Jim Power: we can't tax the rich

SkatesOn

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2009
Messages
59
On tonight's Primetime, Jim Power gave an example of why taxing the rich will not work. He said that if you increased income tax to 65% for all those earning over 100k, it would raise only 16 million (or may have misheard - could have been 60 million) out of budget deficit of 19 billion. Followed by: "That's not going to solve the problem!"

This is a complete lie!

Figures for 2006 (latest year for which data has been published) are as follows:

Total Income for all those earning over 100k: 19.7bn
Total Income Tax paid by thiose earning over 100k: 5.1bn
Average tax rate: 27%
Number of individuals: 98,000
=> There was approx 10bn (19,7bn - 98,000 x 100,000) earned in excess of 100k.

Assuming Income Tax rate was increased to 65% for all earnings in excess of 100k (from current 41%)
= 24% x 10bn = 2.4bn

So if the Income tax rate for earnings in excess of 100k was increased to 65% it would pull in an extra 2.4bn a year.

Can anyone else corroborate these figures?
 


Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
What would you expect from a spiv economist, who depends on the rich for his own wealth and privilege.
 
Joined
Jun 9, 2007
Messages
18,709
Another person currently re-writing his own history. Why he doesn't slink away in embarrassment at his own past failures is beyond me...

The rich, those that profited from the bubble, must pay progressively more. We are not going to tolerate a repeat of the 1980s, the PAYE workers paying for everyone else. The days of Thatcherism are over...
 

d7bohs

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 21, 2009
Messages
1,108
I love the way he trots out the stat that the top 10% of earners pay 80% of the total income tax take, as if that in any way proved they were contributing over the odds, or even their fair share.

Either he thinks we're stupid, or he's really thick himself.
 

CarnivalOfAction

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 15, 2010
Messages
16,393
On tonight's Primetime, Jim Power gave an example of why taxing the rich will not work. He said that if you increased income tax to 65% for all those earning over 100k, it would raise only 16 million (or may have misheard - could have been 60 million) out of budget deficit of 19 billion. Followed by: "That's not going to solve the problem!"

This is a complete lie!

Figures for 2006 (latest year for which data has been published) are as follows:

Total Income for all those earning over 100k: 19.7bn
Total Income Tax paid by thiose earning over 100k: 5.1bn
Average tax rate: 27%
Number of individuals: 98,000
=> There was approx 10bn (19,7bn - 98,000 x 100,000) earned in excess of 100k.

Assuming Income Tax rate was increased to 65% for all earnings in excess of 100k (from current 41%)
= 24% x 10bn = 2.4bn

So if the Income tax rate for earnings in excess of 100k was increased to 65% it would pull in an extra 2.4bn a year.

Can anyone else corroborate these figures?
Yet another one of the "SF = economic illiterates" spivs; how that has rebounded:

SF policies would kill Celtic Tiger - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie :

"SINN FEIN'S economic policies would be "suicide" for the Celtic Tiger, halting the housing boom in its tracks"


Here's the bit I loved: "Commenting on Sinn Fein's policies, Justice Minister Michael McDowell said last night: "It confirmed that Sinn Fein is a party which is economically illiterate, with little or no understanding of how modern business operates or indeed the role of the multi-national sector in the Irish economy."
 

havesomeimagination

Active member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
189
How about proposing that all TV commentators from now on should have their income bracket displayed at all times - sick of rich people telling me the rich 'can't' be taxed
 

gatsbygirl20

Well-known member
Joined
Dec 1, 2008
Messages
22,551
Another person currently re-writing his own history. Why he doesn't slink away in embarrassment at his own past failures is beyond me...

The rich, those that profited from the bubble, must pay progressively more. We are not going to tolerate a repeat of the 1980s, the PAYE workers paying for everyone else. The days of Thatcherism are over...
As an old codger who remembers the 1980s all too well, I wish I could agree with you, but alas....it's shaping up to be the same old scam....
 

Squib

Well-known member
Joined
May 9, 2009
Messages
443
As an old codger who remembers the 1980s all too well, I wish I could agree with you, but alas....it's shaping up to be the same old scam....

The Income tax numbers came in way below what was forcasted for the year. The PAYE people really need to pull their socks up!

All categories of tax were ahead of target for the first 11 months of the year with the exception of income tax, the ministry said. Corporation tax recorded a surplus of 589 million euros, helping to offset an income tax shortfall of 356 million euros.
Ireland budget deficit falls on high tax income | Reuters
 

JCR

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 22, 2009
Messages
6,241
People who can move their money will move their money. They keep it here because of low taxes. They will pay accountants to get out of as much tax as poosible and move their money if it pays them to do so. You can count PS and a lot of private sector PAYE workers over the 100,000 figure, but try figuring out the percentages on that. The rich can move and hide their money and will move their money and as individuals are entitled to do so. People should not be naive.
 

havesomeimagination

Active member
Joined
Nov 13, 2008
Messages
189
The Income tax numbers came in way below what was forcasted for the year. The PAYE people really need to pull their socks up!



