<div class="bbp-reply-author">kerley
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
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”
It doesn't really work like that- people contribute in other ways than direct taxation. Anyone in public service does more by their labour than their tax. Anyone in the private sector is (hopefully) adding value for the company which contributes to corporation tax and makes it possible for the higher earners to do so.
</div>
No, I read your puerile, sanctimonious little post and nearly choked on my falsies.
As a single male higher rate tax payer I pay plenty, get little for my money and am sick of subsidising others existence.
This sentiment moves us to a pay for play system that would probably pass a referendum. No one need public services until they need them...
Politician pay topped at £40k (most have second jobs anyway)
If politicians were experts in their fields then pay would not need to be capped but second jobs should be restricted. Capping salaries often smacks of jealousy and if I can’t have it no one can sentiments..
old talent - you do realise that in any other european country you would be paying muych more?
Are you really so selfish that you are prepared for those less fortunate than you to be in dire poverty and illhealth so you pay a bit less?
Want scandenavian style public services then you have to pay for them thru tax
Want US style services - go there. You are not welcome here.
A no here too.
As already mentioned in earlier posts; the tax system is a farce. Those wealthy enough can afford to use loop holes that enable them to pay much less then they really should. Its endemic for the rich and famous ... even the new Welsh super idol lives in a different county to avoid paying UK taxes here.
Good job the Welsh government are spending thousands on a parade for him; its not as if the money would have been better spent on social services, NHS ...
I love how the "I pay far too much tax" never substantiate their position.
Pure self interest, albeit deeply imbedded .
"Thousands spent" on a parade - yeah that'd lreally fix the NHS!
Those wealthy enough can afford to use loop holes that enable them to pay much less then they really should
But don't the top 1% already pay 28% of the income tax in the UK? It was only 11% when that "high taxation" Labour Callaghan government was in charge?
I love how the “I pay far too much tax” never substantiate their position.
Pure self interest, albeit deeply imbedded .
As imbedded as those that say higher rate tax payers should pay even more.
Its a cyclical argument as old as grotes and King John. Yet here we are in the 21st century stating the obvious and bemoaning the unfairness of a system geared to keep the mega rich rich and tax the many.
Its been designed that way to keep “middle England” working, paying thier bills and kept in thier place. Middle England will never revolt or rebel, it’ll follow its similar path as it has done for millennia. And it’ll moan and cry “unfair, whattabout xxxx” but nobody listens because the cry’s are muffled puffs of indignace.
So yes, imbedded.. good word.
<div class="bbp-reply-author">nick1962
<div class="bbp-author-role">
<div class="">Member</div>
</div>
</div>
<div class="bbp-reply-content">
But don’t the top 1% already pay 28% of the income tax in the UK? It was only 11% when that “high taxation” Labour Callaghan government was in charge?
Is this a useful comparison? Is the gap between top and low earners larger?
</div>
old talent – you do realise that in any other european country you would be paying muych more?
Are you really so selfish that you are prepared for those less fortunate than you to be in dire poverty and illhealth so you pay a bit less?
Want scandenavian style public services then you have to pay for them thru tax
Want US style services – go there. You are not welcome here
Answers below
In not in an European country, so I dont care.
yep
im not in scandinavia
In not in the US, but I prefer their model.
Not welcome where? The uk or this website? You in charge then LOLZ
Actually Yes: I want fundamental tax reform which will result in more taxes being collected from me, lets go for it. we should simultaneously remove all the loopholes and tax breaks for specific industries that then provide a tax dodge for the rich. we also need to get rid of NI and have better distribution of income tax (more bands probably) . It's been going on since the end of Nigel Lawson/start of Lamont and both red and blue did it so it's not a tribal problem, its a bad habit.
I also want voting reform to replace FPTP with proportional representation but I'm not going to get that either.
To the person who thinks that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money already, I can confirm that that is not true. Im looking to move house and despite earning a decent wage there is no chance I can afford the size of house round here that my parents live in. In Edinburgh a 2 bed flat costs 200k...a house with a garden well over 350k. Unless you got into the property market 25 years ago you are screwed if you want a nice place in Edinburgh and dont earn 70k plus.
Unless people realise a benefit for the extra money they will feel aggrieved. No one wants to feel that they are not getting a good deal....
We are not all in this together and especially not at the moment. How many years have the tabloids been screaming about doles cheats? How many years have politicians said public money is being stolen by xyz?
Many people want a pay as you go or pay who you choose system. Their opinion is no more or less valid than those who want the Scandinavian system.
If politicians were experts in their fields then pay would not need to be capped but second jobs should be restricted. Capping salaries often smacks of jealousy and if I can’t have it no one can sentiments..
Jealousy? Horse s&€t. I'm old school, politics should be a calling not a career. The whole argument of it'll prevent talented people becoming MPs is nonsense because you should only be one if you care enough about society and making a difference.
Plus anyone that cant live on £40k (plus expenses) probably shouldn't be in charge of making big decisions
Plus anyone that cant live on £40k (plus expenses) probably shouldn’t be in charge of making big decisions
anyone who is smart enough to get elected and responsible enough will not be satisfied with £40k when a qualified tube driver gets the same. While I agree it should not be about making money but if you want to recruit medical/agricultural/teaching experts who are top in their field to lead you are not going to achieve that (unless you start capping all public sector salaries). Instead you end up with independently wealthy people and others in the pocket of different industries or lobbying groups.
sadly we do not require or politicians to have any qualifications specific to their position or really restrict their outside interests... just wanting to be good at your job because you want to change things and you think it is your calling doesn’t cut it.
you end up with independently wealthy people and others in the pocket of different industries or lobbying groups
This.
To the person who thinks that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money already, I can confirm that that is not true.
I'm drowning in the excess sense of entitlement. I'd enjoy it if it wasn't so bitter. 😆
Good logic as well, that we should all earn more than average.
If anyone wants to pay HMRC more money, I assure you they will accept it. No one will though, because reasons, excuses and the equivalent of "I'm not racist but...".
All boils down to greed, basically.
To the person who thinks that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money already, I can confirm that that is not true. Im looking to move house and despite earning a decent wage there is no chance I can afford the size of house round here that my parents live in
So you are basing it all on whether you can afford a house the same size as your parents, that is like me saying I haven't got enough to buy a Lamborghini. Just get a different place to live, different area, different car etc,.
being in the 40% tax bracket makes you one of the richest people in the country. top few % of earners.
the lack of understanding of reality of some when salaries and tax is discussed is depressing.
Bbeing in the 40% tax bracket makes you one of the richest people in the country. top few % of earners.
No, it puts you in the top end of earners. It doesn’t necessarily make you rich. Plenty of my young colleagues are in that tax bracket but have to repay a lot of student loans so they don’t have large disposable incomes. They certainly don’t own multiple properties.
5 grand over the national average salary gets you in "the top few %" (which is apparently about 16% of income tax payers).
Andy, no.
Average is £27K, 40% starts on average at £46K
Looks like you forgot the NRB.
I would be prepared to pay more tax once the following has happened
1. A dramatic change to the tax system. It is way to complicated with far too many loopholes in it that the wealthiest can exploit
2. Get rid of corporation tax as a tax on profit, it is far too easy to manipulate this as we see every year. I would replace it with a transaction tax at a very low rate based on the location of the customer, not the company. It would be very easy to do as any on line transaction involved either a delivery address or the payment method has an address linked to it, It wouldnt be the same as VAT because there would be no opportunities to offset it against cost like you can with VAT.
Don’t forget inheritance tax.
To all those that can afford thier own properties,and maybe inherited properties themselves, don’t forget to sort your affairs out 7 years before dying..
You may not feel rich in the 40% tax bracket but the simple fact is it puts you firmly in the richest few % of the countries population. Try thinking living on minimum wage. £15000 pa approx.
