UK Government Thread

Wow, yet another guardian article with zero actual information or evidence, just conjecture, 

It looks like pitch rolling to me. Leak some vague policy info to a friendly newspaper as ‘sources say the gov is considering’ and then see how badly people shit the bed.

Definitely ignore the squealing wealthy we don’t need there money.

For too long they hold everyone to ransom with this. They don’t create the pound they just hoover it all up and suck up more assets from the rest of us.

Have all those wealthy non-doms buggered off yet, to avoid paying their fair share? No? Thought not.

Did I miss the bit where the change has gone through, I thought the government were bottling it?
Anyway, the non-doms will no doubt have their bags backed ready for when it happens or more likely just find some other way around it.

Income should be taxed the same, whether that income is earned through hard work or asset inflation. Get on with raising CGT to IT+NI levels, and ignore the squealing wealthy.

Agree, although I would drop the hard work and just replace with work. Why does everyone think that people who earn a lot have worked hard, especially any harder than people who don’t earn much. The guy who delivers my Amazon parcels works harder than me, I was just a LOT luckier than he was…

Have all those wealthy non-doms buggered off yet, to avoid paying their fair share? No? Thought not.

Not often I agree with Polly Toynbee!

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/11/super-rich-flee-britain-labour-tax-grab-exit

the non-doms will no doubt have their bags backed ready for when it happens

No they won’t. They’re not here for the tax breaks, they just take advantage of them because they’re there. Very few will actually follow through on threats to leave. And good riddance to those that do.

The guy who delivers my Amazon parcels

Is exactly who I’m thinking off as regards earning though hard work, paying their taxes… and IT+NI means their marginal tax rate will likely be higher than the rate people earning from asset ownership/selling will be paying in CGT.

Louise Haigh has gone up in my estimation.

No doubt she will be gone soon though as can’t risk losing any investment opportunities however shitty the investors are.

Is exactly who I’m thinking off as regards earning though hard work, paying their taxes

Still could just say people who work rather than work hard as it has nasty overtones of MPs BS, or maybe that is just me.

No doubt she will be gone soon though as can’t risk losing any investment opportunities however shitty the investors are.

I doubt she’ll be moved any time soon, but i can’t see anything wrong with what was said about her comments, she is now a secretary of state and her words do have more meaning now when discussing this type of thing, you have to separate your work and personal beliefs in this type of role, as you’re governing the entire country, not just your supporters.

I think the non-dom thing was totally over stated all ways around.

It was going to *pay for* bugger all really (estimates vary wildly) and was a weird ideological stance given these people simply paid tax where they “earned” it. I don’t think it’s the coup they think it is. It’s been a feature of Labour campaigning for years.

Ideological through and through.  Similar to the independent schools VAT. Not necessary at all but sends a certain signal out.

Labour seem to have a problem with dealing with what is most important and spend time on silly tweaks which then cause shit storms in the media but won’t have a whole load of impact.

I’m hoping but still not certain that they will start to do what’s right but I fear the recent headlines of spending billions will turn out to be not huge amounts. This is the one budget where they will get the crack to wipe the slate clean on massive spending before the ‘how are you going to pay for to crowd turn up.’

(Incidentally if you’re interested in MMT at all then Stephanie Kelton is doing an online with Ash Sarker – with probably a British slant, hopefully UK budget oriented – this Sunday.

This is more interesting than usual because the Novara crew are totally wedded to neoclassical tax and spend because of James Meadway’s influence. So it’s an interesting meet.)

her words do have more meaning now when discussing this type of thing, you have to separate your work and personal beliefs in this type of role, as you’re governing the entire country, not just your supporters.

Indeed. And given that her work is for a Labour government, it was great to see her standing up for workers.

Louise Haigh has gone up in my estimation.

Yes, also in mine. And my feeling is that if DP / P&O are prepared to throw their toys out of the pram at this point, they were never serious about investing anyway.

that if DP / P&O are prepared to throw their toys out of the pram at this point, they were never serious about investing anyway.

Yes, if there’s still a profit for them and a return to their shareholders they’ll progress – they are a business not a wilting violet.

Its posturing – they want it and will profit from it – just dont like the slap they have been given round the face.

these people simply paid tax where they “earned” it.

Most people don’t get to offshore their earnings, and pay tax where they live.

you have to separate your work and personal beliefs in this type of role, as you’re governing the entire country, not just your supporters.

Or you, and your party, could just show some morals/ethics – something that is all too missing generally.

Good news – the DP investment seems now to be going ahead. Almost as if the last 24h were just posturing…  Oh well gave the Times and Telegraph a Saturday headline.

I’m sure the Sunday editions will be leading with this great news… Oh wait.

One of the things I pointed out a while ago which will make the whole VAT charge on independent schools a bit sketchy in terms of tax take will be the ability of the school to claim back VAT on stuff they can’t now. (Thus decreasing net VAT paid and therefore tax take.)

