It's more than vaguely analogous though to the claim that the residential tenancy legislation "protects (tenants receiving discounts) from a landlord later changing their mind and seeking arrears" to which I was responding when I made that observation.This is not vaguely analogous though.
It really isn't, the law governing these areas is quite different. Parties in a commercial contract are free to agree on a discount without the need to complete a prescribed form with 28 days notice.It's more than vaguely analogous though to the claim that the residential tenancy legislation
We know that. But you also claimed, in respect of residential tenancies legislation....It really isn't, the law governing these areas is quite different. Parties in a commercial contract are free to agree on a discount without the need to complete a prescribed form with 28 days notice.
... which the widespread use of business discounts in the commercial arena exposes as groundless.Even in the case of a reduction, it protects them from a landlord later changing their mind and seeking arrears.
Why would you pay me €5,000 if you’re only contracted to pay me €500? Are you gifting me €4,500?So if I rent a field off you and the contract says €500 a year but I pay you €5,000, you're only liable for tax on €500?
No, Tommy, it’s not a red herring.Red herring
I really haven’t been personal towards you.Whatever about getting personal towards me once, your doing so repeatedly suggests something approaching contempt on your part.
It has been known to happen, for example as a rather primitive means of evading tax. Are you still claiming the lower figure is all that's taxable?Why would you pay me €5,000 if you’re only contracted to pay me €500? Are you gifting me €4,500?
But you claimed thatIn any event, the tax code contains provisions to deal with the taxation of premiums (see Section 98 TCA).
Tax is not payable on the rent actually received - it is payable on the rent arising under the lease (ie the contracted rent).
Your apology is hollow. I don't care. I post here in good faith and without any claim of infallibility. But you today have undoubtedly been both personal and contemptuous towards me. That's your problem frankly.I really haven’t been personal towards you.
I initially asked you a question, in the mistaken belief that you were a tax expert, to which you replied “you tell me”.
Again, I fully accept that you never claimed to be a tax expert and I was mistaken in my understanding that you were a tax expert. My apologies, once again.
Parties to commercial contracts can also generally agree terms that don't legally bind them to a maximum of 2% with third parties in perpetuity.Parties in a commercial contract are free to agree on a discount without the need to complete a prescribed form with 28 days notice.
Whether it happens or not is irrelevant. The residential tenancies legislation is quite clear in terms of the landlord's obligation to provide a written confirmation of rent within the framework set out. What can or can't, does or doesn't happen under commercial contracts does not in any way change that.which the widespread use of business discounts in the commercial arena exposes as groundless.
Absolutely, tenancy agreements and commercial contracts are worlds apart, it really makes no sense to compare them.Parties to commercial contracts can also generally agree terms that don't legally bind them to a maximum of 2% with third parties in perpetuity.
That has been said a number of times here and is uncontested.Whether it happens or not is irrelevant. The residential tenancies legislation is quite clear in terms of the landlord's obligation to provide a written confirmation of rent within the framework set out. What can or can't, does or doesn't happen under commercial contracts does not in any way change that.
Nobody compared them. I cited the latter to rebut your claim mentioned in my last comment.Absolutely, tenancy agreements and commercial contracts are worlds apart, it really makes no sense to compare them.
You said:Nobody compared them. I cited the latter to rebut your claim mentioned in my last comment.
This suggests you are confident that there has never once been a case where a supplier charged a single person any more than an agreed price. That is clearly nonsense, and many posts on here over the years attest to that, from builders and tradesmen charging more than the agreed price to telcos failing to honour agreed discounts or supermarkets charging full price for items advertised as on special offer.Trade discounts are commonplace in business transactions and there's never any question of suppliers changing their mind and successfully obtaining arrears.