Not only did you not consider the amount of personal allowances you also forgot those on pensions and benefits
To the person who thinks that anyone in the 40% tax bracket has enough money already, I can confirm that that is not true. Im looking to move house and despite earning a decent wage there is no chance I can afford the size of house round here that my parents live in
I was almost going to make a comment the other day, that the reason so many people in the UK are so "uptight" about taxation is because so much of their disposable income is stripped away by mortgage payments. But I think that it is important to address these issues separately.
The way the housing markets in the UK operate is largely just another way of older generations leaching of younger, but it is also important to realise their are large minorities of those generations who are unaffected and/or do not benefit. Myself for instance have never been able to buy a house due to lack of work etc at crucial times, even if I had been permanently employed throughout my life, I would never have been able to afford my parents house, even though they were factory workers and I am considered skilled. But I do not conflate my misfortune with a problem with taxation.
Plenty of my young colleagues are in that tax bracket but have to repay a lot of student loans so they don’t have large disposable incomes.
Bollocks.
Repaying student loans costs **** all. Choosing to live in a nice big house with a brand new car on tick costs money.
They certainly don’t own multiple properties.
You should start up a justgiving campaign.
For what it's worth, OECD data shows taxation as a percentage of GDP in the UK is around 33%, pretty low for Europe. Germany and Norway 38%, Denmark 46%
That's how you pay for public services.
The way the housing markets in the UK operate is largely just another way of older generations leaching of younger,
Whoa, hold on a minute. Are you saying the older generation are responsible for the massive inflation in house prices over the past 30 odd years?
anyone who is smart enough to get elected and responsible enough will not be satisfied with £40k when a qualified tube driver gets the same.
That 40k isnt unknown in academia and other research positions at the moment.
Bollocks.
Repaying student loans costs **** all. Choosing to live in a nice big house with a brand new car on tick costs money
9% of income, above a threshold, is a fair amount. It’s not as cheap as it is portrayed in the press especially with interest rates for current loans at 6%.
9% of income, above a threshold, is a fair amount.
It is a pittance and would leave any 40% earner ample to live an extremely comfortable life.
A simple yes for me so long as the extra is guaranteed for public services.
Whoa, hold on a minute. Are you saying the older generation are responsible for the massive inflation in house prices over the past 30 odd years?
I am saying that older generations are the net benefactors. Government policy is responsible, government policy far too tied into banking instead of social requirements.
https://www.gov.uk/repaying-your-student-loan/what-you-pay
£187 a month on £50k.
You couldn't even tick an Audi A1 for that.
I am saying that older generations are the net benefactors
So not EXACTLY leeching then?
£187 a month on £50k.
You couldn’t even tick an Audi A1 for that.
Yerrrbutt..
Roughly £50k pa = £2.5kpm take home.
Take out £1000 for mortgage and utility bills and you are left with £1500pcm for living.. that’s not a lot of you have a family..
It is a pittance and would leave any 40% earner ample to live an extremely comfortable life.
Are we to assume then that you pay at least 9% extra in tax each year as it is, to use your phrase, a pittance?
I would happily pay more tax under Labour as I think their redistribution is more beneficial to the majority of the country.
However, the whole monetary system is an over complex trap either way that is used for political leverage rather than for society.
Take out £1000 for mortgage and utility bills and you are left with £1500pcm for living..
There are people who have less than that to live on including housing costs FFS!
Are we to assume then that you pay at least 9% extra in tax each year as it is, to use your phrase, a pittance?
I tell you what, you give me your bank details and I will transfer to you directly 9% of what I earn, *over the threshold, and you can do whatever you like with it. 😆
*don't go trying to move the goalposts on me sonny Jim. 😉
And don't forget that NI has a maximum amount over which which you stop paying NI so including NI your tax rate actually drops again over a certain amount.
£1500 pcm after tax and housing costs is more than many folk in the UK actually have including housing costs.
And don’t forget that NI has a maximum amount over which which you stop paying NI so including NI your tax rate actually drops again over a certain amount.
No, you start to pay at a lower rate, 2% vrs 12%, on earnings above the upper limit which gives effective income tax rates of 32%, 42% and 47%. There is no rate at which you stop paying NI. One of the many reasons why this should just be incorporated in income tax.
