John FitzGerald, says Properties need to be taxed (( Properly)) to achieve fairer wealth distribution,

Status
Not open for further replies.
Towger said:
I don't think his father would have been happy with this idea.
Click to expand...
Maybe john is not happy to have to pay more , He sees what is coming down the line for Ireland if we do not address the problem of hording wealth in property is having on the next Generation ,
 
The problem with LPT is how to value the properties. For example, the Revenue wrote to my father valuing the house at 2.4 or 2.7 million, I can't remember exactly. This is a semi d bought for 10K in the early 70s, for less that 3 years salary. While there are McMansions down the country are in band 1.

Edit: I had a play with Revenue's Validation Tool https://lpt.revenue.ie/lpt-web/portal-access/valuation-guide

It puts my father's house in Band 17 and John Fitzpatrick's father's house in Band 20. The letter sent from Revenue is interesting, as it appears to their systems pick up differences at finer level. I suspect the 2.4-2.7M valuation comes from the attached Semi D. It was sold for 1.5M, knocked down and rebuilt at a cost of well over a million. Therefore it is worth almost 3M in someone's (the owners) eyes, but you would not get 3M selling it on the open market.
 
Last edited:
Many people like to talk about a PPR as an "asset" to be taxed, but less so about the matching "liability" which is the requirement for a living being to have a place to live (a requirement not confined to humans by the way - insects and wild animals also require places to live, although we haven't managed to financialise that yet). The effect of this liability being that the PPR "asset" is completely illiquid, unless humans are to be herded from one pasture to the next depending on their life stage.

It would be great if our society's big brains could opine on such matters - yes, for tenants too.
 
Towger said:
For example, the Revenue wrote to my father valuing the house at 2.4 or 2.7 million, I can't remember exactly.
Click to expand...

Not exactly! From the start, LPT was a self-assessment tax.

That's why the initial (2013) Revenue LPT letter stated that the estimate "....is not based on an actual assessment of the market valuation of the property." It invited the propery owner to self-assess the value of their property and send in an LPT return if they disagreed with Revenue's estimated* valuation.

* God knows how.
 
Last edited:
I am not sure what his argument is in that article? Yes, property tax should be more than just the token payment that is currently is. It will enable local councils to have better facilities etc.

Will it make housing more affordable for younger people? I can't see how. In this area, I would like to see what the cost of new houses would be in houses were built to a lower BER rating. If people can't afford high BER housing, how about lower ratings with obviously higher heating costs in the long run? Young couples would be perfectly happy with this. A 2 bed terrace in a new development near me is going for €675,000. :eek:
 
blackdog said:
Many people like to talk about a PPR as an "asset" to be taxed
Click to expand...
Isn't this issue already covered here?

Key Post - Should your home be considered an investment diversification?

I question the idea that your home is an asset in an investment portfolio. Are your legs also an asset? Diversification means that if one asset falls maybe another will do well. Your home may rise in value but you still have to live in it. If you want to think of it as an asset then think of...
www.askaboutmoney.com
 
Thanks ClubMan, I clearly missed that thread.
Robustly debated on AAM then. Perhaps FitzGerald et al will see fit to go a little deeper and broach it in "the paper of record" some day.
 
Why is this opinion article coming out now... Is it lobbying in advance of the budget?

I thought this guy was retired.
 
fistophobia said:
Why is this opinion article coming out now... Is it lobbying in advance of the budget?

I thought this guy was retired.
Click to expand...
Exactly, surely they should be getting guys on that are at the coal face now and are relevant. I don't know why the media still give him so much airspace and let him talk away without robust challenges to his ideas
 
Towger said:
The problem with LPT is how to value the properties. For example, the Revenue wrote to my father valuing the house at 2.4 or 2.7 million, I can't remember exactly. This is a semi d bought for 10K in the early 70s, for less that 3 years salary
Click to expand...
The house has increased in value at the rate of €1000 a week since he bought it. So your father acquired around €2.5 million in unearned wealth on which, until a few years ago, he paid zero tax. He's now paying an annual rate of around 00.09% tax. He can defer the liability if he has a low income. If property tax was increased by 1000% he'd still be paying less than one percent of the value of the property each year.
 
Purple said:
do we want a society which favours equality of opportunity over inherited wealth. If we want to former then we increase taxes on wealth and reduce taxes on work.
Click to expand...
Your statement would surely suggest an inheritance tax rather than a wealth tax.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top