Irish Times "CGT exemption on family home at risk in the Budget"

Status
Not open for further replies.

odyssey06

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,561
Incidentally, you were arguing on another thread in favour of the State subsidising the purchase of private residences through MIR. Do you think that it's fair, in principle, that somebody can make substantial tax-free profits on the sale of an asset the purchase of which was subsidised by the State? Genuine question.
ps I think it would be better rather than getting rid of MIR completely, to replace it with a scheme whereby people who opt for MIR are thereby committing themselves to a 'clawback' of the MIR e.g. liability at 33% or 50% of the asset gain up to a maximum of the MIR amount.
The key thing is that the 'clawback' is limited in some way by the MIR amount (perhaps interest adjusted), it does not become a general grab at the asset gain.
 

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
Gordon

Please re-read what I actually said - CGT only arises where a profit is realised on the disposal of an asset.
No Sarenco, you said "any gain arising on the disposal of a PPR would never have been previously taxed...that is entirely true".

That is not the case. Any uncrystallised uplift will be subject to LPT. That's "previously taxed".
 

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
Not in the scenario you quoted? You'd need to sell it for in excess of €1.3m (without any enhancement)...
Where are you getting €1.3m from?

The discussion is around taxing gains on a PPR; €1m less €800k base cost is €200k taxable.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,436
Where are you getting €1.3m from?

The discussion is around taxing gains on a PPR; €1m less €800k base cost is €200k taxable.
You are ignoring the fact that the first $250k of profit per taxpayer on the disposal of a PPR is exempt from CGT in the US. I don't think anybody is advocating the complete abolition of the exemption - we are talking about the merits of capping the exemption.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,436
No Sarenco, you said "any gain arising on the disposal of a PPR would never have been previously taxed...that is entirely true".

That is not the case. Any uncrystallised uplift will be subject to LPT. That's "previously taxed".
No Gordon - what I actually said is entirely true.

I didn't say anything about uncrystallised gains arising prior to a disposal - you added that diversion.
 

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
I wasn't talking about a $250k cap, simply the principle of taxing any portion of the gain.

But fine...bought it for €400k, selling it for €800k. Assume €250k exemption. A €50k CGT bill would be a joke in such circumstances.
 
J

jjm

Guest
Prospect of capital gains tax on family home raised
Move is among tax reform options put forward by Department of Finance group

Among the options outlined are allowing relief only for homes up to a certain market value, or allowing relief on gains up to a certain cash limit with tax being imposed on any sum above that amount.


The officials also raise the possibility of introducing a new lower rate of capital gains tax that would apply only to gains made on the sale of the family home.
This is just softening people up and getting them used of the idea nothing will happen until after the next election all in the name of reform,ye must have a short memory not much discussion before the rent capo_O

Bringing in the rent cap was a mine field and they got round it .the above is a walk in the park when the time comes,
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
No Gordon - what I actually said is entirely true.

I didn't say anything about uncrystallised gains arising prior to a disposal - you added that diversion.
No Sarenco, you're entirely wrong! 100% wrong, and it's bizarre to claim that what you said is "entirely true".

"any gain arising on the disposal of a PPR would NEVER have been previously taxed...that is entirely true"

I buy a place for €400k, it increases in value to €800k. Your €250k exemption applies. The €150k ends up subject to LPT and ultimately subject to CGT. It is erroneous in the extreme to suggest that it has never been taxed previously; it ends up being taxed on paper and then taxed in reality; double taxation in any man's language.
 
Last edited:

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,436
No Sarenco, you're entirely wrong! 100% wrong, and it's bizarre to claim that what you said is "entirely true".
No Gordon it is entirely accurate to say that any gain arising on a disposal would never have been previously taxed. It is 100% accurate.

LPT is payable by reference to a self-assessed valuation of a property at a particular point in time. If a property falls within a particular valuation band at that point in time then LPT is payable at the relevant rate.

CGT by contrast is payable on the realised profit (with all appropriate deductions) following the disposal of an asset.

Two completely different things.
 

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
You are 100% wrong Sarenco. 100% wrong. You are in Trump territory at this stage. That Iraqi chap who used to claim the American would be vanquished is smiling down at you as we speak!
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,436
But fine...bought it for €400k, selling it for €800k. Assume €250k exemption. A €50k CGT bill would be a joke in such circumstances.
You could just as easily say that it is a "joke" that an individual can realise a €400k tax-free profit on the sale of any other asset. It's an equally uncompelling argument.
 

Sarenco

Frequent Poster
Messages
5,436
You are 100% wrong Sarenco. 100% wrong. You are in Trump territory at this stage. That Iraqi chap who used to claim the American would be vanquished is smiling down at you as we speak!
Sorry Gordon but I have already explained why I am not wrong.

Simply repeating yourself and descending into ad hominem is really childish.
 

Gordon Gekko

Frequent Poster
Messages
3,579
"any gain arising on the disposal of a PPR would NEVER have been previously taxed...that is entirely true"

My property increases in value - I pay LPT on the gain. I realise the gain, and then I pay CGT. By any stretch of the imagination, the gain has been previously taxed.
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,713
Thread closed until people calm down.

Folks - please do not accuse people with different views to your own as trolling.

Thanks

Brendan
 

Brendan Burgess

Founder
Messages
37,713
OK folks

I have reopened the thread.

It's fine to have different points of view.

It's fine to interpret the same facts differently.

But it's boring for the rest of us if you keep making the same points and attacking each other.

Brendan
 

noproblem

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,629
AND WHAT EXACTLY DO PEOPLE DO WITH ALL THIS UNDER THE COUNTER CASH? One can hardly invest it, then take whatever profit they make again and put that under the carpet as well. That carpet is going to have bulges, then questions will need answering and revenue appear on the scene. Won't take long for bulges in the carpet to disappear then. In any case, this scenario whereby one can take massive money/profit from the sale of a family home needs looking at and lets hope some goverment takes this on and to hell with all the complaints from Tom, Dick and Harry and their Mrs's as well.
 

torblednam

Frequent Poster
Messages
390
I can understand an objection to taxing PPR disposals, on the basis that it might have an adverse effect on the property market and exacerbate a housing crisis - I'd like to see that objection fleshed out however, as the specific events (or decisions) that would have this effect are not clear to me.

I don't believe there should be any sacred cows when it comes to taxation, and at the moment the PPR seems to be a sacred cow. By sacred cow, I mean something that is exempt from taxation because that's the way it's always been or because it's considered politically unpalatable to curtail the exemption. The alternative to a sacred cow being a good old fashioned productive cow, which in this context is a tax exemption which serves to achieve a clear policy objective of the successive governments that continue the exemption.

It's not clear to me that a blanket exemption such as currently exists, is in the best interests of society as a whole. I see no good reason why a person (particularly someone who has benefitted from one of the many forms of tax relief or subsidies that have existed down through the years), who is actually realising the gain in the value of their PPR, shouldn't have the potential to be taxed on it.

To be clear, I'm not saying that ALL the gain should be taxed, and I'm not saying that the CGT rate should necessarily be the same as applies to most assets. I'm simply saying I'd like to see a convincing argument as to what principle it is that causes people to so strongly oppose the suggestion of any taxation on any gain.
 

odyssey06

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,561
Wasn't one of the IMF inspired rationales for bringing in property tax and removing the likes of stamp duty was to replace a fluctuating revenue source with a stable, annualised one? Do we want the government to get addicted to tax from property sales again? That ended so well the last time.

We have a property tax. It is based on the value of the property. It is more stable than CGT. Let's rely on it.
 
J

jjm

Guest
Wasn't one of the IMF inspired rationales for bringing in property tax and removing the likes of stamp duty was to replace a fluctuating revenue source with a stable, annualised one? Do we want the government to get addicted to tax from property sales again? That ended so well the last time.

We have a property tax. It is based on the value of the property. It is more stable than CGT. Let's rely on it.
It is based on the value of the property you also have to take into account where it is located it is not just the value of the property .local politics unfortanely come into play.

Do you not realise The IMF are gone they have reversed all the changes made by the IMF/TRIOKA which can only mean one thing there addiction is back now it is just a matter of which house with money do the rob to feed there habit.
 

odyssey06

Frequent Poster
Messages
1,561
Surely this puts at risk more FG votes than it could ever hopes to deliver. Its not even clever politics. I can see this working very well on the doorstep... for all the other parties.

Would the last FG voter turn out the light?
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top