As they say " you get what you pay for"
Just watching 999 what's your emergency and its showing just how drastically underfunded the emergency services are. This is causing understaffing and basically a crap service by the NHS and police through no fault of their own.
So would you pay more to get more? Or is there another answer ?
No.
When Amazon pay more, i’ll do the same.
HTHs.
Yes, though ideally I’d like to know where it was going to ensure it was going nowhere near the DUP or Boris Johnson.
Though @bikebouy does make a fair point as well.
Yeah as above, I would happily pay more but the current system needs sorting out first.
Yes, and partly because of the Amazon thing. These companies are now so big they can employ very smart people to work out how to get found any tax system. You don't solve that problem by cutting the departments designed to fix it
Yes but, as bikebuoys comment, I would want to see a 'fair' system where its considered all pay their way. And transparency as to where the extra money is going so I can see its not just going on a 10% pay increase for MPs.
Think we are all on the same page. While I don't agree with Amazon paying that much tax, they are playing by the rules. The problem seems to be the rules are wrong
Yes, but there would need to be a total overhaul of MP expenses and accommodation in London. They should create a (reasonably appointed) accommodation block for distant MPs, none of this we-pay-their-mortgage-for-a-five-bed-house-in-London malarkey.
Yes.
As others mention, this should also come with a massive simplification of our tax system and with a crackdown on non-contribution from companies through loopholes.
no
but if I felt the rules were fairer (Amazon, paye/'other employment types', etc etc) I suspect my objections would decrease
Mind you, based on my non-controlled overheard-in-the-pub surveys in the past, everyone says they will pay more personal taxes for the nurses, fire service & schools and then they all vote for the party offering the greatest personal tax reductions....
Not until this shit shower in Westminster show that they can be trusted with the considerable sums I already give them. I paid a lot of tax in DK and didn't begrudge it (much). That's not the same as putting my hand in my pocket to bail out the Tories.
Not really, as above MPs, Amazon plus where is all the money going? In the 60s and 70s there were infrastructure projects, schools, hospitals and roads being built everywhere. We can't even repair pot holes and it takes four years to put up some variable speed signs and a concrete barrier. Any new projects seem to be funded on the never never (PPI).
We need a proper review of how and what we spend. The waste of money is colossal, Brexit for example, school academies, extra layers of politicians (Scotland, Wales, mayors, crime commissioners).
So no more money until I'm happy it'll go in the right direction and make a difference, don't forget the NHS has more real terms funding than it ever has and it's still falling short. More and more money is not the answer.
Yes - and voted for a party that would increase my taxes. The SNP had this in their manifesto at the last GE and won the GE in Scotland, which shows it can be done.
don’t forget the NHS has more real terms funding than it ever has
I thought it was less in real terms but the £ amount was higher?
There's no need for anyone to pay "more tax".
close that loopholes so that all the current taxes that should be collected, are collected, and then spend the money wisely.
Of of course there is no incentive for the people in charge to do either of those things. Many of them dodge their taxes and many of then push through dodgy spending for the benefit of themselves or friends and family.
🙂
A quick example of how stoopid the tax system is, husband and wife earn 49999 quid each still get child benefit, husband earns 60000 quid and wife stays at home and you get nowt!
Yes
We are a low tax country hence crappie services
As Scotroutes said
No
Isn't part of the issue the loss of "British industry" when we had a large manufacturing Base companies and people didn't have much choice but to pay taxes (employed on pt/ft basis).
Now companies owned by shell after shell of corporate investor whose main aim is to drag every last penny of profit out, loopholes and zero hours contracts. Theres an infogram somewhere showing benefit fraud vs tax "underpayment" and it's astounding.
Amazon's recent payment of tax was laughable. I know a bloke down the road who has just started a distillery, bringing employment, training and tourism to the town and his company has paid more tax in the past year than amazon. They've been open since may.
BUPA have, in the last 10 years or so, taken a lot of the slack up in surgical admittance and the funding model channels the costs over to them from the NHS. This is obviously costly, BUPA wouldn’t undertake such initiatives if the pricing model wasn’t lucrative enough.
