucky to half of that working in retail, warehouses, security etc.

As has been said, over and over, it is the mean earnings for full-time workers.

See here, table 5

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/er/elca/earningsandlabourcostsannualdata2018/

Geuze · 17-02-2020 10:46am

DellyBelly wrote: »

Im a bit surprised by that figure. Thought it might be a little higher. Suppose that includes outside cities because if it doesn't I'd say the average wage is closer to 55 - 69 k. Definitely in Dublin anyway

Here is some Dublin data:

https://www.cso.ie/en/releasesandpublications/ep/p-eaads/earningsanalysisusingadministrativedatasources2018/region/

Median weekly earnings were highest in County Dublin in 2018

Median is 9% higher than State average

Mean = 847 pw

Median = 646 pw

Bubbaclaus · 17-02-2020 10:47am

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

There's no way the average salary is 47,000 a year.
You'd be lucky to half of that working in retail, warehouses, security etc.

That's why it's an average and not everyone works in those roles.

Geuze · 17-02-2020 10:47am

B.A._Baracus wrote: »

There's no way the average salary is 47,000 a year.
You'd be lucky to half of that working in retail, warehouses, security etc.

Yes, perhaps.

But you could work in an MNC with much higher earnings.

I am surrounded by hundreds of staff on 80k-100k.

17-02-2020 10:51am

purifol0 wrote: »

Indeed as Eddie Hobbs pointed out it took the private sector nearly 20 years to catch up with the public sector average salary! Imagine that! In 2000 the avg public sector worker earned as much as the private sector one got in 2018.

.

You are comparing apples and oranges, it’s a lazy comparison comparing average public sector pay to average private sector pay as it doesn’t take into account that vast array of job types in the private sector of various different skill levels compared to the other public sector where the majority of jobs are highly skilled, require a strong education etc.

If you compared like for like skill and education levels only things would be a lot closer and the private sector would come out on top in a lot of cases as it’s not limited to public sector pay scales.

Also people like teachers, nurses, guards etc are underpaid and deserve every cent they get and more.

topper75 · 17-02-2020 11:48am

celtic_oz wrote: »

no need to worry ..when sinn fein get in everyone gets a month back in their rent!

this will be taken from the fat cats on 52%

...who then simply add it to the rent demanded of their properties - so the tenants shoulder it, like they did the LPT.

Gee thanks Sinn Féin - you economics whizzkids you. Whoever voted for them left school way too early.

ChikiChiki · 17-02-2020 12:09pm

MNCs easily pay 80k + salarys in Dublin. They need to in order to attract talent as the place is outrageously expensive to live in. They are all expanding their campuses (linkedIn, FB, Google) yet there is a very inflated rental market stifling supply and raising rent prices. The cost of paying these high salaries pales in comparison to the amount they save on tax by just being located here.

So, if you are on 40k and finding it hard to get by, I suggest upskill and join the MNC gravy train. Anyone can do it if they put their mind to it.

dartboardio · 17-02-2020 2:06pm

Geuze wrote: »

I don't think anybody is saying that the mean earnings for FT workers being 47k is "high or shocking".

It is what it is.

Ireland is a high productivity, high cost country.

What I'm saying is its a low average.

€47,000 isn't a 'fantastic' wage. And I would have thought the average would be €60k ish seeming that most people have gone to college or have degrees/masters.

super_furry · 17-02-2020 2:11pm

dartboardio wrote: »

What I'm saying is its a low average.

€47,000 isn't a 'fantastic' wage. And I would have thought the average would be €60k ish seeming that most people have gone to college or have degrees/masters.

43% are college graduates, hardly most.

kippy · 17-02-2020 2:18pm

ChikiChiki wrote: »

MNCs easily pay 80k + salarys in Dublin. They need to in order to attract talent as the place is outrageously expensive to live in. They are all expanding their campuses (linkedIn, FB, Google) yet there is a very inflated rental market stifling supply and raising rent prices. The cost of paying these high salaries pales in comparison to the amount they save on tax by just being located here.

