Archive for March, 2010

An official monopoly is the worst kind

Published March 26th, 2010 in ambrand. 0 Comments

In the private sector if you find yourself dealing with an incompetent company you can vote with your feet and take your business elsewhere. Often times it hard like in web hosting where you will have to migrate databases but it can be done.

However what if the incompetent company has a monopoly? Who can you move to? No one. Will you even complain to the company and let them know about thier poor practices? Probably not, because you might enjoy even worse service then.

Fortunately there are few private sector monopolies.  One that comes to mind is the NCT. A couple of months ago we wrote how the NCT doesn’t send reminder letters anymor, sure why should it? It is private sector company enjoying a Government contract, why would it waste money on postage when it knows that car drivers have to use its services.It is the only show in town, it would be illegal not to use its services!

Indeed, the Government may me infomally happy that it no longer sends reminder letters, because it can pile on penalty points and enjoy some income. Insurance companies must also be smiling on the lack of reminders, as those penalty points allow them to extract higher premimus from drivers, who again must havecar insurance, it would be illegal not to have insurance.

Moving up the ladder the Revenue Commissioners are my favourite example. You have to pay tax, it would be illegal not to. Why should they provide information, indeed they will often say informally “ask an accountant” but who will pay his EUR 60 per hour fee? moi?

Abolish Jobseekers Benefit (Jobseekers Allowance is much better)

Published March 26th, 2010 in reform, PRSI contributions, bureaucracy, unemployment and red tape. 0 Comments

Abolish Jobseekers Benefit (Jobseekers Allowance is much better); No I am not suggesting abolishing the dole, just changing its internal workings, and removing a streaming which is bad news for claimants.

In Ireland, you see, there are two forms of what is commonly called the “Dole”.

  • Jobseekers Benefit - which is based on a persons past employment contributions
  • Jobseekers Allowance - which anyone can get if they can pass a means test showing they need money today 

The idea, is that a person who becomes unemployed starts off on Jobseekers Benefit which is somehow morally superior - because they are not leeching, they are using up their own contributions. I like the idea because it makes the claimant feel less guilty, they feel they are only claiming back what they are entitled to.

However, once we set emotions aside I contend that Jobseekers Benefit is actually a bad deal for the claimant. It should be abolished and everyone should instead go on Jobseekers Allowance. So lets switch the order around, we will start our comparison with Jobseekers Allowance (which has many advantages), and finished with Jobseekers Benefit (which lacks those advantages)

Jobseekers Benefit, is like the medical card, it is a key to many other services, that are not openly advertised.
(The Medical Card allows discounted Freedom of Information requests FFS!)

Why is Jobseekers Allowance Better?

  • Jobseekers Allowance has no end date,
    whereas
    Jobseekers Benefit ends in 9 months, or 12 depending on an individuals contributions
  • Jobseekers Allowance is not taxable by the Revenue Commissioners,
    whereas
    Jobseekers Benefit is taxable.
    However it is possible to avoid taxation on Jobseekers Benefit if “you are participating in a short-time working arrangement”. That’s according to Revenue Leaflet Taxation of Jobseekers Benefit - IT24. Short-time employment means employment in which the employees have been transferred from a normal working week (which is not defined, but we will assume to mean  a5 days week) to a short-time working arrangement each week (e.g. 3 days on / 2 days off) or within a period of four consecutive weeks (e.g. 1 week on / 1 week off; 2 weeks on / 2 weeks off; 3 weeks on / 1 week off).

    The mechanics of how one goes about enjoying this tax exemption are not explained, and this brings us to a huge problem in the Irish welfare system; Social Welfare and Taxation are handled by two seperate government organs, The Department of Social & Family Affairs and the Revenue Commissioners.

    Lets take a side bar here and look at an inefficiency;
    When a claimant fills in a Tax Return the Revenue only ask for the name of his Social Welfare payment (Jobseekers Benefit), and the amount he received in the tax year. The Department of Social Welfare’s weekly “pay slips” for want of a better term do not include a running total, so in order to find out how much he received in a year the claimant must add up the totals of all his payments! It is possible to request a statement from the Department of Social Welfare, but that’s a secret that only accountants know about, oops. Plus it wastes tax payers money on postage. In the real world the likelihood is that a claimant just won’t submit a Revenue return Form 12, but if he did would he really add up all his “pay slips” would he have kept them all? I don’t think so. So the real way of avoiding paying tax on Jobseekers Benefit it to keep a low profile by not submitting a tax return.

