I think there will be a lot of Ebayers who know they are taking the piss
Whereas I am not taking the piss but made more than 30 sales and sold more than £1,700 in 2023 ( a fairly light year) so may be subject to automated reporting. Again, that is my point. Not the worst thing to ever happen in my life but I have never said it is.
One thing to keep in mind is that ebay themselves have an algorithm to detect whether you are trading or not.
If they think you are a trader, then they will force you to change to a business account. Low volume business accounts don't get the same deals that private sellers get
Using "ragley" as a search term shows it isn't often used as this guy is trading in marked up bargain Wiggle parts and breaking up bikes https://www.ebay.co.uk/usr/jayswheels
sorry not sure what everyone else’s opinion on this is but i dont garee with this at all we already pay enough tax ect now they wanna take more from us just a joke
While I think this is more like HMRC going after easy wins, they've not invented any new rules, they are just trying to enforce some existing ones.
This should only affect "side hustlers", who are in effect (but perhaps not by intent) dodging an amount of legally owed taxes (probably not vast sums for the most part). It may well cause a bit of drag on the old Grey/Gig Economy, but that doesn't mean it's wrong...
HMRC now have the tools to investigate transactions which were previously not visible to them, what would you really expect them to do? They're not employed to make friends...
sorry not sure what everyone else’s opinion on this is but i dont garee with this at all we already pay enough tax ect now they wanna take more from us just a joke
One look at public services suggests we're not paying anywhere near enough tax to stop things crumbling around us.....
Or perhaps its just that the tax we do pay is being very inefficiently allocated.
Or efficiently stolen.....
Example 1: https://voxpoliticalonline.com/2023/12/13/vip-lane-covid-19-contracts-inflated-by-925m-good-law-project/
Example 2: https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/150988/unimaginable-cost-of-test-trace-failed-to-deliver-central-promise-of-averting-another-lockdown/
See also Examples 3- to 3000 for more info
In 2022/23 the value of tax receipts for the United Kingdom amounted to approximately 786.6 billion British pounds. This represented a net increase of over 464.8 billion pounds when compared with 2000/01
Total HM Revenue and Customs (<abbr style="cursor: help; text-decoration-line: none; text-decoration-style: initial;" title="HM Revenue and Customs">HMRC</abbr>) receipts for April 2023 to November 2023 are £515.9 billion, which is £24.0 billion higher than the same period last year.
The NHS resource budget for 2023/24 is £168.8 billion
In 2022/23 the value of tax receipts for the United Kingdom amounted to approximately 786.6 billion British pounds. This represented a net increase of over 464.8 billion pounds when compared with 2000/01
Interesting, but it also raises another point for me, I think I should probably plead general ignorance on the topic of national/government spending.
All parties like to talk about budgets, taxes, spending, borrowing and investment but I really don't have a good handle on what the UK's current status is what it has been historically or what any forward projections (under whatever government we might have) look like. The numbers discussed are often given in isolation without wider context and while pledges of millions/billions for something might sound grand, I never truly know enough about what I'm hearing to say I actually understand, It could well just be mathematical rhetoric.
You mentioned the NHS' annual budget and I think I'd heard "About £160 billion" on the news before. But then what about defence, Local Authorities, roads or policing? All too often it's meaningless.
If the next GE is going to be about the economic prowess of the two main parties, I don't actually think many people have a sound enough knowledge base on the topic to really judge either of them. Let alone decide if they're paying an appropriate amount of tax...
I certainly need to go away and educate myself further on the topic before I make anymore sweeping statements or cast another vote I reckon.
At least we know the two tier tax system, the one that has always been denied or misrepresented as insignificant is a thing, a very big thing, with no political will to change it. A great big **** you to the little people.
Digging up an old thread to make some irrelevant general taxation comment, good job. If the data is available then tax should be applied, i.e. all PAYE people pay tax as HMRC has the data to hand. Yes, non PAYE people and their "practices" should be investigated more but that doesn't mean you should stop taxing the other stuff.
As I have said before, if everybody got paid cash in hand with no paper trail how many people do you think would actually pay tax...
If it’s CGT at 10%(?) on anything over £1000
It's not
There are two separate things that could trigger a tax liability
1) trading where income (not profit) exceeds £1000
2) selling high value personal possessions
For 1) you will pay income tax on any profits generated at your marginal rate, if you are a "trader"
For 2) you might have a capital gains tax liability. Some things (like cars) are exempt.
Others have already linked to the HMRC documents and the online tool. I'd also recommend Martin Lewis's guide above.
