50% income tax for earners of £150k and above

[shropshire 0]

It was budget day in the U.K yesterday.

Over the next 5 years we will borrow over £175bn (BILLION!!!!!) More money than any government in the past 300 years - fucking hellllllll

And if you earn over £150,000/year then your will be paying over 1/2 of it in tax (1/2 in income tax and then more on purchases).

Of course, fuel, booze and fags have gone up too.



clicky

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[ryoder 1,590]

Quote

And if you earn over £150,000/year then your will be paying over 1/2 of it in tax (1/2 in income tax and then more on purchases).

Of course, fuel, booze and fags have gone up too.

Only 50%?
I thought your rates were a lot worse:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maz9ddxEQnM

Now where did the fags go?

"There are only three things of value: younger women, faster airplanes, and bigger crocodiles" - Arthur Jones.

[shropshire 0]

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[philh 0]

Am I misunderstanding ? I would have thought it would be 50% on the marginal amount above £1500,000. So for example someone earning £200,000 would only pay 50% on the last £50,000 so their total income tax burdone would still be less than 50%. Have I got that wrong?

[shropshire 0]

No, actually I think that you have that right... my mistake.

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[nigel99 489]

Quote

No, actually I think that you have that right... my mistake.

That's right but this budget is still based on far more optimistic forecasts than everyone else and secondly only goes half way (by chancellors own admission) to wiping out the deficit created in the past 18 months. We are in a serious mess and it is going to take a generation to fix it (Thanks Gordon)

Experienced jumper - someone who has made mistakes more often than I have and lived.

[shropshire 0]

quite


I hope those money grabbing bastards that got us in this mess in the first place are mighty pleased with them selves


And those MPs better clean their own house up and fast too!!!! No pay rises or shed loads of expenses for them the the next 10 years.



Happy St Georges Day

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[freeflysteve 0]

On top of the tax are the national insurance contributions,employer and employee plus higher earners losing higher rate relief on pension contributions.
The lack of tax relief on pension contributions is a double whammy on higher earners cos they will still have to pay higher rate tax on pensions in payment if the pension puts them in a higher rate band.
Basically fucked over yet again and hopefully this is the nail in the coffin for middle england voters who put labour in power and has let them ruin the country in a way no government ever has before.
For those people contibuting into pension investments the tax treatment by this government is the worst in my knowledge it has ever been.

I am an independent financial adviser.

Swooping, huh? I love that stuff ... all the flashing lights and wailing sirens ... it's very exciting!

[Channman 2]

Quote

It was budget day in the U.K yesterday.

Over the next 5 years we will borrow over £175bn (BILLION!!!!!) More money than any government in the past 300 years - fucking hellllllll

And if you earn over £150,000/year then your will be paying over 1/2 of it in tax (1/2 in income tax and then more on purchases).

Of course, fuel, booze and fags have gone up too.



clicky

Still not enough, the rate should be at minimum 70% of every pound earned to meet the growing needs of the people. Also the rate should apply to those who earn 50,000/year or more.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

And if you earn over £150,000/year then your will be paying over 1/2 of it in tax (1/2 in income tax and then more on purchases).

I'm curious, on your side of the pond are the income tax rates and the actual income tax that you pay the same thing?

[shropshire 0]

Sorry, I'm not sure that I fully understand your question

(.)Y(.)
Chivalry is not dead; it only sleeps for want of work to do. - Jerome K Jerome

[JackC 0]

Quote

Still not enough, the rate should be at minimum 70% of every pound earned to meet the growing needs of the people. Also the rate should apply to those who earn 50,000/year or more.

By effectively capping earnings at £50kpa you stifle entrepreneurial spirit. Why take on extra risks and responsibilities when your earnings will never reflect the extra work? You've just created a nation where mediocrity is the optimum career path.

So instead, how about the people stop increasing their needs? Lets not have breast enhancement on the NHS. No IVF treatment on the NHS. No right to council housing for life. Stop handouts to illegal immigrants. etc etc.

[Channman 2]

Quote

Quote

Still not enough, the rate should be at minimum 70% of every pound earned to meet the growing needs of the people. Also the rate should apply to those who earn 50,000/year or more.

By effectively capping earnings at £50kpa you stifle entrepreneurial spirit. Why take on extra risks and responsibilities when your earnings will never reflect the extra work? You've just created a nation where mediocre is the pinnacle of the career ladder.

So instead, how about the people stop increasing their needs? Lets not have breast enhancement on the NHS. No IVF treatment on the NHS. No right to council housing for life. Stop handouts to illegal immigrants. etc etc.

All I'm trying to do is spread the wealth around. Its hardly fair that these very successful individuals who have taken every oppertunity to improve their lives financially have a better standard of living then any one else. Everyone should have a equal share so to speak.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Sorry, I'm not sure that I fully understand your question

We have income tax rates and we complain about how high they are. But when you factor in all of the tax credits/loopholes/incentives that our leviathan of a tax code provides the actual tax amount you are responsible for is quite a bit lower. I think mine was reduced by almost 24%. And if you're REALLY good (translated as "politically connected"), you can work the system and actually pay less than 0%.

[TomAiello 26]

I feel for you.

And I'm sure that in another year or two, I'll feel for me, too.

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[rehmwa 2]

Quote

Quote

Sorry, I'm not sure that I fully understand your question

We have income tax rates and we complain about how high they are. But when you factor in all of the tax credits/loopholes/incentives that our leviathan of a tax code provides the actual tax amount you are responsible for is quite a bit lower. I think mine was reduced by almost 24%. And if you're REALLY good (translated as "politically connected"), you can work the system and actually pay less than 0%.

