What extra taxes would you volunteer to pay?

westernpromise

And what would all these taxes actually cost you? I'd be happy to pay more tax on my inheritance above £100 million, for example.

Money_Muppet

westernpromise wrote: »

And what would all these taxes actually cost you? I'd be happy to pay more tax on my inheritance above £100 million, for example.

Fuel costs would increase, I doubt I can get them down much more anyway.

I'll end up with a big inheritance tax bill at some point.

Hopefully in the future I'll be paying a ton on the income from shares outside my ISA. But I'm not there yet!

westernpromise

Oh right, so in the future you're prepared to pay more. You do realise nothing stops you paying more right now? It wouldn't be hard. Just send say £1,000 to HMRC with a covering letter saying you aren't taxed enough.

Every little helps. HMRC are currently chasing me for £300 in NI they say I haven't paid from 2011. I have, or at least if I haven't neither has anyone else who's on PAYE where I work. But they think £300 makes a difference, otherwise they wouldn't chase it, so don't kid yourself that an extra few quid from you won't be appreciated.

Money_Muppet

westernpromise wrote: »

Oh right, so in the future you're prepared to pay more.

I'd pay any of those taxes if they were to become applicable.

Same as I pay all the taxes that are applicable now. Unfortunately I too am PAYE so don't have to opportunity to find or use loopholes to avoid paying my fair share.

I'm not going to send £1000 to the taxman to cover the £300 you owe them. Stop moaning and cough up.

tara747

westernpromise wrote: »

Our resident leftists are always full of great ideas for new taxes to be applied to other people but not to themselves. So let's explore this a bit. What new taxes are you prepared to pay that you don't have to pay now? Propose one.

Rules: it has to be one you actually stand a chance of paying. Saying you'd pay a tax on unicorns or Ferraris or your £10 million house is not volunteering to pay anything at all if you have none of these things.

Mine is that I would volunteer to pay a square footage tax on my house as long as 1/ it was applied nationallt at the same rate and 2/ it replaced SDLT. There are 27 million households in the UK and SDLT raises £14 billion so that's roughly £500 per household. I'd pay £500 a year to avoid paying £100k to move sideways.

So what would you pay, or can you only think of taxes you wouldn't have to pay ?

Er, your SDLT/land tax proposal would *save* you money...

westernpromise

tara747 wrote: »

Er, your SDLT/land tax proposal would *save* you money...

That's right - if I moved, which I may not.

The majority of the suggestions so far have been for more taxes on other people or theoretical taxes in the future. Labour supporters' enthusiasm for higher taxes seems to be limited to higher taxes on people other than themselves. Nobody has volunteered to overpay their existing tax liability, which is of course tax avoidance.

Herzlos

westernpromise wrote: »

So Oxfam had a really good chief executive, did they?

No idea. They spend a lot more on admin than I'd like, but I can't comment on the CEO.

What they need is retired FTSE CEOs prepared to work for nothing who know what good governance and expense control look like.

Nothing stopping them taking the job and refusing their salary. That they don't indicates there isn't a queue of top class CEO's waiting to work for free.

Herzlos

westernpromise wrote: »

You reckon the mugs handing over £12 to Trussell so they can spend the whole lot on Trussell staff, the actual food being donated by someone else, even know that goes on? I bet you they don't.

It's pretty clear what they do and that it involves some cost. I doubt they know the exact breakdown but it's hardly relevant,

In the same way I would be amazed if individual donors to "housing charity" Shelter know that it has never housed one solitary person,

We've been over this before. Shelter doesn't claim to provide housing themselves, but have still helped millions. That you think that is worthless shows your own bias.

westernpromise

The tide of history is overtaking you, I'm afraid. The lid is being lifted on these rackets one by one - Kids Company, Oxfam, the whole chugging scandal - frankly, when even the Grauniad admits there's a problem
https://www.theguardian.com/voluntary-sector-network/2018/feb/14/oxfam-scandal-uk-charity-regulation-charity-commission-underfunding
- you know you've got a problem.

Pixie5740

I would be happy for my estate to pay more IHT because I will be dead and I won't care. Although in reality I would like my will to read, "Being of sound mind I spent the lot." If people's estates had to pay more IHT it might encourage people to spend money whilst they are still alive rather than hording it for a rainy day but never knowing when to put the umbrella up. Furthermore, my money will probably be of more benefit to my children (and possibly grandchildren one day) whilst I am still alive.

I live in Scotland where council tax has already been increased for bands E+ and income tax is going to increase for higher and additional rate tax payers very soon. I don't think that increasing income tax is going to bring significantly more money into Revenue Scotland's coffers. A lot of people I have spoken with are going to pay more money into their pensions. I don't think increasing income tax generates more revenue I think it just makes tax avoidance more attractive. Tax avoidance schemes that previously might have been border line in terms of benefit to the individual tax payer suddenly become more viable.