It’s in the Guardian today. I can’t imagine the government has wholly factored this in as it’s very difficult to know what they will claim back.

Tax for revenue is inherently flawed on every level. Which is not what it’s designed for of course. But if you frame it that way you will lose to creative accountancy.

It will vary depending on the size of the school which where the Guardian’s focus is.

Obviously I don’t know the complexities of the accounts of schools but I can imagine this to blow up somewhere.

The first opinion poll since March 2022 which hasn’t given Labour a lead over the Tories:

https://twitter.com/LukeTryl/status/1845359983107486155

A lot can happen over the next five years but at the present a Tory-Reform coalition government in 2029 is a distinct possibility.

I would drop the hard work and just replace with work. Why does everyone think that people who earn a lot have worked hard, especially any harder than people who don’t earn much. The guy who delivers my Amazon parcels works harder than me, I was just a LOT luckier than he was…

Yep in my experience, those that work the hardest earn the least.

Now we really can see the folly of Brexit being brought to the fore.

Labour have convened a global investment jamboree where, despite what they’d like you to believe, the basic tenor is the UK flashing a bit of thigh and seeing who fancies a bit.

The CEO of Eli Lilly has been pretty blunt, though. He’s said that small markets like the UK have to deregulate further than blocs with economies of scale and clout – like the EU.

Boom! There you have it.

What these big cheeses are going to say, in lots of presentations, slide decks (yuck) etc is basically the same. “Trousers round ankles and bend over. You can whistle Land of Hope and Glory if you like, but the outcome will be the same”.

Labour will continue to try to paint capitulation as innovation, but it’s bollocks.

Still, blue passports, eh?

Have all those wealthy non-doms buggered off yet, to avoid paying their fair share? No? Thought not.

The super-rich left Norway in 2022 and it resulted in a 40% reduction in revenue from that sector, rather than the $150mn pa extra that it was projected to earn

Its posturing – they want it and will profit from it – just dont like the slap they have been given round the face.

What we don’t know is what had to be gifted to make up for the slap. The Government won’t say how close they came to losing the deal

Trade Secretary Jonathan Reynolds was asked how close the government came to losing the £1bn commitment in the London Gateway port.
Mr Reynolds said: “Look, we’ve had to have a conversation following some of the press reports.” https://news.sky.com/story/government-had-conversation-with-pando-ferries-owner-after-ministers-criticism-put-1bn-investment-under-review-13232803

Labour said that they’d “stop the boats”, the manifesto’s been withdrawn to clarify that it didn’t include P&O 🙂

Companies will try and make more out of this than there is, simply to increase their profits, it’s a black and white argument, no company will withdraw from the UK, or not invest in their infrastructure if there is profit to be made, plain and simple. If the likes of P&O want to make a song and dance about it, then that’s when the government should stand fast and then watch competitors see an opening for gains.

The super-rich left Norway in 2022 and it resulted in a 40% reduction in revenue from that sector

It’s not just about tax revenue. it’s about fairness and principle. It sends a signal to the voters that the govt is on their side and that their interests are just as important as those of billionaires.

It sends a signal to the voters that the govt is on their side and that their interests are just as important as those of billionaires.

That’s working well according to the polls…

Labour have convened a global investment jamboree where, despite what they’d like you to believe, the basic tenor is the UK flashing a bit of thigh and seeing who fancies a bit.

This is really just the same Tory-lite bollocks that’s been tried (and failed) on several occasions from Cameron, via the stupidity of Brexit and then again with Sunak…

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c3e9yk24w3eo

Every bit of red tape for one person is someone else’s protection against fraud, rights abuses, environmental damage, the list is endless. Just seems to be a clarion cry of any Government – “we’ll cut red tape!” and “bonfire of the quangos!”

I mean, I didn’t have particularly high hopes given that most of the election run-up was “we’re not quite as shit as the Tories”; there’s been some pretty positive stuff (from DfT / Louise Haigh in particular) but it’s undermined by the sheer stupidity of “we’ll try what the Tories tried and failed at, we’ll give that another go cos we must be able to make it work…”

resulted in a 40% reduction in revenue from that sector

40% of how much and which sector? 40% of £10 I can fund but 40% of £1 trillion would be a stretch (both sofas would need checking).

Scaremongering ill-defined sums have no place in finance, your point is poorly made as a result.

That’s working well according to the polls…

They haven’t signalled anything much other than “more of the same” yet, which is causing the negative impact in the polls. Is that what you mean?

Scaremongering ill-defined sums have no place in finance, your point is poorly made as a result.

It’s not scaremongering, it’s nonsensical finance with our budgetary “blackhole”.

