Sir, – So let me get this straight – corporations are found to be using various schemes and stratagems to ensure they pay a fraction of the current low corporation tax rate of 12.5 per cent, and our Government’s “solution” is to propose a new corporation tax rate of 6.25 per cent?
Using the same logic, those people refusing to pay the new water tax should be “punished” by having their bills halved. But, of course, in this State taxes are only for the little people. – Yours, etc,
PAUL GAVAN,
Castleconnell,
Co Limerick.
Sir, – In an otherwise regressive budget, it is good to see the attention given by the Government to the Special Assignee Relief Programme (Sarp).
Under the Sarp, under certain conditions, international executives can make a claim to have 30 per cent of their income above €75,000 disregarded for income tax purposes. In budget 2015, the upper income ceiling of €500,000 has been removed and the requirement to have worked for the company for 12 months before being seconded into Ireland has been lowered to six months.
A welcome relief for the working poor, which the rest of us will certainly not begrudge having to pay for! – Yours, etc,
CLAUDINE GAIDONI,
Dublin 7.
Sir, – It took only two days for the prediction of ongoing growth in the Irish economy to hit its first stumbling block. Surely those who are charged with responsibility for the fiscal health of the nation should have made it their business to factor in the ominous signs of a weakening German economy, when it was so glaringly obvious to most economic commentators.
Based on past experience, it was surely a reckless act by Government to frame a giveaway budget without regard to a likely downturn in Europe, as well as wider global uncertainty, which was already evident. It seems Murphy’s law will always have a role to play when it comes to predicting an Irish recovery. – Yours, etc,
NIALL GINTY,
Killester,
Dublin 5.
Sir, – I am appalled at the abolition of the 80 per cent windfall tax on the price of rezoned development land from January 1st.
This tax was introduced by the previous government in the aftermath of the crash to try to ensure that a property bubble would never again wreck the economy. As well as removing the temptation to corruption in the planning system, it is also a simple way of implementing the principle of the 1973 Kenny report – that the community, rather than individual landowners, should receive any profits resulting simply from a local authority’s redesignation of agricultural land for development.
The Construction Industry Federation, whose members will benefit hugely from Labour’s €2.2 billion social housing programme, lobbied very strongly to have the windfall tax removed. It was confident before the budget to speculate on the removal of this “boomtime tax . . . that has generated zero funding for [the] exchequer since it was introduced in 2009”. This statement is self- contradictory, as the bubble had well and truly burst by 2009 and the main purpose of the tax is to prevent it recurring, not to raise revenue.
Property interests also argued that it was necessary to abolish the windfall tax to boost the supply of land for housing. But, as the Green Party’s Eamon Ryan has pointed out, 25,000 hectares of land nationally are already zoned for development and there is no evidence that the shortage of housing is related to the tax.
Clearly, it’s a classic case of the common good being surrendered yet again to profit purely sectional interests.
Have we learned nothing from the last few years of misery for so many ordinary people? – Yours, etc,
DAVID LAWLOR,
Donnybrook,
Dublin 4.
A chara, – "What have politicians down the ages got against older people?" This question was asked of Minister for Finance Michael Noonan on the day after the budget ("Listeners question Noonan and Howlin over Budget 2015", October 15th).
What indeed? They have raised the age of entitlement to the State retirement pension (formerly called the old age pension). It is now 66, will be 67 from 2021 and will be 68 from 2028. Yet they have not given older workers over 65 protection against compulsory retirement. At age 64 workers have legal protections. At age 65 these protections disappear.
For the majority of workers, particularly in the private and voluntary sectors, the State retirement pension will be the main or only income after retirement. Ministers have said that jobseeker’s benefit and jobseeker’s allowance will be available. Jobseeker’s benefit is payable only for nine months and at its maximum rate is €42.20 below the State retirement pension. Jobseeker’s allowance is means-tested and is well below the State retirement pension. This means that nothing will be payable in the intervening months if an older worker has a spouse who is working or has a small pension from his or her employment – and the majority of workers retiring from the private and voluntary sectors have either very small company pensions or none at all.
Are politicians asking staff at the Department of Social Protection to spend lots of time and effort to try to get 66- and 67-years-olds into jobs?
Are politicians saying that the over-65s don’t count? – Is mise,
SEAN KINSELLA,
Rathfarnham,
Dublin 14.
Sir, – I suggest that in a “fair” society those who contribute most to society deserve most in return – the so-called squeezed middle! – Yours, etc,
FRANK BARR,
Dublin 11.
Sir, Ian Kavanagh (October 17th) asks, “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.” To be sure to be sure? – Yours, etc,
D FLINTER,
Headford,
Co Galway.