Since when have the Belgians spoke French?

Seriously? What language do they speak? 😕

😯

Since when have the Belgians spoke French?

Half the country does ……

It would have a negative impact, the question is how significant. Cameron famously said he would roll out the red carpet to French entrepreneurs when the 75% tax was annnouced, the French response was that their citizens would be too patriotic to leave and would stay and pay the taxes. Oh how we laugh now ! There are 400,000 French in London, many are high earners. Rental prices in South Ken and local restaurants and business would certainly suffer I imagine they have paid quite a lot of UK stamp duty too.

EDIT: Belgium has been the biggest beneficiary as it’s a short train ride/drive from Paris and they speak French so they can run their business easily from there. The French in the UK are mostly here for better employment prospects, tax has been secondary.

Well first, there aren’t 400,000 French in London.

Second, can anyone give a grown up answer?

@el-bent – I will double check my 400,000 French in London but that’s the figure I thought I read. As I said I think majority of French in UK where here before the tax policy as employment prospects are better. French business is very important to London, I am sure if you search you can find some stats.

EDIT: Is London France’s Sixth Largest City ?

As per the links above my girlfriend is living here, she doesn’t have to register etc etc so official numbers are likely to massively understate the figures. Even the French consulate number is a guess.

@mugsy – my girlfriend is French and I lived there for a year, am reasonably familiar with French tax/welfare payments (also have many French friends from sailing there a lot over past 10 years, so bar room discussion of tax/state beacracracy etc). I can ask the gf to look into any questions you may have. If looking at French tax you should include their equivalent of NI which is higher than ours.

For it they get generous unemployment benefits (also huge employer liability, if you are made redundant you are paid 80% of your salary for 2 years by your employer), state healthcare (but you pay first 20% of most things and many people have private health care paid privately), very good pensions. Downside is huge state sector (I forget the percentage of GDP spent on state but its huge), every town has a mayor and local state employees – huge overhead.

@el-bent – I will double check my 400,000 French in London but that’s the figure I thought I read. As I said I think majority of French in UK where here before the tax policy as employment prospects are better. French business is very important to London, I am sure if you search you can find some stats.

I did that before and the commom consensus is there are 276,000 French nationals Registered in the UK, so I didn’t need your link.

You seem to be steering away from the question I originally asked as well. I wonder why?

@el-bent, there you go 276,000 registered. There are many non-registered as there is no requirement to do so. So given the 276k I think the total figure could be more than 400k.

I don’t have the time to look up the economic impact these people would have other than to say it’s clearly significant. There is a large concentration around the French consulate and school in South Kensington, one of the most expensive areas in London. These are generally high earners paying top rate tax, renting/buying expensive properties and spending money here. The French banks have more high earners in London than in Paris (not least as the high paid French would prefer to pay less tax in the UK)

Jambalaya.
Thanks for having a go at the calc.

£250k earnings is roughly £110k in taxes
😯
While I acknowledge that figure is rough, goodness me, 110K is a lot of money to pull out of one person, although that alone, probably still wouldn’t pay the fat-cat salary for the head of a City Council.
Notwithstanding, Mr/Mrs 250K then going out and spending the remiander.

EDIT : btw THM do yourself a favour and drop the pretentious french speak, it makes you sound like Del Boy
I was thinking more along the lines of Edukator. Oops, that’s done it now.

You seem to be steering away from the question I originally asked
What? This one:
How much of an effect on us will them pulling their money or their business out have?

… Very late to the debate but…

Whether the 75% rate was a sucess of not is not just whether it raised the tax take of the wider economic impact, but was it political posturing, polpularist rich people person bashing? The French govt must have known that some high earners would move abroad, but even better politicing – point the finger at the unpatriotic wealthy fatcats skulking away with their ill gotten gains! I don’t know if it was a pre-election promise, if it was and it got the Govt elected then it was a success. I can’t believe that French politics is so naive to be believe in an EU of tariff free capital and labour movement that the impact would not have been as expected – but the calculation was that the net impact is worth the expected political gains.

It didn’t seem to make much if an impact in French papers yesterday – stuff about some Sarkozy funding scandal and the usual IS stuff as far as I could tell.

Tax policy (and for that matter spending) is only ever partly about raising income, it should be just as much about social engineering, but in reality is a lot of noisy tweaking that does little for either but a lot for political posturing.

The policy space for govts to act is massively constrained by EU rules and global markey norms. Step to far outside and capital moves, so talk politics but act little.

… ps by that I mean headline grabbing policy that has a big impact on certain groups eg bedroom tax, capping benefits etc, that may have a huge impact on the lives of those affected but do little in economic terms but are political posturing pre-election…

olddog, no worries on your timing, all views gratefully (if not graciously here sometimes) welcomed.

Yes the 75% rate was a political soundbite to appeal to the “working class” and to do some “rich-bashing”. The claim that it was temporary was an attempt to keep the wealthy in-situ but many didn’t believe that or felt economically it wasn’t worth staying so left. I know some people who have kept money inside their businesses rather than pay it out and attract these high taxes (this is very negative for the tax take and the economy). I think the economics of the policy where not thought out at all, as posted it was declared illegal when they tried to introduce it so it clearly hadn’t been thought out. As such not a surprise it’s been a failure.

We too have out soundbite policies as well, the bedroom tax was poorly thought out also, the wrong solution to a real problem.

goodness me, 110K is a lot of money to pull out of one person

As always it depends how you put it and those who object to the wealthy being taxed seem to use such emotive terms for the way they’re taxed. That £110k is money they’ve never seen – would it be more acceptable if they were paid £140k with no income tax, and their company was required to pay “employee tax” at 80%, so that money they have “pulled out of them” not only never appears in their bank account, it doesn’t even appear on their pay slip?

You could of course argue that £140k is a lot of money to give one person in their pocket tax free.

Oh but actually I see you’re already with me there:

although that alone, probably still wouldn’t pay the fat-cat salary for the head of a City Council.

Yeah, how dare somebody earn more than £110k. Maybe we should tax all these fat cats lots of money.

+1 aracer.

People think ‘Oh I’m paid £50k a year, great, but wait where is my £50k look at how much of my money the government are stealing, I wish I had more’

But it’s not really like that. It’s not YOUR money. The root cause of this is people wishing they had more, and fixating on the government as a cause of them not having more.

Tax policy (and for that matter spending) is only ever partly about raising income, it should be just as much about social engineering

Should it? It seems a really crude weapon to use for that, as you suggest one which largely just results in political posturing, and there’s no doubt that such aims are largely behind the excessive complexity of the tax system, resulting in increased expense to administer and more opportunities to avoid/evade.

Of course one issue which as been ignored (I’ve been just as guilty) is that maximising tax revenues may not actually be the best for the economy as a whole. It’s possible to envisage changes to the taxation system resulting in higher revenues, but a decrease in employment, GDP and growth. These things have to be balanced.

Yeah, how dare somebody earn more than £110k. Maybe we should tax all these fat cats lots of money.

11/10 for missing my point. I don’t earn 250K (private sector worker here), yet my taxes go into the pockets of the private sector paid, public sector worker. I’d suggest not wasting your time going on about how those positions need to attract the best from the private sector. It’s clear to me, what they’re really good at.
🙄

People think ‘Oh I’m paid £50k a year, great, but wait where is my £50k look at how much of my money the government are stealing, I wish I had more’
Ha, you’ve just labelled people as thinking that paying tax is the Gov stealing. Just speak for yourself, Yeah?

The root cause of this is people wishing they had more, and fixating on the government as a cause of them not having more.
Nope, I’ve suggested that people should negotiate a proper wage in the first place and that share holders should be convinced that 20% ROI instead of 30%, is much better than an ISA.
How are the home made rollers coming along!

I think he did realise you were moaning about public sector employees but turned it round on you for comedic/pwning affect – ….WOOSH
try reading it again

You could of course argue that £140k is a lot of money to give one person in their pocket tax free.

Oh but actually I see you’re already with me there:

although that alone, probably still wouldn’t pay the fat-cat salary for the head of a City Council.

I would just have mocked you for the politics of envy personally but either way hoisted up by you own petard.

my taxes go into the pockets of the private sector paid, public sector worker

Who built the roads,educated you, kept you healthy, left the streets safe to travel on so you could get to work for a private firm where you moaned about having to contribute to the society that helped you get where you are today.

Ha, you’ve just labelled people as thinking that paying tax is the Gov stealing. Just speak for yourself, Yeah?

He is using the language of those who claim this to mock them

You not getting mockery when it is , preety much, all you do
WOW at the ironing

it should be just as much about social engineering

That’s a harsh term for it, but the government DOES need to do things beyond simply funding services. For example, from a purely economic point of view it woul dbe better to have cars that were less fuel efficient as this encourages more spending on fuel, which increases oil companies profit, they increase operations, employ more people who then drive more faster cars and use more petrol etc.

