[b]Flaperon[/b] - Member
Actually, we don't pay that much. Unfortunately what we do pay is disproportionately loaded onto the poorer in society.In my book tax avoidance = tax evasion.
Not a statement I agree with, you may feel you don't pay that much but you can only speak for yourself.
As for the second statement that's just not true. As an extension to @Ewan's post where the top 10% pay 55% of tax collected the top 1% pay 25%. The poorer in society pay a lower rate, benefit more from tax allowances and the essentials such as housing and food are VAT free. They also benefit from state services like the NHS, police and education which are paid for by others. The wealthy pay more tax, much more and they pay a higher proportion of their income.
but then i've never taken anything from this system (
You only walk on unlit streets? Etc ad nauseum...
this country is set up for tax avoiders, those of us on PAYE are taxed firstly on income, then secondly on things we buy-- 'self employed' --can be creative in their accountancy, and can claim back against most purchases.
Now big companies do this on an industrial scale, full time accountants to ensure that its all 'legal'-- oh and schooling for the rich are registered charitees, again have tax benefits-- as gore vidal noted --its capitalism for the poor, socialism for the rich....
VAT has to be the least progressive tax out there. Yeah, so-called essentials are VAT free but from a day to day perspective it unfairly penalises those least able to pay.
I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I have a high disposable income. I'm in this position thanks to a good deal of luck and circumstance. I'm aware that my tax burden is minuscule. Would I voluntarily pay more tax? No. But I'd understand if I did.
Ironically I'm definitely in your 25% (and possibly in your 1%) but that doesn't stop me seeing how some people are struggling.
see tbh when you think about the whole tax issue is a bit of a red herring anyhow. the most important issue to look at solving is low wages and high prices for goods/services/food/housing etc. the tax system doesn't look all that bad going from that pdf. worst bit is the lower 50%'s wages, raise those and you collect more tax.
@ c-al...
nah, i willing to concede and pay for the fact that german trains run (mostly) on time and are relatively inexpensive (although even that has changed in the ten years that i've known Germany), but taxes here are high as it is and to think that i'm paying the same as - but recieve less than - your average Helmut peeves me a little.
oh, and the street lighting here is generally crap. lit roads are still dark. the Autobahns are devoid of any additional lighting (and cats-eyes and even reflective paint - a bit daunting at times when "cruising" at 200kmph). it does however mean that there is less light pollution.
Sounds like a tough life alpin.
alles ist relativ, al.... 🙂
I dont want to state the obvious, but doesn't this table..
simply refer to *income* tax.
The total tax take, as a percentage of income, should be measured using all forms of tax that someone pays directly shouldn't it?
Perhaps, the top 1% of earners pay less tax overall due to spending less on the high street, or on food, or other goods as a percentage of income.
Perhaps if wealth inequality wasn't so great, we wouldn't need such high rates of tax?
@Flapon - someone in the 1% is paying top rate tax of 45% plus 2% national insurance plus their employer is paying 13.8% employers NI - so the marginal tax take is 60%. If the person buys something with vat on it that's another 20% on the net income - so total tax take is approx 70%. Hardly miniscule. I appreciate that possibly your income is not subject to PAYE style taxes so maybe you have more ways to reduce your bill.
Re so called essentials, food, housing are vat free, NHS and education is free. So a low income person has to pay vat on clothes, booze, takeaways ....
someone in the 1% is paying top rate tax of 45%
(99 percentile £156,000)
37400 @ 20% = £7480
112600 @ 40% = £45040
6000 @ 50% = £3000
total tax = £55520 = 35.5% not 45%
I'll let other people counter the rest, it's getting late..
Disposable income.
low pay, you ave no choice, all your money pays for basics of life, high income means loads for luxury, i would gladly pay 70% tax and get by on the other 30% like richard branson
out of interest, those income:tax tables...
they're on declared income presumably so if I massage my private company accounts, maximise expenses, buy my mayfair house via the cayman islands etc and join Jimmy Carr's scheme, that all won't go down as my income ?
if all they are is bottom line net income vs income tax, aren't they meaningless ?
you getting the way it works there scaredy 😉
My my, interesting responses, odly all the people who earn lower wages suggesting its evil, all those earning higher wages saying get on with it. No jealousy at all I guess.
Its not actually my situation, just a discussion with a colleague. Said person works very hard, has studied for years to get where they are, has had no more opportunity in life than anyone else on this forum, but now at a point in their life where they can start to be rewarded fir all their hard work.
They are not breaking any rules, but want to maximise their income, and see after already having worked 80 hrs in the week, that they can work at a weekend and not have the tax man cut his £5k to £2.5k
Didn't at least one person state that they paid top rate tax and disagreed with your premise? There's nothing wrong with the situation described at all provided his spouse is qualified to be an office manager and the salary reflects the role. Is this the case?
odly all the people who earn lower wages suggesting its evil, all those earning higher wages saying get on with it
Nope not correct at all. I kept my opinion to myself regarding whether I thought it right or wrong and personally I think it is wrong to use tax dodges in this way. It may be legal but that doesn't mean I think it is right.
and see after already having worked 80 hrs in the week, that they can work at a weekend and not have the tax man cut his £5k to £2.5k
Frankly more fool them if they want to work those sort of hours.
Jambalaya - nope, PAYE here.
It's only high earners that work hard eh?FunkyDunc - Member
My my, interesting responses, odly all the people who earn lower wages suggesting its evil, all those earning higher wages saying get on with it. No jealousy at all I guess.Its not actually my situation, just a discussion with a colleague. Said person works very hard, has studied for years to get where they are, has had no more opportunity in life than anyone else on this forum, but now at a point in their life where they can start to be rewarded fir all their hard work.
They are not breaking any rules, but want to maximise their income, and see after already having worked 80 hrs in the week, that they can work at a weekend and not have the tax man cut his £5k to £2.5k
Point isn't really about the tax system, as i said, it's fair enough to be honest(although, I'd raise the tax threshold to about 15k). The moral issue comes with people earning high wages and others earning a pittance and struggling, it's not just people that earn alot that work hard you know.
Big issue that is the moral one is high earners, who set wages etc, pontificating about low earners being spongers etc, when they are generally the ones who set the wages.. Up the wages and everyone is happy, the poorer get to pay more taxes and pay their way, and people can safely earn more with alot less jealousy about...the 2 things aren't inter-connected.
fwiw i'm fairly comfortable btw, so i'm not arguing for myself here, i'm arguing for poor sods who have to live on the likes of 12/15k a year.
Quote from Kerry packer in oz. "I'll pay more tax when you can spend it properly"
Maybe government would spend it properly if they weren't being bribed by people like Kerry Packer (Costigan Commission).
80 hours a week and they're thinking of working weekends? So 5 16 hours days in the week then?!
i doubt its manual work-- looking on here takes a lot of hours up 😉
80 hours a week and they're thinking of working weekends? So 5 16 hours days in the week then?!
Used to be quite normal for me in my old job. The worst weeks were over 100 hours, which got tiresome after a while. These days I don't do as much - rarely more than 60 a week.
I look forward to the day I earn enough to pay 50% tax.
I think I'm a sucker.
Oh, and I work with one of Kerry Packer's old senior management team. I must ask him about those days at some point....
