Proposed change to the tax system, 30% rate for all....
- Thread starter Spit
- Start date
£30,000 - £10,000 tax-free allowance = £20,000 taxable income.
£30,000 / 12 = £2500 /month.
£20,000 / 12 = £1666.67 /month.
30% tax on difference between total income and taxable amount = £500.
Total deduction of tax is £500 /month, meaning your take-home would be £2000 without any other deductions like student loan, etc.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Well the Guardian should know seeing as their owners have a few off shore accounts in the Caymens.
Soldato
- Joined
- 23 Oct 2002
- Posts
- 3,177
i would love to see that but we all know that the super rich only see tax as something the little man must pay.
im struggling to see how this will help the deficit but if most people will be better off then thats ok with me. if it helps keep the innovators here then its a bonus too. im hoping they expect us to spend the money in the economy to keep it afloat.
it doesnt solve the dilemma that local councils will try to milk us more. hasnt local council tax gone up like 400% over the last 10 years or something? this is something we need to keep an eye on, especially since they are closing down facilities left, right and centre yet asking for more from us.
Well if everyone gets more money, how will this help the deficit.
Great idea, can't see it happening though 
. The general public is too stupid to fully understand it and will just bitch and moan without understanding, not to mention the 1000's of fake jobs created in the public sector by having such an inefficient tax system will be axed. They are pointless jobs ofcourse, but no government likes seeing unemployment explode even if they are just hidden currently.
. The general public is too stupid to fully understand it and will just bitch and moan without understanding, not to mention the 1000's of fake jobs created in the public sector by having such an inefficient tax system will be axed. They are pointless jobs ofcourse, but no government likes seeing unemployment explode even if they are just hidden currently.
Theoretically by encouraging spending thereby increasing the economy, demand for jobs, profits made by companies etc thereby increasing tax revenues.
Not that I entirely believe it would work.
Permabanned
- Joined
- 28 Dec 2009
- Posts
- 13,052
- Location
- london
Probably end up paying more. The government would never agree to a new tax system change that would decrease revenues.
For someone like me on £30k this won't make that much difference. At the moment i pay 4,379.00 tax and 2,687.40 ni. If they increased the allowance to £10k with current system I would end up paying less tax than if they change it to the proposed system. That would mean that i pay £6k tax.
Increasing the taxable allowance will mean that low end earners pay less tax and decreases the tax amount to 30% will mean middle to high earners pay less tax. But all the people on the average salary and middle earners like myself will end up paying more or about the same.
said in another way, the only reason why the new tax proposal seems like you would be better off is because of the increase in tax allowance. Which if done with the current system would mean less tax than the proposed system for average earners.
I am all for lowering tax, but taxes changes tend to only go one way.
For someone like me on £30k this won't make that much difference. At the moment i pay 4,379.00 tax and 2,687.40 ni. If they increased the allowance to £10k with current system I would end up paying less tax than if they change it to the proposed system. That would mean that i pay £6k tax.
Increasing the taxable allowance will mean that low end earners pay less tax and decreases the tax amount to 30% will mean middle to high earners pay less tax. But all the people on the average salary and middle earners like myself will end up paying more or about the same.
said in another way, the only reason why the new tax proposal seems like you would be better off is because of the increase in tax allowance. Which if done with the current system would mean less tax than the proposed system for average earners.
I am all for lowering tax, but taxes changes tend to only go one way.
Last edited:
Very true also I can see them adding inner city tax and outer city tax.
In the US the people vote if a county\state wants to raise the tax.. that won't happen here..30% tax is a bad idea.
Because its not about scratting around for a few extra ££ from people. It is supposed to make it more worthwhile for you to go out and build wealth.
If you make £20,000 and pay 30% tax and I make £1,000,000 and pay 30% tax all is fair.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
So we just ignore the fact the State needs an income?
It means that people who form a company and pay themselves 10K a year and a dividend of 40k will pay the same tax as an employee on 50k.
Similarly someone who earns through capital gains of 50k per annum will pay the same tax.
Similarly someone who earns through capital gains of 50k per annum will pay the same tax.
Technically you are correct, but the way people see it in today current field of play is
I make £20K and pay 25%
YOu make £1,000,000 OMG !!!!!!! you should pay at least 50% if not more because its not fair that you earn more than me so you should get taxed through the eyeballs to make me feel better.
People should stop worrying about how much person A and B make and worry more about themsleves. If you earn enough to give you a decent enough living, pay bills put food on table etc then how much someone else earns and gets taxed is not your concern.
Most of the groups that shout about taxation don't have any real reasons for levying high tax rates on the wealthy other than to punitively punish them out of envy and jealousy.
I have yet to read one rational argument on why we should tax the successful to the point of driving them out of the country.
It would need less of an income if the DHSS crowd had jobs to go to and were incentivised to go to work rarther than sit at home watching Kyle et. al. on the telly.
Driving the innovators out of the country, the very same people that could create jobs in their businesses is not going to resolve that, neither is creating public service jobs out of thin air to simply cook the unemployment figures.
Great idea, can't see it happening though
Agreed. Don't forget people who have got themselves cushy public sector jobs are more likely to vote for the politicians they're being treated so nicely by.
Soldato
- Joined
- 8 Mar 2007
- Posts
- 10,938
Do you think we live in a perfect meritocracy? If the answer's no then can you not see that it is OK to question other people's pay, if you do you're mad.