So where once we had local hospitals and palliative care hospitals undertaking such remedial actions, now they’ve been closed down for these “super” hospitals. QA in Pompy is a massive hospital, yet 4 floors of its capacity were closed becuse of funding irregularities. And where did the sick end up going?
BUPA hospitals near Guildford and Sotty Gen which is rammed to the brim.
So within a 15mile radius you have under capacity, outsourcing and overcapacity.
I have no model for these extremities in care provision, but I do feel that successive governments have been all to happy to re-invent the care model to suit thier own Political leanings.
Taxation fails at point of execution, it falls apart at collection and whirlpools into political gerrymandering at a management level.
The Audit Committee probe the findings every year, yet its accepted that the NHS is a sub par service funded at its lowest level, susceptible to corrupt supplier chain contracts and serviced by low paid employees who have had 25years of restructuring initiatives.
Until the Taxation system is overhauled or the NHS becomes a self funding business this situation will not change in your, nor your children’s, lifetime.
Succesive governments play with the NHS as political chess, in a game that affects millions of people in this country.
And yet, every year the same topic comes up and nothing is done about it.
Depends how. I am more open to a penny on income tax than increase in stamp duty for example.
Yes, and I have voted so consistently.
However, I think we need to be much more clear on why services are failing.
Services are failing because of an ideological agenda to reduce funding of essential services (In real terms) and potentially an associated desire to reduce the presence of those services.
We could at current levels of taxation, fund things very differently...
There is a much bigger discussion to be had in this area - including the serious consideration of a universal income. When organisations have had an open agenda of ‘efficiency’ through increased automation etc for 40 years - there is a need to fund and sustain income in a new model that recognises employers are disincentivided to employ.
No.
When Amazon pay more, i’ll do the same.
And this is why socialism can only ever fail - socialists so very often want to keep their own money, and only be socialist with that belonging to other people, like greedy little monkeys, envious of any other monkey with more coconuts than they have grasped tightly to their chest.
Edit:
15 people have paid more tax in 2 years.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2017/oct/01/you-can-pay-more-tax-if-you-want-to
No there is plenty of money just colossal levels of waste and abuse of the system
first hand experience of contractors and companies fleecing government whilst utilising various loopholes to pay least amount of tax. It's happening at all levels. Massive project failures costing £m. sa!Aries of to p levels of government are obscene and are attracting the wrong type of people who are then trying to be more 'commercial' rather than run the country in the best interests of the people (interesting documentary about the water boards on the other day)
It all feels like it's steadily decaying and throwing more money at it is not going to solve it as only a tiny % if any will hit the front line where it is needed. Then you will be asked to pay more again
Yes.
A couple of question for those who say yes, what percentage of your pay should be paid in tax (total percentage not the marginal)? What do you think the upper limit of direct taxation should be?
Companies selling to he government need to be held more accountable too. Most of them work on a ‘cost plus’ model, so they get two prices from suppliers, one to show the government, and one that they actually buy at. Thanks to this I know of sales people that have personally made 6 figure sums from deals to the NHS.
As I sit in hospital ‘enjoying’ the spoonful of lasagne and the accompanying 6 chips, taking meds provided by the one nurse looking after 2 dozen others...
I don’t know him much - I already pay 40% in direct tax and NI on top, but if we are in the position where another 5-10% would get people off the streets, improve the lives of people on benefits and healthcare outcomes...
We need to deal with the corporate taxation system first though!
Yep - I’d pay more tax if it is used well. I spend a lot of time in Scandinavia where they pay more tax and have a good system in my view.
Like others, I voted to pay more tax and now I do. I don't think it's enough and I'd pay more still. How much more? I don't know, how much would we need to in order to fund the services we expect as a society without putting the burden on future generations? That much.
40% feels ok to me given that I don't agree with all the spending priorities and "£X bn IT project failure" stories keep coming up. At 40% there is already a work disincentive effect kicking in.
@wrightyson - but at least they share their tax allowance.
As others have pointed out, it's not just more money that's required. We can throw more at the NHS but we should be intervening much earlier to avoid our dependency on it. Improving diet, reducing alcohol and nicotine intake, encouraging physical activity and mental health awareness - all of these would have a much better ROI than more drugs and nurses. That's why hypothecation if taxes turns out to be not such a good idea - it's too simplistic.
