Wife giving up work ....


PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.

So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year. Yes of course, that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.
 
ashambles said:
PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.

So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year. Yes of course, that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.
Click to expand...
That's an employers cost. It includes a Health Levy of 4 or 5% and a training Levy of 0.7%. That's not a contribution towards the employees social insurance. As far as I know it also covers redundancy payments where the employer doesn't have the means to pay them.
 
Steven Barrett said:
Can you explain how someone can run their own business, sell it for a nice sum, retire and then get a redundancy payment from said company? I've never understood that.
Click to expand...

The benefits of employing a crafty financial advisor, I suppose.
 


The social insurance fund in 2021 was funded by employers PRSI at 8.8B, employees at 3.2B, self-employed 0.7B.

The SIF that funds jobseekers benefit is funded in the main by employers PRSI. If someone prefers to believe otherwise - that's fine with me.
 
ashambles said:
PRSI paid per PAYE employee is 11.05% + 4%.

So an employee on 55k has 15.05% paid into PRSI fund every year, 8277 euro a year. Yes of course, that's between you and employer but that's what's going in.
Click to expand...

So when you wrote "If you work for one year at €55k you've paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers benefit" above, what you really meant was that if you work for one year at 55k then your employer and you have, between you, paid enough PRSI to pay the full amount of job seekers' benefit.

Thanks for clearing that up.
 
I don't think anyone believes otherwise. The issue is that some people seem to think that the social insurance fund just funds the pensions of those who pay into it.
Those who believe that and assume their contributions are funding their pension or the full amount of their Job Seekers Benefit etc are clearly very wrong.
 
Purple said:
The issue is that some people seem to think that the social insurance fund just funds the pensions of those who pay into it.
Click to expand...
In terms of pensions it does only fund the COAP pensions of those who pay in.

Clearly the payout rate has little to do with what people pay in - which is the point you're making maybe?

If you want a JB where it makes sense to restrict it to people laid off, then make it a proper JB based on salary. Fix the JB first, then the eligibility for it.

E.G Germany it's up to 67% of salary for two years, up to a cap of 84,000 euro p.a. , i.e. our max JB is 4.5% of the max German one, we pay less social insurance here - but not 22 times less.
 
ashambles said:
In terms of pensions it does only fund the COAP pensions of those who pay in.
Click to expand...
In theory, but;
ashambles said:
Clearly the payout rate has little to do with what people pay in - which is the point you're making maybe?
Click to expand...
Exactly. The PRSI most people pay, along with the PRSI their employers pays, isn't enough to fund their contributory old age pension and all of the other things it is supposed to fund.
I agree completely. It is ridiculous that it is not linked to what a person has paid in. It's also ridiculous that long term rates are the same as short term rates.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register