Property taxes to include BER

NoRegretsCoyote

Registered User
Messages
3,007
Square footage.....isn't hard to measure.
Well it will be when you start to turn it into a tax base:)

You will need very complicated criteria as to whether converted attics count, what constitutes a roofed area, rules for garages and outhouses, etc, etc.

Revenue will have zero interest in sending people out to tens of thousands of houses to measure distances between walls either.

It's a non starter.
 

Thirsty

Registered User
Messages
3,443
Well it will be when you start to turn it into a tax base:)

You will need very complicated criteria as to whether converted attics count, what constitutes a roofed area, rules for garages and outhouses, etc, etc.

Revenue will have zero interest in sending people out to tens of thousands of houses to measure distances between walls either.

It's a non starter.
Dept of Transport don't send anyone round to your home to check you have your NCT!

BER takes any number of criteria into account when giving a rating for a home; I don't believe square footage will be any more difficult.
 

huskerdu

Registered User
Messages
2,290
Dept of Transport don't send anyone round to your home to check you have your NCT!

BER takes any number of criteria into account when giving a rating for a home; I don't believe square footage will be any more difficult.
They don't have to. Car owners are legally obliged to submit their cars for NCT . The whole NCT infrastructure has had to be paid for , ( and costs a lot of money) but stated benefits of improving the safety of cars on the roads are considered worth it ( by most of us)

If we want a consistent standard method of every household having an accurate measurement of the sq. meterage of their house , this will have to be paid for., As the aim is for tax collection, this will erode the tax base for no real measurable benefit

Also, the BER system is currently very very inconsistent and would have to be vastly improved to make it a fair method for tax collection,
 

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
Value is often linked to local services and amenities. Would it be fair for the owner of a €1.5 million semi-d in D4 to pay the same as the owner of a €100k rural bungalow with no local services and private well and waste treatment just because they're the same size? Using value is possibly the best way to introduce ability to pay as well without just linking it directly to income.
For the vast majority of houses and apartments certainly in the cities they are of standard sizes eg most housing estates have a couple of hundred houses which are almost identical. Why then have two properties within a 10 min drive of each other identical in size with access to the same amenities pay differing lpt simply based on property value.

Comparing two identical sized properties one worth 1.5m and the other worth 100k is taking the extremes.
 

kinnjohn

Registered User
Messages
264
You can get a better Ber rating If you know how to answer some of the questions,
You can have exactly the same house upgrades to exactly the same standard by changing the year built you can get a higher rating,
The coldest house I ever lived in has the highest BER rating,
The warmest house I ever lived in was built around 1905 it has very good airtightness lower BER than the coldest house I ever lived in, both around the same sq footage,
 

kinnjohn

Registered User
Messages
264
the long and the short of it
LPT started out as a property tax, planned to be brought in as a means of Broadening the tax base,

and like the water charges the Government was backpedaling from day one the local services only came into it near the end to get it through and accepted,

The LPT bill going through the Dail at present will bring in some changes one is people in long term hospitals or nursing homes who let out their property will be exempt from the tax,

The sweetest change of all is once the provisions are brought in from 2022 LPT self-assessment tax will be subject to the usual
revenue compliance checks that apply to other self-assessment taxes, a great day will be had by all,

I can not see revenue allowing themselves into a messy BER/LPT tax trap when it comes to accessing compliance,
 
Last edited:

Leo

Moderator
Messages
12,727
For the vast majority of houses and apartments certainly in the cities they are of standard sizes eg most housing estates have a couple of hundred houses which are almost identical. Why then have two properties within a 10 min drive of each other identical in size with access to the same amenities pay differing lpt simply based on property value.

Comparing two identical sized properties one worth 1.5m and the other worth 100k is taking the extremes.
It's rare that two identical houses in the same estate would have significantly different values. If they do, it's likely one or both have under or over-valued, the former may be addressed via Revenue. When you look at houses sold at the same time in an estate, prices tend to find a level.
 

kinnjohn

Registered User
Messages
264
I don't think Horseman was referring to the same estate two houses standard size10 min drive apart using the same amenities,
anyhow from 2022 revenue are going to view declared LPT in the same way as any other self-assessment tax
looks like they will be applying interest and penalties on underdeclared LPT from 2022,
 

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
It's rare that two identical houses in the same estate would have significantly different values. If they do, it's likely one or both have under or over-valued, the former may be addressed via Revenue. When you look at houses sold at the same time in an estate, prices tend to find a level.
I was referring to identical houses in different estates within a 19 min drive of each other.
 

Leo

Moderator
Messages
12,727
I was referring to identical houses in different estates within a 19 min drive of each other.
19 minutes covers a lot of ground at times. In the same area, there generally isn't huge variation that would put a lot of bands between similarly sized properties, so they don't pay markedly different rates. Take Dublin 14 4 beds, 125-150sqm for example, going on asking prices you're looking at 600-700k further out of town, 750-900k closer to areas like Clonskeagh. Regardless, taking value out of the calculation doesn't make sense when the goal is to broaden the tax base.
 

