Upcoming budget.

purple said:
the priorities for the government should be 1) reduce the current spending deficit, 2) do what is necessary to get interest rates down in the bond market and for interbank lending and 3) pay off the bill from the banking crisis.
Click to expand...

2 = 1 + 3
 
Birroc said:
.. and keep unions on board (very difficult).
Click to expand...

If there's one thing that grinds my gears .. .

The unions can not have the final yea or nay on decisions that the democratically elected national parliament make.

If the employer is broke and can no longer pay what was one paid, the opinion and sensitivities of the union are, IMHO, irrelevant.
 
The point is the unions are in bed with the government.. that they are extremely strong in this country,that they are very resistant to change. and it is outrageous that they have a yea or nay say on our country ..
But ,they are "Congress " after all...lol
 
Firefly said:
2 = 1 + 3
Click to expand...
I don't necessarily agree, or at least I don't think it's a 50/50 split. If we can get the current spending under control we will look better to the bond markets and 3 gets easier. It’s the total cost over the period of the loan/bond that counts not it’s face value.
 
The coming budget will see some if not all of the following IMHO..
Child benefit will be reduced ..
Flat rate water charges..
Property tax...
Higher taxes..
Low income earners will be brought into the tax net..
Social welfare cuts..
This is regardless of what we think say or do..
And even at that I think the IMF will have to be called in,as there is no way any government would have the nerve to tackle what is really wrong in this country..
 
thedaras said:
Higher taxes..
Low income earners will be brought into the tax net..
Click to expand...

Removing the PAYE Credit would accomplish both of these with little or no administrative overhead or increase in cost of collection.

People already paying income tax would pay more.
People not currently paying income tax would pay some.
 
TarfHead said:
Removing the PAYE Credit would accomplish both of these with little or no administrative overhead or increase in cost of collection.
Click to expand...

Is that not what I listed in Post#3! They will go for the quick and easy options, giving time to implement the messy ones.
 
You know it is getting close to the budget when the 'PS pay cuts' issue starts up again. You would think cutting pay would solve all of the problems.
The governemnt have said the are not cutting pay but they can still reduce the PS pay bill.

1. Reducing numbers is the most obvious way. There are already 10,000 less working than 18 months ago. The government could easily determine how many workers are due to retire in the next 5 years. With a combination of natural wastage, early retirement and greater flexibility they could easily get the numbers down.
2. Cutting PS pensions in line with current worker's cuts. Average cut has been 13%. If that was done to pensions it would save approx 260 million. Even if they just cut by 6% it would save 120 million.
3. Freeze increments. It was reported that increments added 250 million to the pay bill last year. If there was a 4-year freeze it would save the government adding approx 1 billion to the PS pay bill.
4. Reducing the tax relief on pension contribution to 20%. This would reduce the net pay of PS workers on the higher tax rate. If the government also applied this to the pension levy it would surely yield a significant saving.
5. There are allowances that could be abolished or phased out. At the time of the talks last year a figure of 100 million was mentioned that could be cut from the garda budget. There could be savings here.
6. The whole area of Quangos should be looked at. ABS recommended the abolition of some of these but most are still operational.

In summary, the government can reduce the bill without cutting core pay.
 
Shawady said:
4. Reducing the tax relief on pension contribution to 20%. This would reduce the net pay of PS workers on the higher tax rate. If the government also applied this to the pension levy it would surely yield a significant saving.
Click to expand...
Can this be put to bed for once and for all? As far as I am aware there is no such thing as tax relief for pension contributions - it's deferred income.

The contribution is taken off your total income and effectively buried in a hole. At retirement age you dig it up and pay tax then at the prevailing rate.

You do pay tax on this income, just at a later date.

That the pension levy entitled payers to a credit was just a piece of trickery to make it sound like they'd taken a big cut.
 
Towger said:
Is that not what I listed in Post#3! They will go for the quick and easy options, giving time to implement the messy ones.
Click to expand...

It would appear so ! But 144 posts later, the thread shifts and crosses over ground already travelled.
 
Howitzer said:
Can this be put to bed for once and for all? As far as I am aware there is no such thing as tax relief for pension contributions - it's deferred income.
Click to expand...

Well whatever it is, it is certainly on the government's agenda to reduce relief at the top rate.
 
Shawady said:
Well whatever it is, it is certainly on the government's agenda to reduce relief at the top rate.
Click to expand...
So I'll pay tax on income I don't receive and then 30 years later I'll pay tax on it again? No thanks. I'll give you one guess what'll happen to my pension contributions if that comes into effect.
 
I am on the 41% so I am certainly not arguing for it but am just making the point if the government did this it would cut the net pay of PS workers without actually calling it a 'pay cut'.
 
Howitzer said:
Can this be put to bed for once and for all? As far as I am aware there is no such thing as tax relief for pension contributions - it's deferred income.
Click to expand...

Exactly. It would also be very hard, if not next to impossible to administer. They can't take the same tax from you twice. I think this idea came from some green/lefty politician who does not have a clue on how the tax system works.
 
For what it's worth here's my list of, non-deflationary, tax increases / expenditure cuts.

1. Introduce a windfall tax on Corporate taxes. Corporation tax rate remains the same and a commitment is made to that effect, but a 5% levy is imposed on 2010 profits.

2. Introduce a windfall tax on semi state profits. 100% of all 2010 profits to go to the state.

3. Sell the stake in Aer Lingus. At the very least reduce it to 10%.

4. Stop producing 1/2 cent coins.

I appreciate there are negative consequences but 1 and 2 should be seen as short term measures to plug a hole until other measures outlined in other posts, which re-align our tax base to our expenditure, take effect. The 1 and 2 cent coins? Well I'm afraid that's where we're at.
 
Towger said:
Exactly. It would also be very hard, if not next to impossible to administer. They can't take the same tax from you twice. I think this idea came from some green/lefty politician who does not have a clue on how the tax system works.
Click to expand...

Why would this be so hard to administer?
 
Pensions are a complete waste of money. I suggest instead that we all meet up when we're 66 and come up with a plan to rob the banks involving some sophisticated computer trickery...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register