Ed Balls calls for emergency tax cut

grizzly1911

StevieJ wrote: »

Amazon do that for me

And Ebay - Car Windscreen wipers from that industrial hub Alderney whatever next.

Pete111

grizzly1911 wrote: »

As you well know, it is a regressive tax that disproportionately affects the poor.

Funny how we switch to a consumption tax away from Income Tax just when income starts starting to go off a cliff.

Must be catch all those pensioners too, in our aging little Island, don't want them leaving without paying more tax once more.

Funny how you seem to forget the large increases in Income tax and NI (ie another form of income tax) + lowering of tax bands in the last 18 months...

We are ALL paying - rich and poor alike.

Graham_Devon

So, to bring the thread back to the point.

Would a tax cut, at the moment, be a good idea?

Remember, we are still spending more than we bring in. Cutting tax will add more debt to existing increasing debt.

Personally, I don't think it would be a good idea. This isn't a political statement.

Really2

StevieJ wrote: »

Amazon do that for me

The best one I saw was one of the silver bugs they brought silver from jersey and avoid VAT.( I think he said he had 2000oz.)
I then pointed out the max import cost limit, He said he purchased an oz a day

Kennyboy66

grizzly1911 wrote: »

Not being difficult - I follow both points but don't they contradict each other?

Isn't the latter consumer doesn't pay the VAT?

Surely the seller has to keep a careful balance to ensure taht they do not become a net recipient and alert the rozzers.

The last bit was more the general principle of VAT collection.

Of course you need to be careful - broadly for a small trader VAT paid has to be roughly 20% of gross profit (before wages etc).

To get round the problem, people will simply buy some of there materials for cash.

Graham_Devon

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

'the IMF also warned of “significant” risks that growth will remain feeble and unemployment “unacceptably high”.

..... the IMF said that in such a scenario, the economy should be stimulated with a combination of more “quantitative easing” from the Bank of England and “temporary tax cuts” for businesses and low-income households.

That's some nicely picked cherries.

Heres what the article has to say:

In its recent analysis of the UK economy, the International Monetary Fund said it expected weak growth and rising inflation to be "largely temporary" and suggested the coalition was right to proceed with its deficit reduction plan.

Kennyboy66

Graham_Devon wrote: »

So, to bring the thread back to the point.

Would a tax cut, at the moment, be a good idea?

Remember, we are still spending more than we bring in. Cutting tax will add more debt to existing increasing debt.

Personally, I don't think it would be a good idea. This isn't a political statement.

Why did the IMF suggest it may be necessary then ?

We won't solve the deficit by cuts alone - there has to be economic growth.

What if the tax cut was targeted towards employers taking on additional staff - would that still be a bad idea.

Really2

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Why steal food when there is no VAT on it anyway (uncooked that is)?

If you want a loophole then consider this;

you don't have to be VAT registered if your turnover is less than £60k (ish). Hence when you have your central heating replaced (say 4k including boiler), you may find your plumber wants you to pay direct for the boiler, radiators, copper pipe etc (which you have to pay VAT on) and pay him for the labour etc (you won't pay VAT on as his turnover is consequently less)

That's not a VAT loophole that using a non VAT registered trades man (presumably turning over less than £64K)?

The £64,000 limit is there to help start offs be more competative.
EG They can get a bit more margin out of personal users.
That is negated when dealing with a VAT registered business unless their cost comes out at the same cost as an Ex VAT quote.

The arguments pointless, there is no VAT avoidance the rich have to hand the poor do not have.
But using non VAT registered people is no vat avoidance or a loophole???

chucky

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

Why did the IMF suggest it may be necessary then ?

We won't solve the deficit by cuts alone - there has to be economic growth.

What if the tax cut was targeted towards employers taking on additional staff - would that still be a bad idea.

seeing that a large majority of our growth was consumer led, cutting people's ability to spend will just push things one way and it won't be the pretty...

cuts that go too far probably won't work, there needs to be some consumer driven growth too.

Graham_Devon

Kennyboy66 wrote: »

What if the tax cut was targeted towards employers taking on additional staff - would that still be a bad idea.

But thats NOT what is being talked about by Ed.

He's obviously talking about a reduction in VAT.