TheJournal.ie uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Click here to find out more »
Dublin: 11 °C Saturday 18 May, 2013

Column: Dubliners should pay more property tax – here’s why…

Properties near the capital that have easy access to infrastructure and services should pay a higher price, writes Frank Convery.

SOME HAVE COMPLAINED that the residential property tax to be based on the market value of the property will be unfair to Dubliners because property values are higher there than elsewhere in Ireland.

For example, the value of the 298 properties sold in Dundrum, County Dublin, were compared with the value of the 25 properties sold in Dundrum, County Tipperary, over the 2010-2012 period, using the Residential Property Price Register (RPPR): the median value (and associated full-year property tax in brackets) for Dundrum, County Tipperary are €100,000-150,000 (€225), while the equivalent for Dundrum, County Dublin are €350,001-400,000 (€675).

Benefits reflected in price

The median property owners in County Dublin will pay €450 more in annual property than their counterparts in County Tipperary. But the former have manifold advantages over the latter, including easy access to tax-payer subsidised infrastructure and services in transport, culture, sports, education, health – and the widest range of life style possibilities, job options and entrepreneurial potential on the island.

These benefits are reflected in property prices and therefore in property taxes. This is fair and appropriate. The timeliness and transparency of the property price evidence available on the RPPR is impressive, as is the quality and clarity of the background information and responses to ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ provided by the Revenue Commissioners.

One weakness is that the price is not converted into price per metre squared (M2). This gap should be corrected as a matter of urgency. The data, combined with the Revenue Commissioners’ ability to nudge us towards compliance with a variety of soft and hard measures, make it likely that most of us will comply.

A little background

In Ireland, property taxes on domestic dwellings were abolished by central government in 1977 and this was followed by elimination of property taxes on agricultural land. In order to help make good the shortfall in revenues, local authorities imposed levies on new developments to cover the costs of infrastructure and services provision, and central government increased the tax on property at the time of acquisition (stamp duty). What is notable about both of these revenue streams is that their magnitude depended on the volume and value of new development and property transactions. With the collapse of the property market, in terms of both volume and value, these two revenue streams fell sharply.

It is clear that confining the tax base to transactions and new development made revenues very dependent on the level of economic activity in the property market.  This contributed to the sharp fall in government income and the rise in the deficit. This in turn played its part in Ireland’s exclusion from international money markets and the request to the European Union (EU) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) on November 21, 2010 for financial support. Agreement was reached in December 2010, the terms of which are included in the EU/IMF Programme.

Not surprisingly, this agreement includes a requirement to re-introduce a property tax .

The announcement of a property tax in December 2012, engendered a reaction that this is unfair to property owners in Dublin where property values are much higher than elsewhere in the country. Also, it is argued that because of economies of scale and scope, the cost of providing some public services – parks, water, roads, waste collection etc – per household are lower in Dublin than elsewhere and so the revenue required per household will be lower.

The two Dundrums – a comparison

Using the property price register, which covers all residential transactions since January 2010, we can get a sense of the discrepancy between Dublin and the rest by comparing the records for two Dundrums – one in south county Dublin, the other in Tipperary.

Over the 2010-2012 period, there were 25 units sold in Dundrum County Tipperary, and 298 in Dundrum County Dublin. If we assume that the property tax rates agreed by government will be applied to these prices, the taxes payable will be as shown below:

Property Tax in Dundrum County Tipperary, based on sale prices 2010-2012

Property Value Range Number of Properties Annual Property Tax Per Property €

Property Value Range Number of Properties Annual Property Tax Per Property
€200,001-€250,000 3 €405
€150,001-€200,000 3 €315
€100,001-€150,000 11 €225
0-€100,000 8 €90
Total 25

(Property prices via Property Price Register and The Revenue for annual tax rates)

The median property value is 100,001 to 150,000, with a tax liability of €225.