No. And yes. The largest majority of govt spending is on welfare. Cut that. Spend the same on education and then maybe we wouldn’t need to spend so much on welfare? Paying people to live a life doing nothing, stop it. Subsidising people’s incomes, or giving them an income, when they can’t afford to have kids, stop it. Conducting government in one of the most costly cities in the world, stop it. Spend wisely, waste less, then yes. Until then, no.
Paying people to live a life doing nothing, stop it.
Pensions, you mean?
Pensions aren’t included in welfare spending.
Except pensions, very little of the welfare spend actually goes to people doing nothing all day. Most of it goes to people who work as the companies they work for do not pay them enough to live on. This despite some of those companies earning huge profits which in effect is being funded by taxpayers.
@tomhoward presumably he is talking about the PESA classification of government spending, so no, not pensions.
Straight out answer of NO. When you see how finances are budgeted and distributed in this country, simply paying more tax will mean a bigger skim will be taken off by the bottle feeders at the top. What needs to be done is a whole overhaul of every department starting at number 10. We know that will never happen.
There was a caller on "Any Answers" on R4 on saturday saying that there are the laws to force Amazon to pay more but there have been so many cuts to HMRC that the people with the knowhow have all gone.
According to the ONS 42% of the welfare spend goes to pensions.
Amazons tax bill should be a much bigger scandal ffs! Boycott the ****ers
@rene59 - citation needed for 42% as it contradicts https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/how-public-spending-was-calculated-in-your-tax-summary/how-public-spending-was-calculated-in-your-tax-summary
That link says pensions are 35% of welfare+pensions.
Agree with last comment and that 😱 that the op hadn’t known this already years ago.
DT78 Well said . Agree 100%
Share tax allowance... as a one income married couple i dont get my other halfs tax allowance?
The child allowance set up is a disgrace.
Amazon Boots GSK etc are the tax problem
1.7m on 72m profit.... 2%
My busiess will pay 50k on 250k profit - 20%
My business paid 10 times as much tax pro rata
That folks is the problem.
Yes.
But I need to have a better say in what it is spent on. And don't tell me I can vote for a party that would spend it more aligned to how I would want it spent as I already do but that party loses.
I do not want to pay more tax while a Tory party are in power.
In principle yes. However, if they took every penny I make, it's irrelevant compared to the tax avoidance, waste and self serving that goes on. Sort that, and if we still need more, I'll dig a little deeper.
Not at this moment no. Far to many loopholes and bad management of funds in place. Up until recently I knew of a guy whos local company was contracted to the nhs. Absolutely took the piss, 50 quid to put up a shelf etc etc
And its not just companies like Amazon avoiding tax. Ltd co contractors have been avoiding it for years. New private sector ir 35 rules cant come soon enough imo.
All those people saying no will end up perpetuating poor services and people will suffer.
What you are really asking for is a better distribution of tax burden. IIRC this is Labour's policy. I don't think any parties want to tax the poorer more.
Also, it's very easy to say 'stop tax avoidance' but I think it's pretty hard to actually do. A bit like saying 'catch all criminals' or 'just get a good brexit trade deal'
@rene59 - thanks, interesting for comparison. Not sure where the £20bn difference comes from. Perhaps the ONS include public sector pension spending. Not something I can be bothered to dig into though 🙂
If they sorted out the tax system to a single rate of income tax I'd have no problem paying more.
Yes and no.
It is a shame the question is always framed as "do you want to pay more tax" the question should be "do you want the roads to crumble, do you want social services to not have the finances to protect vulnerable children, do you want crime to rise due to police cuts, do you want your house to burn down because there is only 1 tender in town and that is already on a job ect ect..."
All those people saying no will end up perpetuating poor services and people will suffer.
What you are really asking for is a better distribution of tax burden. IIRC this is Labour’s policy. I don’t think any parties want to tax the poorer more.