So, if you are on 40k and finding it hard to get by, I suggest upskill and join the MNC gravy train. Anyone can do it if they put their mind to it.

Not true.

snotboogie · 17-02-2020 2:37pm

Leland Melted Rumor wrote: »

You are comparing apples and oranges, it’s a lazy comparison comparing average public sector pay to average private sector pay as it doesn’t take into account that vast array of job types in the private sector of various different skill levels compared to the other public sector where the majority of jobs are highly skilled, require a strong education etc.

If you compared like for like skill and education levels only things would be a lot closer and the private sector would come out on top in a lot of cases as it’s not limited to public sector pay scales.

Also people like teachers, nurses, guards etc are underpaid and deserve every cent they get and more.

I think that is a very outdated view from the 60's and 70's when there was very little private industry or capital in Ireland.

mariaalice · 17-02-2020 3:23pm

A large part of the problem particularly around Dublin and other major cities is something that is only being worked through by Irish and other wealthy western societies now.

Third level education does not automatically lead to a certain lifestyle and income the way it did in the past. There are people/couple who really should be looking for social housing, yet they are attempting to buy without the income to support a mortgage and there are a fair amount who need some sort of support to get a mortgage.

A lot find that shocking and it feels like a betrayal.

RandomViewer · 17-02-2020 5:20pm

dartboardio wrote: »

What I'm saying is its a low average.

€47,000 isn't a 'fantastic' wage. And I would have thought the average would be €60k ish seeming that most people have gone to college or have degrees/masters.

If two thirds of the workforce have a degree it's really not worth anymore than a Leaving cert. Recession saw tens of thousands of people get third level qualifications,

Antares35 · 17-02-2020 11:58pm

Leland Melted Rumor wrote: »

You are comparing apples and oranges, it’s a lazy comparison comparing average public sector pay to average private sector pay as it doesn’t take into account that vast array of job types in the private sector of various different skill levels compared to the other public sector where the majority of jobs are highly skilled, require a strong education etc.

If you compared like for like skill and education levels only things would be a lot closer and the private sector would come out on top in a lot of cases as it’s not limited to public sector pay scales.

Also people like teachers, nurses, guards etc are underpaid and deserve every cent they get and more.

Sure many public servants have f*ck all skills, they sauntered into the P&T years back because daddy got them in and they never left, getting promoted simply because of time served and diddly squat to do with skill, education, experience or merit. Literally getting bumped up on the basis of time served. Some of them still getting a 'productivity allowance" which is essentially a 15% increase on pay compared with others who joined later. Different PRSI class too for some who joined earlier. Then there is the DB pension scheme. For many public servants they just got on the gravy train at the right time. Little or nothing to do with skill.

I worked in the PS for several years, most people I knew didnt have the competence to move a pen from A to B and even if they could, they wouldnt move it without going through the union because it "wasnt in their job description" lol

Fred Cryton · 18-02-2020 12:16am

lawred2 wrote: »

Never happening lads. Even if FG got returned, they'd just forget about this pledge like every other pledge.

Fool me once and all that.

Ironically FG may have more power now they're not the lead party, because they have something to offer the main party (Dail seats).

Hopefully Leo really pushes for a €50k higher rate threshold as the price of going into government.

Potential-Monke · 18-02-2020 4:45am

Antares35 wrote: »

I worked in the PS for several years, most people I knew didnt have the competence to move a pen from A to B and even if they could, they wouldnt move it without going through the union because it "wasnt in their job description" lol

I've worked in the PS too. But I can hand on heart say there are more people like that in the Private Sector than the public. Far, far more. I wonder how half of these people manage to dress themselves in the morning, and shur we see the ones that won't and saunter to the shops in the PJ's.

Someone mentioned another posters view was like something from the 60s and 70s. What you describe may have been par for course for a long time, but it's no longer that way. It's still there, but nowhere near as bad as it was.

But I still think it's worse in the private sector. Every job in the private sector I've had, I'd question the abilities of half of the people employed, and nearly all of the people promoted. Cronyism is rife in the private sector.

