# Amazing that there's not more objection to LPT



## Codogly (28 Oct 2015)

When you look at it LPT is for more injust than the water charges and yet the water charges has got the limelight.
LPT in water terms would be like charging people a tax on water the have already purchased.
I can see future governments using this tax in the future to control the stock of property in this country.  Increasing rates on elderly couples to move them out of their homes freeing up their home ( a family home near schools etc ) for the next generation.

The modern thinking see's a house as an asset not a HOME.


----------



## Protocol (28 Oct 2015)

A house is an asset, as well as a home.

Local Property taxes have many advantages over other taxes.


----------



## odyssey06 (28 Oct 2015)

Codogly said:


> When you look at it LPT is for more injust than the water charges and yet the water charges has got the limelight.
> LPT in water terms would be like charging people a tax on water the have already purchased.
> I can see future governments using this tax in the future to control the stock of property in this country.  Increasing rates on elderly couples to move them out of their homes freeing up their home ( a family home near schools etc ) for the next generation.



They already do this down the line with inheritance taxes 

I think a bigger scandal is the state of local democracy in this country. It is not democratic at all given the wide ranging powers exercised by city managers without regard to city councils - this is now doubly intolerable as it's a case of taxation without representation. If we're going to have LPT, we should have mayors.


----------



## thedaddyman (28 Oct 2015)

Codogly said:


> When you look at it LPT is for more injust than the water charges and yet the water charges has got the limelight.
> LPT in water terms would be like charging people a tax on water the have already purchased.
> I can see future governments using this tax in the future to control the stock of property in this country.  Increasing rates on elderly couples to move them out of their homes freeing up their home ( a family home near schools etc ) for the next generation.
> 
> The modern thinking see's a house as an asset not a HOME.



It's quite probable that any policy which set LPT on the basis of age would be unconstitutional. It would also be political suicide for any party since the elderly are more likely to vote then young people.


----------



## Gerard123 (28 Oct 2015)

What is more incredible is the manner on which the LPT is charged, and the unfairness of it, particularly urban dwellers, Dublin in particular (ps I'm not a Dub!  Not a City vs Country argument here). 

Electricity rate - same unit charge throughout the country.
Gas - same unit charge throughout the country.
Road tax - same unit charge throughout the country.

Agree with the above approach.  All other things being equal, reflecting a society, need to have equality, respect peoples choice in terms of where they live, etc, its fair that people pay similar rates for services and utilities.

Yet LPT is charged on a fundamentally different basis and in an unfair manner

Assume couple in same type of house, same income, same circumstances.  Why should a couple pay a lot more in Dublin simply because they live in Dublin.  LPT is a much bigger hit for most people than water charges, and particularly for Dubliners.  Should be more made of it in the upcoming election. 

PS - please don't give me the mansion tax argument, that is usually raised in this type of debate as a distraction.  Let's consider the majority of the population please who live in ordinary houses.

My basic premise is - people in similar circumstances. living in a similar house, similar income, etc should pay the same LPT (as they do electricity rates, gas, car tax, etc, etc). 

LPT should also consider other things, e.g. ability to pay, income levels, possibly number of children in the house, etc.


----------



## Codogly (28 Oct 2015)

My big problem with LPT and it supprises me that more wasn't made of it at the time ... We have already or are currently paying for our houses and paying a big big price at that , so how can it be fair for a government to come along and then start taxing us on something we have already paid for ... tax water fair enough (we all need it and we should all contribute to the cost of providing it)  ... but property in this case we have provided this ourselves at our own expense no help from government ... ironically the people who are exempt from LPT are the ones the government does have to fund houses for.


----------



## glynner (28 Oct 2015)

My mother sold her house this summer . When the solicitor was sorting everything out mum was hit with a LPT bill because the house sold for more then the LPT was registered for . Of course it did as it was a dwelling in Dublin !!!!! , and the prices have risen since 2013-2014 . we had to prove the house was valued at the same price as the band chosen on registration , We got the money back as we had to pay first and appeal after. We moved also this year and had our PPR valued which again had increased in value so as I know it will be sold in the near future I increased my band of LPT.   I just filed my Tax return and was hit with surcharge for years 2013 & 2014 for non compliance of LPT !!!! Appeal letter gone in today !!!


----------



## T McGibney (28 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> What is more incredible is the manner on which the LPT is charged, and the unfairness of it, particularly urban dwellers, Dublin in particular (ps I'm not a Dub!  Not a City vs Country argument here).
> 
> Electricity rate - same unit charge throughout the country.
> Gas - same unit charge throughout the country.
> Road tax - same unit charge throughout the country.



A new electricity connection in rural Ireland will cost you a lot more than a corresponding connection in an urban area. #justsaying


----------



## Sarenco (28 Oct 2015)

A property would have a much lower value if it did not have access to the various services that we all fund through our taxes (roads, street lighting, policing, access to education and medical services, parks, libraries, etc.), whether or not we own any property.  A property tax is therefore justifiable as a contribution to this community funding.

A large part of the reason that properties have a higher value in urban areas than in rural areas is the higher concentration of (publicly funded) services in urban areas.

Having said that, I certainly agree that model that the Government opted for (a self-assessed property tax that is collected centrally) is far from ideal.  A site value tax, in my opinion, would have been a far better option for a number of reasons.

It will be interesting to see if any of the political parties re-visit this issue in the upcoming election.


----------



## Gerard123 (28 Oct 2015)

T McGibney said:


> A new electricity connection in rural Ireland will cost you a lot more than a corresponding connection in an urban area. #justsaying



Exactly my point, even though average cost is higher in a rural area, the Govt does not seek to penalise rural dwellers with a higher electricity charge.  Same with Gas.  Water - in my estate 150 houses, bet the average connection cost is much lower than most rural houses.  Again same unit rate, which I agree with.  General rule - services and utility costs are the same no matter where one lives.

As for roads, don't tell me that the average cost of the road network in Dublin *per person *is higher on average than the western seaboard.  Should residents living there pay higher road tax?  Of course not.   There are 'swings and round abouts' on these costs. It is a fact that there is a large transfer of tax monies from Dublin to the regions.  

So back to my main contention, why charge urban people higher LPT?

There is no logical reason other than the LPT is seen purely as a tax raising mechanism, and the only way the Govy can raise sufficient funds is to hit urban people harder, on the premise that it should be based on house values only.  They are more concerned with the rural electorate??


----------



## Sarenco (28 Oct 2015)

Don't forget that Dublin couldn't exist without a rural road network.  We've got to get our grub somehow!


----------



## T McGibney (28 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> Should residents living there pay higher road tax?  Of course not.


Oddly enough, I'd support getting rid of road tax per se and surcharging fuel excise instead. Which would obviously entail rural drivers paying (much) more, but more importantly, society as a whole sharing the benefits of the efficiency.



> So back to my main contention, why charge urban people higher LPT?


Because their homes are worth more?


> They are more concerned with the rural electorate??


Hardly, given that the urban electorate is now more numerous than the rural one. Mayo used have 6 seats in the Dail but will only have 4 in the next Dail.


----------



## galway_blow_in (28 Oct 2015)

thedaddyman said:


> It's quite probable that any policy which set LPT on the basis of age would be unconstitutional. It would also be political suicide for any party since the elderly are more likely to vote then young people.



the elderly get special treatment when it comes to health insurance and the rest of us pay for it , if the elderly were to be somewhat penalised under 
some aspect of the LPT system , it would be the first time that demographic ever got the less glamorous end of the stick 

a home is an asset


----------



## galway_blow_in (28 Oct 2015)

Codogly said:


> My big problem with LPT and it supprises me that more wasn't made of it at the time ... We have already or are currently paying for our houses and paying a big big price at that , so how can it be fair for a government to come along and then start taxing us on something we have already paid for ... tax water fair enough (we all need it and we should all contribute to the cost of providing it)  ... but property in this case we have provided this ourselves at our own expense no help from government ... ironically the people who are exempt from LPT are the ones the government does have to fund houses for.



could the same not be said about road tax , the goverment didnt hand us a car , im fully in favour of property tax and water charges , id like to see a flat income tax code brought in however which included corporations , i realise its not going to happen


----------



## Gerard123 (28 Oct 2015)

galway_blow_in said:


> a home is an asset



Correction please -

A home *without a loan* is an asset.
A home *in negative equity* is *a liability*.  

LPT makes no distinction for mortgages, negative equity, etc.  At least if LPT was payable on the net house value, after mortgages, that would be a little more equitable than the current crude system for charging on gross values.


----------



## llgon (28 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> Exactly my point, even though average cost is higher in a rural area, the Govt does not seek to penalise rural dwellers with a higher electricity charge.  Same with Gas.  Water - in my estate 150 houses, bet the average connection cost is much lower than most rural houses.  Again same unit rate, which I agree with.  General rule - services and utility costs are the same no matter where one lives.
> 
> As for roads, don't tell me that the average cost of the road network in Dublin *per person *is higher on average than the western seaboard.  Should residents living there pay higher road tax?  Of course not.   There are 'swings and round abouts' on these costs. It is a fact that there is a large transfer of tax monies from Dublin to the regions.
> 
> ...


Would your point change if there was a higher rural electricity standing charge???


----------



## odyssey06 (28 Oct 2015)

Given that the declared goal for water charges is conservation, that cannot be reconciled with charging a flat rate for water in all areas and all times... the price should be fluctuating based on water availability (by locality and by season) ... if the declared goal can be believed...


----------



## Sarenco (28 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> Correction please -
> 
> A home *without a loan* is an asset.
> A home *in negative equity* is *a liability*.
> ...



No, the property is still an asset - it's the loan secured on the property that's the liability.


----------



## Gerard123 (29 Oct 2015)

Thank you for the legalistic/accounting clarification. 

I trust that most people got my meaning, i.e. charge LPT on the net value of the house after mortgage.

analogy - a similarity between like features of two things, on which a comparison may be based
metaphor - a figure of speech that identifies something as being the same as some unrelated thing for rhetorical effect, thus highlighting the similarities between the two


----------



## T McGibney (29 Oct 2015)

Never a good idea for a public policy measure to directly incentivise people to maintain mortgage borrowings on their homes.


----------



## Gerard123 (29 Oct 2015)

T McGibney said:


> Never a good idea for a public policy measure to directly incentivise people to maintain mortgage borrowings on their homes.



I don't disagree with the statement made in principle. However public policy is frequently balancing at times what appears to be irreconcilable and unpleasant alternatives, competing objectives, etc. 

Should not be a free for all re mortgages, with proper controls, etc would be a better measure of wealth.  Would need controls wrapped around it to prevent abuse or excesses, the mansions, people increasing mortgages to reduce LPT. 

Fair to say that the gross value of a house is not (in isolation) representative of someone's wealth, if that was the case then most of the wealthy people in Ireland would live in Dublin.  I don't think they do.  What I am saying is that for the average Joe soap their mortgage is one consideration to be taken account of when calculating LPT.  Should also consider ability to pay, etc. 

Of course not an easy one, but the current approach is crude and unfairly penalising people simply based on where they live.  LPT is really supposed to be a wealth tax, how it is charged is not representative of a true measure of wealth.


----------



## T McGibney (29 Oct 2015)

The property tax isn't a wealth tax though. Nor was it ever supposed to be one.

It's a property tax, applied on residential premises, just as local authority rates apply to commercial premises.

Simples.


----------



## Gerard123 (29 Oct 2015)

llgon said:


> Would your point change if there was a higher rural electricity standing charge???



No, why would I?  I would disagree strongly if there was a higher rural standing charge, purely based on it being a country/locational charge.

There are swings and roundabouts in charges, that is the reality.  However putting in place a system which is hitting urban people harder - that is unfair.

Possible to look at a whole variety of different charges and nickel and dime, that's not my objective.  It's putting in place an overall system which is basically fair all around, and not overly biased towards where one lives.  I think the LPT system does not meet this but is fundamentally an unfair charge.


----------



## Codogly (29 Oct 2015)

There is a real danger IMO that in the future the tax system will penalise people who worked hard and were responsible with the decisions they made with their net earnings ...i.e. People who bought a house to provide for their future accommodation needs and made adequate pension provisions to cover the various expenses upon retirement, who took out and paid for Private Health Insurance.
LPT is the start of taxing the responsible people for doing the right thing.  You cant tax the poor (they dont have it) ... so if you are currently working towards paying off your mortgage and building up a pension pot be careful not to over do it you'll only make yourself a target for future government taxes.


----------



## T McGibney (29 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> No, why would I?  I would disagree strongly if there was a higher rural standing charge, purely based on it being a country/locational charge.


Except there is one (I suspect the question was rhetorical).

http://www.cer.ie/customer-care/about-us/faqs



> *Standing Charge*
> The standing charge covers the upkeep of the network necessary to bring supply to your home, together with the cost of reading the meter, issuing and processing the bills, etc. These costs have to be met irrespective of the amount of electricity used.
> 
> Rural standing charges are higher than urban standing charges due to the additional costs of maintaining supply to rural customers.
> ...


----------



## Gerard123 (29 Oct 2015)

T McGibney said:


> It's a property tax, applied on residential premises, just as local authority rates apply to commercial premises.



Not labelled as a wealth tax, agree with that.  In my view it is a more a general tax masquerading as a property tax, brought in at a time when there was a need to expand the tax base. In most jurisdictions a property tax is seen as a form of a wealth tax, would you not agree with that? 

Here it is leaning in the direction of wealth, not criticising that as I think it is fair that people pay according to means/wealth, as usual the key question/uncertainty/areas of differing opinions is how best to levy charges. 

Don't know enough about commercial rates, is that levied purely on current value?  I thought there was some other way that was levied which led to it being more of a level playing field (though I guess it depends who asks, right).


----------



## Gerard123 (29 Oct 2015)

T McGibney said:


> Except there is one (I suspect the question was rhetorical).
> 
> http://www.cer.ie/customer-care/about-us/faqs



I checked.  Urban standing charge - 140, Rural - 186.  Should be the same, though the difference is marginal.

No comparison in my mind to small differences in these standing charges (which I disagree with by the way) and pretty enormous differences in LPT based on location only.


----------



## T McGibney (29 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> Not labelled as a wealth tax, agree with that.  In my view it is a more a general tax masquerading as a property tax, brought in at a time when there was a need to expand the tax base. In most jurisdictions a property tax is seen as a form of a wealth tax, would you not agree with that?



Nope, most countries have property taxes. Some have wealth taxes on top of property taxes. Ireland had domestic property rates until 1977. Nobody counted that as a wealth tax.


----------



## Sarenco (29 Oct 2015)

Absolutely agree with Tommy.  Property taxes are a mechanism for funding local public services (albeit that the LPT is collected centrally).  A small number of countries have an additional wealth or net asset tax (often with a primary residence allowance) but many countries have discontinued this form of taxation.


----------



## muinteoir (29 Oct 2015)

I disagreed with the property tax from the beginning. The reason there wasn't more of a fuss about it was that people were played. It was made out that those that had houses were rich and those that did not were poor. I think people were guilted into it. I was very disappointed when people paid the tax. They could just keep making the taxing us more and more. At least if it were based on the amount that was mortgage free it would be one thing. My house is definitely not a asset. It is an anchor around my neck pulling me down. I am in negative equity in a house I can't bare to live in but cannot move because I cannot sell.

What they should have done was have people who had more than one house pay a much bigger amount on the second, third, etc. house.


----------



## T McGibney (29 Oct 2015)

muinteoir said:


> What they should have done was have people who had more than one house pay a much bigger amount on the second, third, etc. house.



What would be the logic behind that?


----------



## jpd (29 Oct 2015)

Any bets on "If elected, we will abolish LPT" being included in next election promises, sorry, manifestoes


----------



## moneybox (29 Oct 2015)

muinteoir said:


> What they should have done was have people who had more than one house pay a much bigger amount on the second, third, etc. house.




They had that didn't they in the shape of the NPPR, even people who didn't own a second home were subjected to it i.e those who emigrated like me and countless others who moved into the cities in search of jobs. Then when people refused to pay it or those who weren't even aware of this tax, they were hit with exorbitant penalty charges up to 7K in some instances.


----------



## galway_blow_in (30 Oct 2015)

Gerard123 said:


> Correction please -
> 
> A home *without a loan* is an asset.
> A home *in negative equity* is *a liability*.
> ...




how many retired people are still paying a mortgage on their house ?


----------



## Protocol (30 Oct 2015)

jpd said:


> Any bets on "If elected, we will abolish LPT" being included in next election promises, sorry, manifestoes



SF propose to abolish the LPT and water charges, and instead increase income tax.

