Labour to cut standard rate of tax to 18%

[Reality bites]

Its a bit ridiculous to say that if you want tax cuts or a meaningful policy on immigration you are not 'left wing'. When we talk about left wing in Ireland it usually refers to politically correct policies or the latest celebrity issue.

A tax cut for everyone, at the lower rate; and a proper immigration policy with thought given to how it displaces non-union workers in low paid jobs; is left wing.
It affects everybody across the board in Ireland in a meaning ful way. Its easy to cover up the fact that many foreign workers in Ireland are paid less than Irish workers, but they are happy to bear that for a year or two to earn several times what they might at home. I work in a bar, I know why so many foreign bar staff are employed in the industry. The same goes for construction. Its not an issue in finacial services, high tech industries or the civil service but when trained Irish builders and carpenters find it difficult to get work at agreed union rates you gotta ask questions.

Our current policy of allowing exploitation of labour by employers for short term gain for both the worker and employer will lead to a dangerous undermining of rights and competitiveness, and tax cuts for those paying the higher rate of tax along with generous tax breaks in many industries favours a select few, hardly the majority, an example of right wing policy.

A cut to 18% favours those in non-union, un skilled jobs in the service industry that pay comparitievly low wages and that DO NOT BENEFIT from social partnership. Those in call centres, retail, labouring etc. That is where most of the jobs in the last while have been created.

Someone earning enough to be taxed at 41% isn't what Labour are worried about, it is those who have failed to benefit from the boom.

[owenfeehan]

As one of the 'well off' who pays 41 cent in the euro, I can attest to not feeling that 'well off' - if the PD's can appeal to this sizable chunk of the electorate ( a multiple of their own support ) by claiming that Labour don't want to reward effort and hard work the way they do - ithe 2% tax reduction is capped at about

Looking at world income's based upon average GDP per capita (source world bank 2005, see here):

Average GDP per capita for World: $10,159
Median GDP per capita for World: Not readily available, but much lower again!

Average GDP for Africa: $2,803
for Asia: $6,112
for South America: $6,883
for Central America & Carriban: $8,601
for Middle East: $11,839
for Europe: $21,829
for North America: $26,381
for OECD: $27,742
for Jpan: $29,619
for UK: $30,414
for EU-15: $31,680
for US: $39,319
for Ireland: $40,087

topped only by Luxembourg, a country of about 465,000 people, at $65,994, a huge component of whose working population aren't resident in the country and travel in from neighbouring countries.

Now look at the % tax takes out of total GDP within the countries of the OECD, to pick a few.
#1 Sweden: 54.2 % of GDP
#2 Denmark: 48.8 % of GDP
#3 Finland: 46.9 % of GDP
...
#15 Australia: 31.5 % of GDP
#16 Ireland: 31.1 % of GDP
#17 United States: 29.6 % of GDP
#18 (out of eighteen) Japan: 27.1 % of GDP

Average = 39.4%.

Now as, a taxpayer at the upper band rate, that puts you in in the top 26.5% of the population in terms of income (see here, dated 2001 from Dept. of Finance).

Let's remember what you said:

As one of the 'well off' who pays 41 cent in the euro, I can attest to not feeling that 'well off'

So in short:
- You are in the top quarter of earners
- in the country with the 2nd highest income in the world (about 4 times higher than the world average, and many multiples again times the world median)
- which pays the 3rd least taxes in the OECD

You may not feel that well off, but you most certainly are.

If, as one of the top quarter earners in the second-highest-earning country in the world, you don't feel well off.....well....

...then surely you don't want to vote the same government back in, because something serious must be wrong either you or them if you don't realise how friggin well off you really are!

And please tell me, by mentioning the PDs like you did that you want taxes to be even lower again, given how friggin wealthy you are compared to everybody else?

If so, I daresay a more appropriate username for you would be Montgomery Burns!

[meriwether]

Perhaps Owen, if you examined the relative costs of living and inflations, you might come to a more accurate picture of how well off we are?
It may back up your argument, but Im unwilling to take your word for it we are comparatively very well off without seeing evidence on the above.

[Limerick Lad]

Pat really has FF in a quandary Willie O'Dea was floundering on Q & A tonight trying to defend FF/PD indefensible higher rate tax cut

[meriwether]

Pat really has FF in a quandary Willie O'Dea was floundering on Q & A tonight trying to defend FF/PD indefensible higher rate tax cut

Willie did flounder. The weasel.

[ditchhurler]

[b]

Let's remember what you said:

As one of the 'well off' who pays 41 cent in the euro, I can attest to not feeling that 'well off'

So in short:
- You are in the top quarter of earners
- in the country with the 2nd highest income in the world (about 4 times higher than the world average, and many multiples again times the world median)
- which pays the 3rd least taxes in the OECD

You may not feel that well off, but you most certainly are.

Thank you for pointing out that I am in the top 26% of earners - from the tone of your post this somehow constituites niche in your terms ( leaving aside the fact that it's a multiple of Labour party support levels) The point I was trying to make was that top tax payers are NOT some sort of elite. I have never been a PD supporter but can see how the 26% of top payers leave them a fertile ground to plough, relative to their levels of support at 1-3%.

[Reality bites]

Rock of Cashel, there is feck all a tax change will do for those outside of the tax system, but Labours 5 pledges will do a lot for the poorest in society, with improvements in public health, pre school and eduction, better transport and a better chance to buy a house.

Obviously an increase in the minimum wage would be great, and I am sure it will be on the cards. A living wage will be the next issue hopefully.

A look at the table in todays indo shows the difference that a 2% cut makes in the lower rate. For anyone earning under 100k you gain more than a 1% cut in the top rate while those on under 25k gain with Labours plan when they wouldn't with the other.

Unfortunately, talk of indexing bands, tax credits etc does not go down well. At its most simple the plan shows that Labour will do more for those on low wages than the PDs and FF. Obviously its not perfect, no plan that can be delivered in a few short sentences is, but that is what is required to let people know that you are on their side.

[qtman]

Rock of Cashel, there is feck all a tax change will do for those outside of the tax system

A refundable tax credit, payable to everyone with a PPS number, would do something for people outside the tax system.

, but Labours 5 pledges will do a lot for the poorest in society, with improvements in public health, pre school and eduction, better transport and a better chance to buy a house.

Which of the 5 committments deals with transport?

Unfortunately, talk of indexing bands, tax credits etc does not go down well.

So, PR takes precedence over sound and equitable taxation policy?

Are these words really coming out of your computer?

[tonys]

In politics as in a lot of things, timing is everything. I think Pat’s got this wrong, by about 10 years.

[hiding behind a poster]

In 1997, a single person on the average industrial wage paid 22% of their income in income taxes. In 2007 they will pay 9%

But according to Eurostat, their overall tax burden as a percentage of income is unchanged since 1997. You know what that means? Stealth taxes, government charges, indirect taxes - all massively increased - by FF/PDs.

And finally...Labour have consistently voted against every tax reduction at both the higher and lower rate!

Are you saying that because you can show it to be true, or are you saying it because it's what McDowell said today? And for your information, they haven't - they've voted against the budget every year - as an Opposition party they're entitled to do that. But it doesn't mean they oppose everything in it.

And McDowell was actually funny on TV today - typically for him, he resorted to negative, personalised insults and sneers at Rabbitte. Clearly he's not listening to his party handlers, who know well how such performances turn off the voters.