Not sure what you've even tried to say.
Don't even know what you've just tried to say
Budget 2018
- Thread starter 233
- Start date
Don't even know what you've just tried to say
Equitable taxation so people stop ******* moaning.
What is equitable taxation? I'm not trying to troll you btw
I just said flat taxation :\
Tax on diesels are an active tax imo, such that when the diesels stop being produced, we won't need it anymore. or Carbon in general.
I guess really it's more incentivisation tax.
So you mean a consumption tax? Which we already have tonnes of e.g. VAT, fuel duty, alcohol duty etc. Do you mean you'd like to replace our progressive income tax system with a flat rate system and then go after higher earners by taxing the pants off spending? You'd have to somehow levy different tax rates at the point of purchase according to income/wealth in order for your system not to be incredibly regressive, which as well as being a nightmare to implement would also **** the economy.
I agree taxation should be flat, would cost the country less as well due to the administrative burden of "progressive" tax.
Caporegime
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2008
- Posts
- 26,306
- Location
- Lorville - Hurston
So does all contractors suffer from 2020 then? No more doing contract work as programmers etc?
Are you going to give it back to the Government or a charity then?
It depends. If clients understand what IR35 really means and can draw up contracts for contractors that actually treat contractors as business to business engagements then nothing will change. As the onus is on the client to say whether you are captured or not by IR35 (punishable if they get it wrong), some clients may for an easy life or due to lack of understanding may declare you inside in which case they treat you as an employee and tax you at source and pay PAYE, employers NI and employees NI and pay you the outstanding amount or they could force to engage you via an umbrella.
A problem also arises because the way a client decides in the first instance if they have no competance to decide for themselves is to use the crap HMRC questionnaire (CEST) which has been proven to be not fit for purpose to decide whether you are captured or not. Unsurprisingly enough it captures people that have been deemed outside and also the other way round, where HMRC has challenged and investigated contractors that have passed the test.
Last edited:
This is my understanding as well. Decent clients should already be aware and complying with the requirements of IR35 so for them nothing should change, though I suspect many will use it as an excuse to force contractors to go staff and then just make them redundant at the end of a project.
Don't see why that would be the case.
Let's say a 10k car has a 15% tax attached, but a 100k car has a 55% tax attached.
The rich bloke could buy himself a normal 10k car (for £11.5k) and pay the same tax as the every-man, or he could still buy his Farrari and get taxed up the wazoo for it (paying £155k)
Meanwhile both paying a flat income tax.
I'm not suggesting I know anything about economics (I don't). Just can't see why you'd have to apply different rates based on the wealth of the individual making the purchase as you are saying.
e: Atm one thing I do know is that our income tax is both a) non-functional and b) not progressive due to (a).
The extremely rich in fact manage to pay less % income tax than the middle-classes. Sometimes almost none at all. Various documentaries have exposed the methods they use.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 6,003
- Location
- Location, Location!
Umm probably because if you are on minimum wage you barely pay any tax at all anyway.
Keep using manipulating statistics to suit your agenda though.
OK let's reframe that. Over £50k earners will get a tax break more than 600% of those on the average UK wage.
Tories still gonna Tory.
Soldato
- Joined
- 2 Apr 2009
- Posts
- 6,003
- Location
- Location, Location!
Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...
The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7.
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.
So, that's what they decided to do.
The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.
The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.
So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.
And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving).
The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving).
The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving).
The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving).
The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving).
And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving).
Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free.
But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!"
"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill!
And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.
For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible