You still don't understand... currently it's 25% emergency tax + 12% NI...
The proposed is 30% tax 0% NI...
Proposed change to the tax system, 30% rate for all....
- Thread starter Spit
- Start date
The proposed is 30% tax 0% NI...
Which in theory, would hit the 20/100k earners (Who the benefit would not offset the increase in sales tax) - but would benefit the 100k+ earners.
Think of it like this,
Why would the taxpayers alliance & an assortment of CEO's want this change..... hmmmmm....... let me think....
You've missed the point. He's saying if everyone gets a tax break, how will this increase tax revenue for the country, and reduce the deficit?
I'm all for simplification, but this 30% idea doesn't make much sense.
It allows the local councils to compete with each other, lower business tax rates, lower VAT = more appealing. Councils in the North could theoretically run things cheaper than those in the South.
But of course, we've got the old problem of the festering scum which costs the country a fortune. Drop in funding from central gov will mean that the council has to make up the shortfall, and the norths filled with holes like this that are too far gone to be of any economic value (Bradford)
Soldato
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 12,088
- Location
- Derby
Is there a calculator to compare your take home with current tax and the 30% with higher allowance? I cant be bothered to work it out..
Beyond ensuring a minimum ability to live, and ensuring that income isn't being obtained fraudulently, I don't think it's any of the state's business to try and dictate wages at either the top or the bottom of the wage scale when it comes to private sector businesses.
Again, I'm not in agreement that it is the government's role to try and force balance on the rewards of labour. There is and always will be significant difference between those with easily replaceable skills, and those without, and that's absolutely correct.
I don't disagree, but the issue isn't their contribution to society, but how easily replaceable they are, that determines their salary.
Of course, the obsession in the UK with state monopoly provision of services really damages the earning prospects of good teachers/nurses etc by refusing to allow them to grow without moving into the much smaller independent sector.
The inclusion of capital gains and various other income types that currently have a lower rate, and the much greater simplification will make tax collection and enforcement much cheaper, as well as reducing the massive regulatory and employment burden caused by the current setup.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 3,177
cheers. im the bread winner only as the wife looks after my sprog. how would that affect it?
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 886
Local sales tax sounds terrible. People commuting to neighbouring counties to go shopping. Internet purchases - what tax do you pay then? Do you get poor counties dropping tax rates to attract internet businesses to them like what happened with the channel islands?
IMO the tax system could do with being simplified, especially to join income tax to NI, but I don't think we need to drop the tax band for higher rate earners. People earning 50k don't need a tax cut right now.
IMO the tax system could do with being simplified, especially to join income tax to NI, but I don't think we need to drop the tax band for higher rate earners. People earning 50k don't need a tax cut right now.
It's not determined always by how replaceable they are, that's the problem.
It's a social dynamic of which people at that level try to justify the grossly inflated wages - constantly taking credit for minor increases in productivity (but not taking pay cuts for reductions).
If pay was directly linked to skill (without friends for jobs, or the artificial inflation of wages in certain areas) I'd be much happier with our current system.
Sounds amazing, would like to see it at 15-20k tax free but it would be another step in the right direction. We've allready had a massive personal allowance increase and IMO this has to be taken into account. As that increase wasn't going to happen with no other changes.
It should also massively reduce the cost and complexity of collecting tax.
But it's just a report and not government policy or even pushing for it.
It should also massively reduce the cost and complexity of collecting tax.
But it's just a report and not government policy or even pushing for it.
Last edited:
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Nov 2002
- Posts
- 7,774
- Location
- Under the Hill
Don't you only go on emergency tax if you don't provide a p45 when you start a new job? I just moved companies and have been on the correct code since day 1 and have been paid correctly this month. The arguement that you could be charged more if you fail to provide a P45 seems moot. Just get your P45 to payroll.
Also, you are ignoring the effect of a 10k personal allowance. Figures below are illustrative but may not be exact:
Current System
Income 15k
of which subject to Tax 6.9k
Tax Charge 1.4k
Income subject to NI 8k
NI Charge 1k
Employer NI 1.1K (very aprroximate)
Take Home 12.6k
Tax Paid 3.5k
30%
Income 15k
Taxable 5k
Tax Charge 1.5k
Take Home 13.5k
Tax Paid 1.5k
I'm not sure what the proposal states about employer NI.
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2006
- Posts
- 12,130
Yeah, soopah; a report prepared by the by the 2020 Tax Commission which was setup by the ultra right-wing TaxPayers' Alliance which just by chance happens to have links with the insane American Tea Party movement 
.
.Oh, I agree, the behaviour of trade unions for example shows this.
Or trying to blackmail those who pay their wages with strike action and emotional blackmail with no objective content.
See I have found that pay is generally linked to a combination of skill and will (in terms of accepting things that others may not, and putting effort in to their overall performance). I've worked closely with directors and CEOs of large companies in various places where I've worked, and even for their salary and benefits, I wouldn't want their job, I like spending some time at home more than a few times a year. That position means I'm never likely to rise to that sort of level, because I'm not willing to make the necessary sacrifices, and the number of people who will isn't that great. Combine that with the skills and experience necessary, and the giving up of employment rights (via severance clauses) normally involved, and the pool of talent willing to work at that level in the private sector is really rather small, and hence commmands a high salary.
The problem is the top earners don't even pay 30% now there's so many ways to get around it:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/15/treasury-reveals-super-rich-tax-rates
This wouldn't generate enough income by itself and with no limit on council taxes would most likely lead to the working/middle classes paying much more tax. The alternative would be massive service cuts due to lack of tax revenues which would hit the poorest the most who use those services because wages aren't enough on there own.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2012/apr/15/treasury-reveals-super-rich-tax-rates
This wouldn't generate enough income by itself and with no limit on council taxes would most likely lead to the working/middle classes paying much more tax. The alternative would be massive service cuts due to lack of tax revenues which would hit the poorest the most who use those services because wages aren't enough on there own.
Suspended
- Joined
- 17 Oct 2011
- Posts
- 5,707
- Location
- Buckingamshire
Excellent idea! Bring it on! 
Associate
- Joined
- 7 Jan 2010
- Posts
- 886
Isn't that a separate problem though? One that should be fixed directly by law, not by hoping that they'll stop tax avoidance because the state is being more reasonable?
Terrible idea and misleading - exactly the sort of thing I'd expect from the British Tea Party. You can't just say what the taxes you're going to have without saying what public services you're going to fund or not. I imagine a flat tax rate of 30% will have a massive detrimental effect on government income, why won't they be honest and tell us how many teachers, soldiers, doctors, nurses etc they want to get rid of to fund these tax cuts.
A local sales tax will be a farce designed to promote harmful tax competition, exactly the same as in the USA. All it will mean is that no local authority will be able to raise enough money to adequately fund local services, which is of course what the British Tea Party wants; no government services at all.
A local sales tax will be a farce designed to promote harmful tax competition, exactly the same as in the USA. All it will mean is that no local authority will be able to raise enough money to adequately fund local services, which is of course what the British Tea Party wants; no government services at all.
Last edited: