dividend tax - government on the grab
dividend tax - government on the grab
Author
Discussion

Rob_T

Original Poster:

1,916 posts

282 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
anyone who is self employed should really be signing this...

https://petition.parliament.uk/petitions/106525

PurpleMoonlight

22,362 posts

188 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Why, self employed don't receive dividends (at least not from their own business).

Vixpy1

42,699 posts

295 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
They don't want to stop it at all, they have simply changed the way it is taxed.

It does mean many small business owners will pay more tax (myself included), hardly the same as stopping it.

Quarterly

654 posts

149 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Signed.

Eric Mc

125,855 posts

296 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Why?

ModernAndy

2,094 posts

166 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
I can see what they're doing. It makes sense from the point of view of a tax collector although it will cost some people money. It seems to me that self-employed people can still pay less tax than if they were an employee of somebody else's company albeit the margin between the two will be reduced.

Mr Overheads

2,635 posts

207 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
I get what the petition is trying to say, but it's been very badly worded/constructed.

Eric Mc

125,855 posts

296 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
It's nothing to do with the "Self Employed" people. The Self Employed pay Income Tax (and Class 4 NI) on the profits their self employed business generates. There have been no fundamental changes to the way self employed people are taxed.

This relates to those who pay less tax (and no NI) because they receive money from limited companies in the form of dividends. It affects EVERYBODY who has substantial dividend income - whether the dividends they receive are from a company they substantially own or manage or a company of which they have little or no control.

Simpo Two

93,032 posts

296 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
If you think about it, it's a remarkable loophole. Income should be income.

Eric Mc

125,855 posts

296 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Simpo Two said:
If you think about it, it's a remarkable loophole. Income should be income.
There is a genuine reason why HMRC differentiates between "Earned" income and "Investment" income. "Earned" income is also subject to NI contributions on top of any tax. If you wanted all income treated the same, you could have the weird situation of people having to pay NI on bank interest received, rental income or even dividends.

Ean218

2,046 posts

281 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
There is a genuine reason why HMRC differentiates between "Earned" income and "Investment" income. "Earned" income is also subject to NI contributions on top of any tax. If you wanted all income treated the same, you could have the weird situation of people having to pay NI on bank interest received, rental income or even dividends.
Which is why in this day and age and with no tax hypothecation, the whole concept of NI is ridiculous.

Your scenario isn't really that weird, lots of people now make money from BTL rather than working, surely the income should be subject to the same tax treatment?

Eric Mc

125,855 posts

296 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Maybe we need a more complex definition of "investment income".

To me, an investment is using money to make money.

"Earnings" is creating money by the sweat of one's brow.

ewenm

28,506 posts

276 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Eric Mc said:
Maybe we need a more complex definition of "investment income".

To me, an investment is using money to make money.

"Earnings" is creating money by the sweat of one's brow.
I run everyday and it doesn't generate me a penny of income despite a profusely sweaty browhehe Driving a desk earns the pennies (and I die a little bit more every day). wink

sgrimshaw

7,587 posts

281 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
What they really need to do is simply close the loophole whereby income tax and NI is avoided by running what is essentially a sole trader business as a company and extracting "drawings" as "dividends".

I'm all in favour of it, it's been enjoyed for long enough.


PurpleMoonlight

22,362 posts

188 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
sgrimshaw said:
What they really need to do is simply close the loophole whereby income tax and NI is avoided by running what is essentially a sole trader business as a company and extracting "drawings" as "dividends".

I'm all in favour of it, it's been enjoyed for long enough.
That's rubbish.

Many Ltd have more than one shareholder.

sgrimshaw

7,587 posts

281 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
PurpleMoonlight said:
That's rubbish.

Many Ltd have more than one shareholder.
And many do not ... and they're the ones you know I'm referring to.

Where the ltd company exists primarily to avoid income tax then it is essentially a loophole which in time would perhaps inevitably have been closed.

Not saying the new legislation is the best way to that, but it will go some way to achieving it.

Downside is that it impacts true "investors".

Mudgey

683 posts

205 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
It really sucks, I am a small one man band Ltd company and already pay way more tax than needs be. People seem to forget that these small business owners may also be paying VAT and business rates and probably many more that I am not aware of!

Governments should be looking at reducing business overheads rather than extra taxing, all that happens is the cost gets passed on down the line to the end user...



Edited by Mudgey on Monday 7th September 21:42

Mandat

4,647 posts

269 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Mudgey said:
It really sucks, I am a small one man band Ltd company and already pay way more tax than needs be. People seem to forget that these small business owners may also be paying VAT and business rates and probably many more that I am not aware of!

Governments should be looking at reducing business overheads rather than extra taxing, all that happens is the cost gets passed on down the line to the end user...
I run limited companies and agree that there are a lot of taxes to pay, however you are incorrectly lumping VAT into that. The end users pay VAT, and all that a company does is collect it from them to pass onto the government.

Mudgey

683 posts

205 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Mandat said:
I run limited companies and agree that there are a lot of taxes to pay, however you are incorrectly lumping VAT into that. The end users pay VAT, and all that a company does is collect it from them to pass onto the government.
That's debatable, it's a tax with a different set of rules.

gumshoe

824 posts

236 months

Monday 7th September 2015
quotequote all
Mudgey said:
Mandat said:
I run limited companies and agree that there are a lot of taxes to pay, however you are incorrectly lumping VAT into that. The end users pay VAT, and all that a company does is collect it from them to pass onto the government.
That's debatable, it's a tax with a different set of rules.
Exactly. For some industries, changing the VAT rate from 17.5 to 20% didn't mean they could adjust their prices to collect the additional tax. They had to absorb the rate increase.

And for those crying foul, have you ever done the sums on the total tax paid (including NI) on 40,000 salary income and 40,000 dividends income? Might surprise you a little.