The original questions that was posed was how much tax we as individuals WE were prepared to pay and the answer seems to be none (and I include myself in that group) but make sure you tax "others".
So you are basing it all on whether you can afford a house the same size as your parents, that is like me saying I haven’t got enough to buy a Lamborghini. Just get a different place to live, different area, different car etc,.
Nope I used it as an example of how round here 40% tax payers can't even afford a very average sized family home. So to say that 40% tax payers are all 'rich' and dont need any more money is just plain stupid. Sure I could move away from my friends, add in an hour commute either way, and i'll probably have to. But thats precisely because I'm not rich and I can't afford to not to if I ever want to live in anything but a city centre tenament.
As for your lamborghini comparison, its really rather rubbish. One is a luxury that a tiny percentage of society can afford. Wanting a 3 bed house with a garden is hardly the cravings of a man with a sense of entitlement, rather something I think most folks would aspire to.
You should feel my pain; a quick google only brings up one house for sale in my village and that's up for £2,500,000.
Woe is sbob!
Owning a 3 bed house with garden is impossible for huge numbers of folk me included.
sorry dude but being in the top 10% of income of peoiple in the country makes you rich.
NI drops from above a certain amount REDUCING your rate of tax above this amount.
I di9d forget the newish 2% rat5e. You only pay 2% NI over £43000 pa. So actuyally your tax rate on earnings over this including NI is 42% until you hit £150 000 pa
Also note many of us have stated they would be quite happy to pay more tax and indeed voted for parties that pledged this in Scotland. My earnings actually put me in the area tho of no real change in tax rates. I only earn a bit over the national average so don't get hit by the higher scottish rate. Note also those on low earnings now pay less in Scotland!
A few years ago my brother in law in the netherlands earned similar to me and paid more tax despite 3 dependents. But then there is almost no homeless, public transport is good there and welfare payments are much higher
Owning a 3 bed house with garden is impossible for huge numbers of folk me included
Dont you own multiple flats in Edinburgh?
I di9d forget the newish 2% rat5e
It’s hardly new or even newish
Also note many of us have stated they would be quite happy to pay more tax and indeed voted for parties that pledged this in Scotland.
Did they though? How many people who actually voted for the SNP will actually be liable for the additional tax?
Take out £1000 for mortgage and utility bills and you are left with £1500pcm for living..
There are people who have less than that to live on including housing costs FFS!
Yes, fine I know that (obviously)
But if you are the 2+2 family with one earner then sorry, but that isn’t a lot to live on.
Of course you could cut that model in half and have both adults in the family working, one may earn £50k and the other £25k and there are a lot of people in this situation.
Or..
You could cut both incomes to £35k and £15k and also factor in child care..
£1500pcm isn’t a lot, no matter which way you calve it up...
Nope..I own one flat that I live in..it has one bed room and I pay a mortgage on it still. I have 2 cars, both bought combined for less than the price of a new polo.
I wish the ladies of Edinburgh agreed with you definition of me being rich though!
Owning a 3 bed house with garden is impossible for huge numbers of folk me included.
sorry dude but being in the top 10% of income of peoiple in the country makes you rich.
In edinburgh yes,yet plenty off folks do. Depends on your definition of 'rich' of course, but in my mind not being able to afford the type of house my folks own (who were a single income family, on a teachers salary - so hardly a mansion) points to the fact that I'm not rich, and could do with more money without being accused of being 'greedy'
But if you are the 2+2 family with one earner then sorry, but that isn’t a lot to live on.
Not if you're expecting to live the kind of lifestyle that most STWers obviously feel entitled to, but plenty of people do manage it on less (having a family, not ticking an Audi estate and spending £7k on summer hols).
I realise I am both lucky and rich owning two small flats between 2 of us which if we sold both would not pay for a 3 bed house with garden within pedal power of my work. I also earn just over the average wage, my other half well under.
Knowing I am relativity rich I would be perfectly happy to pay more tax. Even tho I am poorer than many of you.
