Would you mind paying more tax?

I know it’s very general and simplistic, but in the current climate where public services are being severed, I still find it a little odd that people are moaning about the amount of tax they have to pay.

Surely – ultimately – more taxes = better public services?

On that note, if a political party stepped up and said “we’re going to charge you an extra penny in every £5 of tax we take, and this will mean that the health service doesn’t struggle to find beds and teachers have classes of fewer than 25 children”, would you vote for them?

Why should I pay more when we could dump nuclear weapons and divert that money to a more deserving cause?

Why should I pay more when folk a lot more wealthy than me are paying none/very little?

Why should I pay more when much of what I already pay is being diverted into profits for large organisations (many with links to UK politicians) or private landlords?

Yes, I would mind. I pay enough tax as it is.

IF I thought my current tax money was spent wisely and efficiently then no, I wouldn’t mind paying more.

But…

I would if there appeared to be any justice in the tax system. If they closed all the loopholes so that corporate parasites likeAmazon, Starbucks, Vodaphone, and Google, and Tory shysters like Barry Garlowe, and Phillip ****ing Green actually paid their fair share.

But if that was the case, they’d be reducing the tax rate for the rest of us, not raising it

Its not the level of taxation thats the problem. I don’t think its a particularly high price to pay to live in a civilised society. But the fact of the matter is that those who can afford it most are shouldering considerably less of the burden than anyone else. In fact, to all intents and purposes Amazon et al pay no tax at all!. And that just, like, SOOOOOOOO not fair!!!!

Yes I mind, they steal enough as it is.
Being single & childfree I actually think I should be offered a rebate as I use less services.

Why should I pay more when we could dump nuclear weapons and divert that money to a more deserving cause?

Cos we’ve elected other people to decide what’s important and what’s not. You don’t get to choose, unfortunately.

They already spread money out between stuff you don’t like and stuff you do. You can’t make them divert money from one thing to another, so the only other option is to give them more.

Now, this is probably a bad thing in many cases. Stuff like subsidising rich companies should be a democratic matter and we should be able to make them divert money away from it. However, if there are (for example) big companies prepared to leave the country if conditions become less favourable then we might not know about this, as voters. Big companies may be holding us to ransom, but how to get around this?

But stuff like nuclear weapons can’t really be run on a purely democratic basis, because the general public aren’t in a position to decide what our capability needs to be in this area imo.

I actually think I should be offered a rebate as I use less services.

Nice to know people are still altruistic and selfless, isn’t it. Oh wait.. no they aren’t.

Yes, so long as the tax system was simplified (UK a bit currently in Oz a hell of a lot) rebalanced so that those on higher incomes paid more. Universal welfare for those who don’t need it needs to be removed (child benefit, winter fuel payments etc.) and sharpen up company/international tax collection to make sure that income earned in a country was taxed there.

Oh and sort out the utter mess that is anything a government tries to fund so that it’s not just seen as a cash cow for the private sector.

edit Yes I would, no I wouldn’t mind

so long as the tax system was simplified (UK a bit currently in Oz a hell of a lot) rebalanced so that those on higher incomes paid more

They generally do.

Oh and sort out the utter mess that is anything a government tries to fund so that it’s not just seen as a cash cow for the private sector.

+10000000

Never. I would not vote for tax increase proposing party. Stealth tax etc is enough. Get rid of all stealth tax first then we talk.

However, if you reduce the VAT to say 3% and then add 1% to income tax I would not mind. I am no tax expert btw.

Oh ya … I don’t rely on public transport btw.

Being single & childfree I actually think I should be offered a rebate as I use less services.

You should be charged more, because you’re not providing the next generation of tax payers.

I’ll clarify molgrips, close all the stupid loopholes make anything that is deductible only apply at base rate for instance.

Cos we’ve elected other people to decide what’s important and what’s not. You don’t get to choose, unfortunately.[/quote]But the OP was asking for MY opinion.

Yes I would mind.

