Tax raising ideas and fairness?

Mr_Mumble

Here's a novel idea: have the government spend less.

carolt

On themselves.

Ban expenses. That's what the salary is for.

bendix

1984ReturnsForReal wrote: »

Why not just borrow more??:whistle:

Why not just spend less?

StevieJ

bendix wrote: »

Why not just spend less?

Is that an echo

michaels

Pennywise - I definetly agree with both these proposals.

I am sure that the more taxation is simplified the less scope there will be for avoidance. The politics of envy brigade are so happy to see top rates of tax increased even if this actually brings in less revenue as tax is avoided or even jobs leave the UK (and yes this does matter to everyone as these same rich people who are leaving will no longer be having building work done or haircus or spa days). Simplify taxation and avoidance becomes much more obvious.

While we are at it I would also bring in index linked CGT on principal residences. The supply of land is fixed so those profit made from earning from its increase in value should be shared by al not those who got their first - after all we don't let the oil companies keep all the revenue from pumping oil.

The index linking of all interest payments is also long overdue, othewise even inflation acts as a tax on savers.

There was a comment on here about how changing the rules would be unfait on those who had already made pension saving decisons based on the current rules. I am sure this is a fair point but there are always winners and losers from every tax change and changes can be brought in incrementally to mitigate this problem. I notice the removal of tax relefi on pension credits being brought in is a great ruse to introduce double taxation - pay tax when you earn the money, put it in a pension and then pay tax again when you receive it - how can anyone argue this is fair or will encourage pension saving?

Pennywise wrote: »

So, we know that everyone's taxes are going to rise in the next few years to pay for the recession. We also know that there is a lot of ill feeling about tax evasion/avoidance, whether it be through legal loopholes, careful planning or deliberate hiding of income. Rather than tinkering around the edges changing a few minor things and messing around with tax rates, the population is braced for rises so it would be a good time to make some fundamental changes. There are two relatively simple changes I'd like to see which would simplify and transform the tax system and which would be fair and beneficial to lower and mid earners.

1. Free transferability of personal tax allowances, i.e. the personal allowance and capital gains tax allowance, and basic rate bands, between spouses (and those in legal partnerships), so that couples can legitimately benefit from their own allowances without having to resort to the subterfuge of transferring assets between themselves so as not to lose out. It is crazy that two people earning £40k each less tax than if one stayed at home and the other earned £80k. This could be achieved by a simple election to be signed by both to agree to the transfer of all or some allowance from one to another. This is simple, easily understandable and easy for the couple to do.

2. Scrap employees NIC and raise the basic rate of income tax to something like 30% instead. Contrary to what people think, NICs aren't ringfenced to pay for the NHS or state pensions - it's just another tax and goes into the same pot. Previously, politicians have been scared of the publicity of the resultant hike in basic rate tax rates, but now may be the time to do it when the public are already braced for change and bad news. Average and low earners wouldn't notice a difference in their pay packets as the combined tax & NIC is around 30% anyway. Massive amounts of money could be raised from people with investments, i.e. income from property, pensions, company dividends, etc that currently avoid paying NIC as NIC is only charged on earned income not investment income. Again, a simplifying measure - little impact on lower income earners but a proportional impact on higher earners - at the moment, lots of people "arrange" their affairs to produce investment income rather than earned income, thus saving themselves NIC.

Both these relatively simple ideas would solve some of the obvious inequalities in the system. Obviously, the numbers would have be crunched to arrive at the revised thresholds, rates, allowances, etc., and clearly the pensioners tax allowances would have to be reviewed likewise.

StevieJ

While we are at it I would also bring in index linked CGT on principal residences. The supply of land is fixed so those profit made from earning from its increase in value should be shared by al not those who got their first - after all we don't let the oil companies keep all the revenue from pumping oil.

How ridiculous, at certain times people coudn't afford to move :eek: I take it you don't own a house ?I do think that tax on rents for primary residence should be scrapped to enable people to rent out their own house and rent somewhere else without being penalised.

mbga9pgf

StevieJ wrote: »

While we are at it I would also bring in index linked CGT on principal residences. The supply of land is fixed so those profit made from earning from its increase in value should be shared by al not those who got their first - after all we don't let the oil companies keep all the revenue from pumping oil.

How ridiculous, at certain times people coudn't afford to move :eek: I take it you don't own a house ?I do think that tax on rents for primary residence should be scrapped to enable people to rent out their own house and rent somewhere else without being penalised.

Any measusre to increase tax should be matched by cutting benefits. You cant just have one without the other.

This is the message the tories have been telling for a while now, so those that rely on state benefit for survival (as a lifestyle choice) better get working...

StevieJ

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Any measusre to increase tax should be matched by cutting benefits. You cant just have one without the other.

This is the message the tories have been telling for a while now, so those that rely on state benefit for survival (as a lifestyle choice) better get working...

What is your point in relation to my post ?

1984ReturnsForReal_2

mbga9pgf wrote: »

Any measusre to increase tax should be matched by cutting benefits. You cant just have one without the other.

This is the message the tories have been telling for a while now, so those that rely on state benefit for survival (as a lifestyle choice) better get working...

You do realise that there are millions who cant afford life on benefits already...

Do you also realise there are millions who cant afford to live no matter what they do work wise?


But hey... Ignorance is bliss...

mrposhman

mramra wrote: »

A better idea would be cameras for motorists to photograph the cyclists that routinely jump red traffic lights, mount pavements etc. thus endangering themselves and fellow road users/pedestrians. :T

Will that include taking photos of themselves pulling out in front of cyclists, not bothering to look in mirrors so they don't see cyclists and turning without indicating?

Will it also include taking pics of pedestrians who just walk out in front of cyclists or who decide to walk down bus lanes for no good reason too?