Property Tax in Dundrum County Dublin, based on sale prices 2010-2012

Property Value Range € Number of Properties Annual Property Tax Per Property €
1,805,000 1 3812
1,300,000 1 2550
1,050,000 1 1915
950,0001-1,000,000 2 1755
850,001-900,000 1 1575
800,001-850,000 1 1485
750,001-800,000 1 1395
700,001-750,000 3 1305
600,001-650,000 4 1125
550,001-600,000 10 1035
500,001-550,000 7 945
450,001-500,000 20 855
400,001-450,000 34 765
350,001-400,000 56 675
300,001-350,000 40 585
250,001-300,000 37 495
200,001-250,000 35 405
150,001-200,000 32 315
100,001-150,000 6 225
0-100,000 6 90
Total 298

(Property Prices via Property Price Register and annual tax rates from The Revenue.ie)

Why Dublin households should pay more

The median property price in Dundrum (Dublin) is €350,000-400,000, with a median tax liability of €675.  This compares with a median tax liability of €225 in Dundrum (Tipperary).

So, median households in Dundrum (Dublin) are likely to pay €450 more than their counterparts in Dundrum (Tipperary).  The gap widens at the upper end, where the annual tax payment on the most expensive property sold in Dundrum (Dublin), valued at €1,805,000, would be €3812, compared with a tax payment of €405 payable on the most expensive property sold over the same period in County Tipperary, valued at €247,000.

Houses in Dublin are worth more because there are many benefits to living and working in the Dublin region – and these advantages get capitalised into property values. Key Dublin advantages relate to transport, education, health, access to places of worship, religion and lifestyle, culture and sports, enterprise and jobs. Many of these benefits can be characterised as what economists call ‘option value’ – the value that most of us attribute to the choice of being able to avail of a good or service, even if we never take up the opportunity.

Urban dwellers have causes for complaint – but not about property prices

All of the above options and amenities are available to the residents of Dundrum, County Dublin; most can only be accessed by residents of Dundrum County Tipperary if they come to Dublin. Of course the motorway and rail spokes go both ways, so that physical access is easier than before; and where it exists, high quality internet access can reduce the value of Dublin’s advantage. But geography still imposes iron constraints, and gives those in the capital manifold advantages that are reflected in the value of property. Urban dwellers have many legitimate causes for complaint, but the higher value of property in Dublin, and the associated higher property taxes property owners will pay, is not one of them.

The reason Dublin house prices are higher than Tipperary house prices is in part because of the greater benefits created there by society. It is not surprising then that Dubliners should be asked to contribute more via property taxes. The case made by rural lobbyists against the inspection of septic tanks was inappropriate and misconceived. The case against the property tax in Dublin is similarly misguided.

The timeliness and transparency of the property price evidence available on the RPPR is impressive, as is the quality and clarity of the background information and responses to ‘Frequently Asked Questions’ provided by the Revenue Commissioners. This, combined with the latter’s ability to nudge us towards compliance with a variety of soft and hard measures, makes it likely that most of us will comply.

Frank Convery is Chairman of Publicpolicy.ie and is a Senior Fellow at UCD Earth Institute. This blog post was originally posted to Publicpolicy.ie.

Column: Want to value your house for the property tax? Here’s a guide.>

Column: Property tax risks worsening problems Ireland already has>

Read next:

Comments (104 Comments)

  • ‘parks, water, roads, waste collection etc’ – Well, since we already pay separately for our waste collection, and there’s vehicle tax and VRT etc for the roads, and water charges are coming in, then the property tax is for someone to cut the grass in the local park.

    But, then again, the property tax is supposed to pay for local services and since my house is in an area not looked after by the regional authority I pay a service charge to a management company for this, so what am I paying for exactly?

    Reply
  • Nothing the author writes above changes the fact that my parents couldn’t afford a higher urban rate on their small pension. It’s also great way to make sure the psychological divide between urban and rural citizens is kept alive and well.

    Reply
    • Ciaran, couldn’t agree more. My mum is 88, living alone, in fairness her house is in south Dublin and probably worth a couple of bob..but like your parents she’s living on a pension, so her ability to pay is zilch, she barely keeps things going, heating in an old house etc. These guys are so out of touch!

      Reply
    • Joan

      The answer for your mother is simple in the eyes of the failed teachers heading our Government and the bankers controlling the ECB & World Bank. If she cannot afford to pay the “property tax” on her “property” then she should sell it.

      Please note I have called where she lives a “property” not a “home”. Why have I done this? Simple no arm of Government anywhere consider the building / land where people live, for which these same people pay for or have paid for a “home”, they consider it a “property”.

      In the case of your mother our Government expect that where she cannot pay her “property” tax than she should sell this “property”.

      Where would she live? Well that could be with you or another family member. However I suspect they would like to see her live in a “nursing home”. Why would that be? Well if it were in a private “nursing home”, they would be able to take her money via the taxes the “nursing home” would pay them. If she were to go into a state run “nursing home”, even better they would get all her money.

      Remember people when you finish work tonight (if you are lucky enough to still be working), that when you turn the key in the door, you are not arriving “home”, you are getting back to your “property”. Remember the failed teachers know the dictionary makes a clear distinction between a “home” and a “property”, and that nobody is “entitled” to either.

      But at least Edna, (pun intended) gets his €220k, state car & driver and 2 pensions per year, all paid for by the likes of your 88 year old mother selling her “home”.

      Reply
  • Property tax is not linked to service provision so the argument in this article is flawed. However, if it were linked to service provision urban areas should pay less as service provision is better value per capita in urban areas due to simple economies of sale..

    Reply
    • Property tax IS linked to service provision. As stated in the article, more and better services in highly populated areas are capitalised in property prices. Houses are more pricey in Dublin partly because of the (better) level of services than in rural areas.

      People who work in Dublin but can’t afford to live there purchase houses on the commuter belt, where they might only have a few trains/buses a day, poor library services, less public roads and lights to maintain, less public parks and open spaces to maintain, poor leisure facilities, etc, etc. It is only right that people in Dublin pay more, as they get more benefit from public services than those who don’t live in Dublin.

      Reply
    • censored 26/01/13 #

      (big sigh) ok, the answer is to concrete over all those rural areas and turn it into a city. Oh, don’t want that either?

      Reply
  • @Ciaran…couldn’t agree more!! It’s another attempt to divide the population. The media has become this constant barrage of public/private rural/urban effectively dividing members of Irish society to prevent them from unifying against a myopic corrupt establishment that seems to let them down at every turn while maintaining their privileged positions…

    Reply
  • budget deficit? If the stopped paying out for debt that was privately owned we would be ok. The March €3.1 billion that goes to pay for Sean Quinn’s and Sean Fitzpatrick’s mistakes and debt is coming from us the tax payers, that money should be going to central funds to run the country and then the wouldnt be looking for the €3.5 billion in cuts and taxes. €3.1 billion to anglo = €3.5 billion in cuts and taxes.
    So instead of the discussion or argument being about urban ,rural divide it should really be about why the people have we to pay this debt in the first place.
    USC, pension levy, VAT increase,motor tax increase,children allowance cuts, pay cuts, job losses, so far and yet the try to inflict more pain and misery, Home tax, water charge, septic tank charge,communications charge, childrens allowance to be means tested and another budget in October .
    Where or when will it end??? This our new Ireland while the people who were in positions of authority at the time of the collapse walk away with golden pensions all round, paid for by us in the public service domain and no one called to account for any thing. David Drumm stated every one knew what was going on with Anglo in Governmnet and Central bank yet no inquiry and 5 years on and with every year less likely that any thing ever will. So join the dots it is not our debt to pay and hence no need for at the least the tax on our homes. When urban and rural spend their time and energy arguing each other the real argument is not discussed.

    Reply
  • Here we go again. Divide and Conquer. we never learn.

    Reply
  • Sorry but your home is not a an asset it’s your home. Most of us are paying for a home that will never again reach the value we have paid for it. For us It’s a liability not an asset.

    Reply
  • Guess what, Frank – we already paid more for our HOUSES for the very reasons you outlined.

    Reply
    • Exactly what I was thinking Sean. The article seems to miss the obvious point that those living in the capital have already paid far higher for their properties largely due to the benefits outlined in the piece. In doing so they also paid far more in stamp duty (During the boom years often at 9% for a fairly modest semi-d) The logic that they should be penalised for this is bizarre.

      Reply
  • Paul 25/01/13 #

    1 the property tax is meant to pay for LOCAL services, not national ones.

    2 the property tax is NOT going to be kept local, instead it will be put into a central fund and shared out, so if you live in Dublin or Wicklow etc you may be paying for road maintenance in Leitrim.

    3 all of the services mentioned in the article are NATIONAL services paid for through national taxes.

