What should be most heavily taxed? Poll discussion.

N9eav · 5 July 2007 at 8:58AM

What worries me is that the Gov't makes billions on ciggies. Now if too many people give up smoking and the die-hards get their supply from Europe... who makes up the shortfall in tax income?????

It's got to come from somewhere......... Petrol, income tax.....

stinkypete_2 · 5 July 2007 at 9:41AM

Taxing consumables such as fags and booze doesn't make sense both are taxed to the hilt and smoking is on the decline it's just an example of the public jumping on current media trends.

Do people really think that a few pence on these types of items a is going to build us more prisons and hospitals especially as society is trying to be healthier.

We should be looking at ways of sorting out and restructuring and fair Income Tax system so that the ultra rich pay (such as £250K per year) more and lower income pay less (such as £10K).

Also a tax on saturated fats I think would be beneficial.

Finally, stop loop holes where companies don't do their share. Did you Know A major roadside automobile repair and insurance company (not mentioning any names, but like the colour yellow) are paying minimum tax this year because of a loop hole "he's a very nice tax man!"

halia · 5 July 2007 at 11:17AM

It confuses me that people think it is morally 'right' to tax people at a higher rate just because they earn more.

DH already pays MORE tax than someone on a lower salary - ie the actual amount of money the government takes of him is higher. Why should he be punished for earning above the basic tax rate? Where is the incentive to get a good job if you suddenly have to pay a higher proportion of your wages over to the government?

I'd go for a flat rate taxation system. Whatever you earn you pay 25% tax. end of story, I'm also convinced that a simpler system would save millions in terms of admin at the inland revenue! Can you imagine how many people thay have to emplor to manage a 3 tier tax system, with all the associated letters etc every time it changes.

Please dont' start foaming at the mouth about the filthy rich - they dont; pay taxes the same way ordinary people do anyway.

andyinlondon · 5 July 2007 at 12:35PM

what about taxing MPs so that they end up with exactly the same income as the lowest paid person in their constituency.

then just watch the minimum wage go up !

McSaver · 5 July 2007 at 3:00PM

Tax the rich more and more and they will shift to places like monte carlo where they dont pay income tax.

I voted for the fags because they are bought by complusive smokers. Plus I dont smoke so its wouldnt affect me.

[Deleted User] · 5 July 2007 at 3:18PM

I would create a 50% income tax boundary for those on more then 70K.

Id also hit the tax relief on things like private equity.

I would also hit those that are doing "well" out of the welfare society such as multiple childed single mums that earn 37K as an incentive to raise the future criminals of the country.

Coveredinbees!!!! · 5 July 2007 at 3:31PM

How did I guess the environmental mumbo jumbo would figure so prominently in this thread. We already pay far far to much for petrol in this country yet these wallys want to make it even more expensive. Let me guess I should use public transport, what public transport?

I'm guessing 68% don't smoke?

The only thing I have left to try and forget about it all is a few beers, soon I won't be able to afford do that either!!

hldomster · 5 July 2007 at 3:55PM

Why isn't "the rich" on that list? :P

Seriously though, one of Adam Smith's maxims of taxation was that taxes should be made on ability to pay, therefore I believe that income tax should be where the source of most taxation comes from, as it is based on income and that's a fairer way. High taxes on petrol and heating etc are regressive, as it may well cost the same for a rich or poor family to get to work or heat their homes, but in real terms it will be much more expensive for the poor family, as this tax is not based on income.

The Lib Dems were onto something when they proposed to scrap the starting rate of tax and introduce a new super-high band of 50% on earnings over £100k.

halia · 5 July 2007 at 4:12PM

okay someone PLEASE explain to me why it is 'fairer' to pay proportionally more just because you have worked hard to earn more?

If we really need more taxation then I'd raise it on 'luxery items', things that damage the environment - and that is just sound economics coveredinbees. At the moment we don't pay the full cost of polluting industries at source, it is hidden amognst other things and so it is very difficult to draw any conclusions as to what extent people are willing to pay for pollution etc.
So for example when an oil tanker spills we do have to pay for the clean up somehow, if petrol tax was raised to account for cost of clean up, R&D into alternative sources of fuel, cost of road building, cost of any landfill/pollution clena up cause dby mtoer manufacturing. This would give a clearer picture of the true costs.

I'm all for transparancy in taxation - by that I mean a tax system in which the average person finds it relativly easy to see that the 50p a litre tax on petrol goes towards the above mentioned things.

They may think the tax is too high but it is at least a straightforward cashflow with ringfenced funds.
(this is a simple example btw so don't poke too many holes in it)

I'd cut tax on essentials - heat, water, food etc.

As said before I'd have a flat rate income tax - then people have every motivation to earn more.

[Deleted User] · 5 July 2007 at 4:33PM

They work harder do they? hmm I wonder

What should be most heavily taxed? Poll discussion.

Comments

Categories

Get our FREE Weekly email full of deals & guides - and it’s spam-free