Poll: Poll: Prime Minister Theresa May calls General Election on June 8th

[GAC]

speaking of nonsense

Neil Coyle, Labour candidate in Bermondsey and Southwark and a vocal critic of Jeremy Corbyn, says some of the policies his party is focusing on "are actually what people raise as their primary concerns and want to see addressed".
For example, rising knife crime in his borough. The blame for that, he says, lies in one place alone - the former home secretary turned prime minister, whom he says brought about significant cuts in police numbers.
"That is a fundamental failing and Theresa May is totally repsonsible."

so i guess the people going around stabbing each other have nothing to do with it, next up mays fault its raining today due to met office funding....

 

[dowie]

Does the Labour manifesto specify that they're going to raise taxes on the top 5% through income tax/NI alone? All I've seen is promises to not raise it for the other 95% of people.

I'm talking about their proposed increases in income tax at £80,000 - there are other tax proposals such as taxing school fees and medical insurance etc.. though those don't necessarily relate to the top 5%

https://www.ft.com/content/771f0abc-32fa-11e7-99bd-13beb0903fa3

Mr McDonnell, the shadow chancellor, promised this weekend that people earning less than £80,000 a year would pay no more income tax under a Labour government. The main opposition party plans to use Mr McDonnell, one of its most leftwing MPs, heavily in its election campaign over the next few weeks as it tries to close a yawning opinion poll gap with Theresa May’s Conservatives. In local council elections around Britain on Thursday, the Conservatives gained more than 550 seats and Labour lost at least 320. The income tax promise, which covers 95 per cent of workers, is part of a drive to establish the credibility of Labour’s economic policies, with opinion polls showing the Conservatives are more trusted on the economy. Labour had previously suggested income tax could rise for people earning more than £70,000 a year.

“The reason I’m saying this, is I want middle and lower earners to be assured that under Labour they won’t be paying any more taxes,” Mr McDonnell said. People earning above £80,000 would pay a “modest bit more”, Mr McDonnell said. He ruled out raising national insurance contributions or value added tax beyond an already announced plan to charge VAT on private school fees.

 

[Greebo]

No I'm not just talking about PAYE - I am however talking about income tax! The labour policy refers to raising income tax - this has nothing to do with whatever exploits exist (either in reality or in your head) for self employed people.

If you're going to talk about people paying themselves with dividends or things like entrepreneurs relief etc.. then that is a different subject and unrelated to Labour's proposed increase in income tax aside form perhaps that increase simply encouraging tax avoiding behaviour from those who can(such as self employed people).



This is nonsense as far as income tax is concerned.

If you're going to drop in random anecdotes about a specific case (such as Al Fayed) then it would be helpful to provide a link to that case else how do you expect anyone to reply to that point? I'd strongly suspect that this Al Fayed example isn't simply related to income tax and deductions.

Course it has everything to do with self employed and income tax. Most self employed reduce their taxable earnings to keep income tax low, esp below £100k so they dont lose their tax free allowance and pay an even higher proportion on the next £50k. Doesn't matter whether this income has come in from PAYE, rental properties, dividends, the end reckoning is income tax at 40% or whatever on their earnings.

So yes there are legal ways of reducing your income tax through dividends, entrepreneur relief, flat rate vat schemes, whatever. The end result is that the final pot which income tax is then applied to is smaller so their effective rate goes down.

So you have perhaps a situation where somebody earns £200k a year but pays tax on £100k per year, most of it at 40%. It then gets increased to 45% lets say so they have another 5k to pay. My point is they were perhaps only paying 20% on all their earnings so even with another £5k to pay, their overall rate of tax will still be much less than a PAYE employee on £70k per annum.

 

[dowie]

Course it has everything to do with self employed and income tax. Most self employed reduce their taxable earnings to keep income tax low, esp below £100k so they dont lose their tax free allowance and pay an even higher proportion on the next £50k. Doesn't matter whether this income has come in from PAYE, rental properties, dividends, the end reckoning is income tax at 40% or whatever on their earnings.

So yes there are legal ways of reducing your income tax through dividends, entrepreneur relief, flat rate vat schemes, whatever. The end result is that the final pot which income tax is then applied to is smaller so their effective rate goes down.

So you have perhaps a situation where somebody earns £200k a year but pays tax on £100k per year, most of it at 40%. It then gets increased to 45% lets say so they have another 5k to pay. My point is they were perhaps only paying 20% on all their earnings so even with another £5k to pay, their overall rate of tax will still be much less than a PAYE employee on £70k per annum.