    4 Dublin is where most of the venue of the state is generated. I’m not saying it should all be kept in the pale, but pretending that the good people of Dundrum Co Tipp pay anything like what the people of Dundrum in Dublin do in taxes, either individually or as a community is clearly stupid.

    5 in national taxes there is ALREADY a huge transfer of tax take from Dublin, the east and the Cork area, to the rest of the country, the equivalent of €3,800 for every man woman and child.

    Reply
    • Great response. And no mention in the article of the fact that the people of Dundrum in Dublin also paid double the stamp duty of those in Tipp at the time of purchase (based on house prices)

      Reply
    • Well, my local council fills in potholes, rather poorly if I may add. That is all the service we get. Why on earth should we pay more then those who have a multitude of services?
      It’s an unfair tax, but no need to make it even more worse.

      Reply
    • 65% of Property tax IS going to be kept local. The other 35% will be put in an equalisation fund, just as occurs in most European countries.

      Reply
    • censored 26/01/13 #

      You’re missing the point. There is already a huge transfer from Dublin to the regions. We already pay income tax, the only reason this tax has been created is so that income tax can be diverted to pay off the bond holders.

      Also – why on earth should I pay more so that somebody can build a (cheaper) one off house in the country and benefit from local services disproportionately funded by me?

      Reply
  • This argument is distracting from the main argument that the property tax is unjust.
    No one will see any additional services or get any value from this tax.
    We are told it is to pay for local services, but where will the money that is now spent on local government be diverted to? It will be used to pay off bank dept!!

    Reply
  • Eric 25/01/13 #

    The ESRI have said that Dublin residents will be effectively subsidising everyone who lives outside of Dublin and that the property tax represents a huge outflow of capital from urban to non urban areas.

    It’s hardly fair to spin property tax as a tax on lifestyle as the author is trying to do given that it was supposed to pay for services provided by local authorities.

    Reply
  • Never mind who should pay more,it shouldn’t be introduced in the first place.It’s totally unjust while people can’t afford mortgages on property and almost half a million people out of work yet this fine gael and labour government told us they wouldn’t reduce social welfare payments or increase income tax but instead they will get the revenue collect it counts as the same thing if you ask me,what a shower of …

    Reply
  • Can I stop paying my exorbitant management fees and just pay the property tax? What services will Fingal Co council provide in the private scheme where I live? Why should I then be asked to pay for services I won’t receive?

    Reply
  • This tax is simply another attempt by the government to put their hands in your pocket so they can hand over further billions to bankers, bondholders, and gamblers. the fact that they will be deducting it from wages or social welfare payments should people refuse to pay amounts to nothing more than a wage cut /social welfare cut, so much for not taxing income. personally i will be resisting this tax all the way

    Reply
  • I was under the impression that the Property Tax was to pay for local county council services. Therefore the argument relating to the Governments balance sheet is moot. County Councils should simply divide their deficit by the number of properties in their catchment area. Then you get what you pay for. Perhaps its too simplified; but it has to be better than the current, unfair proposal.

    Reply
  • I completely disagree and thinks this is a ridiculous article. In the case of dundrum, Dubliners have paid up to 3000 more for that pleasure. So why pay more now? The property tax isnt actually paying for the shops or culture around them

    Reply
  • Repeat the excercise with Finglas and Kenmare. Or Ballymun and Kinsale. Or Sallynoggin and Westport.

    Those lucky citizens of Finglas. They have opera, haute cusine and amazing public transport on their doorstep. Of course they should pay more than Kenmare folk!

    Article reads like written by an angry senior infant.

    Reply
  • “It costs less to provide you with water/infrastructure/etc. services therefore you should pay more” seems to be the jist of the argument here.

    Not buying it.

    Reply
    • We’ll be paying for water soon, we’re already paying for refuse, we pay road tax to use the roads, we pay heavily for our broadband etc, most of us are forced to access private healthcare as public provision is poor and waiting lists are still long, we pay full price for luas/bus and we are provided with the same services like parks, libraries etc that any decent sized country settlement gets(be it large village/town whatever) so this entire thing is a load of bo**ox! We will not be paying our property tax to dun laoghaire rathdown and we will not see the good of our money. Ppl worked hard all their lives to get to the point where they can afford to live in these areas and give their families the benefits of such. They earn good money and pay their share of taxes as it is. This article is pure bullshit!

