Sunak Rejects Wealth Tax

[satsuma]

9 minutes ago, mrlegend123 said:

I understand what you are saying but they are covid casualties. Simple system meaning have to tax every one

 

Again, I will point out that the government cannot expect to increase tax on the 3million business owners hung out to dry.  We pay more than our fair share and will not forget in a hurry that while others were paid to do nothing we were left out.  I am fine with a small increase but the majority of the tax increase need to be from the sectors that were actually bailed.  This means increase PAYE income tax and NI.  Simple way to collect tax from this that were bailed out.  

[mrlegend123]

7 minutes ago, satsuma said:

Again, I will point out that the government cannot expect to increase tax on the 3million business owners hung out to dry.  We pay more than our fair share and will not forget in a hurry that while others were paid to do nothing we were left out.  I am fine with a small increase but the majority of the tax increase need to be from the sectors that were actually bailed.  This means increase PAYE income tax and NI.  Simple way to collect tax from this that were bailed out.  

which sectors were bailed out? 

[satsuma]

Just now, mrlegend123 said:

which sectors were bailed out? 

Everyone apart from the three million small business owners who were not yet paying themselves a salary or not yet paying business rates.  The way things were rolled out it penalised those in the first few years of running a business.  

[mrlegend123]

7 minutes ago, satsuma said:

Everyone apart from the three million small business owners who were not yet paying themselves a salary or not yet paying business rates.  The way things were rolled out it penalised those in the first few years of running a business.  

I don't think any sectors were bailed out....reduced rates yes but not bail outs 

[NobodyInParticular]

29 minutes ago, Gribble said:

Clueless. You completely missed the point about retrospective decisions and moving goal posts.

No, I didn't miss them, just pointing out your arithmetic was wrong. 

29 minutes ago, Gribble said:

Oh well keep squealing   

I'm not. Are you? 

[satsuma]

1 minute ago, mrlegend123 said:

I don't think any sectors were bailed out....reduced rates yes but not bail outs 

Your missing the point but no worries

[NobodyInParticular]

39 minutes ago, Gribble said:

There was no way this was going to happen. A retrospective income tax is illegal.

OK, I am answering this point. A wealth tax isn't an income tax so your objection is meaningless. 

39 minutes ago, Gribble said:

The Germans thought of it recently and dumped the idea because it was unconstitutional and illegal

I live in the UK, not Germany. Sunak does too. What happened in Germany is irrelevant. 

39 minutes ago, Gribble said:

Its the sponging sector that needs culling,

Which is what, exactly? 

39 minutes ago, Gribble said:

 

 

[reddog]

2 hours ago, Insane said:

I Googled raising income tax and it said putting the basic rate up 1% would raise £4 Billion a year. Googled virus cost and it said so far has cost the Government £210 Billion . So without any more costs (which is impossible) at that rate it will take 52 Years and Six months to repay at present. 

The link between tax and spending broke down some time ago.

 

It crazy, but I don't think they will ever reign spending in until there is some sort of currency crisis.

[LetsBuild]

7 hours ago, mrlegend123 said:

true, make it like a student loan. 

furlough loan payable over 30 years 

Im with this 100%, surely its the logical decision? If its good enough for students to rack up a huge debt whilst they invest in themselves for the good of society then surely its fair for those who cant work for the good of the nation to do similar?

[Sprite]

7 hours ago, LetsBuild said:

Im with this 100%, surely its the logical decision? If its good enough for students to rack up a huge debt whilst they invest in themselves for the good of society then surely its fair for those who cant work for the good of the nation to do similar?

Its not a bad idea but the issue is if people knew beforehand that they would need to repay the furlough money, many may have had second thoughts about taking furlough. Its quite hard to do things retrospectively. 

In my opinion there will need to be some form of wealth tax, the easy target will be increasing inheritance tax but this obviously won't be enough. I can see thing like fuel duty and VAT increasing. Other things that I think are highly likely to be implemented is a digital sales tax on online only retailers (especially as government will likely pay be getting less income from business rates) and some kind of tax or relief restrictions on WFH. 

I would love if there was a one off wealth tax but I think its too politically toxic and virtually impossible under a Tory government.

[byron78]

20 hours ago, Gigantic Purple Slug said:

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9152933/Rishi-Sunak-rejects-wealth-tax-cover-280billion-spent-fighting-coronavirus.html

 

News just in:

Insanely wealthy man decides not to tax himself, friends and family, but all the little proles instead.

[Timm]

3 minutes ago, byron78 said:

 

News just in:

Insanely wealthy man decides not to tax himself, friends and family, but all the little proles instead.

This might be self defeating. 

A small amount now - tick the box, move on, or:

People actually notice, start talking about it and then elect a govt that will do it properly?

[Roman Roady]

If I were planning a tax raid on peoples wealth, I would deny it until the day I did it...bank runs and property market chaos might ensue otherwise.

Kind of the opposite of Chancellor Broon did with the Gold sale AKA Browns bottom.

