mansion tax

[alock]

walm said:

randlemarcus said:

walm said:

I am not a particularly pinko commie but I do happen to think that there is some merit in the concept of:
"From each according to his ability, to each according to his need."

Sadly, the merit stays to the left of the comma.

I disagree - some sort of basic welfare state is something this country should be proud to offer.
Not what we have now - but SOMETHING!

Everything about our welfare state is backwards.

The welfare state should provide for the benefit of society (training nurses, doctors, teachers, soldiers etc...) and should provide protection to those who contribute to society and the welfare system.

I'm quite happy to fund a welfare state that pays the mortgage of a rich banker who has been made redundant and takes 4 months to find a new job. I'm quite happy to fund free higher education for a doctor who goes on to earn a large salary with the NHS.

I don't want to fund some lazy work-shy person who wants his rent paid every month for life. I don't want to fund higher education for a non-degree which will never benefit a future career.

[foreright]

KingNothing said:

On the subject of income tax, the ultimate fair way of collecting income tax, would be that everyone pays a fixed value and nothing more (notice I said value not percentage, as regardless of how you see it, that is the "fairest", everyone pays exactly the same, for arguments sake lets says £5k), but that is so unworkable and insane it's not worth mentioning. ...

This (http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2010/apr/25/tax-receipts-1963) suggests that tax receipts for 2012-2013 were £550.6bn. This (http://www.ifs.org.uk/bns/bn09.pdf) suggests that there were estimated to be 29.7 million tax payers for the year 2012-2013. Taking these figures at face value that suggests that we could do away with all other tax as long as everyone payed a flat rate of £18538 (unless I'm missing something obvious - which I probably am!).

Sounds OK to me - probably not to a lot of people though!

[walm]

It's less because there is a bunch of corporation tax and business rates contributing.

Considering average take home is what? £25k?
I suspect a tax bill of even £10k would push most people WELL over the edge.

[foreright]

walm said:

It's less because there is a bunch of corporation tax and business rates contributing.

Considering average take home is what? £25k?
I suspect a tax bill of even £10k would push most people WELL over the edge.

True and I suspect this is exactly the point as to why a flat tax cannot work - we NEED the wealthy to be contributing "more than their fair share", especially as the forecast tax receipts for the next few years increase pretty sharply

[GT03ROB]

otolith said:

Countdown said:

otolith said:

That's lovely for those of you who have the luxury to choose which country you live in.

We all have choices/options. They may not be great ones but everybody chooses the option that provides him or her with the most benefit.

"You may not like the tax regime here, but you could simply leave the family and friends and the community you were born into and go and work elsewhere"

Oh, but not everywhere will have you. Because lots of countries are quite fussy about who they let in.

Very true. You don't see many countries lining up to take our dole items. These countries by & large want our contributors, the very people we should be fighting tooth & nail to keep

[ChemicalChaos]

I'm just going to give my usual summation of anything to do with Labour and their plans for increased taxes:

[oyster]

FiF said:

Meanwhile on his regular phone in radio show thet Deputy PM one Cletus Clogg Feckwit on air had direct advice for a pensioner complaining about the proposal as he didn't have the cash to pay the tax on the house he'd lived in for decades, "Well sell your house then"

LibDims to be annihilated and Cloggy to lose his seat. Tenner posted with bookies.

How is that any different from any other tax bill that needs to be settled?

As to the use of the word 'pensioner' in a blatant attempt to garner sympathy for some old, poor codger - remember we're talking about £2m homes. And if he is indeed a pensioner, he's hardly likely to have that place loaded up with £1.9m of mortgage.

[walm]

oyster said:

As to the use of the word 'pensioner' in a blatant attempt to garner sympathy for some old, poor codger - remember we're talking about £2m homes. And if he is indeed a pensioner, he's hardly likely to have that place loaded up with £1.9m of mortgage.

I have to admit that I too hate this emotive BS.

If you live in a £2m mortgage free home as a pensioner there is no two ways about it - you are LOADED.

Remember that the average annuity is £40k.
Remember that HARDLY ANYONE pays inheritance tax and that is on an estate of >£325k i.e. LESS THAT ONE SIXTH of this chap's minimum net worth.

I admit that it can be uprooting to have to move house - certainly more uprooting than selling some shares or cashing some of your pension.

BUT DAMN! £2m!!

There are plenty of reasons why a mansion tax is bad but for a few incredibly wealthy individuals having to move house to pay it? Cry me a river, grandpa.

[walm]

So a roughly 10% pay cut.
Hardly the end of the world.

I would have killed for a just a 10% pay cut during the financial crisis.

[Type R Tom]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

My old boss always used to say "the more you earn the bigger your bills" and he's sort of right but I'd have rather had his T&C's than mine! It was difficult to feel sorry for him.

[rovermorris999]

A lot of green eyes on here.

[anonymous-user]

rovermorris999 said:

A lot of green eyes on here.

Aren't there just?

[KFC]

anonymous said:

[redacted]

I never had any issue paying my fair share.


I had a serious issue with paying the share of all the work shy idiots I went to school with, some of who haven't had a single job since then (I'm 32 now).

[anonymous-user]

walm said:

I would have killed for a just a 10% pay cut during the financial crisis.

walm said:

Cry me a river...

Funny how that works isn't it.

[GT03ROB]

walm said:

So a roughly 10% pay cut.
Hardly the end of the world.

I would have killed for a just a 10% pay cut during the financial crisis.

Should have downsized your house/car/wife to make up the difference...hardly the end of the world...

[FiF]

REALIST123 said:

rovermorris999 said:

A lot of green eyes on here.

Aren't there just?

Quite.

[NDA]

walm said:

I have to admit that I too hate this emotive BS.

If you live in a £2m mortgage free home as a pensioner there is no two ways about it - you are LOADED.

Remember that the average annuity is £40k.
Remember that HARDLY ANYONE pays inheritance tax and that is on an estate of >£325k i.e. LESS THAT ONE SIXTH of this chap's minimum net worth.

I admit that it can be uprooting to have to move house - certainly more uprooting than selling some shares or cashing some of your pension.

BUT DAMN! £2m!!

There are plenty of reasons why a mansion tax is bad but for a few incredibly wealthy individuals having to move house to pay it? Cry me a river, grandpa.

Why should anyone have to move house to give more money to the government to fritter away? I live in a house that's in the category you describe, I bought it out of already heavily taxed income and paid a massive amount of further tax on stamp duty too. I pay the highest amount possible in council tax and could be described a 'non user' of council services apart from having my single allowed bin collected fortnightly. I use private schools, private health etc too. So I'm hardly a burden.

The concept of increasing the levels of my already high contributions to a point where I'm forced to move house seem punitive.... My house is not a mansion either.

[walm]

NDA said:

Why should anyone have to move house to give more money to the government to fritter away? I live in a house that's in the category you describe, I bought it out of already heavily taxed income and paid a massive amount of further tax on stamp duty too. I pay the highest amount possible in council tax and could be described a 'non user' of council services apart from having my single allowed bin collected fortnightly. I use private schools, private health etc too. So I'm hardly a burden.

The concept of increasing the levels of my already high contributions to a point where I'm forced to move house seem punitive.... My house is not a mansion either.

Well talking of green eyes... damn! Your garage!!

One minor car downsizing would cover a few years of a mansion tax I suspect!!

Of course I would rather NO ONE has to pay extra tax.
Of course I would rather the government stopped filling the pockets of work-shy baby-makers.
But right now the money has to come from somewhere.

And I firmly believe people getting upset because it is levied on the value of their house rather than their earnings - are getting stroppy over a minor detail.
And frankly don't understand the actual implications which are that VERY VERY few people would ever be FORCED to move house.

Take for example Mr NDA above. I strongly suspect that he could easily absorb say 2% per annum on every £1 above £2m in the value of his property.

That's an extra £10k on £2.5m property.
Which is LESS than raising the £150k PAYE limit from 40% to 50% if you earn £300k.
(That's £15k for those following.)

So many (already plenty wealthy) people would have been BETTER off with a mansion tax in 2009 (or whenever that 50% rate came in - I forget)!!

[babatunde]

NDA said:

walm said:

I have to admit that I too hate this emotive BS.

If you live in a £2m mortgage free home as a pensioner there is no two ways about it - you are LOADED.

Remember that the average annuity is £40k.
Remember that HARDLY ANYONE pays inheritance tax and that is on an estate of >£325k i.e. LESS THAT ONE SIXTH of this chap's minimum net worth.

I admit that it can be uprooting to have to move house - certainly more uprooting than selling some shares or cashing some of your pension.

BUT DAMN! £2m!!

There are plenty of reasons why a mansion tax is bad but for a few incredibly wealthy individuals having to move house to pay it? Cry me a river, grandpa.

Why should anyone have to move house to give more money to the government to fritter away? I live in a house that's in the category you describe, I bought it out of already heavily taxed income and paid a massive amount of further tax on stamp duty too. I pay the highest amount possible in council tax and could be described a 'non user' of council services apart from having my single allowed bin collected fortnightly. I use private schools, private health etc too. So I'm hardly a burden.

The concept of increasing the levels of my already high contributions to a point where I'm forced to move house seem punitive.... My house is not a mansion either.

My £2m home isn't a mansion, repeat slowly to yourself,

Then go on to state the whole I'm a hard working self made fellow, govt never did anything for me, all govt does is take my hard earned and give to slackers.

Now the mansion tax may be a badly though out govt policy but your stand point is frankly laughable, who do you think put in place policies that allow you as an individual to acquire so much more wealth than 99% of your fellow citizens. the tax you pay is a small price.

[mondeoman]

10 men and the beer bill.

Thats all I'm going to say.