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

amcluesent

FAO people who voted Labour in 1997, thanks a bunch for ruining everything for everyone else. I hope the ills of the world fall upon you and yours.

dopester

Dropping my objections to the tax-hike, and taking the rare opportunity to think selfishly for once... at least it might put further payment pressure on people already under strain paying mortgages on fancy high-end properties. The type Anne Ashworth is sweetening up for down-sizing.

The more incentivised people are to sell at the top, lowering their prices ever more, put pricing pressures on lesser properties,... it all feeds through back down lowering prices.

econo_2

Whilst you make some good points Max on 'Brown's later years' (his first two in no.11 were actually fairly prudent) let's not forget that many of the lavish choices people made are just that-choices. It's amazing how few people now wish to hold their hands up and admit they acted like complete fools and borrowed recklessly. Now of course as it becomes the day of reckoning everyone screams blue murder at everyone else!

The blame between government policy encouraging such activity and peoples' own personal responsibility to manage their incomes responsibly, lies probably somewhere in the middle. However, I would lean at government policy slightly and a disastrous dance with the American model which is now all too obvious.

Getting back to the original post with regard a 'top rate of 45% this means a raise for (off the top of my head ) around 1 in 10 right at the higher echelons of the income scale and that does not constitute 'middle class' .

pickles110564

fatpig wrote: »

The government wouldn't have announced the tax hike in the first place if it wouldn't raise more revenue.

Who do u think got us in this mess then? Broon should have been saving in the boom years to help soften the blow in the hard years.
If he did not work that out then what makes u think he will get it right this time.

Generali

pickles110564 wrote: »

Who do u think got us in this mess then? Broon should have been saving in the boom years to help soften the blow in the hard years.
If he did not work that out then what makes u think he will get it right this time.

This is all a part of a pretty dramatic swing to the left that seems to be going on across the Western world. I think that Governments are going to be giving plenty of cash to private businesses over the next few years and will be planning on 'soaking the rich' to pay for it.

It'll all end in tears.

pickles110564

But the rich will find ways not to pay any more Tax. So no-one will win except for the rich getting richer.

Voyager2002

pickles110564 wrote: »

But the rich will find ways not to pay any more Tax. So no-one will win except for the rich getting richer.

It's all a matter of degree.

When Thatcher reduced the top rate of tax on earned income from 80 to 60 per cent, the tax take rose. The rich found that it was no longer worth paying clever accountants, and going to a lot of trouble, to avoid paying a mere 60 per cent.

A top rate of 45 per cent is only the same as the basic rate of income tax in Italy. No-one is going to waste time and effort avoiding that.

chucky

pickles110564 wrote: »

But the rich will find ways not to pay any more Tax. So no-one will win except for the rich getting richer.

it's political not economically motivated. i get the impression that you preferred nothing should have been done.

the docks must be a very dangerous place at the moment with all the Somalian pirates about.

lostinrates

fatpig wrote: »

Nonsense, even when they've paid the 45% they will still take home at least 10 times that of someone who sweeps the streets and who works just as hard, if not harder.

This is not really so, though. There are some who work very, very hard and are paid a pittance, there are some who work very hard and get paid a lot. There are some people who don't work at all (by choice or otherwise) and (right or wrong, I'm not arguing that here) have an income, and some who smile and look pretty or play a game for a living and earn more than anyone else! Some jobs which require a long timeand some money or earning loss qualifying for...say nursing, have paid less than some jobs for which no qualifications are required, say estate agency.

How hard some one works or how much one enjoys their job is not necessarily reflected in their earnings.

lostinrates

OK, having calmed down somewhat, I still feel all is not right. I actually DO belive in a higher tax rate, morally, I just feel all current rates are wrongly placed, I think taking money from 'hard working families' to give in back in some form another is both costly and deceptive, confusing to most people and possibly designed to be so.

It is my opinion that the first higher rate tax point should be set higher to negate this,and then should be staged up at more than one point after this. I also think there should be some sort of recoginition as contributors of the highest tax payers (I mean really) big money if its likely to keep them paying tax here. I don't mean financial, a lot of those people are vain, we could just give them a badge saying 'I pay a lot of tax, worship me '.



However, my concerns about how this will impact on the City and international employment remain very, well, concerning, to me.