Irish Election are pleased to announce our collection of Irish 
The Dublin tourist tax (next on the agenda – €1,000 leaving town tax)
Read more about: Dublin, Local Government, News, Satire, Taxation, Travel & Tourism
Dublin City Council is considering the merits of imposing a “tourist tax” of €1 per night on beds in hotels, hostels and B&Bs in the city in order to raise additional revenue.
Ignoring the fact that this is the taxation equivalent of licking your plate clean after large a steak dinner, there are many questions that need to be answered if this proposal is given the attention it really doesn’t deserve.
For example, if a Dubliner stays in a Dublin hotel will they be exempt from the tax or will they be classed as tourists in their own city? What if they come from the Fingal County Council catchment?
But the tourist tax isn’t the only thing on the agenda. Other revenue-generating ideas being discussed by the Council at the moment include the imposition of a carbon dioxide levy, the introduction of a fee for those wishing to take pictures of public monuments and the rolling out of an ‘Ironic Green Hat’ tax.*
* Not really
I echo Simon’s sentiments!
I think tourists will soon cotton on that they can stay at home and fuck themselves in the ass instead of coming all the way here.
Never mind that such taxes are commonplace in other areas – whether through a flat-rate tax or a ‘luxury’ tax on more expensive hotel rooms. Ultimately, one can only symathise with local authorities scrambling around the place looking for money. Ireland has one of the least funded local government systems in the EU (to reach the local government funding average in other EU countries we would have to increaase local revenue by four-to-five times). However, such local taxation reform begs the question of a more general reform of local government structures, powers and accountability. Hopefully, the discussion around the Green Paper recently published will assist that.
The tax may be used in other countries but if we use international comparisons on other levels it’s fair to point out that Dublin is one of the most expensive tourist destinations in the world – which is kind of my point here.
€1 extra a night is not going to break the bank – but when the city is already expensive for visitors, when that cost is likely to rise further due to inflation and when unfavourable exchange rates (for them) mean costs are even higher in real terms, adding to their bill in any way just seems like a bad idea to me.
There’s also a whiff of the Council taking advantage of the visitors to fund local government, as introducing a tax that would cost citizens would be far too unpopular to be palatable.
No doubt that local councils may be badly funded but that’s an issue that should be addressed by changing administration, not adding additional taxes on people (citizens or tourists). It’s hardly Joe Soap’s fault that the local government structures in Ireland reek.
As you say, let’s hope the Green Paper and the subsequent discussion covers all of these areas rather than just one or two of them.
Adam, the city is expensive but that is not solely the doing of the local authority. And the reason they don’t look at other charges or taxes is they do not have the power to do so. I think such a charge at this point would be silly but we really need local taxes for local people.
Adam, the city is expensive but that is not solely the doing of the local authority.
I never said it was, Dan, but that doesn’t mean it’s a wise idea for them to add to that expense.
And the reason they don’t look at other charges or taxes is they do not have the power to do so. I think such a charge at this point would be silly but we really need local taxes for local people.
As I said, there’s a strong whiff of opportunism on this move as they’re targeting the tourists rather than the residents. As you well know there are plenty of areas where they can raise revenue by charging the citizen and by doing so fairly (through polluter pays bin charges etc.) – suggesting they put a blanket tax on the luxury of staying in Dublin for a night is absurd to me.
Adam, I think the idea is that the council takes the view (wrongly I reckon) that the charge won’t be passed onto the consumer but absorbed by the hotels. Like the way those big hikes in the development levies weren’t passed onto house purchasers. It must be great to work in that unreal world.
Dan, being delusional isn’t an excuse when you’re a public representative.
Given that the industry in Dublin (and Ireland) is facing its toughest challenge in a long time due to the expected drop in visitors and the recent increase in the number of hotels across the city, I doubt these businesses will be happy to absorb very much – let alone a charge of €1 per night per room.
If they can’t see the wood for the trees in an area where even the most passive of observers know what’s going on then perhaps it’s best if they don’t get more power devolved to them in the next few years.
funny thing about polluter pays is that it realise on everyone being bad. if everyone was super green then reling on that kind of tax would be dangerous. (kind of like rely on housing tax)
Adam, since this proposal is coming from only some quarters of DCC it might be an idea to refer to them specifically as being delusional rather than everyone on the council.
simon, the point of polluter pays is that if everyone is really good then there is no problem and hence nothing that needs paying for. That’s the intent anyway.
Dan – I made the point about delusion in the hypothetical context of such a proposal actually being enacted. Note the ‘if’ at the beginning of the sentence.
Simon – As Dan says the theory of the ‘polluter pays’ levy is that the revenue generated is spent on tackling the consequences of the polluter’s actions. Assuming it is balanced right then the need for revenue will always match the actual revenue.
Of course in practice it may happen that authorities (local or national) instigate a ‘polluter pays’ policy in a way that is counter productive or in a way that makes the authority reliant on pollution.
For example it would be foolish to use revenue from a ‘polluter pays’ levy to pay for the maintenance of recycling centres and it would be counter-productive to place a ‘polluter pays’ or use-based levy on waste recycling services.