Labour's £113,000 tax rise for people on £80k

John_Smith_2019

M0ney wrote: »

I think you've forgotten about their commitment to end the industrial scale tax avoidance by companies like Amazon, Google and others. The monies involved there are in the tens of billions every year.

Probably announced on Twitter, without the slightest sense of irony.

BakingC

Are we doing to ignore the fact that it won't be 113k each. People on 80k will have a minor increase. Not even the top 1% will pay much more the top 0.1% will be forking out for this (bankers etc which is the purpose behind the wealth taxes as income hasn't increased in the last decade but wealth divide between the top and the average has)

In order to achieve a fairer society the changes made over the past decade to Corp tax need to be reversed and something done about tax avoidance.

Also things like increase in ISA allowances I would suggest should be reviewed as the people needing help couldn't save 5k a year let alone 20k (they probably don't even have 20k income due to zero hour contracts and a minimum wage which isn't a living wage) so when it was all marketed at helping people the only people it actually helped were those already better off who could previously max out the ISA or now max out this one.

Herzlos

westernpromise wrote: »

There are 1.3 million who are, starting with people on £80k a year (Labour MPs earn £79k). So that works out at £113,000 in tax per year

You understand how tax works, right? People on £80,001 won't pay noticeably more than they do now. The additional tax will scale (because it's a percentage, right?) So those earning £1,000,000+ will be paying the lions share of it.

Boosting minimum wage also puts more money through the economy (give someone a pay rise and they'll spend it) and back into the pockets of the millionaires.

It's economically illiterate and scare mongering to think this will hurt anyone on £80k.

Plus, all MPs earn £79k, not just labour. Many will have additional jobs bringing them above the threshold.

Thrugelmir

M0ney wrote: »

I think you've forgotten about their commitment to end the industrial scale tax avoidance by companies like Amazon, Google and others. The monies involved there are in the tens of billions every year.

Amazon's global profit was £10 billion in 2018. Unsure how unpaid tax could run to tens of billions.

What makes me laugh is that Walmart is actually a more profitable company than Amazon yet never hits the headlines. (Most of Walmarts profit is actually made in the USA).

Crashy_Time

John_Smith_2019 wrote: »

This is actually what I find interesting.
How can a UK govt tax a company like Facebook?
If the company is based abroad and has no assets in the UK.
If its entire business activity is based on offering access to a website, it has no money coming through UK banks, etc?

The only options I can see are putting sanctions on the company.
ie No UK business or public body is allowed to use it. The UK govt probably couldn't stop the public visiting the website.

They can take control of the internet, by providing free internet, then block companies that don`t pay a fee/tax for access to the UK public?

prowla

The idea that the choice is a low-tax Tory government is a laugh.

Thrugelmir

prowla wrote: »

The idea that the choice is a low-tax Tory government is a laugh.

Not tax that's the worry. It's the increase in the National Debt. The servicing costs are going to mount.

DiggerUK

I'm voting Labour. We will know who gets the bragging rights on December 13th.

Then the &hit part of democracy will be revealed. That's the rule that proves we won't all get what we voted for..._

Herzlos

Crashy_Time wrote: »

They can take control of the internet, by providing free internet, then block companies that don`t pay a fee/tax for access to the UK public?

They can do that now anyway, sort of. They've been blocking access to piracy sites for a few years.

westernpromise

Herzlos wrote: »

You understand how tax works, right? People on £80,001 won't pay noticeably more than they do now.

Married PA removed, higher tax on dividends - yes they will.

The additional tax will scale (because it's a percentage, right?) So those earning £1,000,000+ will be paying the lions share of it.

Doesn't work at any level. The top 5% start at £70,000 in fact
https://www.independent.co.uk/voices/top-five-percent-salary-uk-wealth-tax-rich-average-a9213406.html
and meanwhile
To be in the top 1% of income tax payers in the UK (i.e. to be among the 310,000 individuals with the highest income), a taxable income of at least £160,000 is required. £236,000 is required to be in the top 0.5% and nearly £650,000 to be in the top 0.1%.
Someone on £236k has £136k left after tax now. Take another £113k off them and that's a 90% tax rate. Who's going to bother with that job if the state steals it all? Same applies at all levels.

How much money after tax does your hate group actually have?

Boosting minimum wage also puts more money through the economy (give someone a pay rise and they'll spend it) and back into the pockets of the millionaires.

It comes out of the pockets of others who'd have spent it anyway. It makes nil difference except to make it more expensive to employ people. So fewer people will be employed.

It's economically illiterate and scare mongering to think this will hurt anyone on £80k.

It's clearly terrifying to have the truth pointed out. £733 billion doesn't grow on trees. A trillion here and a trillion there and soon you're talking serious money. Labour will be coming after everybody including you.

The top 1% of earners earn 14% of the money but pay 33% of the income tax. 43% of earners pay no income tax at all but expect the state to which they pay no income tax to give them lots of free stuff.

You need to grasp something really, really simple. If you want the free stuff to continue to be paid for by a tiny minority, you need to allow that minority to prosper. If you don't, the money runs out and you live in Venezuela.