Jump to content
House Price Crash Forum
Sign in to follow this  
gruffydd

Cgi Increase Will Reduce Tax Revenue - Adam Smith Institute Propaganda

Recommended Posts

The Thatcherites make their case: http://www.dailymail...o=feeds-newsxml

They're so twisted it's kinda funny!

I wouldn't be so sure they're wrong - when Thatcher cut income tax rates in the 80s, the total tax take did in fact go up so this story is not necessarily as silly as it might sound. It's easy to imagine fewer second home owners deciding to realise gains and just not selling for example, reducing the total CGT take from housing sales. It's also easy to imagine people being more careful to use ISA allowances and pension plans to shelter equities from gains too.

I wouldn't care to bet either way what the result will be myself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is it a variant on the laughing curve?

I vote for negative tax rates so the treasury can make lots of money.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

Edited by ringledman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Its the laffer curve in action. The curve is more sensitive for higher earners who have the option of fking off to avoid tax or decide they cant be bothered and don't run the business/evade even harder. I believe there real world evidence of this CTG tax damaging tax take from other counties aswell?

laffer-curve1.jpg

Edited by AteMoose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Get your comments in. I have already done mine but it has yet to appear.

Comments (0)
No comments have so far been submitted. Why not be the first to send us your thoughts, or debate this issue live on our message boards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

I tend to agree with you sentiment, but I don't think it applies to buy to let.  This should be taxed at 40% for CGT purposes with no taper.  Infact I'd go as far as to then introduce an annual land tax, say 0.5% for properties under £1m and 1% for those over £1m. At the same time I'd then cut corporation tax for manufacturing and services business down to 18%, and raise it to 45% for financial services businesses as they don't really add anything to sum of human wealtj.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The article in the Daily Mail sounds sensible as the people caught up in this are the ones likely to have the greater nouse to avoid paying CGT in the first place.

Providing you don't dispose of the asset you will have no CGT to pay, it's kind of voluntary.

If possible, better to batten down the hatches and wait for the storm to pass. Mindful that CGT rates have been all over the place for the last decade or so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

Because you have to sell eventually.

Extrapolating the effect of higher income taxes to higher CGT rates is a false premise.

People have a lot of control over how much income they earn, they have little control over how much their assets inflate in value.

tim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you have to sell eventually.

Extrapolating the effect of higher income taxes to higher CGT rates is a false premise.

People have a lot of control over how much income they earn, they have little control over how much their assets inflate in value.

tim

Why do you have to sell eventually? You could pass the asset on to family when you die and let them pay the tax on it.

Of course people have a choice in how much they sell something for.

Being pissed off because an asset has gone up in value and you make a profit can only come from a small and twisted mind.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

You're missing the whole point of this change.

At present there is a big loophole in our taxation system, where some activities (that lead to capital gains) are taxed at a lower rate than others (those that lead to income).

Yet success is people creating (adding) wealth for this country. Capital gains do not represent this - only income does. There is a very good reason why capital gains are sometimes called unearned income.

Why should the real wealth creators be paying a higher rate of taxation?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tend to agree with you sentiment, but I don't think it applies to buy to let.  This should be taxed at 40% for CGT purposes with no taper.  Infact I'd go as far as to then introduce an annual land tax, say 0.5% for properties under £1m and 1% for those over £1m. At the same time I'd then cut corporation tax for manufacturing and services business down to 18%, and raise it to 45% for financial services businesses as they don't really add anything to sum of human wealtj.

So you would select just one section of gains for a punitive tax to punish a sector of society. There must be a vast number of equally unethical gains that deserve to be taxed too. This whole thing was initially suggested to stop hedge funds making massive profits that avoided income tax. Now it picking on a certain section of ordinary people, and yes they are ordinary. Its all turned to a crap debate carried on by jealous small minded individuals.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because you have to sell eventually.

Extrapolating the effect of higher income taxes to higher CGT rates is a false premise.

People have a lot of control over how much income they earn, they have little control over how much their assets inflate in value.

tim

No you dont have to sell eventually. So long as your estate is below the inheritance tax threshold you can hold it untill you die, and leave it to family with no tax to pay. I would assume if the tax is raised to punative levels more will find a way to do it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

What's endemic is a small number of wealthy people who believe that "earning" money through NOT working is somehow superior to the plebs who toil all day everyday and pay income tax on their money.

I have zero sympathy for the middle class CGT whiners.... you've been gifted 50 grand through a rising market and now you'll have to pay 40% tax... oh, the inhumanity. Some people would have to work for 2 years to really earn that kind of money.... do they pay a flat 18% tax? Of course they don't, they're the little people who pay income tax and national insurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

I have a deep mistrust of Thatcherite economists - they get it wrong again and again and again. They point to Swiss cantons, but surely the revenue shift from CGT can be calculated from existing figures? PR radar bleeping alarmingly. I also dislike the spiv economy here in the UK - it needs to be rebalanced and this is where government policy can make a real difference.

Edited by gruffydd

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the reason that the MSM can’t leave this issue alone because it’s were MPs were racking it in? The Vis involved have huge PR power behind them so are very active protecting the assets.

Mind you I’d like to know Tony Blair’s opinion on CGT. He is rumoured to have resigned over the impending expenses scandal. He was behind the FOI amendments Bill which would have excluded MP’s from the transparency demanded by the legislation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's endemic is a small number of wealthy people who believe that "earning" money through NOT working is somehow superior to the plebs who toil all day everyday and pay income tax on their money.