      Reply
  • Bit of a diversion from the real issues which is that this property tax is theft. I live in the country-side, paid 40 000 in stamp duty. Get no services whatsoever – the roads are an effing shambles and dear help us if we need to get to hospital (nearly 2hrs away). This is a joke to sustain that moron Edna Kenny’s blooming glorious European ruler lifestyle. Where’s the accountability for broken election promises?
    Some democracy this country is.

    Reply
  • They say you can prove anything with statistics, 14% of people are aware of this.

    Reply
  • The most ridiculous article EVER written on the journal. Losing your spark I think.

    Reply
  • What correlation is there between taxes paid to local Govt and access to places of worship, religion and lifestyle, enterprise and jobs?

    Fair enough many cultural and sporting venues will have some state funding, but having those located in centrally populated areas at transport hubs means they serve a great number of people and are more accessible. But doesn’t every parish in rural areas have its own GAA club anymore? How much of our culture is actually tied to physical locations like Museums Galleries etc?

    Schools hospitals and other services paid for by ALL our taxes, not the property tax and are more plentiful in Dublin because the population is larger and therefore its supply to meet the demand, yet still they are strained and under resourced.

    There’s far too much skewed personal perspective in this article and no small amount of petulance. We’re all hurting by the savage damage done to our economy, families all over the country are going to struggle to pay this tax regardless of post codes. We’re all in the same boat, so why point the finger at each other instead of at those making the flawed policy decisions that have lead us to this point?

    Reply
  • “Easy access to tax payer subsidised infrastructure etc…” Not sure of the figures but I’m sure tax payers in Dublin are subsidising the rest of the country when it comes to the amount of tax collected.

    Reply
  • Sheila 25/01/13 #

    A house I know in Galway city, twice the size of my house in Dublin, is worth about 100k less. It is the same distance from the city centre, and has the same facilities provided by the City Council. There is the added bonus of being close to the Salthill Promenade, rather than surrounded by city streets. Why should the property tax in Dublin be more? We are supposed to be paying for facilities, not to be punished for the current value of our houses (which is pretty hard to set at present).

    Reply
  • Stop. Stop. Stop. How easily the sheople of Ireland are led by their leaders. Here you all are complaining about who should pay more or less, when we should all be making a stand, a unified stand of Non compliance on this vile tax. Your opinions are being moulded by the media, including the journal alas. People have to get up off their comfy chairs and get out and make their voices heard. Get organised. The gov couldn’t care less how much people whine and moan in this virtual world, it’s high time to get out onto the streets and make them know.

    Reply
  • Only problem is the tax takes no account for ones ability to pay. A person in negative equity struggling to meet monthly mortgage payments, a person working on minimum wage but lives in a valuable area in the city etc..Maybe the tax should be calculated using a combination of house value and the income coming into the house.

    Reply
    • Negative equity has no effect on ones ability to pay!!’

      It only affects you when you sell your property, until them it’s only a possibility of an outcome

      Reply
    • Negative equity should not come into it, negative equity is only an issue should you want to sell and a figure on paper should not enable someone to not pay their way as others do.

      Reply
    • Agree. I think it should be divided into three sections to come up with a valuation.

      1. Value of property. (33.3%)
      2. Household income. (33.3%)
      3. Services Provided. (33.3%)

      I believe this would be a fair system to all.
      Also people should be able to to see where each and every penny has been spent. And those making decisions as to where the money is spent are accountable for there decisions.

      Reply
  • all this b/s about 65% goingto local authoriies, what the government are not telling people is that whatever the local council brings in via the tax will be deducted from the amount of money it recieves in government funding, i.e if say co tipperary c.c brings in 1 million in tax then the government will reduce the amount of funding by 1 million, it is NOT going to be an extra source of revenue for the councils. so what will happen to all the money the government saves by not funding councils? well my guess is that it will be used to pay off the banks ,again! for that reason alone i won’t be paying them a cent,not one red cent, oh and i get absolutly no services from my local council anyway, no streetlights, no road maintainance, no liberary, swimming pool, park ,sewerage, bin service, nil nothing nada, so i will pay them accordingly.

    Reply
  • The people being taxed the most are those hit the hardest by the property market collapse. Those with the greatest amount of negative equity now will have to pay the greatest amount of property tax. Very unfair, but what we can expect in a political system where a country vote counts for more than a city vote.

    Reply
  • How deluded is this guy and what is his vested interest?

    Dubliners should pay proportionately less than other parts of Ireland (as should people in other urban areas outside of Dublin) because we live in more sustainable communities which leads to more efficient provision of both public and private services.

    The reality is that Dubliners and other urban dwellers are subsidising the provision of public and private services to those in other parts. If you don’t like this fact then move to an area that is more sustainable.

    Reply
  • One fundamental point is continually missed in these types of articles…

    Peoples ability to pay – Doesn’t come into any equation whatsoever! Record amounts of people in negative equity, record amounts of arrears, record amounts of people having utilities disconnected because they can’t afford to pay. And here we get an article outlining why some should pay more than others. Irrelevant really.

    The medicine being proposed is killing half of the patients…. and this article doesn’t draw the line down between which patients we’re killing and which we’re not. Thats the real discussion that needs to take place!!!

    Reply
  • Conversely the property density of Dublin means you can build one road, one street lamp, have one litter patrol that serves 3-4times the people, it’s much more efficient spending. Thus I would expect to see all the money being pumped straight back into Dublin streets and services and not go to subsiding rural areas services.

    Reply
    • Dave 25/01/13 #

      It is hardly subsidising rural services because we dont get these for services at all!

      There is no public lighting, there is no litter collecting or bins for that matter / no storm sewers / no foul sewers / no ducting for broadband, no gritting, anyone with a house in the country has to find alternative to all of these and provide them themselves.
      I dont know what we get for paying a property tax… maybe a bit of hedge trimming once a yr to stop the trees and bushes engulfing our single carriageway road which is lacking in road markings/lighting/signage

      Why shouldn’t the tax paid for living in the country be less!

      Reply
    • censored 26/01/13 #

      It is less, and you get more than you pay for.

      Reply
  • So far, 81% of the comments here are in opposition to the premise in the article and indeed to the LPT(Local Property Tax) itself. I find that heartening, because I too believe this tax to be an unfair one and a tax too far especially at a time when so many of our middle to low income citizens, and particularly Family Home Purchasers/Owners are struggling with unemployment etc. What is really bad about this tax is the fact that (1) zero account is taken of peoples ability to pay, (2) through so called deferral it proposes to lumber debt on to individuals estates and (3) in a really cynical move the RC’s have been roped in so that those who either can’t or through protest won’t pay the tax, can more easily be crimnalised. Where are the protests? Where are the feet on the streets? 81% negative is a pretty big reaction to this article so why are 81% of the people who believe they will be negatively affected by the LPT marching in protest?

    66 articles on family Home Taxation here. You are welcome to the continuing debate:

    http://familyhometaxlpt.wordpress.com/2013/01/05/family-home-taxation-should-lpt-local-property-tax-have-been-applied-to-family-homes/

    Reply
  • tax the shite out of folk with 2nd homes, particularly holiday homes. people with holiday homes tend not to contribute in any significant way to the local rural economy, bringing their own food/drink with them etc, yet benefit from the local services.

    Reply
  • Haven’t paid
    Won’t be paying either.

    Reply
  • well that writer has been well and truly powned by the commenters. Common sense versus State speak? winner is common sense.

    Great work all ;-)

    Reply
  • Sure someone in a rural area might not have access to the same services as someone in the city, but the city-dweller may be accessing their services from a 900sq ft terraced house while in the countryside some may have a 3,000 sq ft house on an acre, and be paying less property tax. There needs to be equalization for the size of the house and the earnings of the individual…

    Reply
  • Property tax should have been integrated into tbe system long ago. The facts are… When the Celtic Tiger was in full roar our government managers and politicians should of introduced this concept to the public. Unfortunately, they didn’t. .. They were busily taking credit for nothing the actually did and approving large salaries and pensions for themselves.

    Now we are at a crossroads. While all 1st countries have a property tax… Many property owners are against this added taxation. However, the country needs this money more than ever. This country is bankrupt. We need to find money wherever we can. However, I would argue… That we do whatever it legally takes to wrestle the high salaries and pensions from our government manqgers and politicians, then we address property tax.

    Reply
    • Refund me my stamp duty and I’ll pay your property tax

      Reply
    • Marlon I beg to differ this country is not bankrupt, the banks are bankrupt. The €3.1 billion to be paid every march for anglo would eliminate the entire budget for 2013 with change to spare. We the Irish have a good track record of doing noting about any thing with regard people in authority hence the church scandal,doctors scandal and previous politicians who were found to corroupt etc so NOTING will happen now. The politicians will die with their golden pensions and their wives will have half of that pension that the will be taking from old age pensioners and children around the country to pay for. The majority of people have no interest and dont care about what happens so I wont be holding my breath

      Reply
    • The 3,1 billion would eliminate the 2013 budget ??? Budget for what?? The country i running a 20billion deficit in 2012 after this year not much better thats 40 billion over two years

      Reply
    • Jay what part of giving €3.1 billion of our money in march to anglo bond holders and then we the public get tax increases and cuts in services to achive €3.5 billion?????
      €3.1 billion anglo payment = cuts in services and taxes to raise this amount. not very complicated for those that choose to see and not be blinded by bullshit

      Reply
    • 3.1 billion in cuts dont acheve 20billion in deficit savings. Just because you dont argee with maths dosent make it bullshit

      Reply
    • Jay ah com’on will you are you reading the governments propoganda?? its a simple argument If the didnt hand over the €3.1 billion to anglo bond holders then the could keep it to bridge any “deficit” that €3.1 billion is our money and would be better spent in our economy. It is once again not our debt to be paying.any way next october the say (if you can belive them) it will be all cuts in order to achive savings, which means same thing cut the €3.1 billion for anglo out of spending on services and allowances.. I cant understand where you are coming from this is simple and even educated economists says it is the case, that the take our money and use it to pay anglo bond holders . Your argument is not an argument on this issue yours is some thing else . any way leave it as its same thing we arguing over the wrong things while the culprits walk away scott free with no accountably at any level

      Reply
    • jay your maths are correct but the formula which you use is flawed
      most nations in certain times run current budget deficits, as most nations experience periods of growth and periods of downturn.
      your arguement that we have to pay the bondholders in order to get money from the markets, in practice is correct but in theory is wrong.
      The money if it has to be paid to the bondholders should be taken from the ESM and not the Irish people and i will tell you why,
      The night the gurantee was signed outside forces were at work and as we know there are letters to prove this. There was a grave concern that the euro was about to fall. whatever cowan and lenehan wanted didnt matter as there was (in the eyes of our european friends) a bigger crisis looming and the rest as you know is now history.
      So while i agree we are running at a 20 billion defecit, paying the bondholders is not the job of the irish people.
      I don’t come on here banging on about the government because i get a kick out of it, like you i have kids and if we don’t do something there lives are going to be so hard. I’m not being smart or insulting but just think about the bigger picture. the people of this country did overspend but they still have the debts, in there homes and mortgages and they will still have to pay for the boom and bust situation we are now in.

      Reply
  • Absolute and utter rubbish. Take the example of an Post where it costs on average 4 times more to deliver post in rural areas than urban areas. The provision of public services is much more efficient and cost effective in urban areas yet urban dwellers will pay a substantially higher property tax than those in rural areas. How any public policy formulator can try and defend such a situation as equitable defies belief and seriously calls both his credibility and capabilities into question

    Reply
  • The urban weighting is unfair in relation to certain citizens, that are paid a flat rate of PAYE regardless of the area in which they work. e.g Garda,/teachers etc.
    Having had higher house prices forced upon them, (by virtue of were the are posted), and budgeting to pay for same, this does not now mean they they have the disposable income to pay the higher extra tax.

    Reply
  • Those living in Dublin are all too often quick to give a dig at rural dwellers telling them it’s “their choice” to live in the countryside. Perhaps the shoe is now on the other foot. When we get buses every 15 minutes with locally maintained water and sewage systems as well as broadband access amongst the hundreds of other services seemingly restricted to Dubliners we’ll be happy to pay similar rates.

