!!!!!! - Clown to raise the top rate of tax to 45%

chewmylegoff

fatpig wrote: »

Not much of an argument really , is it? If what you say is true, then they won't be paying any of the 40% they should currently be paying, so why worry if it's increased to 70%?

likewise why bother, if the objective is to raise more tax.

would be like raising duty on tobacco if no-one smoked.

mewbie_2

'Some bloke on the radio' was saying this morning that the 45% tax was a smokescreen to hide other tax increases. So all those rubbing their hands with delight over this increase may have missed the fact that NI is going up. For everyone. That is the big story, and the big steal. Once again GB and chums perform the magicians distraction trick - look at this headline, while robbing normal working people throughout the payscales from bottom to top.

It seemed to me, although I am no economist, that the banks got something like 50 billion, whereas we get a few pence off in VAT (that is largely clawed back through the petrol duty increases), and can look forward to even more taxation (as if it were possible).

Feeling short changed? I am.

fatpig_2

chewmylegoff wrote: »

likewise why bother, if the objective is to raise more tax.

would be like raising duty on tobacco if no-one smoked.

Exactly. Your presumption that all the fabulously rich will avoid this tax hike by using clever accountants is clearly wrong. The government wouldn't have announced the tax hike in the first place if it wouldn't raise more revenue.

chewmylegoff

fatpig wrote: »

Exactly. Your presumption that all the fabulously rich will avoid this tax hike by using clever accountants is clearly wrong. The government wouldn't have announced the tax hike in the first place if it wouldn't raise more revenue.

yeah it will raise a bit more (treasury's own figures suggest a measley £1bn), but it's not going to penalise the "fat cats" who are not people on £150k, but the types who hand over their £35k non-dom fee and then get back to buying some more yachts.

the tax rise is clearly a political measure. if they really had any intention of doing it, then they would have done it now and said that the circumstances justify them breaking a manifesto promise. the annoucement has been made to pacify certain people, including the left wing of the labour party.

the dailymash summed it up pretty well: "Gordon Brown will today gamble on you buying things you don't need because they are slightly cheaper, and then believing that rich people are going to pay for it all."

iltisman

fatpig wrote: »

Exactly. Your presumption that all the fabulously rich will avoid this tax hike by using clever accountants is clearly wrong. The government wouldn't have announced the tax hike in the first place if it wouldn't raise more revenue.

No it wont raise much money but it keeps the commies happy.

KennyVader

fatpig wrote: »

Exactly. Your presumption that all the fabulously rich will avoid this tax hike by using clever accountants is clearly wrong. The government wouldn't have announced the tax hike in the first place if it wouldn't raise more revenue.

Don't need a particularly clever accountant, just slot a limited company in to the contracts and pay 100% dividends in place of salary or existing part salary, part dividends route. Only a few hours of accountant time a year to throw together simple one employee ltd co accounts each year.

I genuinely think the government is too stupid to realise this.

mewbie_2

KennyVader wrote: »

just slot a limited company in to the contracts and pay 100% dividends in place of salary or existing part salary, part dividends route.

I just hope no one mentions the IR35 thingy, or we'll be here all night.

Whoops.

neverdespairgirl

fatpig wrote: »

Not much of an argument really , is it? If what you say is true, then they won't be paying any of the 40% they should currently be paying, so why worry if it's increased to 70%?

It's worth paying a lot more to tax planners etc to avoid 70% than it is to avoid 40%. There are also people who probably don't mind paying 40%, but do mind paying 70%.

Generali

neverdespairgirl wrote: »

It's worth paying a lot more to tax planners etc to avoid 70% than it is to avoid 40%. There are also people who probably don't mind paying 40%, but do mind paying 70%.

You've hit the nail on the head - the higher the tax, the more it's worth paying to avoid the tax.

Under Thatcher, the cuts in the top rate of tax led to a higher tax take at the top marginal rate.

StevieJ

Generali wrote: »

You've hit the nail on the head - the higher the tax, the more it's worth paying to avoid the tax.

Under Thatcher, the cuts in the top rate of tax led to a higher tax take at the top marginal rate.

The rate was 98% I believe 83% + 15% on investment income, ridiculous.