This is expected from a socialist party.


----------



## dereko1969 (30 Oct 2015)

Can people stop referring to Road Tax, there's no such thing. It's motor tax.


----------



## trojan (30 Oct 2015)

dereko1969 said:


> Can people stop referring to Road Tax, there's no such thing. It's motor tax.


A lady from Revenue was on radio today and she said as far as i can recall 98%  of people have paid.


----------



## Protocol (5 Dec 2015)

LPT found to be pro-economic growth and pro-employment, without causing equity to suffer:

http://www.oecd-ilibrary.org/economics/searching-for-the-inclusive-tax-grail_5jrqc6vk3n30-en


----------



## Butter (14 Dec 2015)

trojan said:


> A lady from Revenue was on radio today and she said as far as i can recall 98%  of people have paid.



Not at all surprising considering Revenue collect it & have numerous ways to extract the payment from you.


----------



## Sumatra (22 Dec 2015)

LPT is a self assessed tax. It is based on the market value of your property. Market value is defined as the amount something can be sold on a given market. If Revenue send you out a valuation of what they think the market value is of a property in your area why would you pay more than this estimate?


----------



## Jon Snow (26 Dec 2015)

Sumatra said:


> LPT is a self assessed tax. It is based on the market value of your property. Market value is defined as the amount something can be sold on a given market. If Revenue send you out a valuation of what they think the market value is of a property in your area why would you pay more than this estimate?



Because it's not a valuation. It's a very loose estimate, without the property, its condition, or any of a number of other relevant factors being considered...


----------



## horse7 (24 Feb 2016)

This tax does not feature with any of the main candidates in the upcoming election. I am of the opinion that it should be related to one's income.


----------



## T McGibney (24 Feb 2016)

horse7 said:


> I am of the opinion that it should be related to one's income.



Then its just another income tax.


----------



## T McGibney (24 Feb 2016)

sahd said:


> Sinn Fein say they will abolish it .



Yet the council tax they impose in Northern Ireland is much heavier than the LPT is.


----------



## 44brendan (24 Feb 2016)

Sinn Fein are opposed to LPT. This falls nicely into their Socialist agenda


----------



## Agent 47 (24 Feb 2016)

LPT and Water charges are a tax on breathing, even when one retires we will still have to pay for them unless they are eliminated. I have brought this directly to FG when they arrived on my door. We pay enough bloody taxes on everything else that should make up for it.


----------



## Protocol (24 Feb 2016)

They are not a tax on "breathing", you might be thinking of a lump-sum poll tax.

A poll tax per person was introduced in the UK in 1989, but was not politically popular.

Also, please note that taxes in Irl are lower than average, compared to most countries.


----------



## Gerard123 (24 Feb 2016)

Protocol said:


> Also, please note that taxes in Irl are lower than average, compared to most countries.



What countries are you comparing to or thinking of?


----------



## Protocol (24 Feb 2016)

Most continental states, UK.

Not the USA, taxes are lower there.

See the diagram below of total tax revenue as a % of GDP, 2013 and 2014.


----------



## Protocol (24 Feb 2016)




----------



## Protocol (24 Feb 2016)

This diagram shows total Govt revenue and expenditure:


----------



## Leo (25 Feb 2016)

Agent 47 said:


> We pay enough bloody taxes on everything else that should make up for it.



If that were true we wouldn't be borrowing so heavily to make ends meet.


----------



## T McGibney (25 Feb 2016)

Protocol said:


> Most continental states, UK.
> 
> Not the USA, taxes are lower there.
> 
> See the diagram below of total tax revenue as a % of GDP, 2013 and 2014.



All Irish economic stats based on GDP are flawed as our GDP is grossly inflated by multinational transfer pricing. That's why the more tax lobby will never use the more meaningful, and equally accessible, GNP figures when compiling national tax % statistics relative to other economies.


----------



## Protocol (25 Feb 2016)

Yes, that's true.

And it's a pity that Eurostat don't also quote data as a % of Irish GNP/GNI.

When you make the adjustment, the overall tax levels would increase from about 31% of GDP to about 36% of GNP.

So we are neither a high tax, nor a low tax economy. The EU average is 40%.

More like just below average taxation levels, with maybe 12 countries ahead of us.


----------

