torblednam
Registered User
- Messages
- 916
What kind of nonsense is this - of course public sector employers pay employer's PRSI! They have to operate payroll in the same way as any other employer, private or public sector.
Torbledednam you seam to work in the public service can you confirm there is 10.75% prsi stopped along with your own prsi contributions please.I am only going of what another poster said but I will be able to check with someone who is in the public service in the next few days,(HSE)What kind of nonsense is this - of course public sector employers pay employer's PRSI! They have to operate payroll in the same way as any other employer, private or public sector.
FireFly I think you may be able to check is 10.75% Is paid in the HSE by employerDon't get too excited...there was still the inevitable post about PRSI
Torbledednam you seam to work in the public service can you confirm there is 10.75% prsi stopped along with your own prsi contributions please.I am only going of what another poster said but I will be able to check with someone who is in the public service in the next few days,(HSE)
Thanks do you mind if I ask you is employers prsi @10.75% stopped on insurable employment under class D public service,Yes, my payslip includes both employee's and employer's PRSI, same as anyone else insurable at class A.
Thanks do you mind if I ask you is employers prsi @10.75% stopped on insurable employment under class D public service,
I'm not sure if your use of the word "stopped" is just a colloquialism but just to be clear, employer's PRSI isn't a deduction from pay, it's the employer's contribution in addition to the employee's PRSI (which is "stopped").
I don't know about Class D, but I'm sure the answer is readily available.
The pension issue is certainly a problem. It is unsustainable in the long-term. The public sector pension levy is now being proposed as a permanent fixture. As a public servant I support this measure.
I opposed it initially, as it had nothing to do with pensions, but rather paying for the private sector bankruptcies. But it is now proposed to contribute to the cost of public sector pensions and I accept that proposal as realistic.
The thing is though, it comes nowhere to covering the cost, which means someone else must pay for it.
Firefly If you look at a public servant Grade 3 earning around 37000 euro started working in on the 6 of april 1995 the year the PRSI Class A1 came in retiring on the 6 of april 2017 having reached retirement age between employer/employee they are paying 14.75% prsi more before 2013 add there pension contributions add there pension levy .I challange you to show me how that leval of contributions would not buy them there pension.
50% of 37000 euro will give you a pension of 18500 if they had 40 years service they would have 22 years service take away the state pension of 12176 from 18500 and you are left with 5676 if they had 40 years service they only have 22 by 2017 so if you devide 5676 by 40 years and multiply by 22 years you will get a pension of around 3111 euro show me how you come up with the figure showing it will not cover the cost of ther pension it is not there fault if there money was not invested they paid it in,
there are a lot of front line public servants on around 37000 euro,
I stand corrected. I phrased my post very badly. I meant that there ins no net contribution from the State as employers PRSI just goes into general taxation so it's a zero sum equation.What kind of nonsense is this - of course public sector employers pay employer's PRSI! They have to operate payroll in the same way as any other employer, private or public sector.
The thing is though, it comes nowhere to covering the cost, which means someone else must pay for it.
Employers contribution for an PRSI Class A! is very important to give you an example take two public servant grade 3 one started on the 4 April 1995 the would be employed under PRSI Class D and there employer would be paying anywhere from 1.5% to 2.5% into the PRSI FUND, Now take the other public servant who started on the 6 of April 1995 they would be employed under PRSI Class A1 and there employer would be paying 10.75% into the PRSI FUND.
I still challange you to show me how that level of contribution allowing for the 30,525 tax free lump sum would not buy them there pension
The thing is though, it comes nowhere to covering the cost, which means someone else must pay for it.
Private sector employer contributions go to the State. That is a real net contribution to the State coffers.Should be easier for you it was you who made the statment it comes nowhere to cover the cost which means someone else must pay
Again I repeat 10.75% Employers conts go into the prsi fund for anyone on PRSI Class A1 and this comes from the wealth created or paid by employer/employee for the service provided for each employee paying PRSI Class A1 and is directly related to 10.75 % of there wage and not any other taxpayer's
Should be easier for you it was you who made the statment it comes nowhere to cover the cost which means someone else must pay
Again I repeat 10.75% Employers conts go into the prsi fund for anyone on PRSI Class A1 and this comes from the wealth created or paid by employer/employee for the service provided for each employee paying PRSI Class A1 and is directly related to 10.75 % of there wage and not any other taxpayer's