|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Jan 3, 2021 22:28:25 GMT
Yay or Nay? I can see some sense in it - a system that has allowed such vast wealth inequalities clearly needs righting somehow - but is this the right way? How else could we encourage the super rich to spread their wealth more equitably without taxing it from them? Richest 1% have 23% of total wealth |
|
|
|
Post by prestwichpotter on Jan 3, 2021 22:35:20 GMT
Yay or Nay? I can see some sense in it - a system that has allowed such vast wealth inequalities clearly needs righting somehow - but is this the right way? How else could we encourage the super rich to spread their wealth more equitably without taxing it from them? Richest 1% have 23% of total wealthAbsolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by mutters on Jan 24, 2021 15:43:32 GMT
Yay or Nay? I can see some sense in it - a system that has allowed such vast wealth inequalities clearly needs righting somehow - but is this the right way? How else could we encourage the super rich to spread their wealth more equitably without taxing it from them? Richest 1% have 23% of total wealthDon't really see this happening, didn't France try it recently and people left the country? Don't you think that quite a few will be saying my wealth wasn't what it was. Alongside the comments about job and wealth creation they have done Also, sure they will "employ" advisers to get around it as best they can Finally, where does it leave people wishing to better themselves, only for a government to come along and say we want a wealth tax? |
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on Jan 24, 2021 16:49:05 GMT
Yay or Nay? I can see some sense in it - a system that has allowed such vast wealth inequalities clearly needs righting somehow - but is this the right way? How else could we encourage the super rich to spread their wealth more equitably without taxing it from them? Richest 1% have 23% of total wealthDon't really see this happening, didn't France try it recently and people left the country? Don't you think that quite a few will be saying my wealth wasn't what it was. Alongside the comments about job and wealth creation they have done Also, sure they will "employ" advisers to get around it as best they can Finally, where does it leave people wishing to better themselves, only for a government to come along and say we want a wealth tax? Valid points, but we're in unprecedented times. What's the alternative? Increases to income tax which hit the poorest? Increase VAT which hits the poorest. Another purge on out of work and disability benefits, which hits the poorest. Increase council tax which hits the poorest. Cut public services which hits the poorest. I think given the debt we're facing, it's not unreasonable as a one off request to ask those who've benefitted so much from the current tax and regulatory regimes of the UK, to now give a bit more back. After the 2008 international banking crisis, we spent 1.5% of GDP to keep the economy afloat. This time we've already spent 26% of GDP. The UK needs to lead the way in the coronavirus recovery and not make those who've suffered most from it, suffer even more so as we come out the other side. No civilised society would disproportionately put the burden on the weakest. We're Great Britain, and it's about time we showed why. |
|
|
|
Post by basingstokie on Jan 24, 2021 18:45:20 GMT
Absolutely not.
Wealth comes from income that is already taxed.
How do you deal with wealth that isn't cash (property, art,cars, shares), you can't (can you?) force people to sell them
How do you value these items too - what is a db5 worth (& valuations will change every year - who will value it?). Private companies are notoriously difficult to value.
If (initially) it is only applied to people worth over (say) £250k, you can bet that limit will reduce over time (either by actual reduction or lack of inflationary increases)
What's the rate - say its 5%, over 20 years you've lost your asset
There would be mass exodus of wealthy people and even the moderately wealthy would hide assets. The emigration exodus would lead to an overall drop in tax take as we'd lose the income tax from those who emigrate
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 24, 2021 18:51:29 GMT
Absolutely not. Wealth comes from income that is already taxed. How do you deal with wealth that isn't cash (property, art,cars, shares), you can't (can you?) force people to sell them How do you value these items too - what is a db5 worth (& valuations will change every year - who will value it?). Private companies are notoriously difficult to value. If (initially) it is only applied to people worth over (say) £250k, you can bet that limit will reduce over time (either by actual reduction or lack of inflationary increases) What's the rate - say its 5%, over 20 years you've lost your asset There would be mass exodus of wealthy people and even the moderately wealthy would hide assets. The emigration exodus would lead to an overall drop in tax take as we'd lose the income tax from those who emigrate You’re describing the Laffer Curve. At a certain point increased taxation produces less revenue for the exchequer. So, great care is needed in setting tax rates. Being motivated by emotion or ideology is not sufficient. |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 24, 2021 19:36:26 GMT
Absolutely not. Wealth comes from income that is already taxed. How do you deal with wealth that isn't cash (property, art,cars, shares), you can't (can you?) force people to sell them How do you value these items too - what is a db5 worth (& valuations will change every year - who will value it?). Private companies are notoriously difficult to value. If (initially) it is only applied to people worth over (say) £250k, you can bet that limit will reduce over time (either by actual reduction or lack of inflationary increases) What's the rate - say its 5%, over 20 years you've lost your asset There would be mass exodus of wealthy people and even the moderately wealthy would hide assets. The emigration exodus would lead to an overall drop in tax take as we'd lose the income tax from those who emigrate You’re describing the Laffer Curve. At a certain point increased taxation produces less revenue for the exchequer. So, great care is needed in setting tax rates. Being motivated by emotion or ideology is not sufficient. Whilst having some confidence in a part of that correlation, the concept that the rich will just fuck off elsewhere if you tax them progressively has always seemed a bit lame to me. Either way, the rampant growth in inequality over the past few decades suggest that we're are mile off that point and the wiggle room is enormous. Trickle down doesn't work. |
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 24, 2021 20:10:35 GMT
You’re describing the Laffer Curve. At a certain point increased taxation produces less revenue for the exchequer. So, great care is needed in setting tax rates. Being motivated by emotion or ideology is not sufficient. Whilst having some confidence in a part of that correlation, the concept that the rich will just fuck off elsewhere if you tax them progressively has always seemed a bit lame to me. Either way, the rampant growth in inequality over the past few decades suggest that we're are mile off that point and the wiggle room is enormous. Trickle down doesn't work. I agree with you to some degree. But the negative consequences of too high a level of tax need to be considered. So we don’t achieve the opposite of what we want to achieve. Care is needed. Not ideological zeal. |
|
|
|
Post by mutters on Jan 24, 2021 20:13:22 GMT
The alternative?
Well I suspect the entrepreneurs relief will be reduced further - but the point will be where is the incentive for these people to attempt to prosper in our country creating employment and hence tax for the exchequer
Then car tax on electric cars
Possibly National insurance tweaks
Outside of that, I see that Rishi and co won't want to upset the applecart too much as they won't get back into power will they?
|
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 24, 2021 20:57:52 GMT
Whilst having some confidence in a part of that correlation, the concept that the rich will just fuck off elsewhere if you tax them progressively has always seemed a bit lame to me. Either way, the rampant growth in inequality over the past few decades suggest that we're are mile off that point and the wiggle room is enormous. Trickle down doesn't work. I agree with you to some degree. Agree But the negative consequences of too high a level of tax need to be considered. So we don’t achieve the opposite of what we want to achieve. Care is needed. Not ideological zeal. Agreed but Corbyn(McDonnell)omics would have twitched the dial only a couple of notches. The wiggle room lays way beyond that. |
|
|
|
Post by henry on Jan 24, 2021 21:31:30 GMT
If all governments everywhere have similar tax systems, then the mega rich have no where to hide their money.