I don't own a car - thats £2000 pa at least saved
£1500 a month after housing costs is a lot. Its far more than the bulk of the population have.
But childcare costs about £400pcm so £1100 left for food.. £400pcm So s’pose £700 left for wood and coffee and axes.
Erm, nah. Still not a lot is it..
Glad I’m a SINK.
Not if you’re expecting to live the kind of lifestyle that most STWers obviously feel entitled to
why do you keep using the word 'entitled', i dont think you really understand what the word means. I dont feel 'entitled' to anything, I work hard in a pressurised job with absolutely no job security. I dont have a new audi or ever go on more than one holiday a year.
tpbiker. I think its the lack of understanding of many folk on here of what reality is like for many folk. I work alongside folk earning under £18000 pa for very hard full time work. Often as sole breadwinner for a family. People who are delighted to be able to get a housing association house in Niddrie as their dream home, people for whom payday lenders might be the only way of putting food on the table at the end of the month
Or people that my other half sees professionally every day. working 3 zero hours contracts adding up to 30 - 60 hours a week all on minimum wage and supporting a disabled spouse and children on that.
why do you keep using the word ‘entitled
Because you started this off with the view that you simply should be able to have the same type of home as your parents, despite the numerous logical flaws in this position, including: you live in Scotland's and one of the UK's most expensive cities, house prices may have gone up since your folks bought (lower taxes and failure to build houses perhaps to thank for that...)
Oh and what TJ said - work with folk at the low end of the pay scale or those on benefits (vast majority can't work) and you'll see outside your own bubble.
Let's not forget the reduction in availability of housing. Blame anyone with more than two kids if worried about blaming immigrants. 😀
But what you seem to be missing here is that if you have a decent job which pays an above average wage then you are entitled to get a decent house. That is what you work for. You know the bit where it says how much you earn. The key word is ‘earn’. The implication from some on here is that nobody is entitled to a three bedroom house with a garden in somewhere like Edinburgh. So are you saying that everyone in Edinburgh should be glad to live in a small flat? Sounds like envy to me.
Not whilst the current shower of ****s is running the country.
I'm envious of no man. 🙂
Mind you, I do live in Grantchester which has to be one of the more affluent parts of the country.
But what you seem to be missing here is that if you have a decent job which pays an above average wage then you are entitled to get a decent house. That is what you work for. You know the bit where it says how much you earn. The key word is ‘earn’. The implication from some on here is that nobody is entitled to a three bedroom house with a garden in somewhere like Edinburgh. So are you saying that everyone in Edinburgh should be glad to live in a small flat? Sounds like envy to me.
No, we are saying that house price inflation is a problem, but you are kidding yourself if you think you have it bad when your are earning enough to be in the highest tax bracket.
I would say that a hell of a lot of people could not buy the houses their parents owned when they were growing up, and probably most people couldn't afford to buy the houses they now live in at current market rates. That is what happens when tax rates are low and no investment is made in social housing.
The implication from some on here is that nobody is entitled to a three bedroom house with a garden in somewhere like Edinburgh.
If it's my mouth you are trying to put those words into, you've got it wrong.
imnotvery good. so I am entitled to a 3 bed house with garden am I? could someone please give me the £100 000 or so I would need to have my entitlement? I earn more than the national average in a job that quite frankly very few of you even have an inkling of the stresses involved and that very few of you could do. Let alone do it for long enough to be earning above the national average wage.
Its about reality chaps - and some of you simply have no understanding of what reality is like for many folk in this country.
Its about reality chaps – and some of you simply have no understanding of what reality is like for many folk in this country.
This.
There is no excuse for it either.
If you earn it TJ then you are entitled to get a house you can afford. I appreciate that people have it rough, but by and large that isn’t the fault of the people living in a three bedroom semi. & to return to the op the point is I don’t think you get to the root of the problem by upping the tax of such people. There is much more wrong with system than just that.
by and large that isn’t the fault of the people living in a three bedroom semi
I don't think anyone is arguing that it is.
If you earn it TJ then you are entitled to get a house you can afford.
Well some seem to be making the argument that some high earners feel entitled to houses they cannot afford.
I certainly could not afford to buy my flat now. I realise that makes me lucky. I couldn't afford to buy anything in Edinburgh bar a small flat in a rough area even earning over the average wage. ( ah - thats what I did buy all those years ago fortunately for me gentrified now)
I bought my flat for £48 000 when I was earning £20 000 ish. 2 and a bit times my gross earnings. Its now worth maybe £200 000 and I earn £32000 gross pa. More than 6 times
And some high earrners are claiming poverty because they only have £1500pcm after tax and housing costs.
And some high earrners are claiming poverty because they only have £1500pcm after tax and housing costs.
I think you are putting words into peoples mouths there. Stating that you don't think you are rich doesn't mean that you are stating that you are poor.
Definition of Rich; "people who have more than I do."
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.
You do know BUPA isn't a profit orientated company? The firm is a private company limited by guarantee; it has no shareholders, and any profits (after tax) are reinvested in the business.
It doesn't harm the NHS at all to have them provide services at a fair price.
Gonefishing
Roughly £50k pa = £2.5kpm take home.
Take out £1000 for mortgage and utility bills and you are left with £1500pcm for living.. that’s not a lot of you have a family..
Not a lot? that sounds like claiming poverty to me.
And according to the tax and NI calculator, 50k gives you a take home of 37k a year which is just over 3k a month.
https://www.gov.uk/estimate-income-tax
50k gives you a take home of 37k a year which is just over 3k a month.
But then deduct pension contributions and tax on company car and fuel. It's soooooo unfair having to pay your way leaving a mere £1.5k to play with each month. How can I be a sugar daddy on that?
I was lucky enough to have a grant when I went to Uni and so was MrsG. It enabled us to go when no one else in our families had done before and I’d pay more tax to see that sort of social mobility return.
Also I lost my mum and MrsG’s mum this year. The NHS was brilliant and so clearly underfunded. I’d pay more tax for the NHS.
I also pay more tax than I get it out in services and benefits but I have no problem with that.
Just to be clear, I didn't;t say people in the 40% tax bracket are rich. I was saying that if you earn £50k per year you don't NEED more. i.e. you don't NEED a 3 bed house with a garden, you don't NEED a brand new Audi etc,.
People in tyhe 40% tax braket are amongst the richest few % in the country. this is indisputable. To most of the population me included this is riches that they will never attain. People earning that much are rich.
We got somewhat distracted in a debate about house prices - house price inflation has far outstripped earnings. My salery would need to be more than twice what it now is if my wages had kept up with house price inflation
Another indisputable fact is that we are a low tax country. Not only is the tax take significantly lower than most european countries. We get outr healthcare included in that low tax. Most other countries not only do you pay significantly more tax but you then pay for your healthcare on top. A significant further cost.
This is why our public services are poor. We simply do not pay enough tax to have good services.
And some high earrners are claiming poverty because they only have £1500pcm after tax and housing costs.
👏👌🤷♂️
If that’s directed at me then I’m happy to state that I DO think that it’s not a lot to live on (after morts/utilities) and then feeding a family and adding in childcare, you are absolutely right... and I made my calculations easy for people to read and absorb ^^
BUPA = NFP organisation
Yeah, I did know that thanks. And whether it’s right/wrong or indifferent that BUPA take some of the slack up doesn’t make it right that the NHS has closed Smaller Cottage Hospitals and Care units down that have a direct impact on local people’s lives... and ability to get to the (not local) Super Hospital in the next County.
Well the fact that you think £1500 a month for a family of 4 to live on after housing costs is not much shows just how out of touch you really are. Its far more than the vast majority of the country have to live on. the very fact you factor in childcare costs shows how well off you are. Most people cannot afford paid for childcare.
On hospitals - actually the bigger hospitals have very much better outcomes than the small ones. Well proven by research. cottage hospitals are both hugely expensive per bed and provide substandard care.
So thats on two aspects of your argument you are wrong. Not misguided, not an opinion. simply wrong.