The trouble with a “better distribution of tax burden” is that it will sound to most people like “raise the taxes on other people but leave mine alone”. If we want to significantly increase the amount of money raised by direct taxation the it will have to implemented at all earning levels. There’s no point in only raising the rate for people on six figure salaries as there aren’t enough people earning that much to raise significant amounts. It might play well in the press headlines but it won’t actually raise much money.
Speaking purely on a personal level I don’t want to be paying a larger proportion of my income on direct taxes as the current level of over 40% (that’s total not marginal and assumes I’ve done my tax return correctly) is I think enough.
Also, it’s very easy to say ‘stop tax avoidance’ but I think it’s pretty hard to actually do. A bit like saying ‘catch all criminals’ or ‘just get a good brexit trade deal’
There does seem to have been a deliberate policy of complicating tax laws to allow loop holes (across the world not just the UK), combined with restricting hmrc's ability to deal with dodgy practices forcing them to accept paltry offers of tax from corporations because they just don't have the resources to do anything about it. iirc a few years ago it was estimated that in the US every dollar of extra funding for tax collection would bring a 10 dollar increase in the tax collected (that is without changing the laws).
Wait for th Tories to privatise hmrc. If one dollar returns ten, it would be very profitable for someone.
“do you want the roads to crumble, do you want social services to not have the finances to protect vulnerable children, do you want crime to rise due to police cuts, do you want your house to burn down because there is only 1 tender in town and that is already on a job ect ect…”
How about the question "do you want those things, or have you got your cheque book out today ?"
I’d like to pay less.
Maybe somebody who wants to pay more would like to pay my tax bill?
If we want to significantly increase the amount of money raised by direct taxation the it will have to implemented at all earning levels. There’s no point in only raising the rate for people on six figure salaries as there aren’t enough people earning that much to raise significant amounts.
I wasn't talking about income tax necessarily.
the question should be “do you want the roads to crumble
Then the comeback is "but they waste it all". When really they just resent money being spent on things that don't concern them like ooh, jobseekers allowance or something.
Interesting the number of "well yes, but..." replies. There speak the high-earners I guess, and they really need all that money!
What you mean is "no"! This is my favourite:
If they sorted out the tax system to a single rate of income tax I’d have no problem paying more
Which is never going to happen obvs.
Me? Unlikely, but I earn well below the national average.
Like with many companies these days IMO, I suspect the salaries of higher management in the NHS are way more than 20x the salary of nurses (i.e. they have got way out of hand, just like with BBC celebs for example) and tax loopholes are enabling these higher earners (just like companies such as Amazon) to only pay stupidly low amounts of tax.
According to modern monetary theory - tax is only for removing money from circulation.
Governments don't need to tax first and then spend later - they could just effectively print the money.
Clearly this doesn't get talked about much as it suits the Tories agenda to talk in terms of lack of money, low taxes - of which neither need apply.
"The key insight of MMT is that sovereign governments that are the sole supplier of national currency can issue currency of any denomination, and in physical or non-physical forms. Consequently, these governments have an unlimited ability to pay for the things they wish to purchase and to fulfill promised future payments. These government also have an unlimited ability to provide funds to other sectors. Because of this, it is not possible for a government that issues its own currency to be bankrupt."
The whole concept of balancing the books just doesn't exist or need to exist.
There are trade-offs though, inflation, employment and resources.
Yes but I would like to see funds ring fenced and ministers along with senior civil servants accountable for piss poor planning and failure in the same way private industry is.
Piss away all of the money, lie, use creative accounting and crash the company off to prison with you. Same should be for government jobs
also we should mandate that to be a minister you need to have experience in the work area. A political science degree does not qualify you to be minister for agriculture...
still the new regime will be low tax at the top. Low pay at the bottom as we race to the US model
Not sure. I feel that I pay a lot of tax as it is. My wage is taxed. I pay NI. I pay VAT on things I buy. I pay over £350/yr on car tax. I pay council tax. I do a lot of mileage and what, 70% of fuel is taxed.
I appreciate everyone else who works pays as well 😉
Where is it all going?
I wouldn't mind paying a little more. But being realistic, I'm not an especially high earner, I'n probably not first in line to be squeezed nor the most profitable person to squeeze.
