I haven't read it all, but I accept the point that increases in disposable income has contributed to increased consumption and negated somewhat the effects of tax increases.
Fiscal Council: Up to €6 billion of Corporation Tax may be temporary
- Thread starter Brendan Burgess
- Start date
- Status
I haven't read it all, but I accept the point that increases in disposable income has contributed to increased consumption and negated somewhat the effects of tax increases.
The marginal tax rate is 52% (PRSI, PAYE & USC) if you earn over €70,044. Do you think it should be higher? How much more money should we spend per head of population on health services, given that we are amongst the highest in the world already?
How much more should we pay doctors and nurses, given that they are amongst the best paid in the world?
How much more should we spend with no tangible results before we accept that the problem isn't a shortage of money but a shortage on structural competence?
Are you in favour of us continuing to steal taxes from poor countries in order to fund our public services?
Are you aware of the corporation tax systems in places like Costa Rica and States like Delaware (where that complete hypocrite Paddy Cosgrave registers his companies)?
This has nothing to do with the initial point you raised, that is McWilliams view of our attitudes towards multinationals given their transformative impact on our economy. A view that I understood you broadly agreed with?
Im merely pointing out that the multinationals are not here to do us a favor, they realise they get a good deal being here for all sorts of reasons, not least taxation.
In return, the IDA have done a good job in getting something of value in return for favourable tax treatment - sustainable employment.
In other words, McWilliams has focused solely on half of the deal, employment for Ireland. He has missed the how valuable it is for multinationals to be here in the first place.
As I said, the €15bn Apple could sustain those 5,500 jobs in Cork for 40yrs paying €68k each!
The point is that if they leave we lose far more than €6 billion and all it would take is EU or the USA to stop us being a tax haven and they would be gone within a few years. The corporation tax we currently steal from other countries would go first and then, over a longer period, the jobs would go.
So if you want a fairer taxation system I take it that you are in favour of reducing taxes on high earners and increasing them on low and medium income earners. I agree that would be fairer but our populist pseudo left-wing politics wouldn't allow that to happen.
And back to my original question - where will they go?
It would be naive to think that US multinationals will pull out of EU because of tax regime imposed without thinking that access to sell in that market would be severely hampered.
It doesn't sound like good business sense to me to hinder access to access to the biggest (or second biggest) market in the world.
I would be in favor of increasing tax bands, reducing rates on average incomes - a third, possibly even fourth, fifth or sixth tax rate of tax, increasing as incomes increase.
I would be in favor of implementing a healthcare levy applicable as a % of all income as a source for funding universal healthcare - notwithstanding that increasing taxes on low incomes will drive wage demands, unless such tax revenues are allocated efficiently - healthcare, cheaper public transport, school books etc.
They taxes will be paid in the countries in which they business activity takes place.
That means their main reason for being here will disappear.
The biggest market in the world will be Asia quite soon. All else being equal the production/manufacturing activity will take place in the USA or the mainland (Germany, Holland etc.) or in a lower cost country in Asia. The short answer is that they can go anywhere they like. There is nothing holding them here other than our collusion in tax evasion.
So you would reduce taxes and then introduce a health tax. There isn't a cohort of "the rich" in this country which we can tap into to make everything okay, despite what the populist pseudo-socialist Shinners and loony-left say.
They can of course move wherever they like, but not without consequence.
So Im asking, third time, where will all the multinationals go if Ireland's favourable tax treatment ends?
There are 2.2m private policy holders that pay on average €1,200 pa. Mostly for shiny brochures and the option of Beacon or Mater (oh, the choices!), mostly for the promise of a private or semi-private ward (but only if available), mostly to jump the que, paying additional consultancy fees to make up that €300k you mentioned earlier.
It is a con.
Poland? Corporation tax rate of 19%, well educated workforce where the majority of people speak English and access to the EU. The last two multi-national companies I worked for both moved jobs from London to Dublin and then moved other jobs from Dublin to Poland. Eventually the jobs that came from London will be moved as well. Corporation Tax is not the main reason why multi-nationals are here but we are deluding ourselves that we are offering a superior English Speaking workforce that is well educated compared to other countries anymore. When I go to Poland, I see Ireland in the 1990's. We are falling behind in so many ways while other countries are making huge strides. And the high level of personal tax, the housing situation and public transport is now becoming an increasing issue for multinationals. Eventually the cost of hiring people will negate any benefits from the corporate tax rate, access to multi-national workforce and EU access that has driven job announcements in the past.
And these people that you deride are subsidising the public health system so what's your point? Ban health insurance then if that if that's your solution. Ask the hospitals what they think of that
What's the capacity of Ireland's private hospitals in terms of scans and elective surgeries?
What would be the waiting lists for same in our public system if they didn't exist?
How many more doctors and consultants would fly off to Australia, Canada, US, Dubai etc if they were only being paid public rates?
Stop letting the facts get in the way of ideology!
It may be a con but it is still a €2 billion subsidy of the public health system.
I've already answered you. They will go to their home country or China or another cheaper Asian country or to the mainland where they have access to a much bigger and better educated workforce which speaks English (Poland, Holland etc) and have better access to suppliers and markets.
Without our favourable tax treatment (nice euphemism) the consequences of moving will mostly be positive.
- Status