What extra taxes would you volunteer to pay?

Money_Muppet

John-K wrote: »

What is strange is how the facts seem not to be well known. There are often posts on here saying how the conservatives have given tax breaks to their friends, but what breaks I wonder do people thin have been given?

Top earners were much better off under Labour than they are now, in myriad ways, yet people seem to just assume that the opposite’s the case.

Well they cut the 50p top rate of tax for a start.

lisyloo

Cuts in corporation tax

https://www.figurewizard.com/list-uk-corporation-tax-rates.html

aj23_2

Cut foreign add to 0.1%. There you go, there's £10b or so freed up.

I'm in favour of a flat rate of income rate tax, and raising the threshold on which you start to pay. You'd find more people would pay what they should as it sounds more reasonable to them. I don't think it's fair on anyone to be paying more than a third of their income in tax, and it's usually wealth creators and business owners who are penalised for actually creating jobs in which people in turn pay taxes.

I'd abolish inheritance tax, as it's already been taxed in many forms already.

I'd reduce the salaries and pension contributions of the public service elite as well, too much waste Public service is vocational, not for lining pockets.

Uxb

aj23 wrote: »

I'd abolish inheritance tax, as it's already been taxed in many forms already.

Nope - this is the usual misconception with IHT
Most of that due in IHT is on wealth obtained through rises in the deceased's own property and their investment portfolio.
One's own house is not subject to capital gains tax on sale at any time and many share/OEIC investments have not been sold/re bought so again have not been subject to being CGT'd.
So neither of these things have ever been taxed
An expensive work of art kept in the family would be another example of something who rise in value has never been taxed but would be taxed by IHT (all assuming the estate is over the IHT threshold)

In fact IHT is one of the very few taxes where a lot of the tax is due on indeed "things" that has never been taxed before. Unlike normal day to day tax such as VAT, insurance premium tax, council tax etc which are all levied on your post tax income accumulation.

GreatApe

Car tax is too low it should be £520 per year rather than £140 per year.
Roughly 32 million cars so £12.16 billion in additional tax.
Could be used to cut taxes elsewhere

John-K_3

Money_Muppet wrote: »

Well they cut the 50p top rate of tax for a start.

It only existed for a few months as a political trap at the very end of The Labour government.

It is disingenuous to look at a decade of 40%, a few months of 50% then years of 45% and describe the 45% as a cut.

westernpromise

Uxb wrote: »

Nope - this is the usual misconception with IHT
Most of that due in IHT is on wealth obtained through rises in the deceased's own property and their investment portfolio.
One's own house is not subject to capital gains tax on sale at any time and many share/OEIC investments have not been sold/re bought so again have not been subject to being CGT'd.
So neither of these things have ever been taxed
An expensive work of art kept in the family would be another example of something who rise in value has never been taxed but would be taxed by IHT (all assuming the estate is over the IHT threshold)

In fact IHT is one of the very few taxes where a lot of the tax is due on indeed "things" that has never been taxed before. Unlike normal day to day tax such as VAT, insurance premium tax, council tax etc which are all levied on your post tax income accumulation.

You're not expecting to pay any IHT, clearly. If the above were valid arguments for it, it would be charged on all estates regardless of values, not just on those in Conservative seats in the south-east.

aj23_2

GreatApe wrote: »

Car tax is too low it should be £520 per year rather than £140 per year.
Roughly 32 million cars so £12.16 billion in additional tax.
Could be used to cut taxes elsewhere

Yeah because car drivers don't pay enough taxes, fees and charges already. You're penalised for driving car in every possible way.

Money_Muppet

GreatApe wrote: »

Car tax is too low it should be £520 per year rather than £140 per year.
Roughly 32 million cars so £12.16 billion in additional tax.
Could be used to cut taxes elsewhere

Car tax should be inverse to local public transport provision. City center living with plenty of public transport and car tax should be high. Rural living with poor public transport; tax should be lower.

aj23_2

Money_Muppet wrote: »

Car tax should be inverse to local public transport provision. City center living with plenty of public transport and car tax should be high. Rural living with poor public transport; tax should be lower.

That's not fair at all. Just because you live somewhere rural, doesn't mean you would necessarily use public transport. Most people cross county borders to get to work.

A lot of people drive to a train station too, so they are using both private and public.