Discussion
Lotusevoraboy said:
Those in council houses do pay council tax you know.
The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
Not living in London then?The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha.....£100k house.
t! (due to your understanding that is a rhetorical question. One you don't have to answer....)Greg66 said:
Serious questions for the pro-mansion tax advocates:
1. Do you tax the market value of the house (irrespecive of borrowings secured on it) or do you tax the equity in the house?
2. If a £2.1m house is jointly owned between husband and wife, will they be entitled to say that their respective shares are £1.05m, thus both escaping the mansion tax? If so, how do address the £10m house inhabited by husband, wife and four children, all of whom have (through astute planning) equal shares in it?
3. Do you offer hardship relief to (eg) pensioners in £2m+ houses whose annual income is sufficient for their means but << their annual mansion tax bill? If so/not, why so/not?
4. Would you prefer a "property portfolio" tax that captured people who owned a number of cheap properties with an aggregate value of > £2m?
5. Would you still advocate a mansion tax if the threshold was abolished such that it applied to all homes?
I am not at all in favour of the mansion tax as proposed. It is a populist gesture that will raise very little (after administration costs) and is very crude.1. Do you tax the market value of the house (irrespecive of borrowings secured on it) or do you tax the equity in the house?
2. If a £2.1m house is jointly owned between husband and wife, will they be entitled to say that their respective shares are £1.05m, thus both escaping the mansion tax? If so, how do address the £10m house inhabited by husband, wife and four children, all of whom have (through astute planning) equal shares in it?
3. Do you offer hardship relief to (eg) pensioners in £2m+ houses whose annual income is sufficient for their means but << their annual mansion tax bill? If so/not, why so/not?
4. Would you prefer a "property portfolio" tax that captured people who owned a number of cheap properties with an aggregate value of > £2m?
5. Would you still advocate a mansion tax if the threshold was abolished such that it applied to all homes?
I am however in favour of a fundemental reappraisal of the tax system to ensure we have the correct balance between taxes on wealth, income and consumption.
OdramaSwimLaden said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Those in council houses do pay council tax you know.
The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
Not living in London then?The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha.....
OzzyR1 said:
OdramaSwimLaden said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Those in council houses do pay council tax you know.
The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
Not living in London then?The 1% levy should include/replace council tax, so those in £100,000 houses, paying £1000 would see no increase, nor would those in £200,000 houses really. However, the 'wealthy' in £350,000 plus houses, would see the total they pay increase over and above their current rate, assuming a top rate band H current limit of c£3200 per annum with council tax.
hahahahahahahahahahhahahahahahaha.....
Halmyre said:
Can we also knee Camoron in the groin?
That will require a full consultation review to determine what proportion of the ph tax should be spent on millibungs face punching and what proportion should be spent on Cameron knee groining.Well need to commission a new IT system and government agency also, the additional cost of these measures will be about 4 billion.
As a result the ph tax will rise from 1 p a post to 35p a post.
People claiming benefits will be entitled claim 25p per post.
Powerfully built directors with high net worth will pay an extra post tax of 90p a post to express their minority views.
Remapped 330d owners will be able to claim unlimited amounts of money for moderating posts.
It's a progressive taxation of opinions whereby those with the most cash should pay the most to express their opinions.
mondeoman said:
There should only be one tax , either on income or consumption, and I reckon consumption would be the better bet.
You make an interesting point IMO.The current system imposes a truly massive tax burden by means of,
- Earnings to buy a house (income tax)
- Buying the house (stamp duty)
- Living in the house (council tax)
- Buying things for the house (VAT)
- Sale of the house (capital gains tax if not main residence)
- Dying with the house (inheritance tax)
sleep envy said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Rich people do not like paying tax and think they should pay the same as the poor.
Please define rich.Based purely upon financial basis, enjoying a regular income which allows you and your family to provide all that you perceive essential to a standard of living and life enjoyment that you are content with. It could be said that 'being rich' is an inner feeling of satisfaction and contentment in life.
crankedup said:
sleep envy said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Rich people do not like paying tax and think they should pay the same as the poor.
Please define rich.Based purely upon financial basis, enjoying a regular income which allows you and your family to provide all that you perceive essential to a standard of living and life enjoyment that you are content with. It could be said that 'being rich' is an inner feeling of satisfaction and contentment in life.
crankedup said:
sleep envy said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Rich people do not like paying tax and think they should pay the same as the poor.
Please define rich.Based purely upon financial basis, enjoying a regular income which allows you and your family to provide all that you perceive essential to a standard of living and life enjoyment that you are content with. It could be said that 'being rich' is an inner feeling of satisfaction and contentment in life.
In these cases where people talk of the 'rich' it appears to mean 'somebody else but not me as I'm not rich but that bloke over there will do as he works for a bank and that woman in the big house must be rich too'.
When offered as a criticism it's a meaningless term - subjective and suitably vague so that it fits anybody the user wants it to.
thismonkeyhere said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
It's not about using council services. If it was I'd pay nothing given on a private road the council does nothing for me.
Maybe, so long as you never, ever left that private road.....
turbobloke said:
crankedup said:
sleep envy said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Rich people do not like paying tax and think they should pay the same as the poor.
Please define rich.Based purely upon financial basis, enjoying a regular income which allows you and your family to provide all that you perceive essential to a standard of living and life enjoyment that you are content with. It could be said that 'being rich' is an inner feeling of satisfaction and contentment in life.
In these cases where people talk of the 'rich' it appears to mean 'somebody else but not me as I'm not rich but that bloke over there will do as he works for a bank and that woman in the big house must be rich too'.
When offered as a criticism it's a meaningless term - subjective and suitably vague so that it fits anybody the user wants it to.
I also did say that my definition was based upon PURELY A FINANCIAL BASIS. (did you actually read my post I wonder.)
mondeoman said:
crankedup said:
sleep envy said:
Lotusevoraboy said:
Rich people do not like paying tax and think they should pay the same as the poor.
Please define rich.Based purely upon financial basis, enjoying a regular income which allows you and your family to provide all that you perceive essential to a standard of living and life enjoyment that you are content with. It could be said that 'being rich' is an inner feeling of satisfaction and contentment in life.
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff