Yes, both were announced by Noonan in the same budget.
Yes, both were announced by Noonan in the same budget.Was the VAT reduced at the same time as the pension levy was introduced?
Very true the future is uncertain, without hindsight I can't say for sure what the best approach is. But that's always been the case.37 years is a long time especially in governance, how do you know now if the tax benefits that we enjoy now will still be there in 37 years
Glenn Gaughran, head of business development and marketing at ITC, said paying back the levy would “rekindle citizens’ trust in the Government’s commitment to retirement security”.
Probably not.But property and shares held directly are taxed much more highly than pensions even with the levy.
No PRSI from age 66.When sold there is no double USC and PRSI imposed on the total value of the share sale.
Pensions are deferred taxation.
Income tax relief on contributions. But no relief from USC or PRSI.
Yes I stated that fact, but you chose to not quote that part of my post.No PRSI from age 66.
It’s very naive to think that the pension levy money was used to support the hospitality industry. It’s an overly siloed and simplistic way to think about things.You were probably enjoying a meal in an expensive restaurant when it was announced.
but he took it at the worst possible time for pension savers because the pension fund had already fallen considerably due to the financial crash and then the government swoops in to reduce it more and wipe out the possibility of recovery in that part of the fund. It showed who the government would target in a crises.I would feel enormously satisfied if I was retiring this year massively poorer because I’d avoided pensions on the basis that Michael Noonan took 0.6% of my pension fund for a couple of years while the country was being bailed out from the biggest financial disaster in history.
A win for me.
I sure showed them.
It was % charge. It didn’t matter when taken.but he took it at the worst possible time for pension savers because the pension fund had already fallen considerably due to the financial crash and then the government swoops in to reduce it more and wipe out the possibility of recovery in that part of the fund. It showed who the government would target in a crises.
The biggest risk in my opinion is that when they bring in auto enrolement will they try to then restrict or reduce the entitlement of pension savers to the contributory state pension?
The government can tax anything. You can argue as Brendan others did at the time that it would negatively impact the amount of people who would save for retirement but it was not theft.What gall's me about the Pension Levy was how Noonan and the state media tried to portray it as a tax on the pensions industry / companies and their enormous profits when it was blatently clear to everyone at the time that he was targetting the average punter's private money in their pension funds. The state (propeganda ?) media (e.g. RTE) didn't pull him up on this blatent lie. It was state theft of privately held assets.
After September 11, Americans turned away from air travel and took to the roadsz even though flying was still safer. Road deaths increased. I think it's the same kind of thinking.I still don’t understand the mindset.
“During a crisis they took a 0.6% charge so I’m gonna avoid the best investment vehicle of all forever.”
It’s mindless.
Everyone forgets that this was part of an abandonment of a commitment to the troika six months previously to standard-rate all pension reliefs.but he took it at the worst possible time for pension savers because the pension fund had already fallen considerably due to the financial crash and then the government swoops in to reduce it more and wipe out the possibility of recovery in that part of the fund.
I still don’t understand the mindset.
“During a crisis they took a 0.6% charge so I’m gonna avoid the best investment vehicle of all forever.”
It’s mindless.
You need a more open mindset Gordon.I still don’t understand the mindset.
“During a crisis they took a 0.6% charge so I’m gonna avoid the best investment vehicle of all forever.”
It’s mindless.
That problem was dealt with when they invented the USC.Everyone forgets that this was part of an abandonment of a commitment to the troika six months previously to standard-rate all pension reliefs.
The USC was announced in December 2010 two weeks after the bailout agreement.That problem was dealt with when they invented the USC.
Not relieved on contributions and then double charged on drawdowns.
Irrelevant over the longer term though.That problem was dealt with when they invented the USC.
Not relieved on contributions and then double charged on drawdowns.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?