And as I've pointed out I'm referring to income tax I've been quite clear about that - you're conflating that with dividends etc... the rate of tax on dividends is unrelated to this proposal by labour.

 

[jimjamuk]

Whilst reading the comments about the top tax rate payers paying more than any other part of the population I came across this

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...arners-now-paying-a-quarter-of-all-income-tax

It suggests the IFS are reporting top 1% are paying 27.5% of the tax take and the actual number of people paying any tax falls to 56%. Suprised if true

 

[Greebo]

And as I've pointed out I'm referring to income tax I've been quite clear about that - you're conflating that with dividends etc... the rate of tax on dividends is unrelated to this proposal by labour.

It is all income tax..............sigh.

Suggest you read the Income and Corporation Taxes Act 1988 (ICTA 1988) http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/1988/1/part/I/crossheading/income-tax/enacted

Income tax shall be charged in accordance with the provisions of the Income Tax Acts in respect of all property, profits or gains respectively described or comprised in the Schedules, A, B, C, D, E and F, set out in sections 15 to 20 or which in accordance with the Income Tax Acts are to be brought into charge to tax under any of those Schedules or otherwise.

Income is income. Some are excluded, some have relief, some have specific rates applied. Ultimately you end up with a "pot" which has basic and hgiher rate tax then applied to it no matter where your income comes from.

 

[Greebo]

Whilst reading the comments about the top tax rate payers paying more than any other part of the population I came across this

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...arners-now-paying-a-quarter-of-all-income-tax

It suggests the IFS are reporting top 1% are paying 27.5% of the tax take and the actual number of people paying any tax falls to 56%. Suprised if true

Im not. With the top 1% getting richer and richer and the gap to the rest of the country gets bigger, of course the total amount of tax paid by the top 1% is going to get bigger as a proportion.

 

[Mr Jack]

Everyone pays tax, income tax is just part of the picture. And as for the percentage paid by the highest X% this is simply a measure of inequality and the extreme proportion of economic output captured by a small proportion of the population.

 

[dowie]

It is all income tax..............sigh.

in case it wasn't clear before I'm talking about labour's proposal - in reference to this:

https://www.gov.uk/income-tax-rates/current-rates-and-allowances

not savings interest or dividends or entrepreneurs relief etc.. but increasing the rate of income tax for people earning over 80k - that is what is being discussed, I know you seem to want to divert to make some side point about self employed people and their deductions but that isn't really relevant to labour's proposal nor my post... as I've pointed out a few times.

my point was that I think high earners already pay enough (again I'm referring to the mentioned income tax policy here) and that if tax raises are needed we should focus on wealth and consumption

I'm happy to say I agree that self employed people dodging tax ought to be cracked down on but that is a separate point. I'll also point out that my statement was that wealth and consumption ought to be taxed... ergo I'd support raising the rate of tax on dividends! So if you're going to insist on highlighting things like dividend income as opposed to salary then you're in fact partially agreeing with the broader point I made in the first place that wealth ought to be taxed more rather than further penalising people who contribute the most to our economy

 

[chroniclard]

Someone who earns six figures already pays more income tax than most people earn.

 

[Greebo]

in case it wasn't clear before I'm
talking about labour's proposal - in reference to this:

https://www.gov.uk/income-tax-rates/current-rates-and-allowances

not savings interest or dividends interest or entrepreneurs relief etc.. but increasing the rate of income tax for people earning over 80k - that is what is being discussed, I know you seem to want to divert to make some side point about self employed people and their deductions but that isn't really relevant to labour's proposal nor my post... as I've pointed out a few times.

my point was that I think high earners already pay enough (again I'm referring to the mentioned income tax policy here) and that if tax raises are needed we should focus on wealth and consumption

I'm happy to say I agree that self employed people dodging tax ought to be cracked down on but that is a separate point. I'll also point out that my statement was that wealth and consumption ought to be taxed... ergo I'd support raising the rate of tax on dividends! So if you're going to insist on highlighting things like dividend income as opposed to salary then you're in fact partially agreeing with the broader point I made in the first place that wealth ought to be taxed more rather than income.

High earners through PAYE do pay 40% tax on a large chunk of their earnings granted and will pay more under labours proposal and overall they pay some of the highest overall effective rate of tax of anybody in this country. But no where does it say Labour are only targeting PAYE employees. They have said they are raising income tax to 45% (well leaked). Income tax is income tax and affects all people either self employed or PAYE employees.

I will try and find a figure on the number of people with income over £80k on PAYE vs self employed. I suspect that out of the top 5% in this country earning over £80k, the majority will be self employed and not PAYE employees.

