Bollitics: VT General Election Poll #2

[snowychap]

It's a basic human right to arrange your affairs in such a way to pay as little tax as possible.

Where did you get that one from?

With comments like that I am tempted to trot off and join the indignant anti-'yuman' rights camp. Tempted but I shan't succumb.

The US Supreme Court for one:

"The legal right of an individual to decrease the amount of what would otherwise be his taxes or altogether avoid them, by means which the law permits, cannot be doubted."

:?

Legal right != basic human right.

[tonyh29]

Fair enough - how about a flat tax rate then.

I've always been more in favour of a capped rate of tax which is fairer for all ..i.e you all pay the same , after all we do all use the same amount of resources on the country .. fine if you want to tax people more for buying a big house or a big car (petrol duty etc) as they are lifestyle choices take them or leave them so to speak

but your proposal could work though 50% just has that "yuck "factor about it and may not be a vote winner

thing is they (governments) will only get your money some other way .. even recent "giveway" budgets have been proven to have given nothing and taken more money from people

[snowychap]

I've always been more in favour of a capped rate of tax which is fairer for all ..i.e you all pay the same , after all we do all use the same amount of resources on the country

Except people wouldn't all pay the same or use the same level of resources so I think you meant that it would be less unacceptable to those who think they are paying too much tax (and reduce the tax bill of those paying the most) rather than 'fairer'.

I think you may have to define fair. :winkold:

[Gringo]

Fair enough - how about a flat tax rate then.

I've always been more in favour of a capped rate of tax which is fairer for all ..i.e you all pay the same , after all we do all use the same amount of resources on the country .. fine if you want to tax people more for buying a big house or a big car (petrol duty etc) as they are lifestyle choices take them or leave them so to speak

So what's the CAP?

Say we set it at 40% of all earnings capped at £40k

So someone earning £10k pays £4k tax (40%)

So someone earning £25k pays £10k tax (40%)

So someone earning £50k pays £20k tax (40%)

So someone earning £100k pays £40k tax (40%)

So someone earning £200k pays £40k tax (20%)

So someone earning £2,000k pays £40k tax (2%)

Obviously fairer for all lol

What was it that brought maggie down again?

[kidlewis]

Fair enough - how about a flat tax rate then.

I've always been more in favour of a capped rate of tax which is fairer for all ..i.e you all pay the same , after all we do all use the same amount of resources on the country .. fine if you want to tax people more for buying a big house or a big car (petrol duty etc) as they are lifestyle choices take them or leave them so to speak

So what's the CAP?

Say we set it at 40% of all earnings capped at £40k

So someone earning £10k pays £4k tax (40%)

So someone earning £25k pays £10k tax (40%)

So someone earning £50k pays £20k tax (40%)

So someone earning £100k pays £40k tax (40%)

So someone earning £200k pays £40k tax (20%)

So someone earning £2,000k pays £40k tax (2%)

Obviously fairer for all lol

What was it that brought maggie down again?

how about you close up all these loop holes then and charge people a flat 25% for anyone earning between £20,000 and a billion?

I don't see why (if I am lucky enough) to move up to beyond the basic tax rate why another 20% should be taken out of my wage. I am working my ass off now to try and move up in the world and if it simply gets taken away through another 20% going onto government coffers then I will be a bit pi**ed in all honesty.

No wonder people want to avoid this countries 50% tax by "living" elsewhere in order to avoid it.

it's been proven by the current government that their stance on re-distribution of wealth is misguided and failing. Child Trust Fund is one such red herring pile of £500m turd. I should know because I got a £250 cheque about 7 months ago.

Really bad idea I think. £500m much better spent on schools (in particular on a more varied education, Art, Music, Sport, Politics and computer science) because lets face it those lessons are going to be hit before maths, science, english.

[tonyh29]

Say we set it at 40% of all earnings capped at £40k

except you wouldn't set it like that

the cap is on the total amount of tax you pay not a flat tax rate for all

What was it that brought maggie down again?

unwashed students protesting about a tax that the underlying principle of was fairer than the current council tax system of today . If council tax is indeed a tax on services, surely it should be in proportion to their use ?

in theroy the poll tax epitomised fairness and equality something which New Labour are obsessed with ..wonder how all those protesters voted the past few times out ?

[Risso]

The IOM has a £100k tax cap. However much you earn, you never pay more than £100K in tax.

[Gringo]

Say we set it at 40% of all earnings capped at £40k

except you wouldn't set it like that

the cap is on the total amount of tax you pay not a flat tax rate for all

Spookily enough that is exactly what the above example does - no one pays more than £40k tax. I think that's what you call a cap. I say again, how would you structure such an offering.

