'Should high earners pay 50% tax?' poll discussion

zygurat789

from each according to their means, to each according to their needs

ducky2004

zygurat789 wrote: »

from each according to their means, to each according to their needs

More like From each according to their inability to escape the tax, and to each according to their wits to explot the system.

dottiepeas

I'm not a high earner, to be honest- it doesn't really affect me, so for me, I don't think it's massively unfair that those earning significantly large sums of money are taxed more. Surely if you earn more, then you can afford to give more tax? I thought higher earners are only taxed using the higher rate on one part of their earnings? Like they get taxed the standard rate up to earnings of £40k or something?, and then anything they earn over that, is then taxed at the higher rate?

I also don't think this means people will lack ambition in life! As most of us probably wish we could earn over £150k, but in reality most people would never reach that mark anyway. I think the downside of this policy, would be that large businesses might think about relocating somewhere out of UK if they had lower income/business taxes elsewhere! Which inturn might cause more economic problems!...

Well, one less holiday a year for the high earners isn't that bad!? :rotfl:

zygurat789

High earners pay a smaller percentage of their income in tax than do low earners

Horace_Wimp

zygurat789 wrote: »

from each according to their means, to each according to their needs

Lol, if you're going to dig up an old Marxist quote then at least get it right!

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"

And the old answer of course:-

My ability is zero and my needs are £1000 per week.(adjusted for inflation:D)

tuggy12

zygurat789 wrote: »

High earners pay a smaller percentage of their income in tax than do low earners

Back to school for you my friend:rolleyes:

It's a very simple calculation, the more you earn the more income tax you pay as a percentage and that's even before Darlings changes for next year.

ducky2004

I think that poster is trying to quote those lefty research that included VAT in the calculation and then forget to count tax credits freebies.

e.g. Income 16k, Personal allowance 6k, Taxable 10k @ 33% (NI+IncomeTax) @ £3300. Then add VAT paid on skyTV, Wii, DVD, Plasma Screen, total tax might work out to be >41 %. But of course, if those luxuries were not spent and tax credit included, the effective tax rate might be around 15% ish..

High earner may earn 100k, pays maybe 33k tax, and then invest most of the money, don't spend so much on full skyTV packages etc, so, total VAT paid might not be much and he might ended up paying just 39% of the income.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs"
Oh..let's gets a few millions from Africa in then as their obviously have greater needs (don't even have clean water, can't read/write) while British poorest can still afford Premium SkyTV packages and Wii Console and most can at least read/wriite (greater ability).

Neilhmtn

I think the last three posters have been extremely unfair towards zygurat789 - as far as I'm aware s/he's correct - high earners do pay a smaller percentage of their income in tax than lower earners in this country, and correcting his/her misquotation of Marx doesn't change that fact.

It's certainly not as simple as tuggy12 says, because you have to take VAT into account when taking account of a person's annual liability to tax, so income doesn't really indicate that much. Richer people spend less as a proportion of their income than poorer people, because it's easier to save more, as is presumably obvious to people who come to this site.

As it happens, I don't object to this tax rise, because I don't think the tax burden in this country is very fair at all, and certainly not as fair as some people here seem to think.

zygurat789

A. I never quoted Marx, that was someone else's mistake.
B. You'll be telling me next that higher earners pay tax at 40%
`which will also be a mistake - its 32.5%

IT_nerd

zygurat789 wrote: »

Tax 20p
NIC 11p
Reduction in tax credit 39p
(to look after two perimary aged boys because she has been abandoned and the CSA et seq can't do anything)
Total 70P

I cannot see how you get 45p

It's pretty simple when it comes to matters like this.
You can't complain about money you didn't earn getting taken away because, shock horror, you didn't earn it.
You can decide not to better yourself and still get the said free money, but there will be a point when you're earning enough that tax credits don't matter.
Also, that 39p in the £ is a made up statistic.
That means if she was earning £100K now, then she would have been getting £39,000 in tax credits.


C.I’m NOT a high earner. 50% is too high.

Fixed rate 25% for everyone. Poor included.
If they want more money, earn it.