    However, since 2006 the computer systems of the Department of Social Welfare and the Revenue Commissioner have been linked. Alas the linkage conveniently doesn’t extend to the Department of Social Welfare informing a the Revenue Commissioners that a claimant’s Jobseekers Benefit was But getting back the the point of how to avoid paying tax on Jobseekers Benefit

    Since 2006 their two computer systems have been linked in some fashion.But in order to enjoy the exemption for “a short-time working arrangement” a claimant will have to get something called a “Certificate of taxable benefit” from the Department of Social Welfare. Note how this certificate is not mentioned at all in the Revenue Leaflet Taxation of Jobseekers Benefit - IT24. Who wrote that leaflet? Are they still employed? Can we blame them? They were writing a Leaflet for the Revenue, they cannot comment on the internal workings on another Department, there are lines of demarcation here you know.

    and speaking of different Departments brings us nicely to FA, a completely separate government organ….

  • Jobseekers Allowance; opens up many FAS jobs. Many are limited to persons who have been on Jobseekers Allowance for x months. I have seen numerous Clerical/Office jobs that sounded interesting, but I have been unable to apply for. I contacted my local TD’s one of whom asked the Minister for Social and Family Affairs in the Dail, but here answer was a copy and paste vague answer to the effect that the Department offers a range of schemes, and didn’t address the actual question.
    whereas
    Jobseekers Benefit; is of little use with FAS.

Please let me know what you think by leaving a comment below.

    Ambrand visits Seanad Eireann

    Published March 23rd, 2010 in bicameral and upper house. 0 Comments

    We believe that the upper house should be retained. It should be given more power, not less. It is suffering a death of a thousand cuts. It allows the Taoiseach of the day to appoint anyone as a Minister, theoretically. (He could appoint me as a Senator, and he could elevate me to a Ministerial Portfolio)

    Such a power is imporant, while it mighn’t be used in practice it reminds us of the position in Britain where the Queen retains powers, which while only exercised “on the advice of” others still give her a status, she could do certain things if she wanted to.

    Irish Revenue Commissioners make eFiling mandatory

    Published March 23rd, 2010 in HM Customs and Revenue, online, secure certificate, slippery slope, IRS, efiling, Revenue Commissioners, paperless, eire, Pay and File and ireland. 0 Comments

    Back in 2006 we mused over whether estatements from  a Bank were good or bad we concluded they were goodfor the bank, but bad for the individual.

    Well now abother large organisation here in Ireland has furthered its hatrid of paper. From 1 January 2010, the Revenue Commissioners (who are the Revenue and Customs and Excise organ of the state) commeced “Phase 2″ of mandatory eFiling. It applies to certain companies only.

    But the slippery slope is here, its just a matter of time before it extends to individuals.

    The Revenue Commisioners already refuse to accept cash in their offices; they only accept payment by Debit Card, Cheques (which the IPSO wants to abolish by 2016) and a Single Debit Authority or Direct Debit.

    Can you see where this is headed? I can, and its a bad place.

    You see eThis and eThat sounds well and good in the short term, and there will be photo opportunities, like a Minister for Finance holding a CD-ROM containing a PDF instead of a paper booklet, thats ok, thats like an eStatement, you could print itif you wanted to, but we are talking about the Revenue Commissioners here. They have huge powers, and limitless funds to hire lawyers.

    What happens if they say you didn’t submit a return? What proof would you have? a paper receipt from your own printer or a screen shot of the submission page? What could would believe that, sure you could have photoshopped it yourself. The Revenue Commissioners know that paper matters. That is why for years their documents have had watermarks and UV threads.

    so heres our slogan (comprised of three clichés)…
    “eFiling: It’s all fun and games, until something goes wrong, then you don’t have a leg to stand on”

    Single debit authority

    Published March 23rd, 2010 in phasing out, cheque and copyright. 0 Comments

    I remember watching an episode of Columbo. He was having his Peugeot (a “foreign car”) serviced. He said he left his chequebook at home and the mechanic said it was ok, he could use a “Counter cheque”.

    I wondered what a counter cheque was, it seems to have been a cheque that didn’t have any particular customers account written on it.

    A dangerous idea! it would mean I could withdraw money from anyones account if I knew their account number.

    Well, the use another anecdote, today while brwosing the Revenue Commissioners website I heard of a “Single debit authority”. It is the same thing as a “Counter cheque” except the receivers name is printed on it - The Receivers name being the Revenue Commissioners. So its like writing them a blank cheque.

    Its nice to know that paper still has a place, as the IPSO plans to phase out actual cheques by 2016.

    I am a great fan of the Cheque. It is the ultimate “push” mode of payment, and it has the added benefit of delivery notification; cheque you bank statement and you know if your letter arrived because the cheque will have been debited! An Post charge EUR 5.25 for delivery confirmation on an envelope they call it “Registered Post”!

    Advertising

    .