[MARTINX9]

Dishi Rishi is reportedly considering replacing both council tax and stamp duty with an annual national percentage levy on the value of residential properties which according to the Mail 'will hit Tory shires really hard - cue picture of Guildford High Street'. Not quite as hard I expect as inner city remain voting Labour heartlands like Hackey, Camden and Islington let alone the oligarchs in Mayfair, Belgravia and Knightsbridge but that wouldn't scare the readers.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9156747/Ministers-consider-replacing-council-tax-property-levy.html

Now its been leaked to the Mail I give it 48 hours before Ministers announce they have no such plans!

 

Edited January 17, 2021 by MARTINX9

[NobodyInParticular]

2 hours ago, Roman Roady said:

If I were planning a tax raid on peoples wealth, I would deny it until the day I did it...bank runs and property market chaos might ensue otherwise.

Kind of the opposite of Chancellor Broon did with the Gold sale AKA Browns bottom.

To be fair to Brown, he sold a smaller proportion of gold stocks than many countries did. 

[Former postman]

On 1/16/2021 at 7:00 PM, Gribble said:

Some peoples marginal tax rate is 67% when you take into consideration NI. Add another 10% or so stamp duty of those wanting a BTL as a pension and its 77% Add another 5% wealth tax on top. 83%   = FO, No way 

There was no way this was going to happen. A retrospective income tax is illegal. The Germans thought of it recently and dumped the idea because it was unconstitutional and illegal

Looks like the green eyed thieves on here will have to bark up another tree. 

its the sponging sector that needs culling,

Keep squealing saddos

PS A HPC of epic proportions will come, but dont rely on stealing little commies 

 

 

No one, anywhere, pays 67%. 

[Bruce Banner]

4 minutes ago, Postman said:

No one, anywhere, pays 67%. 

Really? 

40% Income tax

13.8% Employers NI

14% Employees NI

[Notting Hell]

1 hour ago, Bruce Banner said:

Really? 

40% Income tax

13.8% Employers NI

14% Employees NI

Marginal rate is 72.8% if paying additional rate income tax via ltd with personal income over £150,000/year.

[msi]

3 hours ago, Notting Hell said:

Marginal rate is 72.8% if paying additional rate income tax via ltd with personal income over £150,000/year.

No one person pays that...

[NobodyInParticular]

7 hours ago, Postman said:

No one, anywhere, pays 67%. 

For those who are on average wages, it's 20% and 12% NI - 32%. On higher rate 40% plus 2% - 42%. On the highest rate 45 plus 2%, so 47%. Eventually the 0% rate tapers, so for a narrow band of earnings it can be 67%, but then it's back to 47%. And that is only for very high earners in terms of marginal taxation for a narrow band. The numbers will be tiny. 

[NobodyInParticular]

7 hours ago, Bruce Banner said:

Really? 

40% Income tax

13.8% Employers NI

14% Employees NI

Employees don't pay employers' NI so you can ignore that. Higher earners don't generally pay 14% employees NI on the higher earnings (although I don't believe the bands are synchronised, so there might be a narrow band of overlap). 

[NobodyInParticular]

6 hours ago, Notting Hell said:

Marginal rate is 72.8% if paying additional rate income tax via ltd with personal income over £150,000/year.

No, no, no. You pay lower NI, and employee only. 

[Trump Invective]

11 hours ago, MARTINX9 said:

Dishi Rishi is reportedly considering replacing both council tax and stamp duty with an annual national percentage levy on the value of residential properties which according to the Mail 'will hit Tory shires really hard - cue picture of Guildford High Street'. Not quite as hard I expect as inner city remain voting Labour heartlands like Hackey, Camden and Islington let alone the oligarchs in Mayfair, Belgravia and Knightsbridge but that wouldn't scare the readers.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9156747/Ministers-consider-replacing-council-tax-property-levy.html

Now its been leaked to the Mail I give it 48 hours before Ministers announce they have no such plans!

 

Ha yes - dismiss that ridiculous idea early doors, before concentrating on what they actually intend to do (wait and hope)

[Bruce Banner]

4 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Employees don't pay employers' NI so you can ignore that. Higher earners don't generally pay 14% employees NI on the higher earnings (although I don't believe the bands are synchronised, so there might be a narrow band of overlap). 

Effectively they do if they own a company and pay themselves on PAYE.

[dugsbody]

7 minutes ago, NobodyInParticular said:

Employees don't pay employers' NI so you can ignore that. Higher earners don't generally pay 14% employees NI on the higher earnings (although I don't believe the bands are synchronised, so there might be a narrow band of overlap). 

Actually, it is still a tax on the employee, it is just that you never see it because it is deducted before your pay. If there was no employers NI then the difference could be split with the employee, probably more to the employee. Of course, it would have to be taxed anyway, so it would be more obvious how much we're paying.

Having "the employer pay it" is just a way of hiding the tax from us.

You must then also consider all the tax benefits those below certain thresholds receive such as free childcare, etc and remember that higher earners lose these as soon as they cross the threshold - no scaling, just a straight loss of the benefit. This is also a "tax". 

Our tax system is too complicated and hides what we all really pay.