Your browser isn't supported
It looks like you're using an old web browser. To get the most out of the site and to ensure guides display correctly, we suggest upgrading your browser now. Download the latest:

Welcome to the MSE Forums

We're home to a fantastic community of MoneySavers but anyone can post. Please exercise caution & report spam, illegal, offensive or libellous posts/messages: click "report" or email forumteam@.

Search
  • FIRST POST
    • MSE Karl
    • By MSE Karl 5th Nov 19, 5:01 PM
    • 144Posts
    • 46Thanks
    MSE Karl
    MSE Poll: Should the higher 40% tax band start at 50,000?
    • #1
    • 5th Nov 19, 5:01 PM
    MSE Poll: Should the higher 40% tax band start at 50,000? 5th Nov 19 at 5:01 PM
    Poll started 5 November 2019
    Currently, for most in England/Wales/Northern Ireland, you pay annual income tax like this (Scotland is a little different)

    - Up to 12,500 is your tax-free PERSONAL ALLOWANCE.
    - Above 12,500 and up to 50,000, the BASIC 20% tax is taken.
    - Above 50,000 and up to 150,000, the HIGHER 40% tax is taken.
    - Above 150,000, the TOP 45% tax is taken (and you've lost your personal allowance).

    While there's a huge number of variables, if you could only move the 40% rate (41% in Scotland) to be fair to individuals and provide revenue for the nation, which of these is closest to where you'd place it?



    Did you vote? Are you surprised at the results so far? Have your say below.

    If you haven't already, join the forum to reply.

    Thanks!
Page 1
    • jasdev
    • By jasdev 5th Nov 19, 6:34 PM
    • 85 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jasdev
    • #2
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:34 PM
    • #2
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:34 PM
    This is such a difficult question to answer without the core underlying data: which of those would maximise the tax take for the exchequer? Without knowing that, I'm really not happy to cast my vote at all, as it's just pure speculation.
    • Calpol4life
    • By Calpol4life 5th Nov 19, 6:52 PM
    • 82 Posts
    • 201 Thanks
    Calpol4life
    • #3
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:52 PM
    • #3
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:52 PM
    ‘I’m non binary’ get outta here!
    • Calpol4life
    • By Calpol4life 5th Nov 19, 6:54 PM
    • 82 Posts
    • 201 Thanks
    Calpol4life
    • #4
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:54 PM
    • #4
    • 5th Nov 19, 6:54 PM
    Interesting lots more males earning 50k plus
    • fallen121
    • By fallen121 5th Nov 19, 10:01 PM
    • 819 Posts
    • 706 Thanks
    fallen121
    • #5
    • 5th Nov 19, 10:01 PM
    • #5
    • 5th Nov 19, 10:01 PM
    Interesting there is so little discussion about this.

    I live in Scotland where Wee Jimmy Krankie seems to think anyone earning over 30k is richer than they should be and is taxed accordingly. I'm not just talking about income tax. Council tax was hiked recently and Band E upwards were stuffed with extra charges even though a large percentage of the population own one.

    I wish we could have the same tax bands as the rest of the UK. We already have colder weather and shorter summers so pay more for our utilities.

    The SNP need the Greens to stay in power and thanks to them some of the major cities such as Edinburgh and Glasgow will soon be introducing workplace parking taxes and encouraging employers to pass this onto their staff. For those of us in rural areas, the public transport to get to work simply doesn't exist. We have no option but to cough up for this as well.