What was it that brought maggie down again?

unwashed students protesting about a tax that the underlying principle of was fairer than the current council tax system of today . If council tax is indeed a tax on services, surely it should be in proportion to their use ?

in theroy the poll tax epitomised fairness and equality something which New Labour are obsessed with ..wonder how all those protesters voted the past few times out ?

In theory the poll tax was a regressive middle ages tax regime which was laughed out of existence in th e 90s.

So let's try again, if we're looking for fair - let's go for the Levi option of an asset tax. The state exists to protect people and their assets - ie someone doesn't rob your bently vs robbing my punto. Your asset is worth more than mine therefore as any insurance policy goes, the more you are protecting the more you pay. It's just an extenstion of the mansion tax idea and it means everyone pays their fair share in proportion to their use.

[kidlewis]

Say we set it at 40% of all earnings capped at £40k

except you wouldn't set it like that

the cap is on the total amount of tax you pay not a flat tax rate for all

Spookily enough that is exactly what the above example does - no one pays more than £40k tax. I think that's what you call a cap. I say again, how would you structure such an offering.

What was it that brought maggie down again?

unwashed students protesting about a tax that the underlying principle of was fairer than the current council tax system of today . If council tax is indeed a tax on services, surely it should be in proportion to their use ?

in theroy the poll tax epitomised fairness and equality something which New Labour are obsessed with ..wonder how all those protesters voted the past few times out ?

In theory the poll tax was a regressive middle ages tax regime which was laughed out of existence in th e 90s.

So let's try again, if we're looking for fair - let's go for the Levi option of an asset tax. The state exists to protect people and their assets - ie someone doesn't rob your bently vs robbing my punto. Your asset is worth more than mine therefore as any insurance policy goes, the more you are protecting the more you pay. It's just an extenstion of the mansion tax idea and it means everyone pays their fair share in proportion to their use.

but it should go on the value of it when purchased not the value it is now.

Otherwise that IS an unfair mansion tax.

[snowychap]

I don't see why (if I am lucky enough) to move up to beyond the basic tax rate why another 20% should be taken out of my wage. I am working my ass off now to try and move up in the world and if it simply gets taken away through another 20% going onto government coffers then I will be a bit pi**ed in all honesty.

'Simply gets taken away'?

Okay, it might appear that we haven't moved too far from feudal times in that the really wealthy are still getting away with paying little or no taxes and the ordinary people are bearing the burden of paying for foreign wars (or, as they always have been, the foibles of our leaders) but that really isn't the essence of taxation policy in the modern world.

[drat01]

Ah the Poll Tax - the wonderful flagship of a certain Mrs T

COMMUNITY CHARGE (POLL TAX)

Flat-rate tax per adult, replaced old rates system

Proposed by Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher who saw it as a more accountable tax

Introduced in Scotland in 1988-9, England and Wales a year later

38 million were to pay the poll tax against 14 million who paid rates

Controversial and opposed by some 'Thatcherites' like Nigel Lawson

Admin costs shot up and there was widespread non-payment

Tax was abandoned when John Major replaced Thatcher in 1990

A readable article on the BBC web site at the moment - prejudiced in parts it could be argued but a indication of what you get if you vote Dave's Tory party in

link

[Gringo]

but it should go on the value of it when purchased not the value it is now.

Otherwise that IS an unfair mansion tax.

Why? If I buy something that is worth £100k and now after me sitting in it for 20 years it is worth £1,000k - what have I done to earn that increase in value? If I buy gold today and it doubles in value over 10 years - what have done to earn that increase in value? nada. It deserves to be taxed - more than earned income does.

OK, so if you have no cash, what about a share of the asset. Say it's worht £1m and you have no cash (well I'd be selling my house if I was you) then maybe the govt / council take out a second charge on the property to the value of the tax - let's say 5%, and then sell that charge to a bank. So you get to keep your property, the govt get it's cash and the bank can charge you5% on your 5% (£250 per annum). And we let it mount up over the years and when you die that total bank lien is £900k, the bank owns the house, your estate gets the £100k back and all the debts are settled.

[snowychap]

OK, so if you have no cash, what about a share of the asset. Say it's worht £1m and you have no cash (well I'd be selling my house if I was you) then maybe the govt / council take out a second charge on the property to the value of the tax - let's say 5%, and then sell that charge to a bank. So you get to keep your property, the govt get it's cash and the bank can charge you5% on your 5% (£250 per annum). And we let it mount up over the years and when you die that total bank lien is £900k, the bank owns the house, your estate gets the £100k back and all the debts are settled.

I think you've just suggested a way to make bankers even more disliked than they already are.

[tonyh29]

The IOM has a £100k tax cap. However much you earn, you never pay more than £100K in tax.

which is what i'm get at as Gringo is fully aware :-)

pays their fair share in proportion to their use

what tax are you proposing on the Bentley v Punto though ?

They both use the same road so arguably road tax should be the same

If you put a sales tax too high it may be at detriment to the manufacturer and impact on orders

but If you put the "tax" on petrol the Bentley is going to be filling up far more often than the Punto and thus the Bentley driver is paying more tax

I guess the airlines are another example ..if you fly cattle class you pay £35 airport tax , if you fly club you pay £70 and if you fly first you pay £100 .. It's a lifestyle choice if you like and then one can't bitch about the extra tax ( well OK truth be known I do bitch about the different rates of airport tax tax as it should be the same for all class of passengers , but for the sake of this debate lets assume that i'm not a whining hypocrite :-) )

[tonyh29]

Say it's worht £1m and you have no cash

on the same arguemnt if you have no cash you shouldn't be having children and thus we can scrap child benefit and save a few quid

[CarewsEyebrowDesigner]

on the same arguemnt if you have no cash you shouldn't be having children and thus we can scrap child benefit and save a few quid

That's a pathetic argument.

[Gringo]

The IOM has a £100k tax cap. However much you earn, you never pay more than £100K in tax.

which is what i'm get at as Gringo is fully aware :-)

OK £100k capped tax, with a sliding scale of 20-40%

So someone earning £10k pays £2k tax (20%)

So someone earning £25k pays £7.5k tax (30%)

So someone earning £50k pays £20k tax (40%)

So someone earning £100k pays £40k tax (40%)

So someone earning £200k pays £80k tax (40%)

So someone earning £500k pays £100k tax (20%)

So someone earning £2,000k pays £100k tax (5%)

So someone earning £5,000k pays £100k tax (2%)

So the question goes back - if that's not what you envisage then lay out what you do think is right - it's not like you work in an industry where numbers are not used? Create a plan with a scaled tax and cap where the govt still gets the money it needs. Without describing your scale and cap your idea is meningless - it might as well be along the lines of tax the CO2 we breathe out.

[kidlewis]

I don't see why (if I am lucky enough) to move up to beyond the basic tax rate why another 20% should be taken out of my wage. I am working my ass off now to try and move up in the world and if it simply gets taken away through another 20% going onto government coffers then I will be a bit pi**ed in all honesty.

'Simply gets taken away'?

Okay, it might appear that we haven't moved too far from feudal times in that the really wealthy are still getting away with paying little or no taxes and the ordinary people are bearing the burden of paying for foreign wars (or, as they always have been, the foibles of our leaders) but that really isn't the essence of taxation policy in the modern world.

ok well perhaps not taken away but I certainly don't feel there is ANY point in me getting a pay increase to over the £37,401 40% band unless I am heading way over it.

Why is it OK for someone earning 30k to pay 30% yet someone earning £7k more to pay double?

I can certainly see why people try and get round it when they are around that threshold figure.

I understand people on moster salaries trying to get round it is more of an injustice, but certainly if I am lucky enough to earn £37k or even up to £45k per year, I', going to try and get round that extra 20% if I can.

Yes If I am super lucky and the company goes sky high and I end up somehow getting £70k-100k a year then most certainly will be happy to pay the 40%.

[Gringo]

what tax are you proposing on the Bentley v Punto though ?

let's go for the Levi option of an asset tax. The state exists to protect people and their assets - ie someone doesn't rob your bently vs robbing my punto. Your asset is worth more than mine therefore as any insurance policy goes, the more you are protecting the more you pay.

No mention of road tax in my thread - it was regarding asset tax. So instead of the car example, let's say your house. You pay for the police and the fire services to protect your house from burglary and arson or even mishap, and the army exists to protect your house from being overrun with goths and anarchists; so your surrey mansion is worth £1m and my northfield 2 bed is worth £140k, so you should pay 7 times more in tax - as the state exists to preserve your asset value.

Go on explain how you envisage a fair tax - in numbers.

[Gringo]

Say it's worht £1m and you have no cash

on the same arguemnt if you have no cash you shouldn't be having children and thus we can scrap child benefit and save a few quid

So are you saying all these people shouldn't use council services because they can't afford to pay their council tax? Is this a choice?