Personal allowance lost over £100k

DVardysShadow

Rothschild wrote: »

Why would anyone not want to AVOID all the tax that they possibly could?? :eek::p:T


Avoiding tax is 100% LEGAL, and so everyone who has isnt a dimwit avoids paying as much tax as they possibly can!

Evading tax is illegal, however the OP hasn't asked anywhere about how to evade, only how to legally avoid.

On this, I don't even think he was trying to avoid tax, he was just trying to avoid being overtaxed. Just as any of us would raise an issue if our tax code was changed from 647 to BR

Rockporkchop

DVardysShadow wrote: »

The OP could indeed, on £100k, pay cash for quite a nice car. So his car loan is actually as a result of his choice, unlike for many here. It is someone on that money suggesting that finding the money for car finance is a hardship which I find so incongruous.

That's what I was trying to explain, he might not actually have the disposable income to pay cash for a nice car. Or on the other hand, he might have got such a good loan interest rate, it wasn't worth paying cash for the car. Or he might be leasing the car, in which case you are required to pay monthly instalments.

I think you are making the mistake of looking at the OP's net salary, mentally deducting your own outgoings and thinking that there would be a huge amount left over to enjoy. This is not going to be accurate as someone on a high salary will usually have outgoings commensurate with that salary.

SueC_2

For all we know, the OP could be donating the vast majority of his earnings to charity, leaving himself with the bare minimum to survive on.

Or, he could be supporting an (ex)wife, dependent parents, fifteen children, or a cocaine habit.

The thing is... Why does it matter to us, and why on earth would any of us consider it relevant to his original post?

bootman

Why do people think a salary of £100k is so big it's not? Take home of around £5k. I hardly call that extreme, especially if that is perhaps the household income just one earner. No handouts in any shape or form on top either.

I was reading on another thread a single mum with 2 kids claiming all she can in benefits gets £26k a year. Now that is obscence as the tax the poor poster is paying for probably working a 70 - 80 hour week pays for one of these lazy why work people, lets just breed.

UnderPressure

bootman wrote: »

Why do people think a salary of £100k is so big it's not? Take home of around £5k. I hardly call that extreme, especially if that is perhaps the household income just one earner. No handouts in any shape or form on top either.

I was reading on another thread a single mum with 2 kids claiming all she can in benefits gets £26k a year. Now that is obscence as the tax the poor poster is paying for probably working a 70 - 80 hour week pays for one of these lazy why work people, lets just breed.

I have thanked you for this post because on the whole I agree with it completely but...................

So far as the woman claiming 26k a year and before the self righteous brigade invade this thread AGAIN I am not defending her in anyway and she should be made to somehow contribute to her own hildrens upbringing......................

I do have to say that it IS the fat cats with the huge pay and the second and third homes that have essentially made the UK such a bloody expensive place to live, although on the face of it 26k a year may seem an awful lot for doing nowt, I bet she isn't driving round in a Bentley and drinking champagne every night, by the time she has paid rent, c tax, (which will bit essentially be included in this figure) then utilities, kept her kids in clothes, put food on the table blah blah blah there probably is not an awful lot left.........

How much do you think would be a "reasonable" amount for her and her family to live on wothout having to resort to beans on toast 7 nights a wekk, the government cant be saying "oh we should all be feeding our kids well with 5 of this a day and 5 of that a day" and then not provide the means for benefit claimants to do that???

I dont wish to get into a huge debate over this, but seriously, houses costs lots of money rented or owned, so does keeping the kids in clothes and shoes and putting food on the table, as said PLEASE dont get me wrong I am not defending her actions and surely just throigh a bit of self pride she would want to contribute something financially towards her childrens upbringing but what else can the government do? The UK is a HUGELY expensive place to live 26k a year with 2 kids is probably around about breadline anyhow when you way it up.

Wasnt going to post this and will probably end up wishing I hadn't but I live in the real world, I know how much it costs to kepp the roof over my families heads and feed them and clothe them and still pay day to day bills with hardly any help from ConDem apart from Child Benefit and a very small amount of tax credits hardly worth having TBH, 26k really is not a lot in the year 2010

Right bring it on I have donned my tin hat and armour and am ready for the verbal abuse

bootman

UnderPressure wrote: »

I have thanked you for this post because on the whole I agree with it completely but...................

So far as the woman claiming 26k a year and before the self righteous brigade invade this thread AGAIN I am not defending her in anyway and she should be made to somehow contribute to her own hildrens upbringing......................

I do have to say that it IS the fat cats with the huge pay and the second and third homes that have essentially made the UK such a bloody expensive place to live, although on the face of it 26k a year may seem an awful lot for doing nowt, I bet she isn't driving round in a Bentley and drinking champagne every night, by the time she has paid rent, c tax, (which will bit essentially be included in this figure) then utilities, kept her kids in clothes, put food on the table blah blah blah there probably is not an awful lot left.........

How much do you think would be a "reasonable" amount for her and her family to live on wothout having to resort to beans on toast 7 nights a wekk, the government cant be saying "oh we should all be feeding our kids well with 5 of this a day and 5 of that a day" and then not provide the means for benefit claimants to do that???

I dont wish to get into a huge debate over this, but seriously, houses costs lots of money rented or owned, so does keeping the kids in clothes and shoes and putting food on the table, as said PLEASE dont get me wrong I am not defending her actions and surely just throigh a bit of self pride she would want to contribute something financially towards her childrens upbringing but what else can the government do? The UK is a HUGELY expensive place to live 26k a year with 2 kids is probably around about breadline anyhow when you way it up.

Wasnt going to post this and will probably end up wishing I hadn't but I live in the real world, I know how much it costs to kepp the roof over my families heads and feed them and clothe them and still pay day to day bills with hardly any help from ConDem apart from Child Benefit and a very small amount of tax credits hardly worth having TBH, 26k really is not a lot in the year 2010

Right bring it on I have donned my tin hat and armour and am ready for the verbal abuse

I was ready for the abuse with my post, I usually start to type then delete!

I can't find what I was reading this morning, it was on debate the economy thread, for some reason that topic comes and goes for me to view. It was paying all her housing costs and council tax costs,

pinkichiban

That's the problem with this country, rich people doing everything legal in their power to avoid paying tax.

Legal yes, moral? I'll leave that for you to decide.

UnderPressure

pinkichiban wrote: »

That's the problem with this country, rich people doing everything legal in their power to avoid paying tax.

Legal yes, moral? I'll leave that for you to decide.

Geesh I suggest you re-read this whole thread "PROPERLY!!!!!!"

The op was trying to do no such thing, crikey what is it with people here why do you only seem to read the parts you want then make a big judgement and a ridiculous reply..........................

SueC_2

pinkichiban wrote: »

That's the problem with this country, rich people doing everything legal in their power to avoid paying tax.

Legal yes, moral? I'll leave that for you to decide.

That's right, all those with... ooo, I dunno... ISAs... Child Trust Funds... Premium Bonds... or caught shopping duty-free at the airport are to be derised and condemned.

Because of course, it's only the amoral rich people who do those things.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

hermanmunster_3

a it is a pain. I like working but am trying to decide whether to work less to get under 100k or work lots more to get above 120k