Sir, – Is the offering of tax relief on the water tax not the most ridiculous, contradictory, politically hollow decision made by a government in a long time? Imposing a tax and then providing relief against it? – Yours, etc,
BRIAN CULLEN,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin 16.
Sir, – A budget prepared by public servants is likely to be biased in favour of the public sector. If the group preparing the budget were to be drawn from the private sector, I suspect the universal social charge would have been fairly and equitably applied across income bands. As it stands, it blatantly discriminates against the self-employed. – Yours, etc,
ALISON HACKETT,
Dún Laoghaire,
Co Dublin.
Sir, – So the Taoiseach has indicated Fine Gael’s intention to keep increasing USC on incomes over €70,000 in further budgets to prevent higher earners getting “disproportionate benefits” from tax cuts (“Taoiseach pledges to cut income tax rate again in next budget”, October 15th). Fine Gael seems to have switched from being pro-austerity to anti-ambition. Time for a true party of the right to emerge. – Yours, etc,
MAIT Ó FAOLAIN,
Deansgrange,
Dublin 18.
Sir, – Why does it take two Ministers to deliver a budget speech? After all, the UK, with a population 16 times ours, manages perfectly adequately with one. – Yours, etc,
IAN KAVANAGH,
Kilmainham, Dublin 8.
Sir, – While hardship is still widespread, it is nevertheless true that our exports are booming, our growth rate is amazing, 70,000 people have now got jobs who hadn’t a year ago, and we can now borrow money at a fraction of the interest rate that obtained not so long ago. We are clearly moving in the right direction towards getting our country back on its feet again, and there are four words that should be said, but never will be. It would be nice to hear “thank you” said to Enda Kenny and his colleagues in Government, and to hear “austerity works” said by Paul Murphy and his colleagues in the Anti-Austerity Alliance. – Yours, etc,
PETER BOYLE,
Blessington, Co Wicklow.
Sir, – The lack of revenue from the 80 per cent levy on land rezoning is more a reflection on both the over-zoning that took place during the Celtic Tiger years, combined with a moribund building sector, meaning there has been no need for rezoning at all.
The best argument for the levy, first recommended in the 1973 Kenny report on the price of land, comes from the report of the Mahon tribunal, which stated that “the introduction of an 80 per cent windfall tax on profits/gains attributable to land rezoning . . . is likely to dramatically reduce incentives to make corrupt payments to influence land zonings should the opportunity to make such profits return”.
In that context the lack of revenue should be taken as a success, and the removal of the levy as opening the door again to planning corruption. – Yours, etc,
Cllr PATRICK COSTELLO,
Ranelagh, Dublin 6 .
Sir, – I am puzzled as to why Michael Noonan chose to penalise the self-employed with a new rate of 11 per cent USC as compared to 8 per cent for PAYE workers.
This acts as a serious disincentive for people considering setting up a business.
When you factor in concerns that our new-found growth is being heavily lead by foreign direct investment (FDI) companies, surely the logical move would have been to attract people to set up business and create employment ? – Yours, etc,
DONAL GREENE,
Managing Director,
Snap Citywest,
Citywest Business Campus,
Co Dublin.