PommieBast · 18-02-2020 9:54am

Fred Cryton wrote: »

Hopefully Leo really pushes for a €50k higher rate threshold as the price of going into government.

I personally don't hold out much hope..

Potential-Monke wrote: »

But I still think it's worse in the private sector. Every job in the private sector I've had, I'd question the abilities of half of the people employed, and nearly all of the people promoted. Cronyism is rife in the private sector.

I think it is more a factor of organisation size than public/private.

Antares35 · 18-02-2020 12:00pm

Potential-Monke wrote: »

I've worked in the PS too. But I can hand on heart say there are more people like that in the Private Sector than the public. Far, far more. I wonder how half of these people manage to dress themselves in the morning, and shur we see the ones that won't and saunter to the shops in the PJ's.

Someone mentioned another posters view was like something from the 60s and 70s. What you describe may have been par for course for a long time, but it's no longer that way. It's still there, but nowhere near as bad as it was.

But I still think it's worse in the private sector. Every job in the private sector I've had, I'd question the abilities of half of the people employed, and nearly all of the people promoted. Cronyism is rife in the private sector.

Hand on heart based on what? Your account is (like mine) anecdotal.

Enter name here · 18-02-2020 2:56pm

Anyone earning above 60k per annum should be on a flate tax rate of 20%.

We are less of a burden on resources than low income earners.

Anyone under 60k should pay 40% to cover all the additional services and rebates they use.

RobbieTheRobber · 18-02-2020 2:59pm

Antares35 wrote: »

Sure many public servants have f*ck all skills, they sauntered into the P&T years back because daddy got them in and they never left, getting promoted simply because of time served and diddly squat to do with skill, education, experience or merit. Literally getting bumped up on the basis of time served. Some of them still getting a 'productivity allowance" which is essentially a 15% increase on pay compared with others who joined later. Different PRSI class too for some who joined earlier. Then there is the DB pension scheme. For many public servants they just got on the gravy train at the right time. Little or nothing to do with skill.

I worked in the PS for several years, most people I knew didnt have the competence to move a pen from A to B and even if they could, they wouldnt move it without going through the union because it "wasnt in their job description" lol

This whole post is bullshít!

Antares35 · 18-02-2020 3:22pm

RobbieTheRobber wrote: »

This whole post is bullshít!

Have I hit a nerve? Simply relaying my experience

o1s1n · 18-02-2020 3:37pm

Enter name here wrote: »

Anyone earning above 60k per annum should be on a flate tax rate of 20%.

We are less of a burden on resources than low income earners.

Anyone under 60k should pay 40% to cover all the additional services and rebates they use.

Nonsense.

If you were to do this, people under 60k would become even more of a 'burden' as they'd have considerably less money.

How does this solve anything other than making those who are well off even more well off?

Tony EH · 18-02-2020 3:42pm

o1s1n wrote: »

Nonsense.

If you were to do this, people under 60k would become even more of a 'burden' as they'd have considerably less money.

How does this solve anything other than making those who are well off even more well off?

That's all some people give a shit about.

dartboardio · 18-02-2020 4:05pm

Anyone earning over 80-100k should be taxed at a higher rate

Under that should be 20%

18-02-2020 4:15pm

dartboardio wrote: »

Anyone earning over 80-100k should be taxed at a higher rate

Why? They already pay far more why should they be punished further with an even higher rate of tax for being successful. Its scandalous the way a higher earner is treated like a cash cow, the extra money they earn should be benefitting them and their family not subsidising those who don't work or earn small amounts.

PommieBast · 18-02-2020 4:24pm

It should be a flat rate across the board, starting at €0. No exceptions.

Antares35 · 18-02-2020 4:56pm

dartboardio wrote: »

Anyone earning over 80-100k should be taxed at a higher rate

Under that should be 20%

Why?

mariaalice · 18-02-2020 4:58pm

It should be rebalanced towards property and asset tax.

KaneToad · 18-02-2020 4:58pm

Antares35 wrote: »

Why?

We all want the higher rate of tax to kick in at a sensible level of earnings. That level is usually €1 more than we earn...

Average salary at €47,000

Comments