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 25, 2021 15:31:49 GMT
I agree with you to some degree. Agree But the negative consequences of too high a level of tax need to be considered. So we don’t achieve the opposite of what we want to achieve. Care is needed. Not ideological zeal. Agreed but Corbyn(McDonnell)omics would have twitched the dial only a couple of notches. The wiggle room lays way beyond that. What would you like to see? Do you have an idea of salary bands and tax rates? |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 25, 2021 15:50:49 GMT
Agreed but Corbyn(McDonnell)omics would have twitched the dial only a couple of notches. The wiggle room lays way beyond that. What would you like to see? Do you have an idea of salary bands and tax rates? I'd narrow the bands putting in new higher rates at £75K and £100K and a top one at £150K. Additional levies on companies paying mega salaries of over £250K. Even more important for me though would be to stop the rampant deregulation of Labour markets and outlaw the shameful practice of zero hours contracts and the gig economy, giving people more job security. |
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 25, 2021 16:29:09 GMT
What would you like to see? Do you have an idea of salary bands and tax rates? I'd narrow the bands putting in new higher rates at £75K and £100K and a top one at £150K. Additional levies on companies paying mega salaries of over £250K. Even more important for me though would be to stop the rampant deregulation of Labour markets and outlaw the shameful practice of zero hours contracts and the gig economy, giving people more job security. What rates of taxation in those bands? |
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Jan 25, 2021 16:49:54 GMT
What would you like to see? Do you have an idea of salary bands and tax rates? I'd narrow the bands putting in new higher rates at £75K and £100K and a top one at £150K. Additional levies on companies paying mega salaries of over £250K. Even more important for me though would be to stop the rampant deregulation of Labour markets and outlaw the shameful practice of zero hours contracts and the gig economy, giving people more job security. Absolutely agree with you about zero hours contracts and the gig economy. People at the bottom need more money and more job security. People in the middle and the top should be prepared to pay more at the tills to ensure that this happens. Employers also need to consider reducing their margins to ensure that this can be facilitated. Tax laws and their collection need to be improved. Loopholes should be closed. If Amazon don't want to pay their fair share of tax in the UK then let them leave there will be plenty of other companies willing to fill the gap. No one needs Amazon. It is just an easy convenience...and I speak as a Prime Member and a subscriber to other Amazon services. The gap between the top and bottom earners in the UK is now following the American model. In the 70's we were nearer the European & Japanese model. While the gap in Western European countries has widened I don't think it has widened anywhere near as fast as the UK has. I have not checked this for a long time so would be interested to see if this is still valid. In short we need to spread the wealth more evenly to reduce the gap between the top earners and the lowest earners. |
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 25, 2021 19:52:10 GMT
I'd narrow the bands putting in new higher rates at £75K and £100K and a top one at £150K. Additional levies on companies paying mega salaries of over £250K. Even more important for me though would be to stop the rampant deregulation of Labour markets and outlaw the shameful practice of zero hours contracts and the gig economy, giving people more job security. What rates of taxation in those bands? 45 kicking in at 75K up to 55 at 150K would be a start but it's not all about income tax. Capital gains reforms, corporation tax reforms (although I think we know where that is heading post Brexit), transactions taxes on the City of London, changes in inheritance tax and gifting. There's plenty to go at to tackle inequality and achieve a fairer society if there is a will. I think where we will agree is there no real will in the country at large or in the two main parties to achieve that. |
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 25, 2021 21:32:04 GMT
What rates of taxation in those bands? 45 kicking in at 75K up to 55 at 150K would be a start but it's not all about income tax. Capital gains reforms, corporation tax reforms (although I think we know where that is heading post Brexit), transactions taxes on the City of London, changes in inheritance tax and gifting. There's plenty to go at to tackle inequality and achieve a fairer society if there is a will. I think where we will agree is there no real will in the country at large or in the two main parties to achieve that. It’s an interesting discussion - how to reduce the wealth gap while still trying to grow a successful economy. I agree with you that it’s not just about income tax. Actually I think income tax is one of the less effective ways. Tax relief is one of the biggest areas to address. I’m sure all parties want to do something positive in this regard. The problem is they aren’t sure what to do. So they just do populist stuff and leave it at that. I’m talking, from my perspective, of both SNP and Tory. But Labour were the same when they were in power. I’m going to think a little more about this. Do some digging around. Btw - I’ve just finished reading Ian Kershaw’s Rollercoaster. It’s a fascinating study of post WW2 Europe. It describes, am9mg plenty of other things, the inexorable rise of neo-liberalism across Europe from the 1980s but notes that Britain was at the far end of the spectrum in adoption. Which had its benefits as well as its downsides. It’s interesting to reflect on why different countries had different takes on that approach. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Jan 25, 2021 23:52:13 GMT
A wealth tax would ensure that MLS teams in the US would improve overnight! "The British Invasion III"
In all seriousness, I don't want to make a joke of income inequality. How about tax relief for those not making a killing each year? In the US (And I suspect in the UK as well) just cutting out all the loopholes in the tax law, where the ultra-wealthy get away with paying little income tax (Per capita as compared to us) would be a more equitable place to start. Then a flat tax across the board could be explored. You make a lot - you pay a lot.
