Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

NPPR charges over €7000

13»

Comments

  • #62
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Takes a few minutes to reconnect electricity, if I remember right the last time I saw it done, it involved ESB networks guy putting a new fuse in meter board and taking a reading. ESB want a form filled out by electrical contractor to confirm electrics are sound, took my electrician about an hour to check everything and fill form. I don’t know if that could be considered significant.

    Yes but you are assuming the wiring in the property is ok, what if vandals had made bits of the board or pulled wires out of the ceiling, or rodents have eaten some wiring etc, it could be a big job and given that one house given as an example is vacant since 2000 there is a high likely hood the wiring would not be ok.


  • #63
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    Coyler wrote: »
    The vast majority of people on this forum would agree with that principle. However if you are arguing for 700% fines on original charges for all legally obliged payments I'd suspect you start to get a little push back.

    I dont really care , if you think I should pay and someone else thinks they dont have to the pain should be given. I think this is a good way, there were alot of the people at the time saying that the would not pay. The law was spelled out at the time what would happen.


  • #64
    Coyler
    Registered Users Posts: 386 ✭✭Coyler


    handlemaster wrote: »
    I dont really care , if you think I should pay and someone else thinks they dont have to the pain should be given. I think this is a good way, there were alot of the people at the time saying that the would not pay. The law was spelled out at the time what would happen.

    And if that were the case I'd agree with you. However I can think of several scenarios of how a self-declared charged could be easily missed by plenty of people. Also, the claim that it was spelled out does fall flat because as I remember it it was referred to as the "Second Home Tax" or "Holiday Home Tax".

    It's fairly obvious from this thread and several other areas online many people thought it didn't apply to them or just didn't know about it. I'm sure some of those are spinning a tale and it's entirely up to you to assess how many but do you honestly believe they are all lying? And if they are lying then they know about the charge so why bother coming here for advice? Surely they know the answer by now?

    Anyway, I'm a complete sucker for a sob story so happy to help someone out.


  • #65
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    I have a house rented out under HAP. It's kind of ironic that the same council sets very different standards as to what constitutes "habitable" when it suits them. Ah well, you get used to the hypocrisy at some stage.


  • #66
    Drifter50
    Registered Users Posts: 617 ✭✭✭Drifter50


    4ensic15 wrote: »
    Wait until either you sell, the council issue proceedings, or 2025.

    Thanks for your helpful and constructive comment. I did`nt realise this existed at all, thought I would have to live with my stupid mistake


  • Advertisement
  • #67
    Dav010
    Registered Users Posts: 13,978 ✭✭✭✭Dav010


    JimmyMW wrote: »
    Yes but you are assuming the wiring in the property is ok, what if vandals had made bits of the board or pulled wires out of the ceiling, or rodents have eaten some wiring etc, it could be a big job and given that one house given as an example is vacant since 2000 there is a high likely hood the wiring would not be ok.

    Are you on the right thread?


  • #68
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,189 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    It's a long shot but there is one other way out of paying NPPR.
    The "Granny Flat" exemption.
    It was introduced as cover to exempt farmers with a second house on their property.
    Any residential property within 2km of your principal residence is exempt.


  • #69
    AmberGold
    Registered Users Posts: 1,281 ✭✭✭AmberGold


    I was seriously affected by the recession, lost my job, negative equity, forbearance mortgages the lot. I still managed to hang onto two RIP’s which I question the benefit of to this day and also paid the NPPR every year.

    How can the fines and penalties expire in 2025, seems unfair?


  • #70
    JimmyMW
    Registered Users Posts: 695 ✭✭✭JimmyMW


    Dav010 wrote: »
    Are you on the right thread?

    Absolutely I am, read the previous posts I responded to, thanks


  • #71
    Coyler
    Registered Users Posts: 386 ✭✭Coyler


    AmberGold wrote: »
    I was seriously affected by the recession, lost my job, negative equity, forbearance mortgages the lot. I still managed to hang onto two RIP’s which I question the benefit of to this day and also paid the NPPR every year.

    How can the fines and penalties expire in 2025, seems unfair?

    Again, as a principle, I really don't think many disagree with you but it's the details that make the difference. Putting aside the issue of making people aware of the charge for the moment, the 700% penalty is without comparison. Revenue doesn't even come close to that level and they go to far greater levels to ensure you are aware of what your responsibilities. In fact, you can be years late with your property tax or household charge and Revenue won't usually even penalise you.

    I commend you on you keeping your personal finances in order, I really do. But it's entirely plausible many people didn't realise it applied to them. Even now with all the exemptions and interpretations it literally changes from CC to CC for who it actually applies to. Confusion has plagued this charge from the beginning to this day which is an unavoidable fact.

    As for the expiry, can you imagine trying to prove you don't owe this charge in 2040? 2050? The commission were working on GDPR in 2012. You think this set off a few alarm bells? This wasn't put in for you or I, this was put in because they realised it was poorly implemented and wasn't sustainable.

    Worse, I'd argue the expiry makes the whole thing even more unfair. Why should it expire? Why should those who have to sell even when faced with a charge of €7,230 be hit and those who can afford to wait it out or had no plan to sell not? Seems to completely favour those with deep pockets in my eyes or am I being unfair?