My 2% payrise (yes I know I’m lucky to have got one etc.) turned into a 1% rise in take home thanks to our tax system. Yes I would mind paying more tax because:

1. A silly amount of my pay already goes in tax.
2. I pay more tax whenever I spend money.
3. I pay tax when I’m being responsible (take out insurance etc.)
4. I have no confidence that more tax will equal better services.
5. What Scotroutes says about our spending priorities.
6. Any extra tax take will just go to funding the current politicians pet schemes, most of which never work.

Surely – ultimately – more taxes = better public services?

Personally I’d rather see a reduction in tax and be expected to pay for more of the services I use (leaving those that genuinely can’t pay to be supported by the tax others do pay). That way there might actually be a correlation between what I pay and the level of service I get.

I shall now don my flame proof suit and get back to working hard to fund the tax man.
No that just equals more public servants (an oxymoron if ever there was one).

I think the “would like to, but… try some other options first / finger pointing” has merit but always sounds – just sounds – a bit like “why aren’t out catching real criminals” / “I will when you’ve sorted out stuff to my own preferences” response. Not invalid, just blurring the argument – or maybe getting to the heart of the argument. Don’t know. Too hard. Next!

Yes.

But I would like to see revisions of the current system first such as no non-dom status, no offshoring of profits (eg to Ireland ebay, starbucks, Amazon, Apple etc etc)

@marky there are no tax benefits to being married, why don’t you consider it that you are still paying for your birth and education

I’d happily pay more so long as ‘we’re all in it together’

If strikes me that although cuts are being made in the name of efficiency the result in a lot of cases in poor value. Small percentage cost cuts in some services result in larger percentage losses in provision. The core costs of a service are more or less the same whatever the budget they have is, they just achieve less on a smaller budget – one of the london boroughs (I forget which) cut their Libraries budget by about 20%, but result of that was closure of half of their libraries. So the service is cheaper but its not better value

On a many a mickle mackts a muckle basis I’d rather pay not much more so that the value of the tax I pay is tangible rather than a little less for an infrastructure thats then barely able to function, but costs nearly as much.

Trick question !!!!

I wouldn’t mind paying more tax…if it meant I was earning more thus being on a higher wage.

OP didnt say in what context you would be paying more tax !

Nice to know people are still altruistic and selfless, isn’t it. Oh wait.. no they aren’t.

Ive never claimed to be 🙂

You should be charged more, because you’re not providing the next generation of tax payers.

The planet is already hugely overpopulated, unfortunatly it seems by the kind who are unlikely to work & pay tax..

Yes, I would mind. I pay enough tax as it is.

However, if less of it was wasted funding the Indian Space program, and subsidizing those who get away with paying little or nothing of what they owe, I might be a bit more inclined to pay a bit more…

Iain Duncan Smiths turned up again, I see

Personally I’d rather see a reduction in tax and be expected to pay for more of the services I use (leaving those that genuinely can’t pay to be supported by the tax others do pay). T

you don’t know what services you’ll use in a lifetime until you’re dead. You’re only looking at the contibution and the demands you are making right now For most of us the bulk of the value we’ll see from the NHS, for instance, we won’t receive until the weeks before we die.

Being a net contributor in tax terms is just the bit you do in the middle of your life – there can be 40 odd years either side of that where you are a net beneficiary.

Being a net contributor in tax terms is just the bit you do in the middle of your life – there can be 40 odd years either side of that where you are a net beneficiary.

True dat. And the majority of people never contribute more than they take out!

Pretty sure there was an online test somewhere to see if you are a giver or taker.. can’t locate it at the moment..

I would not mind paying for better services but there are so many caveats. Most noted above.

i would also add a **** tax for those who lack the empathy to want to pay more …you know who you are 😈

The planet is already hugely overpopulated, unfortunatly it seems by the kind who are unlikely to work & pay tax..

Oh and the stupid lets tax them as well as we have to waste time explaining reality and facts to them

Personally I’d rather see a reduction in tax and be expected to pay for more of the services I use (leaving those that genuinely can’t pay to be supported by the tax others do pay). That way there might actually be a correlation between what I pay and the level of service I get.