|
|
|
|
Post by sheikhmomo on Jan 25, 2021 23:56:34 GMT
45 kicking in at 75K up to 55 at 150K would be a start but it's not all about income tax. Capital gains reforms, corporation tax reforms (although I think we know where that is heading post Brexit), transactions taxes on the City of London, changes in inheritance tax and gifting. There's plenty to go at to tackle inequality and achieve a fairer society if there is a will. I think where we will agree is there no real will in the country at large or in the two main parties to achieve that. It’s an interesting discussion - how to reduce the wealth gap while still trying to grow a successful economy. I agree with you that it’s not just about income tax. Actually I think income tax is one of the less effective ways. Tax relief is one of the biggest areas to address. I’m sure all parties want to do something positive in this regard. The problem is they aren’t sure what to do. So they just do populist stuff and leave it at that. I’m talking, from my perspective, of both SNP and Tory. But Labour were the same when they were in power. I’m going to think a little more about this. Do some digging around. Btw - I’ve just finished reading Ian Kershaw’s Rollercoaster. It’s a fascinating study of post WW2 Europe. It describes, am9mg plenty of other things, the inexorable rise of neo-liberalism across Europe from the 1980s but notes that Britain was at the far end of the spectrum in adoption. Which had its benefits as well as its downsides. It’s interesting to reflect on why different countries had different takes on that approach. I'll look that up. Cheers. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 26, 2021 8:17:34 GMT
Yay or Nay? I can see some sense in it - a system that has allowed such vast wealth inequalities clearly needs righting somehow - but is this the right way? How else could we encourage the super rich to spread their wealth more equitably without taxing it from them? Richest 1% have 23% of total wealthDon't really see this happening, didn't France try it recently and people left the country? Don't you think that quite a few will be saying my wealth wasn't what it was. Alongside the comments about job and wealth creation they have done Also, sure they will "employ" advisers to get around it as best they can Finally, where does it leave people wishing to better themselves, only for a government to come along and say we want a wealth tax? France have been doing it for years. People didn’t leave the country. In France I believe your primary residence is exempt along with another €650,000 of assets, so you need to be very wealthy to be taxed. There is also a maximum of something like 10% of gross income as a cap, to ensure those who are capital rich but income poor (often elderly) are not disproportionately affected. We absolutely should have some sort of wealth tax. |
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 26, 2021 8:47:53 GMT
Don't really see this happening, didn't France try it recently and people left the country? Don't you think that quite a few will be saying my wealth wasn't what it was. Alongside the comments about job and wealth creation they have done Also, sure they will "employ" advisers to get around it as best they can Finally, where does it leave people wishing to better themselves, only for a government to come along and say we want a wealth tax? France have been doing it for years. People didn’t leave the country. In France I believe your primary residence is exempt along with another €650,000 of assets, so you need to be very wealthy to be taxed. There is also a maximum of something like 10% of gross income as a cap, to ensure those who are capital rich but income poor (often elderly) are not disproportionately affected. We absolutely should have some sort of wealth tax. “Some sort of wealth tax” Easier said than done. This article helps explain some of the challenges... If a Wealth Tax is Such a Good Idea, Why Did Europe Kill Theirs?Btw, the ultra rich are also usually, relatively, income poor relative to their wealth noting, by way of example Jeff Bezos who has a net worth of $135 billion, but his formal salary is less than $100,000 per year. It’s illuminating to note the solution, given in the conclusion to that article, that Thomas Pickety arrived at in his book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, that considers wealth inequality and what to do about it... A bit depressing I know. But tilting at windmills is a fruitless endeavour. |
|
|
|
Post by oggyoggy on Jan 26, 2021 9:23:55 GMT
France have been doing it for years. People didn’t leave the country. In France I believe your primary residence is exempt along with another €650,000 of assets, so you need to be very wealthy to be taxed. There is also a maximum of something like 10% of gross income as a cap, to ensure those who are capital rich but income poor (often elderly) are not disproportionately affected. We absolutely should have some sort of wealth tax. “Some sort of wealth tax” Easier said than done. This article helps explain some of the challenges... If a Wealth Tax is Such a Good Idea, Why Did Europe Kill Theirs?Btw, the ultra rich are also usually, relatively, income poor relative to their wealth noting, by way of example Jeff Bezos who has a net worth of $135 billion, but his formal salary is less than $100,000 per year. It’s illuminating to note the solution, given in the conclusion to that article, that Thomas Pickety arrived at in his book, Capital in the Twenty-First Century, that considers wealth inequality and what to do about it... A bit depressing I know. But tilting at windmills is a fruitless endeavour. The rich will always hide their income and assets from the tax man. That doesn’t mean we stop trying to tax them. My clients aren’t rich like Bezos, obviously. But they have 6 or 7 figure incomes, plus significant capital. They pay lots of tax already and could afford to pay lots more. Shutting loopholes and regulating tax havens should be done at the same time, ideally with an internationally agreed approach. |
|
|
|
Post by dirtclod on Jan 26, 2021 17:53:24 GMT
That's what I'd like to see oggy - shutting the loopholes and action against these tax havens. Only then are the things in my earlier post even possible.