EDIT: stats on this is ahrd to find but found this

A gross employee annual salary of £58,917 gets you into the top 5%.

so clearly there arent 5% of employees earning over £80k. In fact it takes £118,027 to get you into the top 1% employee wages club. So, as I stated earlier, the vast majority of people affected by a 5% increase on income tax are the self employed. Perhaps only the top 2% of employees will be affected looking at the above stats.

 

[dowie]

High earners through PAYE do pay 40% tax on a large chunk of their earnings granted and will pay more under labours proposal and overall they pay some of the highest overall effective rate of tax of anybody in this country. But no where does it say Labour are only targeting PAYE employees. They have said they are raising income tax to 45% (well leaked). Income tax is income tax and affects all people either self employed or PAYE employees.

I will try and find a figure on the number of people with income over £80k on PAYE vs self employed. I suspect that out of the top 5% in this country earning over £80k, the majority will be self employed and not PAYE employees.

You're the only one mentioning PAYE here - I'm simply talking about the labour proposals re: income tax.

 

[jimjamuk]

The tax laws are already too complicated - I dont know what they can put in place to give the self employed an effective 45% rate without making a right mess of it. If anything they should be simplifying tax so its clearer what everyone pays and reduce the perfectly legal loopholes. Merging NI and Tax into one would be a good start

 

[chroniclard]

My wife is technically self employed, a solicitor. Its not really a scam as she pays a large amount of tax. However there may be other so called self employed people who do play the system.

 

[Greebo]

You're the only one mentioning PAYE here - I'm simply talking about the labour proposals re: income tax.

So why do you seem to think income tax just affects employees???? Thats why i am mentioned PAYE. You seem to think the top 5% of the country earning over £80k are all employees when in fact its the opposite. And then I pointed out that a huge chunk of these 5% dont pay an effective invomce tax rate of 40% and a lot dont even pay 20% so perhaps them paying a bit more is no bad thing.

Yes, the one or two percent of employees earning top money will have 5% more to pay and already pay the highest rates of income tax per year so perhaps that isnt fair.

 

[Greebo]

My wife is technically self employed, a solicitor. Its not really a scam as she pays a large amount of tax. However there may be other so called self employed people who do play the system.

My other half has been self employed as well and paid huge amounts of tax but that doesnt mean to say it was a huge percentage of tax compared to her earnings. I suspect your wife will be paying the minimum that she legally has to pay been self employed and claiming for all the expenses she legally can which as an employee she can't. Hence on the same gross earnings she will be paying less tax than an employee on the same gross earnings.

 

[dowie]

So why do you seem to think income tax just affects employees????

I don't

Thats why i am mentioned PAYE. You seem to think the top 5% of the country earning over £80k are all employees when in fact its the opposite. And then I pointed out that a huge chunk of these 5% dont pay an effective invomce tax rate of 40% and a lot dont even pay 20% so perhaps them paying a bit more is no bad thing.

Yes, the one or two percent of employees earning top money will have 5% more to pay and already pay the highest rates of income tax per year so perhaps that isnt fair.

AFAIK this affects the top 5% of earners - at least according to Labour, I'm not sure where your 2% is coming from?

regardless of what % it affects I thought I'd been clear before - I'm referring to the labour policy of increasing income tax for amounts above 80k (whether this is paid via PAYE or not isn't really relevant)

this also has little to do with your side points about some self employed people making use of dividends, entrepreneurs relief etc..etc..

if labour want to propose raising the rate of tax for dividends then great, I'd support that - but that isn't being proposed and that isn't what my post related to...

 

[Gabbatek]

Manifesto annocdment with Corbyn and THE GENERAL PUBLIC which may is scared of.

https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbynMP/posts/10155359322363872

 

[GAC]

Manifesto annocdment with Corbyn and THE GENERAL PUBLIC which may is scared of.

https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbynMP/posts/10155359322363872

much like the labour ex councillor (lost her seat the other week) who while leading the local council implemented a policy of vetting questions before PUBLIC council meetings.

 

[chroniclard]

My other half has been self employed as well and paid huge amounts of tax but that doesnt mean to say it was a huge percentage of tax compared to her earnings. I suspect your wife will be paying the minimum that she legally has to pay been self employed and claiming for all the expenses she legally can which as an employee she can't. Hence on the same gross earnings she will be paying less tax than an employee on the same gross earnings.

I think the benefits are more on the firm side rather than hers, a lot of law firms seem to setup this way, she doesn't/can't really claim for much at all. In reality she isn't really self employed.