Is the 41% Exit Tax Soon to be Scrapped? Michael McGrath to Review

Interesting to see the prevalence of socialist thought - and as always it's diected at the working middle class, who are those hit by 41pc exit tax on an ETF because they don't have the scale to efficiently structure their affairs.

The excuse given in the media is laughable and demonstrates they couldn't even be bothered coming up with something credible.

There is no incentive to save in these products between a 1pc levy on entry (for a life assurance product), 41pc on exit with no relief on losses, and the product charges. All that on capital which has been taxed at roughly 50pc already because that's what you pay on any earnings beyond subsistence levels for a family.

This reflects the overall lack of incentive in Ireland to better oneself and build up a nest egg for hard times. Much more incentive to simply fall back upon the state - and you could argue they like it exactly that way, fearing the emergence of a mass who have space to think, ask hard questions and say NO more often.
 
Last edited:
camlin90 said:
Interesting to see the prevalence of socialist thought - and as always it's diected at the working middle class, who are those hit by 41pc exit tax on an ETF because they don't have the scale to efficiently structure their affairs.

The excuse given in the media is laughable and demonstrates they couldn't even be bothered coming up with something credible.

There is no incentive to save in these products between a 1pc levy on entry (for a life assurance product), 41pc on exit with no relief on losses, and the product charges. All that on capital which has been taxed at roughly 50pc already because that's what you pay on any earnings beyond subsistence levels for a family.

This reflects the overall lack of incentive in Ireland to better oneself and build up a nest egg for hard times. Much more incentive to simply fall back upon the state - and you could argue they like it exactly that way, fearing the emergence of a mass who have space to think, ask hard questions and say NO more often.
Click to expand...
The 1 % drives me nuts. They're taking 1% of my money, before anything else happens. At least the 41% is only on growth...
 
yellowmoose said:
I think its valid to have tax policies that achieves any number of different goals. Encouraging the large number of the population that don't spend every penny they earn every month to invest for their own future rather than gift money to the banks sounds like good policy to me and not one that should be binned because there are poor people.
Click to expand...

Something I have always thought about but never been able to fully articulate is that there are people on the same money in the same situations who make different choices. No new cars, fewer holidays but are more risk adverse and want to put money away for a rainy day or into their pension.

Any discussion just seems to band all people of a certain income together and include things like car loans as normal every day expenses of the ordinary man.
 
The amount of whinging about this subject never ceases to amaze me. Income for most people with spare cash to invest is taxed at 52% on receipt each year. In a fund, there can be no income and you can just pay 41% on rolled-up income and gains every eight years. That’s worse than 33% CGT on the uplift in value but better than income tax. The tax when a fund is inherited by a spouse is bad, but all in all, it’s not the worst.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top