Lowering Taxes

Carl31

stator wrote: »

Given brexit uncertainty it's certaily a good idea to cut corporation taxes.


You never know how much a tax cut costs because you never know how much of a boost it will make to the economy, increasing other tax receipts.
You can't even know how much it costs when looking back

i agree with this

Corporation tax is such a small amount compared to other taxes. Getting companies to increase their wages bill would be better from a tax perspective

movilogo

surely we are already a low tax economy, do we need to go further?

No we are not.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_rates

A tax reduction is welcome. It will lead to more spare money to spend on hobbies etc which will improve economy.

lisyloo

Zero_Sum wrote: »

Tbf whilst they reduced basic income tax by 2%, they increased NI also by 2%
So yes its a bit sly in terms of claiming taxes have gone down, the net effect is virtually nil

It took me 2 years of 1% pay rises & increases in personal allowances before my net pay had actually increased after Camerons lies.

Pensioners don’t pay NI, so maybe a bung to the elderly electorate?

zagubov

One of the things the US gets right is it doesn't allow brain drains. People aren't incentivised to move to low tax jurisdictions because money earned overseas is still potentially taxable, and renouncing citizenship is expensive.

If you owe them taxes, they make it difficult for you to run away from your commitments.

spadoosh

Our tax rates arent low.

Tax revenue as a proportion of GDP has pretty much always been around 36% of GDP. Doesnt matter if it comes from the rich poor or middle, its always 36% of GDP.

EU average is 36%
South Korea 33%
Canada 32%
Eire is 31%
Australia 28%
US 27%

And then youve got some massive economies (Relative to size and population), the likes of singapore, hong kong and taiwan all hovering around the 15% mark. Some of the world biggest business centres coincidentally.

Zero_Sum

lisyloo wrote: »

Pensioners don’t pay NI, so maybe a bung to the elderly electorate?

Im well aware of that

lisyloo

Zero_Sum wrote: »

Im well aware of that

Why did you say the net effect is virtually nil then?
We have a lot of pensioners who would be affected.
Some who are incentivised to work after state pension age.
That’s not virtually nil.

Sailtheworld

lisyloo wrote: »

Pensioners don’t pay NI, so maybe a bung to the elderly electorate?

It shows how sensitised to high taxes we are when getting to keep more of your own money is referred to as a bung.

lisyloo

Sailtheworld wrote: »

It shows how sensitised to high taxes we are when getting to keep more of your own money is referred to as a bung.

Don’t get me started on IR35.
Employee taxes but no employee rights or benefits and costs of being economically mobile.
Coming to the private sector near you.

edgex

sevenhills wrote: »

Surely cutting taxes just moves the money around, it does not boost anything?
I can understand the corperation tax argument, when companies can choose to have their head office in any low tax country. But do we need to cut it further?

Not their Head Office, just their registered office

Which businesses would move actual operations (employment) to the UK if Corporation Tax rates were reduced?