    Reply
    • it didn’t take long for the “divide and conquer” to work on you, Brian

      Reply
    • Well said Brian, but this should apply to all cities that provide these services. I dont agree with the property by the way, a home should not be taxed !

      Reply
    • Go start a bus company and see how much you’d have to charge each passenger for a 15 min service. These things are provided in cities because they are economically viable.

      Reply
    • Hello namesake – if you want the provision of services – private and public – on a comparable level to those in Dublin and other areas then you should pay for them. At the moment rural dwellers are having their lifestyles subsidised – how can you have a 15 min bus service to ever god forsaken bohereen in the country (and we have to pay for the upkeep of these bohereens), how can you you have a decent broadband services when wires have to strung up for km’s and only service a few homes.

      It is clear that there needs to be a double rate system and higher rate should be paid by rural dwellers where services (public and private) can not be efficiently be provides.

      We’re tired of paying for your lifestyles. Now pay up.

      Reply
    • @ Brian and Barry – Dublin Bus, the Luas and the DART are part financed by the state. In other words, remove state subsidies and these too would be unviable. What I have a gripe with is the constant barrage of insults from urban dwellers telling us in the country if we don’t like something we shouldn’t live there. Finally, we can now say it back. If you don’t like subsidizing the countryside, then move to it. Simple. Oh, and without the countryside you’d have no food, furniture, houses, etc. We grow the food, we grow the trees to make your furniture and we quarry the land to build your houses. Nivag is correct and I don’t usually like divide and conquer policies, but when urbanites consistently look down their noses at you it is nice to get a little victory, even if it is rare.

      Reply
    • Paul 25/01/13 #

      Luas makes a profit.

      DART and suburban rail: Bray to Connolly packed like sardines in a tin €3.30 one way, Heuston to Galway in considerably more comfort €14.99 one way, I wonder who’s subsidising whom there? Likewise with the buses.

      Broadband is provided in urban areas by private enterprise, often (but not always) subsidised by the state in rural areas.

      Lots of us also pay for the upkeep of our own areas privately through management fees, so in reality we receive sweet fa from the council too.

      Every man, woman and child in Dublin and surrounding counties currently (not including home tax) contributes €3,800 more in taxes than they receive in services from the state, similar rates of contribution exist in Cork. This is reversed in the BMW and SE.

      Cheers for the building materials and food, which were not a gift but were paid for.

      Average home tax in Wicklow will be €350 versus €90 in BMW/SE. This does not reflect ability to pay, we live here because this was where we got jobs or because we are from here. You probably live there for the same reasons. Rural life is already subsidised and now you want more?

      Your argument can be summarised as follows: hey, no fair, you got sirloin and we only got lamb! Yes, but you’re either getting fed for free or you only paid for a horse burger, and you’re still whinging!

      Reply
    • censored 26/01/13 #

      Wow. Well, Brian – so your solution is for us all to go live in the country is it? Will it still be “the country” then, do you think?

      Reply
  • All taxes should be levied on ability to pay.

    Reply
  • Erm .. yes, people whose houses are adjudicated to be worth more should and will pay more.

    That’s sensible.

    Reply
    • Will someone please ban this guy from the journal.

      Reply
    • censored 26/01/13 #

      Er Damocles, are you not keeping with the Government propaganda? They say this money is needed to fund local services, not a house value tax (which btw we already paid, and will still pay in the form of stamp duty which hasn’t gone away)

      Reply
    • Damocles 26/01/13 #

      Censored, city dwellers tend to pay more and consume more and subsidise more. It’s the way it has always been. It has nothing to do with propaganda from the government.

      Look at the UK, the South East subsidises the rest of the country, no one likes it but that’s the way it goes. Scotland may want to survive without this subsidy and good luck to it but I don’t rate its chances.

      So the cities end up subsidising the country in Ireland, what of? Such is the way of things.

      You say Government propaganda, I say natural order.

      Reply
    • Blank 26/01/13 #

      Damocles wrote “Censored, city dwellers tend to pay more and consume more and subsidise more. It’s the way it has always been.”

      Only because rural dwellers were in the majority and could vote themselves as much urban dwellers money as they wanted.

      Reply
  • Dublin wants to steal water from the Shannon. Let them pay for it.
    Cavan coco should get to sell the Shannon water as that is where it’s source is.

    Reply

Add New Comment