Blood is Boiling - "Don't pay the revenue"

Prime Time program was fascinating. But there are two separate issues:

1. Those who deliberately seek to transfer tax residency overseas in order to avoid tax in Ireland but who in reality still live here. Some of the individuals mentioned in PT could well be considered Economic traitors, particularly when moving abroad merely to avoid Capital Gains Tax.
2. Those who legitimately used tax incentive schemes offered by Government. One can hardly criticise those who avail of such schemes. Afterall what's the point in offering such schemes if we don't expect some people to avail of them. The criticism should be directed at those who make these schemes available (Govt) when there is little or no economic need for such (e.g. Hotels, Sect 23's in Dublin 2 & 4 , Dundrum Towncentre etc).

90210 said:

We all know it is the law to evade tax

Click to expand...

On the one hand I suspect that this is a typo but on the other, given some of the rubbish that has been contributed to this thread, I'm not so sure!

90210 said:

So, if I choose to rip off the Gov a little but not a lot, for me that’s acceptable, as I know I am pulling my weight unlike Miss Harney and others.

Click to expand...

Fascinating... what's a little/a lot when it comes to tax evasion? When is it acceptable and when does it become unacceptable? Do you condone those who illegitimately evade all tax or just those who dabble in it? Do you take the same a la carte approach to many other laws of the land?

ClubMan said:

Originally Posted by 90210
So, if I choose to rip off the Gov a little but not a lot, for me that’s acceptable, as I know I am pulling my weight unlike Miss Harney and others

Fascinating... what's a little/a lot when it comes to tax evasion?

Click to expand...

Well I suppose if you earn €50 million a year then evading 1 million in tax is a little and so you should be let off. Whereas if you earn €80'000 a year and evade €10'000 in tax then that's a lot and you should have the book thrown at you.
It doesn't seem fair to me but that's what 90210 is saying....

Maybe the limits are absolute rather than relative (to income)? Or maybe there is no logic to this stuff at all?

yea, the second bit clubman, the second bit...

MM3 said:

if I can digress into computer speak I'd imagine it would only take one SELECT statement on their database to generate a list of people who have more than one property and haven't filed a tax return. If they took that list and sent everyone a letter along the lines of 'we know you have a second property and we expect a tax return from you' within the first year of ownership then I suspect that would nip it in the bud.

Click to expand...

You seem to assume that the Revenue database has the ownership of every property in the country in their database. They don't.

MissRibena said:

Am I the only person who isn't entirely happy with all the revenue back-tracking into things like the life assurance policies? I am fed up with the whole thing of "shock horror people weren't declaring their taxes properly in the eighties" and the "ordinary PAYE worker" footed the bill for this etc. etc. Am I the only one who remembers that many an "ordinary PAYE worker" was doing plenty of non-PAYE work? That many people viewed car tax as an optional extra, more for Christmas than for life? Ditto re telly licences etc. etc. I am tired of hearing how it was all this tax evasion that was responsible for mass emmigration. Am I the only one who remembers the scores of businesses that went bust too? I find it a bit rich that the Revenue can calculate interest/penalites etc based on the amount of time passed when they should have been collecting it all along. Is it because it's more lucrative to wait for the taxes owing to snowball rather than act promptly? It would be one thing if all this money was collected and spent wisely but I really feel our government is squandering it and using it to make their accounts look far healthier than they are in reality. I have sneaking suspiscion that the money would be better spent by the people who earned it, even if they didn't pay tax.

Click to expand...

Blaming the Revenue as the primary cause of tax evasion is missing the point. You're treating the symptom, not the cause. The cause of tax evasion is tax evaders. Until we start making tax evasion socially unacceptable, it will continue. Blame the tax evaders, and let's not give them a further charter (like the 2 tax amnesties) for evasion.

MissRibena said:

When I was thinking of keeping my house to rent out and buying another one, the main reason I didn't go ahead was the tax implications. And like mo3art, I was told by lots of acquaintances already in the investment game that I was "mad" not to go ahead and keep shtum from the Revenue. Most of these people were "ordinary PAYE workers" like me. Most of them are not financial whizzes and are investing/tax evading as a means of funding college fees/retirements down the line. Would it not be fairer to all concerned to nip this in the bud before it ends in disaster?

Click to expand...

Any chance that you'd consider reporting these evaders to Revenue to level the playing field for tax-compliant landlords & tenants.

You seem to assume that the Revenue database has the ownership of every property in the country in their database. They don't

Click to expand...

Ok maybe you have inside knowledge on this , but for every house purchase I've ever made (five in the last six years) I've had to provide my PPS number so its being recorded somewhere. I would assume that at some stage its inputted into a computer - otherwise whats the point?

M

MM3 said:

Ok maybe you have inside knowledge on this , but for every house purchase I've ever made (five in the last six years) I've had to provide my PPS number so its being recorded somewhere. I would assume that at some stage its inputted into a computer - otherwise whats the point?

M

Click to expand...

The usual point of providing your PPS number is for anti-money-laundering legislation - so that if/when Gardai and/or Revenue want to trace the owners of the house, they can do so.

Having said that, I don't have any inside knowledge of Revenue systems. If they do have this information on file, I withdraw my comment.

Ownership details for the majority of properties in this country is on public record in the Land Registry and is fully accessible to everyone, including the Revenue.

The requirement to record vendors and buyers PPS numbers on property conveyance documents was in place for a number of years before the specific anti-money laundering legislation was introduced. Given that these details are furnished directly to Revenue Capital Taxes division it is hard to imagine any other motivation behind this requirement than to assist in tracking instances of suspected evasion.

RainyDay said:

Blaming the Revenue as the primary cause of tax evasion is missing the point. You're treating the symptom, not the cause. The cause of tax evasion is tax evaders. Until we start making tax evasion socially unacceptable, it will continue. Blame the tax evaders, and let's not give them a further charter (like the 2 tax amnesties) for evasion.

Any chance that you'd consider reporting these evaders to Revenue to level the playing field for tax-compliant landlords & tenants.

Click to expand...

I'm not blaming the Revenue as the primary cause of anything. I'm saying that they are focusing on the past too much and not going to too much trouble with what is going on at present. If they wanted to find the people evading tax at the present, it would hardly be much more difficult than tracing things from thirty years ago. I think the Revenue's approach of basically ignoring the current issues sends out the wrong signal. If we don't tolerate tax evasion in this country and we are trying to change a culture of tax evasion lingering from the past, it is not too much to ask for a little consistency from the people with the rule book. Leaving the collection of taxes until they have spiralled over a number of years is not fair and just IMHO and if that is how the government agencies behave, it will not promote more compliance/co-operation or respect for what they are trying to achieve. As an earlier poster said, if the Revenue nudged most people in the early days of this, then they probably wouldn't evade tax at all. But what good would that be to us in ten years time!

I've no intention of reporting anyone to the revenue or any other government department. I don't suffer from the same kind of indignation that bothers other posters. Anything I was told, I was told in trust by people who thought they were doing me a favour; it's not my style to run around telling tales in cases like these. I told them that they were playing with fire and after that it is up to them to act as they see fit and suffer any consequences that arise.

Rebecca