Uk Council tax,. Reform. Needed?
Discussion
Integroo said:
otolith said:
Aggressive tax avoidance, for example?
As you will be aware, tax avoidance isn't illegal. Loopholes should however be closed to prevent it. Part of the problem is our tax system is so complicated, loopholes will always exist. And likewise, campaigning for Brexit while shifting their business out of the country and making sure they retain an EU passport?
Integroo said:
Individuals operate within the confines of the system. One can take advantage of the system as it exists whilst advocating for a change of the system.
selmahoose said:
1) So assuming no disability or handicap type exclusion, what's to stop any 16 year old deciding they want to be a corporate lawyer and going for it?
2) In my very real and tangible business plan, any drop in btl unit profitability caused by LVT will require the accumulation of more units to maintain (and increase) the same arithmetic level of profit. LVT will therefore ENCOURAGE further accumulation which is the exact opposite of your theoretical notion of its impact.
1) poor schooling / lack of tutoring meaning they don't get the grades despite being sufficiently bright, having to work to fund their studies giving them less time to study, not having the support to apply to top universities including drafting personal statements etc, the need to apply for bursaries etc that they may not get and are in limited supply acting as a barrier to entry, no encouragement to pursue a path that goes above and beyond what their parents and their peers are doing, poverty leading crime / violence / gangs / etc. ... that's only a few, the list is endless. 2) In my very real and tangible business plan, any drop in btl unit profitability caused by LVT will require the accumulation of more units to maintain (and increase) the same arithmetic level of profit. LVT will therefore ENCOURAGE further accumulation which is the exact opposite of your theoretical notion of its impact.
Note these are barriers, not absolute exclusions. It is obviously not the case that a particularly bright, well driven individual can fight their way past these. I want to remove/reduce barriers. I have been accused of being naive elsewhere in this thread but I put it to you that is is particularly naive to suggest that a child to two investment bankers in Kensington and a child to a single mother in Lewisham can both achieve the same provided they work equally as hard.
2) That doesn't sound very sensible, if the profitability of btl drops why would you not put your money into a more profitable asset class?
otolith said:
Integroo said:
otolith said:
Aggressive tax avoidance, for example?
As you will be aware, tax avoidance isn't illegal. Loopholes should however be closed to prevent it. Part of the problem is our tax system is so complicated, loopholes will always exist. And likewise, campaigning for Brexit while shifting their business out of the country and making sure they retain an EU passport?
Integroo said:
Individuals operate within the confines of the system. One can take advantage of the system as it exists whilst advocating for a change of the system.
On (2), campaigning for Brexit whilst moving your assets out of the country and making sure you retain an EU passport betrays a dishonesty in how positive one thinks Brexit is going to be, or that you think it will be good for you but bad for the less well off that are less able to protect themselves against the negatives. That is hypocritical.
Integroo said:
otolith said:
Integroo said:
otolith said:
Aggressive tax avoidance, for example?
As you will be aware, tax avoidance isn't illegal. Loopholes should however be closed to prevent it. Part of the problem is our tax system is so complicated, loopholes will always exist. And likewise, campaigning for Brexit while shifting their business out of the country and making sure they retain an EU passport?
Integroo said:
Individuals operate within the confines of the system. One can take advantage of the system as it exists whilst advocating for a change of the system.
On (2), campaigning for Brexit whilst moving your assets out of the country and making sure you retain an EU passport betrays a dishonesty in how positive one thinks Brexit is going to be, or that you think it will be good for you but bad for the less well off that are less able to protect themselves against the negatives. That is hypocritical.
otolith said:
Surely they are just exploiting the system as it is. We've established that it isn't hypocritical to exploit a situation you are in favour of changing.
There is a difference between (i) exploiting the system as it is whilst advocating for change and (ii) advocating for change so that you can exploit the system when you know others cannot. Integroo said:
otolith said:
Surely they are just exploiting the system as it is. We've established that it isn't hypocritical to exploit a situation you are in favour of changing.
There is a difference between (i) exploiting the system as it is whilst advocating for change and (ii) advocating for change so that you can exploit the system when you know others cannot. fblm said:
You're advocating taxes on land rather than income. You're a high earner with no land. Your motivation might not be self interest, I don't know or care, it doesn't matter. Lets just call it a happy coincidence.
You clearly do care or you wouldn't keep mentioning it rather than arguing against my position. What's your reasoning behind wanting lower taxes? Self interest.
Integroo said:
You clearly do care or you wouldn't keep mentioning it rather than arguing against my position.
What's your reasoning behind wanting lower taxes? Self interest.
Obviously I can't speak for flbm but I've never claimed anything other than self interest- I think my tax is too high to an inequitable extent & wish to see it lowered, either by lessening government largesse or by getting some of the lesser contributors to take some of the load.What's your reasoning behind wanting lower taxes? Self interest.
You want to shift taxation from what adversely affects you to what would benefit you, whilst claiming it's for altruistic reasons.
I commend you for your chutzpah, sir.
otolith said:
I would say that the main barriers to social mobility are parental attitudes, abilities and aspirations, and the failings of the state education system.
Yep, you're right. I have a friend who teaches in one of the poorer areas and she was telling me about the utter lack of any ambition that the parents and children have - in fact teachers are seen as the enemy.I can't see that taxing my garden so that mouth breathers don't pay VAT for their KFC buckets is going to help to be honest, in fact it's lunacy. The net effect will be fewer tax receipts. The same has happened with Stamp Duty - higher rates introduced as a foil to the 'mansion tax' proposed by the Loons, net result is £1billon less in receipts. Brilliant.
Punitive taxation on net contributors is akin to hobbling the best athletes so that those who can't (or won't) run as fast can catch up. Looks optically attractive to certain sections of society, but ultimately ruinous for the economy.
Rovinghawk said:
Integroo said:
You clearly do care or you wouldn't keep mentioning it rather than arguing against my position.
What's your reasoning behind wanting lower taxes? Self interest.
Obviously I can't speak for flbm but I've never claimed anything other than self interest- I think my tax is too high to an inequitable extent & wish to see it lowered, either by lessening government largesse or by getting some of the lesser contributors to take some of the load.What's your reasoning behind wanting lower taxes? Self interest.
You want to shift taxation from what adversely affects you to what would benefit you, whilst claiming it's for altruistic reasons.
I commend you for your chutzpah, sir.
Edited by nikaiyo2 on Wednesday 20th February 14:38
Integroo said:
selmahoose said:
1) So assuming no disability or handicap type exclusion, what's to stop any 16 year old deciding they want to be a corporate lawyer and going for it?
2) In my very real and tangible business plan, any drop in btl unit profitability caused by LVT will require the accumulation of more units to maintain (and increase) the same arithmetic level of profit. LVT will therefore ENCOURAGE further accumulation which is the exact opposite of your theoretical notion of its impact.
1) poor schooling / lack of tutoring meaning they don't get the grades despite being sufficiently bright, having to work to fund their studies giving them less time to study, not having the support to apply to top universities including drafting personal statements etc, the need to apply for bursaries etc that they may not get and are in limited supply acting as a barrier to entry, no encouragement to pursue a path that goes above and beyond what their parents and their peers are doing, poverty leading crime / violence / gangs / etc. ... that's only a few, the list is endless. 2) In my very real and tangible business plan, any drop in btl unit profitability caused by LVT will require the accumulation of more units to maintain (and increase) the same arithmetic level of profit. LVT will therefore ENCOURAGE further accumulation which is the exact opposite of your theoretical notion of its impact.
Note these are barriers, not absolute exclusions. It is obviously not the case that a particularly bright, well driven individual can fight their way past these. I want to remove/reduce barriers. I have been accused of being naive elsewhere in this thread but I put it to you that is is particularly naive to suggest that a child to two investment bankers in Kensington and a child to a single mother in Lewisham can both achieve the same provided they work equally as hard.
2) That doesn't sound very sensible, if the profitability of btl drops why would you not put your money into a more profitable asset class?
All you are doing again is proving how naive you really are to how the world actually works rather than in a text book..........
- so put the funding into schools as already stated. Giving it to parents who do not have a clue as tax breaks /more benefits will not solve anything.
-being aggrieved at having to work to fund studies is just a cop out for being lazy, I did it as did many others with ambition
- why do you need to go to a top university, or any university. It has its place but learning whilst actually working has its place for most vacations based on the shocking quality of graduates I see every single year, I much prefer offering apprenticeships and end up with people who can actually do a days work at the end of it.
Ps property will always be the best and most valuable long term investment in the UK, as a wise man once told me “we are a small island at the end of the day”. You can tax it all you like, it will still be worth more over time than you paid for it, it will just find an even higher level and become even harder to get.
I really should go back to the start of this thread which was I assume actually about changing how local taxes are raised lol
Ps did someone mention business rates, now there is a scandal waiting to explode, how the hell did Cameron get away with what he did at the last revaluations....... of wait he had a referendum to hide it lol
I’ve made, actually I have lost count as it probably over 50, revaluation appeals since the last revaluation and all but one have been upheld, the one that didn’t was won at first tier tribunal. How can that be right ? All its done is a) waste valuable business time and resources, not to mention cash flow, b) line the pockets of ex valuation office staff who now make a much better living as “consultants” c) keep public sector staff in a job. It is simple lunacy. And to top it all off you can’t even have your day in court to show how incompetent / criminal the whole process has been. I still to this day can get now explanation as to how they got away with delaying the last valuation round by 2 years and then made such a pigs ear of it other than “we are under resourced”. That’s because everyone has left to be a “consultant” !!!!!!!!
Ps I pity the poor council finance staff who have to set a budget on assumed business rates income. I’m sure they must take what’s on the rating list and divide by 2 due to the number of outstanding appeals lol I dealt with one council that we where rated at 7 digits for (a five fold increase) from 2015. They eventually agreed to put the account on hold when we got fed up with paying it for 12 months pending appeal (they sent the bailiffs in first which was enlightening, not), that’s the one we won at tribunal and yep they owed us a significant sum of money back just to bring us up to date. How they balance their books I have no idea.
Edited by jonttt on Tuesday 19th February 22:32
Integroo said:
...arguing against my position.
...
I don't know what your position is from thread to thread so I've given up trying. 3 months ago you wanted higher income tax on high earners. Then you get a job in the dreaded 62% marginal rate bracket which is an unpleasant surprise to you. Now you want lower income tax and LVT. You argue for lower house prices on every thread yet now claim you want to keep renting. Righto. You're all over the place. Full of opinions but you know nothing. Then you whine about playing the ball not the man but invariably call people all kinds of names when you fail to articulate or support whatever point you're making today. We get it; you're highly successful but deeply caring, you're better than us. You know how to fix societies ills but you're not prepared to do it yourself unless everyone else is also forced to. Get back to us after a decade working 60+ hour weeks for your new employer, when you're paying half your income in tax and not just at the marginal rate and tell us you're not paying your 'fair share'....
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff