thebudget

so what gonna happen, i think the fags will go up ( good news ) and i have heard that car tax is going up also ( bad news )

but what areas should be looked at, i feel child care should be a major issue, the amount of money some couples are payin out on top of a mortgage each month is a scandal, it should at least be tax deductable.

also with the price of fuel at the moment there should be no increase in excise duty on petrol/diesel and people on minium wage should be taken out of the tax net asap.

the various tax loopholes in this country should be looked at as well, the news that a number of millionaries paid NO TAX last year was disgustin, ii know it was tax avoidance whish is legal, BUT these loopholes should be closed.

What I'd like to see is the minimum wage taken out of the tax net, and the bands increased in line with inflation since their last increase. However, I reckon he may move towards the former, and compromise on the latter (whilst hailing it as a tax cut, when it isn't). I don't expect much to change, and do expect that they'll throw in something totally illconceived and unrelated to shift focus as they did last year with decentralisation.

Smokes will defo go up - their losing too much money through the smoking ban...

He better not go near the car tax, you should see the shape of some of the roads around home :eek: the poor motorist seems to be an easy target for this shower, tax the feckin horse crowd.

Minimum wage gone from tax net.

Stamp duty to be done away with for first time buyers of certain housing. What certain means I dont know.

Tax credits go from €200+ to €1200 per month .

So far so good.

i think the car tax thing was annocuned in advance, all i know is that it is a rip off, my tax is 144 for 3 months, thats a rip off in any book, its almost as much as my insurance.

the certain house this is under a value of 350,000 and i think they must be second hand ? i'm buildin so it won't help me :(

No tax on the feckin Cigs WTF

http://www.rte.ie/news/features/budget2005/speech.html

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

If it's a generous one, FF wil be accused of trying to build the vote back up before the next Election.

---

Disagree Conor, depends on who he's generous too. If he's like McCreevy he'll be disproportionately generous to the rich, and will deserve to be hammered as right wing. Increases in indirect taxes while reducing income tax is a right wing policy, and that's what McCreevy did.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Which will no doubt result in an increase in the prices charged for such houses...

---

seeing as I forked over in excess of €8000 in stamp duty for the house I bought two months ago, that's only a slight compensation.

Bought a house in last month, stamp duty was six and a half grand...

However we got the house at 12 grand under market value as the seller had agreed a sale with another buyer and needed a quick sale. Still though...

Doesn't look like a right wing budget to me. Decent Social Welfare increases, small (but significant) increses to tax credits and an upping of the standard band. No VAT increase, no increase to excise duty on fags, booze or petrol

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Gary

Stamp duty to be done away with for first time buyers of certain housing. What certain means I dont know.

---

F[size=2]irst-time buyers on second-hand houses up to €317,000 apparently.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]Anyone got a loan of €317,000? You know I'm good for it.[/size]
[size=2][/size]
[size=2]adam
[/size]

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

As I say though, I suspect that €10k will end up being tacked onto the house price, the marketplace is a *******...

---

You're probably right.
Banks give out 92% mortgages maximum (with some exceptions).

E.g. Previously on a €250,000 house someone needed a €20,000 deposit plus and extra €7,500 for stamp duty, i.e. had to save €27,500 before legal fees.

Someone that has saved that €27,500 can now use it all as deposit, and can apply for a mortgage of well over €300,000. From my point of view, I hope it does push prices up.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

As I say though, I suspect that €10k will end up being tacked onto the house price, the marketplace is a *******...

---

I'd say the houses that go up will be the one's that were artificially held at the Stamp Duty threshold. Actually not too bad of a thing, however, do a lot of second hand houses fall under that level, particularly in the Dublin market? Maybe extra tax relief for first time buyers would have been better - caught more people, and because people building have been hit twice in the last few years - first time buyers grant going, and then the development levies (can be a lot more than the stamp duty charges).

My opinions on the budget - disappointed, but it was a bit of non event. Pleased that indirect taxes haven't gone up (on top of ESB, Eircom, VHI, hospital charges etc).

Extremely disappointed that the tax bands weren't widened more. Most of that money will be eaten up by the increased charges, and 2% was due yesterday under sustaining progress. Even the minimum wage is under review and is likely to increase in the middle of next year to bring it back in the tax net.

Thought they'd be something on childcare, but again nothing. Also despite Bertie's promises this morning, I think they should've brought in some kind of minimum payment for the ones that are escaping paying any tax due to the various loopholes. Even a nominal 10k or something this year in lieu of this review (which was promised last year wasn't it?). Similarly there should be something done about horsey and artist exemptions - maximum income threshold for exemption....

