TUK020 wrote:Combine Tax & NI? So that folks who currently don't pay NI will wind up paying equal to 'workers'
So your big idea is to tax pensioners more?
You know, the demographic that votes the most?
Thanks to Anonymous,bruncher,niord,gvonge,Shelford, for Donating to support the site
TUK020 wrote:Combine Tax & NI? So that folks who currently don't pay NI will wind up paying equal to 'workers'
servodude wrote:DrFfybes wrote:
There's the answer, scrap IHT but raise VAT to 25% and CGT and Dividend tax to 30% to match Swedish levels. Still means the kids get less.
Paul
...and yet Sweden has (checks the billionaires per capita index) over 4 times the rate of billionaires than the UK?
absolutezero wrote:Don't worry.
The scrapping of non-dom status and VAT on school fees will fund everything they promise.
TUK020 wrote:Combine Tax & NI?
So that folks who currently don't pay NI will wind up paying equal to 'workers'
Lootman wrote:TUK020 wrote:Combine Tax & NI? So that folks who currently don't pay NI will wind up paying equal to 'workers'
So your big idea is to tax pensioners more?
You know, the demographic that votes the most?
TUK020 wrote:Lootman wrote:So your big idea is to tax pensioners more?
You know, the demographic that votes the most?
I am not proposing this as a 'big idea'. Wondering about possible routes for Labour to increase taxes. You know, getting more feathers while getting less hissing from those likely to vote Labour
Lootman wrote:TUK020 wrote:I am not proposing this as a 'big idea'. Wondering about possible routes for Labour to increase taxes. You know, getting more feathers while getting less hissing from those likely to vote Labour
They usually think that involves taxing only the rich. But then the rich find 101 ways of avoiding that, and so the tax increases end up hitting the middle and the poor anyway.
I recall my first job after leaving university in 1975. Although on only a graduate starting salary (3K a year or so at the time), some of my income was taxed at 35%, just 5% shy of what is now higher rate tax.
Even with current rates, people like Branson and Dyson leave the UK. We should be lowering the top rates of tax and enticing them back, not punishing them and driving them away..
Lootman wrote:The non-doms would not even need to completely leave. I imagine many of them have several homes in several locations. They can merely adjust the time spent in each home such that they are non-resident in the UK for tax purposes.
gryffron wrote:Lootman wrote:The non-doms would not even need to completely leave. I imagine many of them have several homes in several locations. They can merely adjust the time spent in each home such that they are non-resident in the UK for tax purposes.
Taxing non-doms is hard. Gordon Brown tried it, and couldn’t get through the complexity in time. They have incomes from a hundred different tax regimes, with dozens of different tax treaties. Trying to legislate for all those is staggeringly difficult. That’s why the non-dom rules were introduced in the first place. As an easy way of getting some money from them without tackling the complexity.
I have no doubt Labour will try, it is a red line policy for them. But I reckon it will take most of the next parliament before it can reasonably be introduced. Which means very little chance of even the fantasy of increased tax take for several years.
didds wrote:TUK020 wrote:Combine Tax & NI?
So that folks who currently don't pay NI will wind up paying equal to 'workers'
NI as a hidden tax in effect somewhat grates with me; Chancellors going on about "we will not increase Income Tax" - and then altering the tax burden of NICs etc ... (GB springs to mind?)
So yes Id agree with removing NICs from individuals and having a single rate of tax. As for how that affects those that don't pay NIC on their income eg pensions, that could be overcome by increasing the personal allowance for those demographics and thus a higher tax code.
Charlottesquare wrote:didds wrote:NI as a hidden tax in effect somewhat grates with me; Chancellors going on about "we will not increase Income Tax" - and then altering the tax burden of NICs etc ... (GB springs to mind?)
So yes Id agree with removing NICs from individuals and having a single rate of tax. As for how that affects those that don't pay NIC on their income eg pensions, that could be overcome by increasing the personal allowance for those demographics and thus a higher tax code.
Yes, the Tories in the 80s headlined IT decreases whilst nudging up NI rates, my old Tolleys make interesting reading- how could the Blessed Margaret have done this?
wanderer wrote:1) CGT rates to move level with income tax rates
2) Dividend tax rates to move level with income tax rates
3) Personal pensions to come inside the scope of IHT
4) New council tax bands for high value properties
wanderer wrote:CGT rates to move level with income tax rates
Dividend tax rates to move level with income tax rates
Personal pensions to come inside the scope of IHT
New council tax bands for high value properties
Charlottesquare wrote:Dividends taxed at IT rates without any imputed tax credit for the Corporation Tax already paid by the company is a recipe for disaster re companies not distributing funds to their shareholders- every company becomes a Berkshire Hathaway.
BobGe wrote:Charlottesquare wrote:Dividends taxed at IT rates without any imputed tax credit for the Corporation Tax already paid by the company is a recipe for disaster re companies not distributing funds to their shareholders- every company becomes a Berkshire Hathaway.
Things have been moving in that direction for a while now accompanied by all kinds of dreadful reasoning to support those goings on, all of which can presently be said to be unreasonable and unfair taxation, thus a disincentive, on those who would like to invest their earnings to support businesses and hence the country's economic growth generally. The introduction of this double taxation was claimed to be because Corporation Tax had been reduced to 19/20%, but where are we now?! Currently dividend earners are the only ones paying the Health and Social Care Levy (AFAIIA).
As for not distributing funds, the capital gains position is hardly much better. Allowances and lower rates were to compensate for the withdrawal of indexation. Now inflation is back, allowances are being cut and how long will it be before rates are increased.
The average Joe (or the pro) thinks this fair because people just receive dividends and gains like manna from heaven and have no comprehension of risk.
Hoping for a hung Parliament...
servodude wrote:Starmer is the ultimate beige flag, but probably safer than a billionaire by marriage who didn't lack the political nouse to realise claiming to "stop the boats" was handing away his balls on a plate
- verbs he could have used succesfully include: improve, lessen, decrease, lower, cut, mitigate, ameliorate... but he said "stop"?!
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 4 guests