Tax Avoidance = Immoral

[fandango_c]

coyft said:

AstonZagato said:

NorthernBoy said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Are you a genuine "low earner" or have you overlooked,

• VAT 20% (paid out of taxed income)
• Council Tax (paid out of taxed income)
• Stamp Duty (paid out of taxed income)
• Fuel duty (paid out of taxed income and itself subject to VAT)
• Airport tax (paid out of taxed income)

I'd wager the government takes at least two thirds of a high earner's income these days.

• Oh, I forgot the 40% Inheritance Tax payable at the end, if you've got anything left....

52% marginal rate on income.

The effective tax rate at £100k is 62% (40% plus loss of personal allowance plus NI)

Hope you're not an accountant.

Why?

[AstonZagato]

coyft said:

AstonZagato said:

NorthernBoy said:

Ozzie Osmond said:

Are you a genuine "low earner" or have you overlooked,

• VAT 20% (paid out of taxed income)
• Council Tax (paid out of taxed income)
• Stamp Duty (paid out of taxed income)
• Fuel duty (paid out of taxed income and itself subject to VAT)
• Airport tax (paid out of taxed income)

I'd wager the government takes at least two thirds of a high earner's income these days.

• Oh, I forgot the 40% Inheritance Tax payable at the end, if you've got anything left....

52% marginal rate on income.

The effective tax rate at £100k is 62% (40% plus loss of personal allowance plus NI)

Hope you're not an accountant.

At £100k you lose £1 of personal allowances on every £2 you earn. You therefore pay, for an extra pound of earnings, 40% on £1.50 - which is 60p or 60%.

Am I wrong?

[Eric Mc]

For that narrow slice of income, you are correct.

[AstonZagato]

coyft said:

Yes you're correct, that would be the marginal rate, not the effective rate.

Not sure I care about the semantics of the terminology, 62% is a chunk of change

[TTmonkey]

Hands up if you believe any high net earner on lets say half a million or more a year pays anywhere near 62% on their income....

because I dont believe for a minute that anyone does.

[Eric Mc]

Even a person who IS paying the equivalent of 62% tax isn't actually paying that on ALL their income anyway.

They'll have their personal allowances for a start. They'll also be paying 20% on their lower level of earnings.

[AstonZagato]

It's on the incremental pound that you earn. It is only a relatively thin slice of income that pays 62% but it does exist (and it was set low to catch the most people). So, if you earn £100,002 gross versus £100,000 gross, that extra £2 suffers £1.24 of tax, and so on until your personal allowances are gone. Then you pay 40% again until you hit the 50% band. I wasn't suggesting that £62,000 of tax is taken

[Laughingman21]

TTmonkey said:

Hands up if you believe any high net earner on lets say half a million or more a year pays anywhere near 62% on their income....

because I dont believe for a minute that anyone does.

They may not be, but over £300k in tax seems a lot for one person to pay (even if they are on half a million).

[fandango_c]

Laughingman21 said:

They may not be, but over £300k in tax seems a lot for one person to pay (even if they are on half a million).

It's approx 240k tax & NI on half a million.

Edited by fandango_c on Sunday 24th June 23:50

[AstonZagato]

It's not quite that bad. £500k, would have given £252k net of tax and NI in 11/12 according to an online tax calculator. So almost 50% overall.

[Steffan]

Laughingman21 said:

TTmonkey said:

Hands up if you believe any high net earner on lets say half a million or more a year pays anywhere near 62% on their income....

because I dont believe for a minute that anyone does.

They may not be, but over £300k in tax seems a lot for one person to pay (even if they are on half a million).

I think they do. There are directors of banks and so on earning under PAYE literally over a million pounds a year. They cannot avoid the tax.

Tax avoidance is much less welcome in many areas of business because the companies have close relationships with Government and the Inland Revenue and cannot afford trouble in those areas.

[Laughingman21]

fandango_c said:

It's approx 240k tax & NI on half a million.

Edited by fandango_c on Sunday 24th June 23:50

Still sounds like they paid more than enough for one person.

[fandango_c]

Laughingman21 said:

Still sounds like they paid more than enough for one person.

It is a huge amount, and must these tax avoidance schemes very attractive to those earning large amounts.

[johnfm]

Laughingman21 said:

fandango_c said:

It's approx 240k tax & NI on half a million.

Edited by fandango_c on Sunday 24th June 23:50

Still sounds like they paid more than enough for one person.

According to you? Hmm, that's nice. Are you the same arbiter who decides how big our houses can be? What cars we can buy? What food we can eat?

[Laughingman21]

johnfm said:

According to you? Hmm, that's nice. Are you the same arbiter who decides how big our houses can be? What cars we can buy? What food we can eat?

IMO they pay enough and everyone is allowed an opinion.

Do you think they should be paying more?

[Murph7355]

johnfm said:

According to you? Hmm, that's nice. Are you the same arbiter who decides how big our houses can be? What cars we can buy? What food we can eat?

Conversely you appear to be wanting to limit the size of their houses (etc) by suggesting their net income should be acceptable...I guess that's ok because there aren't many of them/you're not in that bracket/they still get a lot of money anyway?

Personally I think ALL taxpayers should be paying less. The amount of tax this country appears to "need" to function (or not function, depending on your viewpoint) is grotesque.

Unfortunately cuts always hurt those most reliant on government services the most. This does not alter the fact we are running a smassive deficit and the country will soon owe over a trillion quid. Which even the most right on cannot believe is sustainable.

[fandango_c]

Laughingman21 said:

IMO they pay enough and everyone is allowed an opinion.

Do you think they should be paying more?

Out of curiosity, how much tax do you think someone earning £5m pa or £50m pa should pay? 250k seems to be not enough to me.

[johnfm]

Laughingman21 said:

johnfm said:

According to you? Hmm, that's nice. Are you the same arbiter who decides how big our houses can be? What cars we can buy? What food we can eat?

IMO they pay enough and everyone is allowed an opinion.

Do you think they should be paying more?

No. I either misread your post or you edited it. I thought your posted that they 'get paid enough'

If you posted they already pay enough tax - agree 100%

[Laughingman21]

fandango_c said:

Out of curiosity, how much tax do you think someone earning £5m pa or £50m pa should pay? 250k seems to be not enough to me.

Why? I'm sure they don't use anywhere near £250k of public services.

How much do you think they should pay?

[Eric Mc]

Laughingman21 said:

Why? I'm sure they don't use anywhere near £250k of public services.

How much do you think they should pay?

Do you think that a person's tax bill should equate with the value of services they use

in a week?

in a year?

in a lifetime?

Or do you think that what you opay is not only to cover your own personal government service requirements?