Unbelievable chutzpah

michaels

The hmrc (they just collect the money, they have no politcal axe to grind) study found increasing the tax rate from 40% to 50% resulted in negligable additional revenue as avoidance increased - I'm not sure what consequence moving it back to 45% has had but I don't think you can claim that increasing the rate to 50% did anything to help fix the deficit problem.

angrypirate

StevieJ wrote: »

Is that the same party that is 12% ahead in the polls?

Public opinion polls. Public are notoriously stupid and fickle.

Graham_Devon

StevieJ wrote: »

Over the majority of Labours reign we were not in dire straights

Evidence shows that 50% doesn't bring in more tax, and actually brings in less.

Would you prefer it was at a level that does the job? Or are you not concerned with the actual outcome and more concerned with the politics?

Wookster

StevieJ wrote: »

Over the majority of Labours reign we were not in dire straights

Of course. They'd abolished boom and bust.

What could possibly go wrong?

angrypirate

BobQ wrote: »

This may be true, but neither have the other parties.

Were Labour leading a coalition, similar meaningless sniping would have prevailed and the Tories would still not know what it stands for.

When the Tories were in opposition, in the early noughties they often had publicly available policies. After Labour repeatedly hijacked and watered down a significant number of these policies, Tories stopped releasing these policies to the public.

One prime example of this was the Tories ideal of taxing non-doms. Labour promptly stole this idea and then watered it down.

Labour have no ideas because their ideas got us in this mess to begin with.

StevieJ

michaels wrote: »

The hmrc (they just collect the money, they have no politcal axe to grind) study found increasing the tax rate from 40% to 50% resulted in negligable additional revenue as avoidance increased - I'm not sure what consequence moving it back to 45% has had but I don't think you can claim that increasing the rate to 50% did anything to help fix the deficit problem.

That is because it only lasted one year and income was shifted forward and backwards between financial years, this would not have happened if the rate had remained

Sainsbury’s, where major Labour Party donor Lord Sainsbury is still a shareholder, will bring forward bonus payments for its 1,200 highest-earning staff in a move that means they will escape paying the new 50p in the pound top tax rate.

http://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/article-1257705/Sainsburys-bonuses-brought-forward-avoid-Governments-50-supertax.html

Goldman Sachs is among a number of banks considering delaying UK bonus payouts until after the top rate of tax falls, according to the Financial Times
After April 6 the top rate of income tax will fall from 50% to 45%.

http://economia.icaew.com/news/january2013/goldman-sachs-considers-delaying-bonuses-for-tax-drop

StevieJ

Graham_Devon wrote: »

Evidence shows that 50% doesn't bring in more tax, and actually brings in less.

Would you prefer it was at a level that does the job? Or are you not concerned with the actual outcome and more concerned with the politics?

Where is that evidence?

angrypirate

StevieJ wrote: »

Where is that evidence?

HMRC figures conclusively show that the income tax received by the government for those earning over £150k a year dropped significantly the year that the 50% tax band was brought in. There is no argument in this. The argument though is why - defered tax? Taxpayers leaving the country? etc Who knows. Probably a combination of both and multiple other reasons.

Wookster

angrypirate wrote: »

HMRC figures conclusively show that the income tax received by the government for those earning over £150k a year dropped significantly the year that the 50% tax band was brought in. There is no argument in this. The argument though is why - defered tax? Taxpayers leaving the country? etc Who knows. Probably a combination of both and multiple other reasons.

Just to be clear Labour have criticised every single deficit reduction measure brought forward by the coalition and the only measure they put in place actually reduced the tax take.

That's how good their economic management is!

StevieJ

angrypirate wrote: »

HMRC figures conclusively show that the income tax received by the government for those earning over £150k a year dropped significantly the year that the 50% tax band was brought in. There is no argument in this. The argument though is why - defered tax? Taxpayers leaving the country? etc Who knows. Probably a combination of both and multiple other reasons.

Refer post 17