  • Advertisement
  • #72
    handlemaster
    Registered Users Posts: 6,003 ✭✭✭handlemaster


    Coyler wrote: »
    And if that were the case I'd agree with you. However I can think of several scenarios of how a self-declared charged could be easily missed by plenty of people. Also, the claim that it was spelled out does fall flat because as I remember it it was referred to as the "Second Home Tax" or "Holiday Home Tax".

    It's fairly obvious from this thread and several other areas online many people thought it didn't apply to them or just didn't know about it. I'm sure some of those are spinning a tale and it's entirely up to you to assess how many but do you honestly believe they are all lying? And if they are lying then they know about the charge so why bother coming here for advice? Surely they know the answer by now?

    Anyway, I'm a complete sucker for a sob story so happy to help someone out.

    Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Cough up like the rest of us.


  • #73
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,189 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    handlemaster wrote: »
    Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Cough up like the rest of us.

    You don't have to be a victim of the NPPR to empathise with people who were caught out.
    Some owners assumed that because the house was the only one they owned in Ireland that it didn't apply to them. Others took it to only apply to "holiday homes".
    Most taxpayers on PAYE are unfamiliar with the workings of Revenue.


  • #74
    Rew
    Moderators, Sports Moderators Posts: 8,679 Mod ✭✭✭✭Rew


    It was very well publicised at the time you would have to have been deluding yourself or living under a rock to have missed it. Whats frustrating about it now is the people it didn't apply to having to jump through hoops years later to get an exemption certs.


  • #75
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    There are people still posting to this day about not being aware of how you pay for the M50; despite a decade of advertising and huge signs beside the road. So its really not that implausible for there to be people completely unaware of the NPPR.


  • #76
    murphaph
    Registered Users Posts: 19,018 ✭✭✭✭murphaph


    L1011 wrote: »
    There are people still posting to this day about not being aware of how you pay for the M50; despite a decade of advertising and huge signs beside the road. So its really not that implausible for there to be people completely unaware of the NPPR.
    Yep. I have property in Ireland and Germany. The German authorities know which of my properties are my PPR and which are rented etc. If you don't rent a second property out here then it will usually attract a "second home tax".

    In Ireland we haven't even moved all property to the bloody land registry (the site I am actually talking about in Dublin is "registry of deeds". We have a big stack of paperwork tracing the path of ownership going back a hundred years or so. It should have been all registered decades ago.

    It's night and day how the two systems operate.

    I was actually paying the NPPR for residential property that was habitable and rented out, but it never crossed my (or my brother's) mind to pay the NPPR for a property without a toilet, kitchen, windows, running water or electricity.


  • #77
    garhjw
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,424 ✭✭✭garhjw


    Could someone please explain where the 12 years comes in? Why in 2021 does is 2009 NPPR charge no longer payable/ owed and so on?


  • #78
    L1011
    Moderators, Business & Finance Moderators, Motoring & Transport Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 67,523 Mod ✭✭✭✭L1011


    garhjw wrote: »
    Could someone please explain where the 12 years comes in? Why in 2021 does is 2009 NPPR charge no longer payable/ owed and so on?

    Either the Statute of Limitations or something to do with debt recovery time limits, as far as I can remember. Searching is turning up nothing; but basically it'd be rather difficult to enforce after that - particularly as it was originally a charge collected by the local councils, not a Revenue collected tax. Revenue can go back basically forever for tax.


  • #79
    elperello
    Registered Users Posts: 14,189 ✭✭✭✭elperello


    Rew wrote: »
    It was very well publicised at the time you would have to have been deluding yourself or living under a rock to have missed it. Whats frustrating about it now is the people it didn't apply to having to jump through hoops years later to get an exemption certs.
    L1011 wrote: »
    There are people still posting to this day about not being aware of how you pay for the M50; despite a decade of advertising and huge signs beside the road. So its really not that implausible for there to be people completely unaware of the NPPR.

    So, you were working away in Los Angeles for the last 35 years. Never drew a penny from Irish State and never will. Eventually hoping to retire and spend US pension living in Ireland.

    Only follows GAA news from Ireland and never sees an Irish paper or TV station except when home on vacation once a year.

    Spent good US money employing local contractors to renovate the homestead.

    Not me but a guy I know. Currently lying low and hoping it blows over.


  • #80
    Coyler
    Registered Users Posts: 386 ✭✭Coyler


    handlemaster wrote: »
    Ignorance of the law is not an excuse. Cough up like the rest of us.

    And I did but here's the rub. There are some who knew about the charge, didn't pay it and are now set to get away with not paying it as they wait it out. In fact they still be better off if they just pay for 2013. The enforcement mechanism actively encourages people not to pay the charge at all.

    Don't know about you but I certainly feel I was made a fool of.


  • #81
    sunnysoutheast
    Registered Users Posts: 2,072 ✭✭✭sunnysoutheast


    I was actually idly wondering whether Revenue would be more "proactive" in going out to collect this charge before it becomes uncollectible after the 12 years or whatever. I'd guess not because it was originally a local authority charge.

    It's not as if Revenue don't have a good handle on who owns what property now.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement