[Closed] 27K a year? Well that's scuppered marrying my university sweetheart

Which country is your partner from ? Easy for you to move/work there ?

Just reinforces my opinion about May.
It's not the country, it's the con servatives.

(P.S. for the sake of accuracy 25.7K not 27K, not that it will make much difference to you)

Looks like they are doing something about the immigration problem as promised in their election campaign and voted for accordingly.

Isnt 25k about the figure below which you are a financial burden not contributor to society in which case why should you be welcome?

If earning below 25k means you are a burden to society, why are there so many low paid jobs?

Wot? If you earn under 25k your a financial burden? Dd I misunderstand?

I earn 13.5k a year and pay my taxes unlike certain labour MPS and puffball players.

IanW - have you a source for that information. I would be genuinely interested in reading all the apportioned costs that are taken into account in arriving at such a figure and conclusion?

I'd like some clarification on that claim as well.

Or is it just another piece of STW bollox?

Load of left wing guardianista bollocks more like. That paper is worse than the daily mirror.

Gorehound - Member
Load of left wing guardianista bollocks more like.

What is?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/mar/26/theresa-may-migrants-immigration

^^^^that is^^^^

Load of left wing guardianista bollocks more like. That paper is worse than the daily mirror.

[url= http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/9165090/Ministers-plan-major-immigration-crackdown.html ]All the lefty papers seem to have picked up the story- I think it originated here, actually.[/url]

I'd suggest that the right to live with your partner in the counter of their nationality is a fairly fundamental one.

It's not the country, it's the con servatives.

It was well on its way long before they got the job....

The last govt screwed the country right into the ground long before the present inherited the job of sorting their mess out.

😆

ARGUALYMPIANS! ASSEMBLE!

😉

and don't get me started on the freaking EU.

ARGUALYMPIANS! ASSEMBLE!

another Flashism bubbles to the surface of the ooze...

After all these years of reading your contribution to threads, I have no idea what you actually [i]think or believe.[/i] Well done!

Wot? If you earn under 25k your a financial burden? Dd I misunderstand?

Makes sense, assuming everyone takes form the NHS and schooling etc equally then anyone earning below the average (which is around £25k?) is a net drain on resources.

In fact seeing as taxes go up in proportion with earning (nowt below a threshold, 20% bracket, 40%, etc), the very bottom of the scale are entirely on benefits, and there are all sorts of tax credits for those working on lower incomes the point at which you become a net contributor is probably some way above the average salary?

Lots of assumptions there, mainly that everyone requires the same resources, and that all other taxes are proportional to your wages (i,e how much vat and corporation tax does your bos pay on the profit they make from whatever you produce, and your car tax, stamp duty etc are all in proportion). And it ignores smokers/drinkers.

Good, isn't it? 🙂

Tax credits and benefits? I get my wage after tax and sod all else.

So what about those like me, earn less than that, been working for 30yrs in engineering, no kids, paid all my taxes, only taken dole for 7 months in that time, healthy so very little drain on the NHS - i'm a bloody freeloader am i?

This place really is full of prats sometimes.

This place really is full of prats sometimes. So what about those like me, earn less than that, been working for 30yrs in engineering, no kids, paid all my taxes, only taken dole for 7 months in that time, healthy so very little drain on the NHS - i'm a bloody freeloader am i?

If I was in the mood to argue i would, but I'm not so I'll point you back at the last paragraph.

Lots of assumptions there, mainly that everyone requires the same resources, and that all other taxes are proportional to your wages (i,e how much vat and corporation tax does your bos pay on the profit they make from whatever you produce, and your car tax, stamp duty etc are all in proportion). And it ignores smokers/drinkers.

Besides, the term was net drain/net contributor tot he state funds, not freeloader it's not back & white, the point being made was that if you earn less than average then you'll pay less tax than average. And everyone (on average) probably takes an equal amount from the state.

Exactly how much do i drain the exchequer then?

Unless it can be shown i take more from the State than i contribute in direct and indirect taxation (which disproportionally affects the lower paid) then no, i don't take an equal amount from the State.

Plenty of people earning far more than me taking child benefit for example.

p.s. I'm pretty sure I'm still in the "net drain" category too, so not sure why you've taken umbridge to it, just a fact that I probably pay less in tax than I've cost the treasury over my lifetime so far.

David Milliband £2,500,000 a year and evades paying the full amount of tax he should pay. How many puffball players etc are registered as offshore companies so they don't have to pay any tax at all? Don't blame those of us who work hard for low wages for all the ills of the country.

AND DON'T CALL US A BURDEN ON THE WELFARE STATE!

David Milliband £2,500,000 a year and evades paying the full amount of tax he should pay. How many puffball players etc are registered as offshore companies so they don't have to pay any tax at all? Don't blame those of us who work hard for low wages for all the ills of the country.

AND DON'T CALL US A BURDEN ON THE WELFARE STATE!

So you're saying that Mr XXX (ficticious footbal player) pays less tax than you or I do (not as a percentage, as an absolute figure)? Even once he's spent his £100k a week on coke and hookers and bentleys (and paying VAT on the hookers and bentleys). And in that I'm including all the VAT and corperation tax paid on the product he makes (tickets to watch him play every week.

50,000 seater stadium, £50/ticket, 20 people on the pitch (just counting the rich ones) for each team, 20% vat, = £12.5k per premiership player in VAT recitps just on match tickets every game.

So paying VAT on a ferrari exempts you from paying income tax does it?

If everyone in the country paid the right amount of income tax there would probably be no need for VAT.

seems to be a bad policy to solve a difficult problem and to reduce immigration - where nationalised UK residents bring spouses/ families from other countries and don't contribute to the UK economy/ society. unfortunately people like bwaarp get caught in the net. usual KPI driven politics.

So you're saying that Mr XXX (ficticious footbal player) pays less tax than you or I do (not as a percentage, as an absolute figure)? Even once he's spent his £100k a week on coke and hookers and bentleys (and paying VAT on the hookers and bentleys). And in that I'm including all the VAT and corperation tax paid on the product he makes (tickets to watch him play every week.

So, by extension this facility should be available to all shouldn't it?

Exactly how much do i drain the exchequer then?

I don't think TINAS was trying to suggest that you [i]take[/i] anything from the state, more that your contributions are lower than average (although, the average will be skewed by very high earners).

For example, if the gov needs an average of a £1 contribution from every person in order to provide for the state, many people will only be contributing £0.50, whereas some will be contributing £5. Even if the person contributing £0.50 never uses a single penny of state financed services, they are still shy of contributing what the state needs, therefore a burden.

Not saying I agree with it, just making the point that paying 20% tax and not claiming the dole doesn't automatically lift you into Platinum State Sponsor category.

You could make the argument that contributions should be looked at in conjunction with the benefit you receive from the state, but you'd really have to look at that after someone died, since I suspect the biggest benefits from the state and lowest contributions occur when you retire.

So paying VAT on a ferrari exempts you from paying income tax does it?

Who said that?

You said that you think Mr XXX pays less tax than you or I do. As a percentage he may well do, but as an absolute figure he still contributes significantly more.

So, by extension this facility should be available to all shouldn't it?

Exactly.

So, by extension this facility should be available to all shouldn't it?

That would be a very regressive step.

I've not said that it's right that the super rich pay less as a percentage, simply that as an absolute figure they pay more.

Unless it can be shown i take more from the State than i contribute in direct and indirect taxation (which disproportionally affects the lower paid) then no, i don't take an equal amount from the State.

Lifetime calculation as well though, isn't it - so there was that edumacation that you got for the first sixteen years, and there's that pension you get when you retire (assuming from your wage that your pension is less than the minimum income guarantee or whatever is in place in the future, fingers crossed) and the health care, and the doctors, and the rights of way, and the petty pen pushers doing things on your behalf, and the police protecting you, and the bombs and bullets bought to wreck other countries on your behalf, etc.

anyone care to get back on topic?

Gorehound,so you just dislike anyone who earns more or less than you?

For a start a puffball player does not pay income tax on ticket sales the mugs who pay to watch them pay VAT not the players. If you are registered as an offshore company you don't pay any income tax at all in this country. Why should the highest earners get away with paying no income tax when the lowest earners have to. For instance after tax my takehome is £225 a week some soccer players are on over £100,000 a week and they can legally get away with paying no income tax at all, even if they paid 50% their takehome pay would be £50,000 a week.

Gorehound,so you just dislike anyone who earns more or less than you?

Not at all. I do dislike the fact that people who earn vast amounts of money get away with "avoiding" paying income tax when the rest of us have to.

anyone care to get back on topic?

p.s. if she's on a student visa, then gets a job can't her employer 'sponsor' her next visa, I know a lot of people at work have to go through the process every couple of years for a finite period of time until they can stay permanently. The rule changes would only affect people wanting to marry someone from outside the UK who has no current job here?

For a start a puffball player does not pay income tax on ticket sales the mugs who pay to watch them pay VAT not the players.

Yes but without the football player there would be no ticket.

If you are registered as an offshore company you don't pay any income tax at all in this country. Why should the highest earners get away with paying no income tax when the lowest earners have to.

Read this article, and ignore the lefty spin.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/15/treasury-reveals-super-rich-tax-rates

"Of those earning between £250,000 and £500,000, 27% were paying tax of less than 40%. "

Very few below those figures will be paying 40% (they'll be paying a combination of 0%, 20% and 40% and NI). And 73% of the 250-500k earners are paying over 40%.

For instance after tax my takehome is £225 a week some soccer players are on over £100,000 a week and they can legally get away with paying no income tax at all, even if they paid 50% their takehome pay would be £50,000 a week.

[quote=Gorehound said] some soccer players are on over £100,000 a week and they can legally get away with paying no income tax at all, even if they paid 50% their takehome pay would be £50,000 a week.

I very much doubt that footballers playing in UK can evade UK tax. If you have any examples then report them to HMRC 🙂

OK, i was not taking umbrage at TINAS, more the assumption at the beginning of the thread that i am basically a benefit sponger for not earning xxxxx

I have a pension pot currently worth £30'000 and probably shrinking as i type. As i don't have kids i am in effect paying towards other peoples kids education whilst they are claiming Child Benefit.

I don't begrudge paying this, its the price we pay for a stable society, i just object to being labelled a scrounger for working hard, owning my own home and not having any debts.

If you are registered as an offshore company E.G. registered as a company in the isle of man or Jersey you are exempt from paying UK income tax, also if you register your name as a limited company (like David milliband has) you only pay 20% corporation tax no matter how much you earn.