Isn’t that what essentially happens in the US? (certainly with regard to health and higher education)

chewkw – Member
Never. I would not vote for tax increase proposing party. Stealth tax etc is enough.

You’re voting UKIP chewkw. Your opinion is void. 😛 😉

Not really.
As much of our income as possible is channeled through what many people might call loopholes. If these were changed/closed it would probably be fairer, but while they exist and are legal I’m not going to pay more tax than necessary.

OP didnt say in what context you would be paying more tax !

OK, for argument’s sake, let’s say it’s a flat rate. Let’s assume that the £40k higher band still exists, but it’s essentially every taxpayer pays an extra 1% overall (so the more you earn, the more you pay).

i would also add a **** tax for those who lack the empathy to want to pay more …you know who you are

This sounds faintly similar to my proposal to reduce demand and waiting times for NHS services by withholding treatment for Tory voters. (edit – better put a smilie in there 🙂 )

I’m not sure how you establish that during triage – it’ll be the ones who are tutting and rolling their eyes the most in the waiting room probably

I earn a bit less than the average wage, and after the tax free allowance I pay roughly 6.5% in NI, 9% in tax and 6.5% in pension.

It’s not much to pay for what it provides really? But I suspect better use could be made of it.

subsidizing those who get away with paying little or nothing of what they owe

They make the news, but there really are very few of them.

Pretty sure there was an online test somewhere to see if you are a giver or taker..

Think I saw that a while back.

Edit: no, it was a totally different website. 😳

Ideally yes, but it sickens me when taxes are used to subsidise major corporations through things like tax credits. And if they paid their fair share of tax as binners said.

Though to be honest, if these things did occur the tories would cry themselves to sleep every night (hence it won’t happen) and an increase in tax would not be necessary.

They make the news, but there really are very few of them.

True. But the sums involved are absolutely enormous. For example Phillip Green funnelled £1.5 billion through his wife’s bank account in Monaco to avoid taxes on profits all made in the UK. The government were so appalled with this, they got him on board as a business advisor, without feeling the need to mention that the rightful tax on the £1.5 billion might have employed the odd nurse, or maybe built a new sports hall on the local comp.

He spent £16 million of the tax he didn’t pay on his own birthday party. And yet still nobody has beaten him to a bloody pulp in the street. Its a funny old country we live in

Being single & childfree I actually think I should be offered a rebate as I use less services

Whenever I think/hear this ^^ it reminds me of a chat I had with an aneasthetist (sp?) friend who explained that after 5 years of carefully balancing their drugs budget his trust went into the red due to one patient requiring an antibiotic cream which cost over £80K per dose. You never know what you might need or indeed who you might be helping out.
It’ll be a bold (perhaps suicidal) politician who stands up and says an extra 1p in the £ income tax specifically for education and healthcare as an election promise, I would take notice of them.

It woud be nice to think we could do without Trident etc but I’m not convinced tbh.

In a theoretical socialist utopia, yes.

In this lifetime, no.

Middle Tier PAYE for me.

Still a few days to go before the aver age person in the UK is working for himself rather than the state (tax freedom day is either 28 may or 2 June), so no thank you.

I would happily pay more tax . I would also happily vote for any party that promised to address the state subsidies of the free market g4s crapita asda Amazon Starbucks et all.
Currently our government seem hell bent in taking as much money out of the economy as posssible and diverting it to non Dom non taxpaying transnational corporations .

I’d happily pay more tax tbh. But then I agree with the comments about wasting less money, too- I don’t like the idea of my tax money subsidising private companies, or building public institutions so they can be sold for peanuts, or used to build nuclear submarines we don’t need.

But these things aren’t mutually exclusive.

crankboy – Member
Currently our government seem hell bent in taking as much money out of the economy as posssible and diverting it to non Dom non taxpaying transnational corporations .

Last time I checked it was taxation that was a withdrawal from the economy. So how is the coalition gov hell bent on taking money out of the economy when it seeks to cut tax?