Norway collected around $1.5bn in revenue, which dropped by $600mn when the rules changed. The government of the day projected a $150mn additional revenue had the super-rich stayed

From a finance POV you then have to translate their experience into UK finances and UK super-rich psychology; who knows what that will look like in £££?

They haven’t signalled anything much other than “more of the same” yet, which is causing the negative impact in the polls. Is that what you mean?

We’ll see what the future brings.

If the UK follows Norway’s pattern ^^ then offset that by hammering the estimated 35-40% of pensioners who don’t claim pension credits further into fuel poverty then it isn’t a good look for “fairness and principle”.

The private schools VAT thing has the potential to go badly wrong on grounds of “fairness and principle” as well. If parents can’t pay then that will increase burdens on the state sector and competition for places at the better-rated state schools

The Government isn’t polling well and that will continue

FWIW I don’t think that the mass hysteria about private schools claiming 10 years of VAT back when they become VAT-registered is an issue because they will have used other rules in place for institutions with charitable status to already have made those claims

Norway collected around $1.5bn in revenue, which dropped by $600mn when the rules changed. The government of the day projected a $150mn additional revenue had the super-rich stayed

So (and this gives me a frisson) a rounding error when set against the “income” (used for brevity not accuracy) from petrochemicals, their sovereign fund and the rest of their economy.

The super-rich left Norway in 2022 and it resulted in a 40% reduction in revenue from that sector, rather than the $150mn pa extra that it was projected to earn

I’m not sure you can fairly compare the two countries. Norway, unlike the UK, already had a wealth tax and increased it modestly. It’s a high tax economy without a global financial centre. The idea that the super rich would uproot themselves and their families from London is lacking evidence.

Every bit of red tape for one person is someone else’s protection against fraud, rights abuses, environmental damage, the list is endless. Just seems to be a clarion cry of any Government – “we’ll cut red tape!” and “bonfire of the quangos!”

You mean like this?

The Grenfell protesters are right. Red tape saves lives

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/jun/18/red-tape-political-grenfell-fire-telegraph

Just seems to be a clarion cry of any Government

I thought it was just the clarion cry of right-wing governments.

So (and this gives me a frisson) a rounding error when set against the “income” (used for brevity not accuracy) from petrochemicals, their sovereign fund and the rest of their economy.

I did say, “who knows what that will look like in £££?”

We’ll have to see what happens… 😉

The UK doesn’t need money from the wealthy.

Taxation is to control their wealth not to access money to be spent by the Government.

Losing some rich people is not a problem.  The sterling doesn’t just disappear.

Taxation as a form of revenue solves nothing. No one dare tax them enough for it to make a substanial difference to what we spend.

This is why we are where we are.

FWIW I don’t think that the mass hysteria about private schools claiming 10 years of VAT back when they become VAT-registered is an issue because they will have used other rules in place for institutions with charitable status to already have made those claims

I can say with 2nd hand experience many indepedent schools don’t know their arse from their elbows when it comes to VAT rules.

However I still don’t think back-claiming VAT will have been factored in if by way of example the calculations for non-dom revenue are to believed. Currenty Labour has a really shoddy time with accountancy and projections.

The Tax-revenue-balance model doesn’t yield results as evidenced by austerity, black-holes and other anomalies. We need to spend more than we take to make a difference. There is no getting away from it and is Reeves’ biggest mistake.

The Rich are currently sat on the biggest pile of deficit spending – interest from income paid out of the same account/overdraft for government spending – the Consolidated Fund at the BoE.

If the stuff about the well off fleeing high tax was true then you’d expect the US state with the highest taxes to have the lowest proportion of millionaires, no? Cos it’d be super easy to move across to another state, so obviously they’d all do that to avoid the higher taxes.

But in reality the US state with the highest taxes – California – not only does not have the lowest proportion of millionaires, but actually has the highest. There must be something about the good living and fine business available in California that makes those people think it’s worth paying the extra tax for?

Just like trying to appease racists by adopting racist policy ends up with more racism being demanded, no matter how much the super wealthy horde they will always demand more. Billionaires by definition have far far more than everyone, they are feeding off the rest of our life’s, but it still isn’t enough for them, they could afford a thousand lifetimes of lavish excess and they will still demand more, they will cheat your granny out of her savings, brake any employment law they wish to ignore, devalue their employees and even in a global pandemic steal from everyone, they don’t care who dies as long as they are “winning”.

Donald Trump once famously said it wasn’t worth his time to pick up a hundred dollar bill from the street, but I bet if he saw someone else try to pick it up he would stamp on their hand and try and steal it, because depriving someone else so he can become richer is what these scumbags feed their egos with.

These are the people who are destroying our society, their greed and narcissism has no limits and if governments keep pandering to them they will take everything.

Or we could just apply to join the EU…

These are the people who are destroying our society, their greed and narcissism has no limits and if governments keep pandering to them they will take everything.

So you’re not a fan of the rich i take it?