|
|
|
|
Post by partickpotter on Jan 26, 2021 18:10:07 GMT
That's what I'd like to see oggy - shutting the loopholes and action against these tax havens. Only then are the things in my earlier post even possible. Please excuse another book recommendation but if you are interested in this subject you might like to read Treasure Islands by Nicholas Shaxon published in 2012. It’s an illuminating read if somewhat depressing as you come to realise not just the problems they cause but how utterly dependent global national economies, particularly ours, are dependent on them. |
|
|
|
Post by tuum on Jan 28, 2021 20:12:20 GMT
I found this interesting video on youtube that explains the difference between income disparity and wealth disparity. It cites The Netherlands as being the most unequal place on earth in terms of the gap between the rich and the poor in terms of wealth. The Scandinavian countries also come quite high on the list of wealth disparity. Obviously, there is a catch to this analysis which he explains in the video. I liked the simplified way in which the economics was explained. Easy for people like me to understand.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on May 22, 2021 18:17:54 GMT
Given the release of the most recent rich list and the fact there's been even more UK billionaires created in the last 12 months, surely the only humane way to resolve the COVID black hole is by asking those who already have extraordinary privilege and wealth to contribute heavily to the recovery?
Or is that a bit too much like socialism for the UK?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dave the Rave on May 22, 2021 22:48:17 GMT
Given the release of the most recent rich list and the fact there's been even more UK billionaires created in the last 12 months, surely the only humane way to resolve the COVID black hole is by asking those who already have extraordinary privilege and wealth to contribute heavily to the recovery? Or is that a bit too much like socialism for the UK? Changed my mind. Tax the poor. The rich have earned their wealth. Leave them alone or they'll take their wealth elsewhere and we'll all suffer. |
|
|
|
Post by PotteringThrough on May 22, 2021 22:52:36 GMT
If we were all playing the same game it’d be much better.
|
|
|
|
Post by Rednwhitenblue on May 23, 2021 7:13:40 GMT
You’re describing the Laffer Curve. At a certain point increased taxation produces less revenue for the exchequer. So, great care is needed in setting tax rates. Being motivated by emotion or ideology is not sufficient. Whilst having some confidence in a part of that correlation, the concept that the rich will just fuck off elsewhere if you tax them progressively has always seemed a bit lame to me. Either way, the rampant growth in inequality over the past few decades suggest that we're are mile off that point and the wiggle room is enormous. Trickle down doesn't work. I agree. It's always presented as the argument as to why this can't work. Yet, this conveniently ignores the fact that tax take overall is higher on the continent, they still have wealth creators and rich people and generally better public services. And happier people. It also amuses me that Tory supporters bristle when you suggest they might be a tad on the selfish side, as they happily agree that rich people will bugger off if you dare to suggest taxing them more. Perhaps these great patriots who are so happy to turn their backs on the UK for the sake of their own cash should be prevented from voting when they do bugger off? Why should they get to influence the country they so clearly don't want to support or even live in? |
|
|
|
Post by wagsastokie on May 23, 2021 8:07:51 GMT
With social care
I think what is needed is some sort of impartial commission
Which all major parties sign up to abide by
As with the last may attempt to start to deal with social care the Labour Party waded in with death tax death tax in a attempt to win votes
The Tory party have done similar when labour tried
It’s time to make social care non political as none of us know when we may need it
|
|