I have zero sympathy for the middle class CGT whiners.... you've been gifted 50 grand through a rising market and now you'll have to pay 40% tax... oh, the inhumanity. Some people would have to work for 2 years to really earn that kind of money.... do they pay a flat 18% tax? Of course they don't, they're the little people who pay income tax and national insurance.

Little people! Careful what you say. Your not a BP chairman or something in disguise are you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You're missing the whole point of this change.

At present there is a big loophole in our taxation system, where some activities (that lead to capital gains) are taxed at a lower rate than others (those that lead to income).

Yet success is people creating (adding) wealth for this country. Capital gains do not represent this - only income does. There is a very good reason why capital gains are sometimes called unearned income.

Why should the real wealth creators be paying a higher rate of taxation?

But this is not a black and white thing:

If I invest in a small company, and they make a profit, but use the profit to expand and build the business - then that is a capital gain (but it was definitely a wealth creation that led to that profit and that capital gain).

By contrast, if I invest in a large company, they pay the profit out as a dividend because they don't need to grow - then that is income - it's the same wealth generation taxed in a different way.

But not all capital gains are wealth generation - inflation causes asset prices to rise. So CGT without inflation relief, is essentially a tax on inflation. If I hold cash, it gets stolen (by stealth) by the government inflating it away. If I buy assets, the imaginary gains due to inflation, mean I have to pay tax on the real value of what is left, so the government steals the money openly.

For this reason, I think it correct that CGT should be payable at the same rate as income tax - but it would need to have an inflation allowance. This type of tax would ensure that the tax remained progressive, and avoid theft via inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Why must we reward failure and not success?

Why must we reward speculation more than work? It seems to me that the neo liberals have a problem here in that they proclaim themselves as supporters of risk taking entrepreneurs but also want to protect the interests of those whose 'wealth creation' consists of parking their money in property or blue chip stocks and waiting for the magic money machine to pay out.

Surely taxing passive specualtion would have the effect of rediriecting investment toward the more risky but real wealth creating type of enterprise?

We now live in a world where the speculators in real estate have mostly made out like bandits, while those stupid enough to have worked and saved have been fleeced- to protect this unearned wealth.

The argument that CGT would inhibit wealth creation might be more convincing were it not for the fact that most of the available capital in the past decade has been invested in property speculation.

Edited by wonderpup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lower taxes bring in more in revenue. Simple really. Surprising how many people miss it because they like to see anyone who makes a few quid fail.

Why sell any assets at all at 40% capital gains tax????

It is endemic in our society that people who look after themselves must be punished. You made £50k on a house or stocks, this must be redistributed to the rest of society.

Why must we reward failure and not success? I don't mean this in a conceited way. I am far, far, far from wealthy but there is something wrong in today's society to believe these views.

When did looking after oneself and not relying on the state be seen as wrong?

When did relying on the re-distribution of wealth instead of looking after oneself be right?

This country really is fuked.

I thought you were a libertarian gruffydd???

I'm not sure if you're joking, I think you must be because nobody could be that dumb. Whatever one person manages to acquire is solely at the loss of someone else. The best at it get rich and conversely the worst at it get poorer and poorer, then the rich ones think that somehow they deserve better because they have more. Do you know how ridiculous that all is? Another nice but dim...

Edited by unclefudgly

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are clearly a poorly educated moron if you can't appreciate the point.. whatever the colour of your politics if you can't appreciate that raising the tax level on something may change behaviour then you are sadly deluded. Whether it will lower the amount of CGT collected I don't know, it probably depends oin the final outcome, but it wouldn't surprise me if CGT receipts are lower especially during the first two years.. anyone with a veyr samll element of common sense could see that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Little people! Careful what you say. Your not a BP chairman or something in disguise are you.

Are you not one of the little people?

I know I am, I earn my money the old fashioned way... by getting off my @rse and earning it through hard graft.

If people who earn stacks of cash for doing f*ck all honestly believe they are entitled to pay half the tax rate us working stiffs are forced to pay what would you conclude?

Me, I've concluded that the rich CGT moaners regard me as one of the little people, a pleb not clever enough to earn money for doing f*ck all.

How else do you explain the unshakable belief these people have that UNEARNED income is superior to EARNED income?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Are you not one of the little people?

I know I am, I earn my money the old fashioned way... by getting off my @rse and earning it through hard graft.

If people who earn stacks of cash for doing f*ck all honestly believe they are entitled to pay half the tax rate us working stiffs are forced to pay what would you conclude?

Me, I've concluded that the rich CGT moaners regard me as one of the little people, a pleb not clever enough to earn money for doing f*ck all.

How else do you explain the unshakable belief these people have that UNEARNED income is superior to EARNED income?

I also am one of the little people.Just slightly up the asset scale to be effected by this. Buti am not rich at all, just have spent a lifetime of hard work to have gathered an asset over many years that is now considered to some on here to put me in the same league as a hedge fund. And it was payed for out of EARNED INCOME.Like most of the little people effected by this. The asset was payed for with earned money instead of pissing it away on holidays . So what is wrong with having CGT allowances. Its not like your anual income tax allowance is being removed is it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • 152 Brexit, House prices and Summer 2020

    1. 1. Including the effects Brexit, where do you think average UK house prices will be relative to now in June 2020?


      • down 5% +
      • down 2.5%
      • Even
      • up 2.5%
      • up 5%



×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.