Ireland budget deficit falls on high tax income | Reuters
I've been waiting for the media to point out the bleeding obvious reason for this is that wages have fallen while profits have risen ergo more CT & less income tax in line with the transfer of wealth to capital.
 

Cael

Well-known member
Joined
Jun 19, 2006
Messages
13,304
I love the way he trots out the stat that the top 10% of earners pay 80% of the total income tax take
All that figure shows is that a small percentage of the Irish people have hijacked the Irish economy, and diverted its fruits into their own pockets. These people are thieves.
 

Bill D Gallows

Active member
Joined
Sep 10, 2010
Messages
219
I suppose its apt that Jim Power works for Friends First.

As an economist, he is completely discredited, all he has left is to be a battering ram for his rich buddies.
 

Mitsui2

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 13, 2009
Messages
32,380
Yet another one of the "SF = economic illiterates" spivs; how that has rebounded:

SF policies would kill Celtic Tiger - National News, Frontpage - Independent.ie :

"SINN FEIN'S economic policies would be "suicide" for the Celtic Tiger, halting the housing boom in its tracks"


Here's the bit I loved: "Commenting on Sinn Fein's policies, Justice Minister Michael McDowell said last night: "It confirmed that Sinn Fein is a party which is economically illiterate, with little or no understanding of how modern business operates or indeed the role of the multi-national sector in the Irish economy."
Yes, citing the halting of the housing boom as a disaster, on the authority of Independent newspapers, and backed up by the man who kept Bertie in power, holds rather less appeal to people these days I'm afraid.

I wonder why?
 

hammer

Well-known member
Joined
Jul 6, 2009
Messages
58,180
Well Jim Power earns well over €100,000

Of course he is going to say "dont tax the rich"
This country is still a basket case if we dont even believe €60 million would help :(
When you are balancing the household budget every cent counts !!!


I may be mistaken but €60 million would pay the salaries of 1,500 public servants at €40,000 each :)
 

Barnacle

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 15, 2009
Messages
854
On tonight's Primetime, Jim Power gave an example of why taxing the rich will not work. He said that if you increased income tax to 65% for all those earning over 100k, it would raise only 16 million (or may have misheard - could have been 60 million) out of budget deficit of 19 billion. Followed by: "That's not going to solve the problem!"

This is a complete lie!

Figures for 2006 (latest year for which data has been published) are as follows:

Total Income for all those earning over 100k: 19.7bn
Total Income Tax paid by thiose earning over 100k: 5.1bn
Average tax rate: 27%
Number of individuals: 98,000
=> There was approx 10bn (19,7bn - 98,000 x 100,000) earned in excess of 100k.

Assuming Income Tax rate was increased to 65% for all earnings in excess of 100k (from current 41%)
= 24% x 10bn = 2.4bn

So if the Income tax rate for earnings in excess of 100k was increased to 65% it would pull in an extra 2.4bn a year.

Can anyone else corroborate these figures?
I did my figures slightly different, but only rough and not sure how correct they would be.

98,000 earned over €100,000 and those 98,000 paid in total €5.1bn with an average rate of 27%. Taking out the element of the tax they pay on the first €100k (€27,000 x 98,000 = €2.6bn), this leave €2.4bn paid in tax on the element over €100k. If the rate was increased by 24% on this element, it would raise extra tax of €588m.

An increase is needed as under the current plan, someone earning €50k will have the same amount charged to tax as someone earning €500k. 5.1% charge to net income of someone on €50k but there is only a 0.37% charge to net income for someone earning €500k.

If they raised the tax in this area, it would probably tax a few years for a real value to be seen as the excess may be mopped up by Capital Allowances, but the sooner these are mopped up the sooner this residue will be wiped out. They have mentioned in the 4 Year Plan "legacy relief" which seems to point at this area, but the plan is not clear on their intentions. The budget should be much clearer but should be interesting how they intend to deal with this.

If they could give us the level of Capital Allowances/Losses claimed against income could do a better calculation. If, however, they raised the rate and made it exempt from any offset against Capital Allowance, they would raise quite a bit. The problem is these allowances.

(Still mulling the figures around in my head though, think I need to think about this one a bit more)
 
Last edited:

HarshBuzz

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 28, 2008
Messages
11,815
Assuming Income Tax rate was increased to 65% for all earnings in excess of 100k (from current 41%)
= 24% x 10bn = 2.4bn
SkatesOn, if you're going to start threads at least have the brains to get your figures right:

the current marginal rate of tax for high earners is over 55%

PAYE 41%
PRSI 4%
Health Levy 5%
Income Levy 5%

now start again
 

harpsman

Well-known member
Joined
Aug 6, 2010
Messages
327
I agree with all the above posts.
Anyone who earns more than me is a fatcat profiting off everyone elses hard work.
So my proposal is every euro of earnings above what i earn be taxed at 99%.
 

Canon

Member
Joined
Aug 29, 2010
Messages
63
Tax reform must consist in making our economy less of a slave economy for the wealthy. Bigger countries make bigger demands for their people, not just because of their size but because they respect themselves.
 


New Threads

Most Replies

Top