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
19 minutes covers a lot of ground at times. In the same area, there generally isn't huge variation that would put a lot of bands between similarly sized properties, so they don't pay markedly different rates. Take Dublin 14 4 beds, 125-150sqm for example, going on asking prices you're looking at 600-700k further out of town, 750-900k closer to areas like Clonskeagh. Regardless, taking value out of the calculation doesn't make sense when the goal is to broaden the tax base.
The principle remains the same why should two houses of identical size pay different lpt if it is supposed to pay for local amenities.

The lpt is charged on the value of a property to pay for local amenities but it still does answer the question how are two identical properties are both using the same amount of local amenities pay different amounts.
 

Leo

Moderator
Messages
12,727
The principle remains the same why should two houses of identical size pay different lpt if it is supposed to pay for local amenities.

The lpt is charged on the value of a property to pay for local amenities but it still does answer the question how are two identical properties are both using the same amount of local amenities pay different amounts.
The ability to pay forms the foundation of our tax system.

Let's face it though, no two properties will ever be using the same amount of local amenities. Property tax can never be more than a crude measure. If you want to tax local amenities on a more accurate basis, then you'd need to start charging for public water and waste treatment for a start, start charging for street lighting, street cleaning, charge kids for every time they go down the slide in local playground, Charge per km walked on footpaths, use of public bins, parks, libraries, etc. etc..
 

NoRegretsCoyote

Registered User
Messages
3,007
LPT stands for Local Property Tax.

PRSI stands for Pay-Related Social Insurance.


They are both misnomers to a large degree!

LPT is not collected locally, and some of it is pooled nationally before being returned to your local authority.

Likewise, PRSI can be levied on income that is not "pay" and in some cases provides no "insurance" either.
 

kinnjohn

Registered User
Messages
264
LPT stands for Local Property Tax.

PRSI stands for Pay-Related Social Insurance.
the property tax was one of the reforms to broaden the tax base insisted on by the TROIKA it only became LPT when the governing parties ran into problems getting support within their own parties at the local level,
on the other hand
Pay related social insurance when set up was what it said on the tin
I benefited from it myself for around mid-1986 when out of work,
pressure from the shortsighted right-wing element within both FG and FF got it changed it had the exact opposite effect to what they were hoping to achieve,
 

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
The ability to pay forms the foundation of our tax system.

Let's face it though, no two properties will ever be using the same amount of local amenities. Property tax can never be more than a crude measure. If you want to tax local amenities on a more accurate basis, then you'd need to start charging for public water and waste treatment for a start, start charging for street lighting, street cleaning, charge kids for every time they go down the slide in local playground, Charge per km walked on footpaths, use of public bins, parks, libraries, etc. etc..
But size is a fairer way rather than house price. All of the costs you reference above are fixed costs. Have you ever tried to get the council to install extra lights? Clean streets, cut grass etc. They don't do it trust me I am Chairperson of the local residents association.

The idea that those areas of highvalue properties should pay based on property value takes no account what so ever of the amenities provided.
 

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
the property tax was one of the reforms to broaden the tax base insisted on by the TROIKA it only became LPT when the governing parties ran into problems getting support within their own parties at the local level,
on the other hand
Pay related social insurance when set up was what it said on the tin
I benefited from it myself for around mid-1986 when out of work,
pressure from the shortsighted right-wing element within both FG and FF got it changed it had the exact opposite effect to what they were hoping to achieve,
I fully understand that we need to broaden the tax base but it is the squeezed middle being expected to carry the can.

Ironically Pascal Donohue if I recall correctly said income tax take during the pandemic remained stable despite the fact so many people availed of the PUP. This suggests those who availed of the PUP pay little or no income tax normally.

Perhaps this is an area to look at aswell when looking to broaden the tax base.
 

kinnjohn

Registered User
Messages
264
so did the LPT tax
the argument you are making is shortsighted and I say that having worked very hard all of my life earning above the average income under PAYE,
For a good bit of my working life, I paid twice as much income tax as the squeezed middle pay today, with a lot fewer tax breaks,
 
Last edited:

The Horseman

Registered User
Messages
447
so did the LPT tax
the argument you are making is shortsighted and I say that having worked very hard all of my life earning above the average income under PAYE,
For a good bit of my working life, I paid twice as much income tax as the squeezed middle pay today,
You may think it's shortsighted but I don't. I am one of the squeezed middle income who pays a lot of tax, prsi, usc. The chances of me receiving a State pension is remote as it will no doubt be means tested by the time I reach retirement. I have invested in a private pension because the State suggested it.

Yet again those who take responsibility for their future are expected to look after those who don't bother.

It appears that you have already retired from the wording in your posts so you have received something back from all your income tax and prsi during your working life.

What exactly do the existing working squeezed middle have to look forward to when we retire?
 
Top