If a moderate increase in my tax burden was the "cost" for a commensurately higher increase in higher earners' tax burdens then have at it.
I'd also want to see that less of it was used to line corporation's pockets though, and that the services and systems built with taxpayers' money wouldn't be flogged off for peanuts
I wasn’t talking about income tax necessarily
Then what taxes were you thinking of? In reality there are three main ways that we as individuals pay, income tax (and let’s include NI in that), VAT, and council tax.
Points about salary multipliers are fairly moot in terms of taxation. If you are paid a salary directly by a company there are very few tax loopholes available so the chances are that those high salaries are being heavily taxed.
If I felt any extra tax would contribute to improved public services I'd be open to the idea.
It doesn't seem to work out like that in the UK though, so it's a no from me.
Interesting the number of “well yes, but…” replies. There speak the high-earners I guess, and they really need all that money!
I am a high earner "yes, but". Giving more in tax to the Tory government is not going to be spent on anything I would want it to be spent on so why would I want to give more?
.I would say that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money and doesn't really NEED any more.
Also helps if you don't look at it as tax and look at it as what amount of money people are taking from the system (the net amount) So instead of the angle "I am paying £NN in tax" it is "I am receiving £NN per year"
Puts in perspective the difference between a net wage of £100,000 and a net wage of £12,000. Who cares if the net £100,000 person is paying a load of tax.
And this is why socialism can only ever fail – socialists so very often want to keep their own money, and only be socialist with that belonging to other people, like greedy little monkeys, envious of any other monkey with more coconuts than they have grasped tightly to their chest.
Who said anything about socialism?
And whose the monkey?
Unless you are talking metaphorically, and including yourself in that statement..
”Taxes are what we pay for civilized society”
I agree with that, but as a top rate PAYE payer I tend to feel that I am being taken for a mug. As others have said, there is an awful lot of lawful avoidance that I would like to see stopped before I pay even more.
So instead of the angle “I am paying £NN in tax” it is “I am receiving £NN per year”
But it looking at it the same way high earners who have private medical cover, use private schools and live in low crime areas or single childless workers might then turn round and say I pay all this in but get much less back...
people don’t like to see someone else getting more than them... or at least it seems that way... look at the I pay my road tax drivers vs cyclists as an example
these groups already complain about supporting the ****less and the “breeders”. Other than a smug superiority over other people what does this offer?
I would say that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money and doesn’t really NEED any more.
We don’t need shiny bikes, iPhones, expensive cars, large houses etc. We still want them...
this is not limited to humans. It is in built to build up fat reserves to boost survival odds. Animals horde food or in the case of pets where food is plentiful they horde toys and the like....
Where is it all going?
Foreign aid & dole scum.
As a single male higher rate tax payer I pay plenty, get little for my money and am sick of subsidising others existence.
So its very much a no from me.
Is it really underfunded?
Or
Do the bloodsucking leaches from the private sector just need to be replaced with state run setups
Sure, as long as I can see the increase going to the NHS, education, welfare and not funding tax cuts for companies and the rich.
The tax loop hole thing needs sorted. Theres enough russian billionaires in london and enough billion pound companies in the UK that taxing them would easily fix a lot of problems. If you need a top up I'll happily pay an extra £50 pm in tax.
Also, while we are at it. How about -
Politician pay topped at £40k (most have second jobs anyway)
Tax second homes out of existence
Tax cigs out of existance
Minimum price for alcohol
Legalise cannabis
.I would say that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money and doesn’t really NEED any more.
Would you !
good for you,
well done,
what a guy !!!
Post a pic I bet you`re dead fit as well.
Anyone who says I would gladly pay more tax if I knew it was going to what I think it should....is a thoroughbred prick!! There is no other description. I would rather give it to my new mate the Nigerian Prince who just inherited a gold mine with a cash flow problem.
I would pay more if we could only re build the Royal Navy and go and reclaim some of our Empire !!!
Is giving more money to the bellendery who waste our money really the answer ?
Did you type the wrong URL when meaning to go on to the Daily Mail site there cheekyboy.
I know exactly who the thoroughbred prick is from your 'post' thanks