Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
Earning more than people below you and helping society.
Tax.... what is everyone’s problem with it?
- Thread starter eviled
- Start date
Earning more than people below you and helping society.
I think a lot of this discussion has focussed on increasing tax rates at the £80k point rather than what happens when you earn more.
Also, if we're to covet what others have, that's a nice 3900x and 2080Ti you have there. I mean the cost of that system could have fed a family for a few months.
You'd be earning less if you're paying more tax as a result of a tax hike, which is what was being referred to.
There isn't necessarily a direct benefit and there are some drawbacks or disincentives that come into play too. Not to mention perhaps those tax payers lower down the scale should share the burden of any increase to income tax.
I'm not opposed, in principle, to paying a bit more. I am opposed to the idea that it is just fine to whack it all on the top end when you want to increase income tax. I'm also, just out of personal opinion, opposed to going beyond a 50% marginal rate at any level... once it gets to the point where they're taking the majority of what you earned after a certain level (or in this case between certain levels) then that just doesn't strike me as fair at all.
If you earned an extra 20k annual bonus but only get to keep 8k of it then that seems excessive to me... doesn't affect say the investment banker earning a 500k bonus much...they can keep the majority of their bonus as the marginal rate drops right back down after 125k but it's right at the sweet spot where it targets some very productive workers and makes their performance or overtime incentives much less effective.
This was the chart I was referring to in an earlier post: https://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance...t-shows-there-are-12-rates-of-income-tax.html
Unfortunately it misses the reduction in nursery fees at £100k and the 45% tax band kicking in at £150k. And the reduction/loss of Personal Savings Allowance at the 40% and 45% band respectively.
Unfortunately it misses the reduction in nursery fees at £100k and the 45% tax band kicking in at £150k. And the reduction/loss of Personal Savings Allowance at the 40% and 45% band respectively.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
It's not coveting what others have, where have I done that?
I earn about 55k per annum, and am happy to pay more tax than somebody earning half that. It benefits society, and I waste loads of money on tech stuff anyway.
Whoosh...
I know of plenty of people on PAYE earning these amounts or more. Also, you don't need to be on PAYE to pay this tax - a sole trader or partner will still pay near identical rates of tax on this income.
That's what discussions around earnings vs tax are all about. Not personally coveting, but socially speaking.
Interestingly, your marginal tax rate at £55k is the same as someone earning half of that so you're not yet into this slightly disproportionate burden of taxation.
To be clear, I'm not saying my taxes should be less nor that I should be paying less that someone earning less than me. My point is that taxation is skewed, earnings are skewed, wealth is skewed and simply saying higher earners should have their tax rates increased because they earn more than the average is really missing the point.
Soldato
My problem with paying more is that I don't feel what I'm currently paying is being spent properly.
https://www.statista.com/chart/4520/where-do-uk-taxes-go/
https://www.statista.com/chart/4520/where-do-uk-taxes-go/
Without wading through this in massive detail, my big issue with income tax is that my marginal rate is so much higher than somebody with a lower income to me. Also, by nature i rely on fewer public services than average and therefore my perception is that i get terrible "value".
A flat rate system would result in me paying much more tax than a lot of people, but at least it would seem fair.
A flat rate system would result in me paying much more tax than a lot of people, but at least it would seem fair.
I don't get this aversion to paying tax.
We need roads, schools, hospitals, transport, tech infrastructure, police, social services, etc. If only for the selfish reason that this will attract a stable working population to pay for the pensions of the older generation.
These need to be paid for and it is impractical for every single person to pay the same amount of tax, therefore some have to pay more. If you earn more and pay more tax you still have more disposable income than someone earning less.
This argument that taxes are badly spent by the government is absolutely flawed. The money is generally paying for services (eg. Social services, transport, diplomatic services, etc) that could never work commercially so how do we measure what is efficient or not (except with middle managers monitoring political metrics, which we all love to complain about) and for capital infrastructure projects that keeps the economy moving (eg. HS2) .
We need roads, schools, hospitals, transport, tech infrastructure, police, social services, etc. If only for the selfish reason that this will attract a stable working population to pay for the pensions of the older generation.
These need to be paid for and it is impractical for every single person to pay the same amount of tax, therefore some have to pay more. If you earn more and pay more tax you still have more disposable income than someone earning less.
This argument that taxes are badly spent by the government is absolutely flawed. The money is generally paying for services (eg. Social services, transport, diplomatic services, etc) that could never work commercially so how do we measure what is efficient or not (except with middle managers monitoring political metrics, which we all love to complain about) and for capital infrastructure projects that keeps the economy moving (eg. HS2) .
I don't think anyone in this thread has said anything about not wanting to pay tax. Just that it isn't right to increase tax rates from where they currently stand. Nobody has suggested they should be reduced.
Interesting that you point out the thing about taxes being used to pay for things that won't work commercially. That's correct, but I'm really confused why labour would want to ban private schools. I mean you're literally shifting the burden of cost away from the wealthy and to the taxpayer.
Permabanned
Everyone needs to pay more, we are living beyond our means, coupled with the huge Brexit tax we need to pay more taxes.
Soldato
Soldato
Alternatively, the government can cut public spending and start paying off it’s debts.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 30 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 28,928
Yeah mate, the previous 9 years of cuts have been so beneficial.
I'm sure everyone appreciates how wonderful things are now....
Soldato
I didn’t say that they’d cut the right things.
Absolutely this. We know quite a few people who send their kids to private schools. Most of them make huge sacrifices to do so and struggle to get by. If they raise taxes on the fees then some will simply have to put their kids back into the state system. Similarly a lot of private school parents travel a long distance daily to get their kids to such schools. If they are converted back to state schools then they will again just put them into local state schools instead. Their idea is ridiculous.
Associate
- Joined
- 19 Dec 2016
- Posts
- 244
the part where you said the benefit of taxing more means you earn more -its illogical. YOU earn first and then get taxed.. its not a lottery or interest system whereby you tax more and then someone happens to give you more money!
Permabanned
You said "what really gets me is that the more you earn the more % you pay in tax- you dont necessarily get any extra benefits"
If you earn more you take home more, you always benefit. If you meant you dont get any extra benefit for your taxes, then yes.