The govt has to step in to avoid this, for reasons other than economics. Banded VED is one way to do this.

molgrips.
But it’s not really like that. It’s not YOUR money.

Whose money is it then?

Whose money is it then?
Precisely, I was going to mention zero tax codings etc, but frankly, in light of recent posts, its a task I can’t be bothered with. Horse to water and all that.

The point is, you couldn’t earn that money without the rest of society allowing you to do so. The money isn’t yours just because that is what is in your pay packet. There are 60 million people in the country, you don’t get paid in isolation.

Molgrips.
The rollers you intend to make. How are they coming along? You know, the rollers that will cost you less than buying them, so that the VAT man doesn’t steal your money.

Solo – Member

Molgrips.
The rollers you intend to make. How are they coming along? You know, the rollers that will cost you less than buying them, so that the VAT man doesn’t steal your money.

Tenuous.

The rollers you intend to make.

When did I say I was going to make rollers?

I think you need to work on your reading skills 🙂

DIY Rollers

molgrips – Member
As in training rollers. Anyone tried it? Rollers are way more expenisve than they should be, and you can get conveyor belt parts for cheap on ebay…

You were insulting saying, or something.

Rollers are way more expenisve than they should be
Damn that tax and those silly, greedy, employees, eh?

I asked if anyone had tried it. That’s a long way from saying I’m going to do it!

Honestly I think you need to go on a bike ride or something 🙂

molgrips – Member
I asked if anyone had tried it. That’s a long way from saying I’m going to do it!

Sounds like it…

molgrips – Member
Although.. resistance coupled with a big piece of ply that can be inclined.. could be good..

But yeah, you’re probably right there. You… doing something?
I think I see the flaw in your plan.

imnotverygood – Member
The point is, you couldn’t earn that money without the rest of society allowing you to do so. The money isn’t yours just because that is what is in your pay packet. There are 60 million people in the country, you don’t get paid in isolation.

Well that’s a new take on wages and how they are determined?

Whose money is it then?

Well clearly if it’s income tax via PAYE then it was your employer’s and now it is the government’s. At no point was it ever yours. We come back to whether there’s a real difference between an employee paying income tax via PAYE and employers paying “employee tax”.

I’d suggest not wasting your time going on about how those positions need to attract the best from the private sector. It’s clear to me, what they’re really good at.

They’re clearly vastly overpaid for the job they do, when other people work just as hard and earn a lot less.

Aracer – you may as well strip out all of your deductions then???? And see what’s yours at the end of it…..does part of my wage belong to rail company that I use to get to work before it belongs to me?

Little wonder the questions you ask, do not merit a reply.

You do know you said that in a reply * 😯

FWIW the subtle beauty of your trolling is slowly growing on me 8)

* rhetorical and I am certain you will resist the urge to reply

you may as well strip out all of your deductions then

His argument was they were never given to you therefore they cannot be deductions.

would it be more acceptable if they were paid £140k with no income tax, and their company was required to pay “employee tax” at 80%, so that money they have “pulled out of them” not only never appears in their bank account, it doesn’t even appear on their pay slip?

does part of my wage belong to rail company that I use to get to work before it belongs to me?

You should think about taking legal action as I believe the truck system was outlawed centuries ago. I think this is the current law you need:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1996/18

An answer would be more interesting first – then I can re-write my labour economics notes.

Well as I just wrote, if it’s being compulsorily deducted from your wages at source, then that is illegal.

Phew!

What all of them, even simple ones like this? I’ll have to assume a lack of reply means it’s actually a lack of capability to reply on your part.

I think the use of the word “give” above is very interesting. An employer doesn’t give you your salary, it’s earn’t. I see on STW frequent differentiation of money earnt when discussing normal (worthy?) jobs/salaries but when speaking of higher amounts there is an agenda of that money not being fairly earnt and the use of the word gift here seems to tie in to that.

I don’t buy at all the concept that tax is money you never had, it is absolutely a deduction from your salary. The employer was willing to pay you that larger gross amount (and to pay the employer NI on top) in return for the work you did. If you do take the counter-view that you only receive the net amount (ie the employer pays the tax) then when government tax policy changes you could well get a pay cut, that you are going to notice. That is money you had but which you not longer get.

EDIT: just a further note on “your” money, if you are set up as a business and receive a fee for the work/service then it’s very much your money, if you happen to base yourself/business offshore then you can determine how much tax you pay based upon how your business is organized. I really think this “not your” money point is a total red herring.