Like I said, pretty much as you were (compared to last year - not compared to 2 years ago).

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

FF wil be accused of trying to build the vote back up before the next Election.

---

Accusation is hardly the word, when one is merely stating the truth......

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Patsh, you don't need to be walked through the world of difference between opinion and fact. It may well be the opinions of those who absolutely despise FF and view everything through that prism that it's a vote catcher, those who support the government may view things differently, but neither is susceptible to objective proof.

---

Are you trying to say that Ahern's "socialism", his careful orchestration of media interviews and the "message" in them, the barbs at "right-wing commentators", the adoption of most of CORI's agenda, the isolation of McDowell, is not part of a plan to "win" back the electorate and votes?
That these things are all coincidence, and that FF has actually been left of centre and worried about the poorer sections of our society all along, but we just didn't notice it?
Claim what you like, but it is a FACT that FF are worried about the results of the last elections and have a planned, co-ordinated strategy, which includes media profiles, the budget and various speeches designed to put clear distance between them and their own policies of the last 7 years, in order to win votes. You can be either objective or subjective in your views, but that is not an opinion, it is a FACT.

well im just fukin sickened :mad:
stamp duty quashed....a few months too late for me mate
paid 7.5k in stamp duty 3 months ago
people may say, well its paid now ...forget about it
i could ....only thing was i took a loan out with the credit union to pay it...
so its still lying there to be paid
does the bleeding ff governemt feel like they should pay this off for me please....like fuk it will

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by aidz1

does the bleeding ff governemt feel like they should pay this off for me please....like fuk it will

---

In all fairness, they could back date it 3 months, you'd be happy and then someone would be on saying they paid stamp duty 6 months ago. It's arse when you're on the wrong side of dates, but there has to be some cut off. I'm sure there's (foolish) people that signed for houses yesterday morning - extra thousands of costs for the sake of a few hours...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

As valid a fact as my opinion that Pat Rabbitte is no more a socialist than Margaret Thatcher...or that Joe Higgins doesn't REALLY care that much about bin taxes but it's a sure fire vote winner in Finglas...it's all opinion and coloured by our bias, and you are as biased against FF as I am for them, which makes both our opinions equally vaild...or of course equally invalid...

---

:rolleyes:
As usual, you ignored my post, to have another little rant about Rabbite.
What has your opinion of Pat Rabbite (who you bring into EVERY post about FF..:rolleyes: ) got to do with FF's plan to win back votes?
Instead of waffling on, again, about Rabbite, answer the question I posed to you.
If you don't want to answer it, fair enough. Go on pretending that your party is not trying to win back votes, and carry on in your fantasy that it's only bias that makes me, and virtually everybody else in this country, believe the facts I see before me.

I think the point may be that FF are prioritising vote-gathering over, you know, running the country in a decent way. They have a proven history of playing to the voters in the run up to an election and then going back on the promises they made just beforehand. Don't insult our intelligence by trying to deny it, it's as plain as the nose on your face. :)

Also, wouldn't you agree that saying Rabbitte isn't a socialist is the same as saying Bertie is? I'm pretty sure you could come up with a better argument than "I'm rubber, you're glue" if you put your mind to it.

adam

You posted this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

FF wil be accused of trying to build the vote back up before the next Election

---

I posted this in reply.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patsh

Accusation is hardly the word, when one is merely stating the truth......

---

You then replied with this

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

It may well be the opinions of those who absolutely despise FF and view everything through that prism that it's a vote catcher

---

I replied that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Patsh

is not an opinion, it is a FACT
(that FF were trying their hardest to get votes back)

---

You repeated your assertion that as I am biased against FF, my claim that they were trying to win votes back was

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

you are as biased against FF ........opinions..........

---

and now you end up with

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Ummmmmm hate to state the extremely obvious, but I suspect that every party wants to win votes.

---

So you start off by saying that FF will be accused of trying to win votes back, I say it's not an accusation, but a fact, you claim I am just posting a biased opinion not a fact, and at the very end say that in actual fact, yes FF are trying to win votes.
So you are either
sort of not agreeing with me, but ending up contradicting yourself
or
agreeing with me, thus contradicting yourself!

FF are running scared of the electorate and trying their hardest to win back votes any way they can. It's not a crime, there is nothing wrong with it, it's not unusual, it's simply a FACT, and for once can't you simply admit that that is what they are doing......
and eh, agree with me!
:D

Seem to be a nothing much budget, just tinkering around the edges again. Good to see low income folks out of tax net & that standard tax band widened more which will proportionatly benefit tax payers the less they earn.

