Income tax accounted for 25.05% of tax revenue at the start of 2007, rising to 28.70% by the end of 2007. 2008 Q1 revenues from income tax accounted for 28.07% of the total, rising to 32.31% by year end. In 2009 the corresponding figures were 34.23% and 35.82%. So far this year, Q1 2010 income tax revenue accounted for 36.10% of total revenue. Q2 2010 figure is 35.49% - higher than corresponding Q2 2009 figure of 35.23%. Chart below illustrates:
In year-end terms:
One can (roughly, as an approximation) split taxes into the following three categories: business-related (corporate, excise -- attributable to business (Corporate & Vat - adjusted for the share of non-household consumption);
- attributable to households (income tax, Vat adjusted for personal consumption share of total expenditure), and
- transactions taxes - Stamps, CGT & CAT
When one realises that less than 50% of those working in the State pay income tax and majority of them barely avail of much of the public services, this really does put into perspective the burden of the state spending on our more productive middle and upper-middle classes.
4 comments:
How would you distribute the tax burden?
Consider this 1st though, you can't get much tax from those living on the breadline.
All these issues are a symptoms of the unemployment situation.
It's very easy to put up a posting like this spouting statistics without actually coming out and saying what your views are about what the stats mean. the posting has many inferences rather than conclusions. Additionally, it's also easy to avoid how these changes have actually taken place. Would the sudden and severe drop in transaction taxes (Stamp Duties, CGT, CAT and to a lesser extent VAT) have anything to do with the rise of Income Tax as a percentage of the total take?
Wow, that's gotta be the first time I get accused of not "coming out with a view". Yes, the change in the weights is attributable to collapse in transactions taxes and to deliberate shift of tax burden onto ordinary income earners. What's your point? That I am not saying this? My blog post is about the fact that our tax system has shifted to penalize income earners. The reasons for this shift are important, but the shift itself is a matter of policy. The Government is still aiming to get deeper into our pockets comes 2011. Given the already high burden of taxes on families, this seems to be a prescriptikn for disaster. Enough of a "coming out" for you?
The Government have been taken to task for relying excessively on tax sources that are inherently unstable. There is clearly a smaller range of viable sources now and these are highlighted in this article. Taxes must be seen in the context of the level of public expenditure and the value received for this. The Government will be skewered when forced to reduce expenditure that has been driven by political considerations and expediency - such as the 33% increase over 5 years in the HSE budget with no evident improvement in services and the outrageous sums paid to lawyers.
Post a Comment