Typical right wing selfishness. Don't want to pay your fair share?



{{{wouldn't it be neat if we could delete all the credits/loopholes/incentives and just pay the lower rate from the get-go?

I suspect that's also selfish of me - since it would put accountants out of work and the Congress wouldn't have as much power}}}

...
Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Typical right wing selfishness. Don't want to pay your fair share?

I do pay my fair share. They just don't manage it very well.

Quote

{{{wouldn't it be neat if we could delete all the credits/loopholes/incentives and just pay the lower rate from the get-go?

I suspect that's also selfish of me - since it would put accountants out of work and the Congress wouldn't have as much power}}}

That's just crazy talk. Do you want all of our banks to fail?!?!

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

I do pay my fair share. They just don't manage it very well.

I'm sure we can find comfort in the "fact" that private industry is always more efficient than government agencies. Surely you don't believe that USPS would have charged less than $1 million to ship two 19¢ washers from South Carolina to Texas, do you?

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

I'm sure we can find comfort in the "fact" that private industry is always more efficient than government agencies. Surely you don't believe that USPS would have charged less than $1 million to ship two 19¢ washers from South Carolina to Texas, do you?

They probably would have gotten away with it if they had kept their shipping costs down to something "reasonable" like $99,000.
On another note, look at the pattern of the orders.
One for two washers.
One for three screws.
One for one split washer.

Hmmm...I think I'm beginning to figure it out. You know all of those signs you see on the side of the road that say you can make thousands of dollars by working from home stuffing envelopes and the like? I'll be the phone number goes to the Pentagon. And here I thought it was just another scam

[BDashe 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Still not enough, the rate should be at minimum 70% of every pound earned to meet the growing needs of the people. Also the rate should apply to those who earn 50,000/year or more.

By effectively capping earnings at £50kpa you stifle entrepreneurial spirit. Why take on extra risks and responsibilities when your earnings will never reflect the extra work? You've just created a nation where mediocre is the pinnacle of the career ladder.

So instead, how about the people stop increasing their needs? Lets not have breast enhancement on the NHS. No IVF treatment on the NHS. No right to council housing for life. Stop handouts to illegal immigrants. etc etc.

All I'm trying to do is spread the wealth around. Its hardly fair that these very successful individuals who have taken every oppertunity to improve their lives financially have a better standard of living then any one else. Everyone should have a equal share so to speak.

Wow. I hope this is a joke...

If not, you'd be content to be a surgeon and have the same standard of living as a janitor? This isn't "Lost" ya know, we're not isolated on an island with 20 people...

So there I was...

Making friends and playing nice since 1983

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

Still not enough, the rate should be at minimum 70% of every pound earned to meet the growing needs of the people. Also the rate should apply to those who earn 50,000/year or more.

By effectively capping earnings at £50kpa you stifle entrepreneurial spirit. Why take on extra risks and responsibilities when your earnings will never reflect the extra work? You've just created a nation where mediocre is the pinnacle of the career ladder.

So instead, how about the people stop increasing their needs? Lets not have breast enhancement on the NHS. No IVF treatment on the NHS. No right to council housing for life. Stop handouts to illegal immigrants. etc etc.

All I'm trying to do is spread the wealth around. Its hardly fair that these very successful individuals who have taken every oppertunity to improve their lives financially have a better standard of living then any one else. Everyone should have a equal share so to speak.

Quote

Why should you get part of what someone else has earned? you didn't work for it, someone else did. what makes you so special that you should have part of someone elses hard work?

not trying to be mean here just trying to understand your thinking.

[idrankwhat 0]

Quote

Why should you get part of what someone else has earned? you didn't work for it, someone else did. what makes you so special that you should have part of someone elses hard work?

Very good questions. Just don't forget that "wealth" can can spread upward as well. The last 25 years are a real testament to that.
And on top of what some of them "earned" we recently gave them bonuses for being shitty at their jobs. Maybe we should give them a tax cut just to be sure.

Hate to snipe and run but I've got a long weekend ahead.
See ya!

[marks2065 0]

Quote

Quote

Why should you get part of what someone else has earned? you didn't work for it, someone else did. what makes you so special that you should have part of someone elses hard work?

Very good questions. Just don't forget that "wealth" can can spread upward as well. The last 25 years are a real testament to that.
And on top of what some of them "earned" we recently gave them bonuses for being shitty at their jobs. Maybe we should give them a tax cut just to be sure.

Hate to snipe and run but I've got a long weekend ahead.
See ya!

Quote

Why don't we hold those that bankrupted a company responsible and take all their assets? set an example that if you do good you get rich, if you do bad you get broke, just like the rest of us. If fraud was used you go to jail, just like the rest of us.

[TomAiello 26]

Quote

Quote

I do pay my fair share. They just don't manage it very well.

I'm sure we can find comfort in the "fact" that private industry is always more efficient than government agencies. Surely you don't believe that USPS would have charged less than $1 million to ship two 19¢ washers from South Carolina to Texas, do you?

I'm curious how a couple of criminals defrauding the government by taking advantage of loopholes in government payment schemes says anything about efficiency in the private sector?

-- Tom Aiello

Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com
SnakeRiverBASE.com

[jcd11235 0]

Quote

Quote

Quote

I do pay my fair share. They just don't manage it very well.

I'm sure we can find comfort in the "fact" that private industry is always more efficient than government agencies. Surely you don't believe that USPS would have charged less than $1 million to ship two 19¢ washers from South Carolina to Texas, do you?

I'm curious how a couple of criminals defrauding the government by taking advantage of loopholes in government payment schemes says anything about efficiency in the private sector?

There are none so blind as those who will not see.

Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials!