Property Tax, it's only a matter of time

Maybe I'm missing something but again is the property tax another example of the Government failing to connect the dots. Right now the Government through NAMA is the States largest property owner. Its a requirement to return the tax payers investment which is dependent on increasing property prices. surely a property tax will further supress prices.

Gaining money on property tax, losing money on NAMA an earlier poster said 5 years too late - 5 years too late meaning a property tax would have helped to halt property price inflation.

It hasnt even been shaped and already there is a discussion about who should be exempt which is typical - surely exemptions should be recorded as a liability against the property in the event of a future sale of that property.
 
Complainer said:
Chris, would you like to point to anywhere else in the world where your interesting ideas have worked?
Click to expand...
Hong Kong? Cayman Islands? Monacco?

umop3p!sdn said:
Personally, I'd rather not have to pay out extra hundreds, or thousands. Especially when I see how the money is wasted.
Click to expand...
Got to say I agree with this. The most infuriating thing about paying taxes here is seeing how the money is wasted.
 
Introduce a property tax on all new first time buyers.
Introduce a property tax on all existing homes that have not paid a lump sum property tax upfront (Stamp duty).
Do NOT introduce a property tax on those that have already paid a property tax (Stamp duty).
Its the fairest way to go!!!
 
Its the fairest way to go!!!
Click to expand...

Am I the only one who thinks that NO property tax is the fairest way to go?

The way it looks to me is that the Government release information, get everyone worried and the row back a bit. Then people think they have picked the fairest way. Previous post is a typical example. Someone calling for a property tax on first time buyers and existing homes. Why o Why.

We need to get real in this country
 
To repeat.
You either have a tax because it's fair/needed or you don't. Convoluted schemes, as decribed above, only enable and facilitate tax evasion.
 
Heres an even more equitable solution,there seems to be a good few who own property and are in favour of this tax (indeed seem positively excited by the prospect) why not make it an opt in tax?

Those that think it an excellent idea get to support it by paying the tax annually and those that have paid the front loaded property tax called stamp duty can decide they have paid waaayy more than enough on tax and can opt out.


Win win for all.

Problem solved.
 
Quite honesty, suggestions like this are the reason why there almost certainly will be a universal property tax brought in within the lifetime of this Govt.
 
canicemcavoy said:
Don't most countries in Europe have a property tax?
Click to expand...

Do most countries have a 41% Inc Tax rate which kicks in a a shockingly low level relative to cost of living?
Do most countries have 3 different income taxes (PAYE/PRSI/Levy)
Do most countries have VRT
Do most countries have different levels of VAT
 

Marginal tax rates in Ireland are lower than most of the EU.
 
Look what happened to Maggie Thachers Poll Tax, Bye Maggie, Hello Tony Blair. Only a goverment here with a 20 plus majority for 5 years would be stupid enough to try bring in a property tax, Hello Enda
 
Purple said:
Marginal tax rates in Ireland are lower than most of the EU.
Click to expand...

I was speaking relative to the level at which the marginal rate kicks in

If a country has, say a 50% rate which only kicks in in at €150K or something similar, it is far less punitive to the ordinary man on the street than the 41% (effective 50%+ with levies etc) rate which prevails in this country

Nonetheless, what other countries have or don't have shouldn't have a bearing on what taxes we decide to impose on our already well-taxed citizens
 
JEON50 said:
Look what happened to Maggie Thachers Poll Tax, Bye Maggie, Hello Tony Blair. Only a goverment here with a 20 plus majority for 5 years would be stupid enough to try bring in a property tax, Hello Enda
Click to expand...
And what happened to the Poll tax? Blair got rid of it right?
 
Howitzer said:
As such, Stamp Duty was not a tax on the buyer, but the seller. Ok, the buyer paid it, but if the tax wasn't there that money would have went to the seller instead
Click to expand...

This is the most bizarre reasoning I have heard in a long loooong time,its akin to arguing black is actually white.
 

Yes, same as us. Typically 0%, low rate, main rate.
 
As such, Stamp Duty was not a tax on the buyer, but the seller. Ok, the buyer paid it, but if the tax wasn't there that money would have went to the seller instead

Knuttell said:
This is the most bizarre reasoning I have heard in a long loooong time,its akin to arguing black is actually white.
Click to expand...


This is actually correct.

As consumers, we all pay VAT. But without VAT, some pre-VAT selling prices would be higher. So, in effect, the incidence or burden of the tax is shared between the buyer and the seller.

Even though it's the buyer who actually pays the tax.

It's in most 1st year economics textbooks.
 

I don't want to sound like an apologist for the Gov and its total mismanagement of the economy and our finances, but I think that all of those that are shouting that we shouldn't tax this, that, that and this need to realise, like it or not, that this country is tettering on the verge of bankruptcy and the Gov need to raise money, and damn fast.

Now we would all love them to tax someone else other than ourselves, but thats not going to work.

I continually hear people on radio and TV saying we shouldn't take money from this group, that group, these people etc, but if the Gov agree to all of these demands they will take in no money and then we all, as a nation, will suffer in the long run.

I will pay a property tax as long it applies to everyone who is able to pay it, and it is means tested in some way.
 
Beat me to it. The most recent example of this was the increase in VAT from 21% to 21.5% (and subsequent decrease). Retailers didn't increase their prices by this amount, they took the half percent off their bottom line.
 
DB74 said:
Nonetheless, what other countries have or don't have shouldn't have a bearing on what taxes we decide to impose on our already well-taxed citizens
Click to expand...

I agree, and why is this argument always touted for the bad stuff? We never hear the government use it for the good stuff -
Most countries in Europe have an excellent health system
Most capital cities in Europe have integrated ticket systems on an excellent public transport network
Most countries in Europe have 24 hour drinking laws (a positive or negative depending on your viewpoint)
Most countries in Europe have cheaper food and drink
etc.

I think that is the most annoying thing about politicians touting about this argument - it's always about taking something from the citizen, never about something positive. It's an ignorant argument anyway as if most countries had the death penalty would we then follow suit? Or if they all decided to commit mass suicide would we do the same? Or are we a country with our own mind?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register