Should UK Troops Be Given Tax Breaks ?

Von Smallhausen

Von Smallhausen

Von Smallhausen

Man of Honour
Joined
1 Aug 2004
Posts
12,681
Location
Tyneside
I read in the press today that British troops continue to pay income tax while serving in war zones abroad. The US and Canadian military do not. If they serve in a war zone then they are exempt from income tax.

Whatever spin the MoD may place on British troops serving over in Iraq and Afghanistan in them having good conditions and the right kit, those of us with blinkers removed see that they clearly do not, hence they are calle ' the borrowers ' by US forces.

Many people in this country do an unlpleasant job at times, police officers, fire service, paramedics etc and they will see some bad stuff and come under attack. Look no further than inner city riots in recent years when all 3 services are targets, especially the police at the front line. They have the luxury though, of going home at the end of a shift.

British troops in, say, Afghanistan do not. They live in tent cities in stifling heat and with what many describe as sub-standard equipment. Their US colleagues are looked after in that they have things such as McDonalds and entertainment facilities on site, where the British rarely have. The US also does not pay income tax in a war zone.

So, British troops live in bad conditions, do not see their families, get 20 minutes free phone calls a week ( assuming the links work ) and they also pay income tax while a lot of other Allied forces do not. Is giving them an exemption from income tax so bad or too much to ask ?

According to reports, it would cost around 15 million to give them this tax break and that is not a lot of money in the scheme of things. I personally think they should get this perk considering the job they do and their ultimate price could be their life.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this ?

Please do not turn this into a I hate Bush / Blair / thread as that is not relevant here. British troops do not have the luxury of picking and choosing where they are posted.
 
If the Government can magic up money for disasters in other countries at the drop of a hat, then surely the least the could do is give our own lads tax breaks when they are in war zones abroad.

But, saying that, they if they can't even provide them with proper equipment..............................?
 
Telescopi said:
How do UK troops compare with US troops concerning standard salary and the bonuses they get for being on active duty?
Click to expand...

British troops are apparently better paid in terms of basic pay but combat allowances are very meagre in comparison with the US.
 
If woman popping out children out left and right, and get rewarded for doing so, the boys (and girls) doing their job, for their country deserves this surely?
 
Given the pittence that the average squaddie is paid to potentially put his life on the line yes they should be given tax breaks, along with this soldiers like the Gurkha's should be treated just the same as uk soldiers as far as things like pentions go but that is a little off topic.
 
Yes

A) there not in the uk and therefore should not pay tax.
B) there risking there lives for the government on a pitiful wage. Well it is considering when there on tour there often working 24/7
 
Its disgraceful that they dont get this already. Surely they must get some breaks though, for being out of the country for x amount of time? Even people who work on cross channel ferries can wangle that one.
 
I'd rather they just come home, then we wouldn't have to bother with combat allowances and we'd cut a large portion of our expenditure.
 
robmiller said:
I'd rather they just come home, then we wouldn't have to bother with combat allowances and we'd cut a large portion of our expenditure.
Click to expand...

They longer they are out there, the longer Jim Davidson spends out the country....
 
Poor pay, poor conditions and being shot at are not reasons to give them tax relief. They are reasons to increase their pay. However the simple fact that they are not in the country and therefore not using the services provided by the government IMO means they should not pay income tax while abroad. Although it could be argued that their dependants (if they have any) still benefit from these services.
 
Von Smallhausen said:
I read in the press today that British troops continue to pay income tax while serving in war zones abroad. The US and Canadian military do not. If they serve in a war zone then they are exempt from income tax.

Whatever spin the MoD may place on British troops serving over in Iraq and Afghanistan in them having good conditions and the right kit, those of us with blinkers removed see that they clearly do not, hence they are calle ' the borrowers ' by US forces.

Many people in this country do an unlpleasant job at times, police officers, fire service, paramedics etc and they will see some bad stuff and come under attack. Look no further than inner city riots in recent years when all 3 services are targets, especially the police at the front line. They have the luxury though, of going home at the end of a shift.

British troops in, say, Afghanistan do not. They live in tent cities in stifling heat and with what many describe as sub-standard equipment. Their US colleagues are looked after in that they have things such as McDonalds and entertainment facilities on site, where the British rarely have. The US also does not pay income tax in a war zone.

So, British troops live in bad conditions, do not see their families, get 20 minutes free phone calls a week ( assuming the links work ) and they also pay income tax while a lot of other Allied forces do not. Is giving them an exemption from income tax so bad or too much to ask ?

According to reports, it would cost around 15 million to give them this tax break and that is not a lot of money in the scheme of things. I personally think they should get this perk considering the job they do and their ultimate price could be their life.

Does anyone have any thoughts on this ?

Please do not turn this into a I hate Bush / Blair / thread as that is not relevant here. British troops do not have the luxury of picking and choosing where they are posted.
Click to expand...


In my opinion they should be given tax breaks, as they get very low wages compared to their counter parts. Also von you state the US army have mccy d's and so they do. But dont forget the british army is no where near the same size as the states, and as you say they take kit from the US which in my opinion makes us look like a joke, i say this is down to us not being able to afford the kit in the first place. When the army where based here, as far as i am aware they got all the best kit they could get their hands on (for example road side bomb proof jeeps - compared to the soft skins ones they use in iraq now) and the total troops at one point was 25,000 based in NI. Compare that to the total based in iraq and afgan now (which is less then 12000 fighting trrops and you will see that the british army is nothing compared to what it used to.

This is an example of what happens when you make cuts to save money.

Hope someone understands that, as i had to write it in a hurry
 
robmiller said:
I'd rather they just come home, then we wouldn't have to bother with combat allowances and we'd cut a large portion of our expenditure.
Click to expand...

Yeah and while we are at why dont we just get rid of the army? The army is there to fight wars and defend the country, its why people join it, not to sit around a camp doing dam all.
 
Chronos-X said:
As with any job, if you don't like the terms...
Click to expand...

Good job everyone isn't as mercenary as you.

How about giving a group of people doing a vital dangerous job a break, is it really too much to ask in your eyes?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom