Sir, – It is a relatively simple matter for a government to introduce taxation measures, if it has the will to do so. If one takes an arbitrary figure of ¤100,000 as the starting threshold for a higher income tax bracket, each 1 per cent extra taxation on ¤10,000 over the ¤100,000 threshold would yield ¤100. On ¤20,000 the take is ¤200, etc. Hardly much of a loss for that high earner! If, for example, an extra 5 per cent income tax on earnings over ¤100,000 were imposed, a person earning ¤110,000 would lose an extra ¤500, someone earning ¤140,000 would lose ¤2,000.
Such a loss is peanuts compared with the losses being endured by the less well-off. While introducing a higher tax for such higher earners might not bring massive sums into the State coffers and solve our economic woes, it would, more importantly, impact positively and psychologically on those with low incomes.
It is certainly not beyond the wit of the Government, but, unfortunately, it is not its innate will to rock the boat on the disproportionate and grossly exaggerated pensions (compared with other countries) of former taoisigh. – Yours, etc,
MARTIN KRASA,
Sunday’s Well Road, Cork.
Sir, – Where does the Government get the huge sums of money for the pensions of retired taoisigh and ministers, when it does not have sufficient for the disabled, children, elderly, and carers, etc. These pensions may be legal, but they are blatantly unjust . . . in which case, what does that say of our justice system? So many questions. Are there any answers? – Yours, etc,
EM GREEN,
Ballyknocken Beg,
Rathnew,
CoWicklow.
Sir, – It appears we are all equal, except pensioner taoisigh are more equal than pensioner lay people (“Legal advice against cutting ex-taoisigh pensions”, Front page, March 11th). Members of the “club” will not be targeted by members of the “club”. – Yours, etc,
BRIAN SUGRUE,
Glenbeigh,
Co Kerry.