'Cut child benefit to fund childcare' Regina Doherty

Orbit v2

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 8, 2010
Messages
12,092
Silly season kite-flying, or serious proposal? It never ceases to amaze me the brain blockage around this issue.

https://www.independent.ie/business/personal-finance/doherty-urged-to-cut-child-benefit-for-high-earners-to-fund-more-childcare-36978212.html

Thank god I'm out of that racket, but a family with three kids under 18 gets a minimum of €5040 pa from child benefit. That would be around €10K of pre-tax income if you took it away. Do they really think families on €100k aren't going to notice an income drop like that? I'm sure we'll be hearing all about the families who have the money transferred straight into their bank account, instead of spending it every week on cigarettes and crisps, as if that is evidence they don't need it. The way people talk about this issue (with their head in the sand) makes me think, if they go ahead with it, they would have no idea the backlash they would get.
 


hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
The move will revive memories of a 2012 push by the Troika to means-test children's allowance that was eventually parked as the bailout ended.

Well done FG :)
 

Spanner Island

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 22, 2011
Messages
23,973
No problem.

But, cut the extortionate amount of tax I pay...
I think the idea is to redirect the money to use elsewhere (in this case childcare)... not to give it back via tax cuts...

I thought an economics genius like yourself wouldn't be capable of misunderstanding such simplicity...
 

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,815
Speaking as half of such a couple....Doherty is right, it's very hard to justify cash handouts irregardless of income.

Stop paying out cash. Start targeted spending.
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
I think the idea is to redirect the money to use elsewhere (in this case childcare)... not to give it back via tax cuts...

I thought an economics genius like yourself wouldn't be capable of misunderstanding such simplicity...
The idea is to increase the effective progressivity of the Irish fiscal Pork Barrel even further.

This is simple:

Abolish child benefit, cut the top rate of marginal taxation.
 

Disillusioned democrat

Well-known member
Joined
Mar 16, 2010
Messages
16,011
The idea is to increase the effective progressivity of the Irish fiscal Pork Barrel even further.

This is simple:

Abolish child benefit, cut the top rate of marginal taxation.
Basically this is a way to reduce the wages people with kids need to earn so the SMEs can make more money.

With FG you only have to ask one question - which set of their cronies will benefit?

80% of the tax used to fund CA comes from those couples who earn €100k, but the SMEs just can't get their hands on their money fast enough, so this wheeze is designed to cut their gross income by about 10% and transfer it to "child care" - and WHO could argue with that - except the FG ulterior motive, of course is to have more state funded child care so the low cost employees can get back to work to increase profits for IBEC members.
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
Almost two thirds of taxpayers would favour the introduction of a “wealth tax”, according to a new survey.

Taxback. com asked 1,700 taxpayers throughout the State for their views on taxing wealth. The survey uncovered that a “landslide” 65 per cent agreed a new tax on accumulated wealth should be imposed.

Alternatively, 61 per cent of respondents agreed that a new higher third rate of income tax should be introduced to gather additional taxes from those on larger incomes.

Barry Flanagan, tax director at Taxback.com, said seven out of ten people said they would not be in favour of paying more tax themselves.

“I’m sure many people will be surprised that support for a wealth tax amongst taxpayers is so high,” he said. “After all, 65 per cent pretty much constitutes a landslide. However, the results come with a caveat.

“When asked if they themselves would be prepared to pay more tax if it resulted in better public services, 72 per cent said they wouldn’t – either because they think they pay enough already or they think that it won’t result in better public services.”



Nearly spilled my coffee.

Must have contacted p.ie posters :)
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
Almost two thirds of taxpayers would favour the introduction of a “wealth tax”, according to a new survey.

Taxback. com asked 1,700 taxpayers throughout the State for their views on taxing wealth. The survey uncovered that a “landslide” 65 per cent agreed a new tax on accumulated wealth should be imposed.

Alternatively, 61 per cent of respondents agreed that a new higher third rate of income tax should be introduced to gather additional taxes from those on larger incomes.

Barry Flanagan, tax director at Taxback.com, said seven out of ten people said they would not be in favour of paying more tax themselves.

“I’m sure many people will be surprised that support for a wealth tax amongst taxpayers is so high,” he said. “After all, 65 per cent pretty much constitutes a landslide. However, the results come with a caveat.

“When asked if they themselves would be prepared to pay more tax if it resulted in better public services, 72 per cent said they wouldn’t – either because they think they pay enough already or they think that it won’t result in better public services.”



Nearly spilled my coffee.

Must have contacted p.ie posters :)


All these types of questions are framed in such a way that all the subject hears is "would you favour taxing other people more".
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
Reminder - You can provide childcare I think for 3 kids in your own home and earn € 15,000 or so tax free.

Parents and stay at home mums need to think outside the box :)
 

Paddy{ie

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 5, 2012
Messages
1,468
The move will revive memories of a 2012 push by the Troika to means-test children's allowance that was eventually parked as the bailout ended.

Well done FG :)
‘Parked’ - like water then? But.....
Expand on the Bailout ending. Are we finished paying it back? Sure that’s great news.
 

Trainwreck

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 6, 2012
Messages
26,416
Basically this is a way to reduce the wages people with kids need to earn so the SMEs can make more money.

With FG you only have to ask one question - which set of their cronies will benefit?

80% of the tax used to fund CA comes from those couples who earn €100k, but the SMEs just can't get their hands on their money fast enough, so this wheeze is designed to cut their gross income by about 10% and transfer it to "child care" - and WHO could argue with that - except the FG ulterior motive, of course is to have more state funded child care so the low cost employees can get back to work to increase profits for IBEC members.

What this really is, is yet another "policy"" which is just a way of politicians trying to make business for themselves.


Imagine, Apple declaring "we are thinking of making a new iPhone. 80% of you will get it for free, the other 20% are going to be forced to buy it for €3,000"


That is exactly what this is.
 


Most Replies

Top