    How much MORE can they tax us whilst telling us that we voted to leave the UK? I didn't. 56% of us didn't. But Wee Jimmy Krankie doesn't give a stuff about democracy. And when she DOES force us to leave, they'll use that as an excuse to tax us even more
    • Ectophile
    • By Ectophile 5th Nov 19, 10:16 PM
    • 3,920 Posts
    • 2,579 Thanks
    Ectophile
    • #6
    • 5th Nov 19, 10:16 PM
    • #6
    • 5th Nov 19, 10:16 PM
    Obviously, the 40% tax bracket should always be slightly more than whatever I'm earning. Taxing the rich is good, so long as I'm not classified as "the rich".
    If it sticks, force it.
    If it breaks, well it wasn't working right anyway.
    • Alijj
    • By Alijj 6th Nov 19, 10:04 AM
    • 2 Posts
    • 0 Thanks
    Alijj
    • #7
    • 6th Nov 19, 10:04 AM
    • #7
    • 6th Nov 19, 10:04 AM
    I do not think you can judge someone earning over 50k, not everyone has it easy earning that amount. My husband is a self employed courier for a well known company, he works 12 hour days and Saturdays. He works incredibly hard for his money and deserves every penny, he runs around all day delivering. Having a high tax bracket means the government are the only winners, if you work hard then do not punish. I think it should be 20% for everyone!
    • One-Eye
    • By One-Eye 6th Nov 19, 1:00 PM
    • 48,469 Posts
    • 7,412,337 Thanks
    One-Eye
    • #8
    • 6th Nov 19, 1:00 PM
    • #8
    • 6th Nov 19, 1:00 PM
    I am amazed at what this poll is revealing. With a massive and growing national debt, but also massive and growing complaints about austerity, only 8.6% think income tax for the "rich" should be increased. The 68.4% who think income tax for the "rich" should be reduced should perhaps say whether they favour more public spending cuts, increased budget deficit and national debt or increasing other taxes.

    At the time of posting, of 10275 votes cast, 887 favoured tax increases, 7026 favoured tax cuts. "Rich" is defined here as earning over 50,000, and while some might object to this term being used, I think "not poor" may sum it up better.
    • zagfles
    • By zagfles 6th Nov 19, 5:34 PM
    • 14,791 Posts
    • 13,275 Thanks
    zagfles
    • #9
    • 6th Nov 19, 5:34 PM
    • #9
    • 6th Nov 19, 5:34 PM
    I am amazed at what this poll is revealing. With a massive and growing national debt, but also massive and growing complaints about austerity, only 8.6% think income tax for the "rich" should be increased. The 68.4% who think income tax for the "rich" should be reduced should perhaps say whether they favour more public spending cuts, increased budget deficit and national debt or increasing other taxes.

    At the time of posting, of 10275 votes cast, 887 favoured tax increases, 7026 favoured tax cuts. "Rich" is defined here as earning over 50,000, and while some might object to this term being used, I think "not poor" may sum it up better.
    Originally posted by One-Eye
    I think it reveals how out of touch some journalists, politicians and pressure groups are with ordinary people. It's quite revealing that a majority of those earning under 50k want a rise to the threshold, ie a cut not to their own taxes, but to the taxes of those richer than them! Especially amongst women, 67% of women earning under 50k want the threshold raised, and 59% of men.
    • loony767
    • By loony767 6th Nov 19, 9:03 PM
    • 14 Posts
    • 21 Thanks
    loony767
    Rather than penalizing people on what they earn, why not scrap income tax altogether and just have a sales tax on everything. That way the richest who spend more will pay more tax than the poor who don't have the money to spend in the first place
    • jasdev
    • By jasdev 6th Nov 19, 9:33 PM
    • 85 Posts
    • 18 Thanks
    jasdev
    loony767, the reason for not doing that is because the poorer spend a greater proportion of their income than the rich, so VAT and other sales taxes hurt them more. The rich tend to save and invest their wealth (tried to buy a property in London recently?) and there's only so much one can spend on essentials in any given week (unless one has champagne breakfasts, foie gras lunches and caviar & Pol Roger dinners daily).
    • ruperts
    • By ruperts 6th Nov 19, 9:47 PM
    • 2,685 Posts
    • 5,242 Thanks
    ruperts
    I think it reveals how out of touch some journalists, politicians and pressure groups are with ordinary people. It's quite revealing that a majority of those earning under 50k want a rise to the threshold, ie a cut not to their own taxes, but to the taxes of those richer than them! Especially amongst women, 67% of women earning under 50k want the threshold raised, and 59% of men.
    Originally posted by zagfles
    Or, a cut not to their own taxes, but to the taxes of their future selves. Since a lot of people will be thinking their wages will go up in the future, they don't want that higher rate tax level coming down too much. I would imagine in reality almost everyone will have voted to make the higher rate bracket start 5k or 10k above what they ultimately see themselves earning at their peak.
    • dodgy
    • By dodgy 7th Nov 19, 10:57 AM
    • 155 Posts
    • 49 Thanks
    dodgy
    I think the most enlightning thing this poll is highlighting is that

    23% of females responding earn > 50k
    52% of males responding earn > 50k

    Although I don't suspect that the readership of this site is really a representative slice of the UK population.
    • newatc
    • By newatc 7th Nov 19, 11:16 AM
    • 502 Posts
    • 639 Thanks
    newatc
    I'm retired and my income is a lot less than 50k so not personally affected. It does however seem to be that someone earning 50k (with likely mortgage costs and perhaps children) .can not be classified as rich.
    So the 40% should start at much higher level but progressively increase as we get into the megasums of the Director's Club.
    Last edited by newatc; 07-11-2019 at 10:38 PM. Reason: typo
    • Gavin83
    • By Gavin83 7th Nov 19, 1:04 PM
    • 6,410 Posts
    • 11,164 Thanks
    Gavin83
    I am amazed at what this poll is revealing. With a massive and growing national debt, but also massive and growing complaints about austerity, only 8.6% think income tax for the "rich" should be increased. The 68.4% who think income tax for the "rich" should be reduced should perhaps say whether they favour more public spending cuts, increased budget deficit and national debt or increasing other taxes.
    Originally posted by One-Eye
    I'm not at all surprised at what it's revealing. People feel that they shouldn't pay more tax but others should, therefore reaping all the benefits while suffering none of the negatives.

    How good 50k is will depend a lot on your circumstances as well. In some northern village you could live like a king. Living in London you'd probably just about get by, it's not a great salary. Assuming you were single you probably wouldn't even be able to afford your own flat on that, you'd have to house share. Not exactly the hallmarks of a rich person.
    • Cormedy
    • By Cormedy 11th Nov 19, 9:39 AM
    • 3 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Cormedy
    Non-binary earning
    Pleasantly surprised to see that Non-Binary readers are more than twice as likely to earn above 50k as male readers. Wasn't expecting that.

    Anyone else unsure which bracket they are in? My annual salary is 51k but because I salary sacrifice 16% towards pension savings, my actual salary is considered closer to 42k. Thus, I don't pay higher rate of tax. Perhaps the categories should be amended so that they divide the readers into categories such as "I am female and do not pay higher rate"..."I am female and pay higher rate" etc as I assume this will be closer to what they are asking. Also, I would be interested in the views people have about the 2% bracket for NI for those paying higher rate. I imagine there would be appetite across the board to ditch that and have everyone pay the normal NI rate.
    • Cormedy
    • By Cormedy 11th Nov 19, 9:50 AM
    • 3 Posts
    • 1 Thanks
    Cormedy
    Sales Tax
    I see some benefits on this. We need to tax consumption rather than earning because that is ultimately what destroys our planet more. However, most people seem to be convinced that the only thing driving the economy is foolish spending by the consumer so they'd fight against this.

    In actuality, people lowering their consumption and investing it would power an economy better so a sales tax might encourage this too.
    • MastG
    • By MastG 12th Nov 19, 11:05 AM
    • 75 Posts
    • 59 Thanks
    MastG
    I earn over 50k but 12k is non taxable (pension and charity GAYE).
    I voted to lower to 45K, but wouldn't mind national insurance being raised in the higher band …. say 4% from current 2% if it was to fund NHS, pensions or education.
    • davestretty
    • By davestretty 13th Nov 19, 7:56 PM
    • 61 Posts
    • 19 Thanks
    davestretty
    disappointed to see that MSE, along with many other comparisons, conveniently forget to include the other income tax that is National Insurance. Including NI the basic rate of tax is 32% (not 20%) and those earning >50K pay 42%. The differnce between basic and higher rate is, for most people, not 20% but actually only 10%. The question needs asking is why is NI not a progressive tax.
Welcome to our new Forum!

Our aim is to save you money quickly and easily. We hope you like it!

Forum Team Contact us

Live Stats

4,346Posts Today

5,591Users online

Martin's Twitter