Its clear FF are keen to move from right of centre to left of centre for next election as thats where the opposition are positioning themselves. FF already have the right of centre vote snapped up as little competition except for PDs here 'n there. If FF compete well & electorate fall for it then they certain to win next election.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

I'm aware of the fallout from the last election, but I can't really remember the 'proven history' (again, no more so than any other party, I mean did Labour and FG promise to bring the country to its knees with record unemployment and debt levels in the 1980s, because that's exactly what they did?). Could you enlighten me a little on the 'proven history'?

---

Does the last election not count or something? Is it not the best example of how Fianna Fáil are going to behave again? As to the unemployment and debt, those problems were of course created by Fianna Fáil, and as usual everyone else had to mop up after them.

adam

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Patsh, I don't concede much, but I think you got me there. I assumed your suggestion was that FF were wrong in such action, I see you were not.

---

Your profuse apology and humble concession is accepted....:p

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Which is as valid an argument as saying that any problems now can be traced back to the Rainbow Coalition...

---

I was being facetious Conor. It's funny that you say this and then go on to argue the point though. :)

FF/PD coalition have only been in power since 1997 so they can't claim sole responsiblity for current boom as it had already started (96-97) by time they elected.

I think irish politics has become so focused on concensus that aside from SF there little difference anymore & also budget has little significance either. I'm looking for now & knew in advance that budget would have zero difference to my chances either way.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Which is as valid an argument as saying that any problems now can be traced back to the Rainbow Coalition...

The FG/Labour Coalition in the 80s was a complete and utter disaster for the economy. Now of course you may well go back in time and collar someone else, and I will concede that there were many factors outside their control, but their utter crapness was also a major factor. They spent 5 years in office while Ireland effectively ground to a halt and everyone fled and the National Debt (where did that go?) doubled. It would have been easy for governments after that, which included FF, Labour and the PDs, to use your line and say 'but Fine Gael created all the problems', instead they went a hell of a long way towards clearing it up.

---

Conor74..correct ...
Ok history lesson. Deficit budgeting in earnest began under FG/Labour in 1973 the Finance minister was Richie Ryan. But it got brutal altogether under two different regimes . The 1977-79 FF Government under the late Jack Lynch appointed an economist Dr. Martin O'Donoghue to a newly formed Department of Economic Planning. Then came the 1982-87 FG/Labour regime under an Economist as Taoiseach, Dr. Garret Fitzgerald. These bozos combined, mostly the latter two, buggered up the economy for decades to come by KEEPING ALL THEIR ELECTION PROMISES! When the economy did not generate enough revenue to fulfill them the governments concerned borrowed and borrowed and borrowed. Fitzgerald's bunch taking a £13 million national debt and turning it into a £26 million national debt. And all we got for that was dole payments to 300,000 plus people and mass emigration.

Two morals here, 1/ Never allow an economist anywhere near your economy 2/ Governments who occasionally break their promises are better for your country in the long run.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by CollegeTillIDie

Fitzgerald's bunch taking a £13 million national debt and turning it into a £26 million national debt. And all we got for that was dole payments to 300,000 plus people and mass emigration.

---

I presume you meant billion there...

There's a misconception that a budget deficit is necessarily a bad thing. IMO one McCreevy's big mistakes (leaving aside his tax policies) was the fact he was too hung up on breaking even, when we were (and still are) crying out for infrastructure investment. There would've been no problem going into deficit for capital investment programmes.

It's just the same as personal finances - debt isn't a problem if your buying an asset (eg mortgage for property, loan for a car), it only becomes a problem when it's going on current (everyday) spending....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Conor74

Unless it's a George W. Bush deficit. I believe he likes them in terms of trillions, no pussyfooting about with 13 million or even 13 billion...

It's funny how the National Debt were such buzzwords in the 80s and seem to have disappeared.

---

Prime example of doing it wrong - he's national the national debt to fund tax cuts.

Irish national debt now only 30% of GDP or GNP (not sure which they use) which by international standards is very low.

Yanks ar eonly trying to half their annual deficit in next 4 years so that instead of 4 trillion annual deficit would "only" be 2 trillion.

Always found it kinda strange how Amercian Republicans preech their Democrates about tax & spend yet historically the republicans always cut taxes but continue to spend so have huge deficits. :confused: