Active discussions

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

To think Reeves is missing a trick here?

114 replies

Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 10:25

Every single thread on taxation has numerous posters gleefully asserting that they would be delighted to pay more tax. Why on earth doesn't Rachael Reeves publicise the fact that anyone can volunteer to pay more tax if they are that way inclined and that there are already mechanisms to do this? You could even give everyone that donates additional tax a little sticker or certificate so that they can prove they're morally superior to the rest of us and just how much of a better citizen they are.

I would expect to raise at least a few billion from this if everyone put their money where their mouth is and the donors would be in a far better position to preach about the virtues of high taxation if they could prove that they were actually walking the walk.

AIBU?

OP posts:
Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:34

Poppingby · 17/10/2025 12:31

No I think the idea is that not only do you get prestige from the amount you GIVE but the amount you EARN/ OWN in the first place. So the gold/ platinum levels etc would just be about your tax level as a percentage not as an amount. Who cares if you paid £100 in tax if you're worth 20 mil? You can feel superior if you're a platinum level tax payer though.

You could certainly do 'Just Giving' style tax adverts but like with charity donations you wouldn't get to decide how the money is actually spent as that's just costly admin. Like if you donate to Battersea Dog's home you don't decide if they spend your money on nice dog toys or retarmacking the staff carpark.

Show quote history

But you get to decide what policy area it is spent on. That way people will be more incentivised to give. So if you donate to education, you can't dictate that your money is used to fund text books are teachers. However you know it won't be spent on housing for example or other policy areas that you maybe don't want to actively support.

OP posts:
Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:32

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 12:18

I think if you're successful, work very hard and/or are incredibly clever or talented and invent something brilliant, you should be able to enjoy the rewards of that...

...up to about £10m.

No-one needs more than that. No-one needs a yacht in the Med. You can be rich, sure, be not obscenely so. How this could be organised fiscally I have no idea. But I just wish society would start to judge and disapprove of extreme wealth. I differentiate between that and people who have made sacrifices to be high earners and deserve a comfortable, even luxurious lifestyle...within sane limits.

I think many decent wealthy people want to be rich in a rich country, not rich in a poor country.

Where is the incentive to innovate, grow and take risks if everyone is capped at £10 million? When I get my £10 million I might as well just wind down my business and fire everyone. I might as well stop innovating as there is no reward. I might as well stop working. I might as well stop.

It makes far more sense for us as a society to put a huge emphasis on those that have extreme wealth to be seen to be contributors. To publicly reward them giving more tax and to give it a status in itself. In the Victoria age it was a status symbol for the very rich to build opulent public buildings as a legacy to themselves. This is why we have so many beautiful buildings in cities. What if we encouraged this spirit again and encouraged the super rich to build schools, hospitals and other publicly useful buildings in their name?

OP posts:
Bushmillsbabe · 17/10/2025 12:32

I think some people would be happy to pay more tax if they could see a direct benefit from it for their local community. At the moment there is a feeling that it is just going into a massive government black hole.

Many already do this - voluntary contributions to schools for example are an attempt at filling the gap between what the tax payer provides and what is actually needed. We went to look at a state secondary school recently, where the suggested 'voluntary donation' was £500 per term! And looking at their facilities compared to another secondary on the same road, they clearly got this and more!

Children's hospices are another example of what should be government funded but is actually propped up by donations.

Donations which fulfill what should be a statutory service are already a form of voluntary taxation.

Poppingby · 17/10/2025 12:31

Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 11:56

Also just to add to the idea. We could have 'Just Giving' style target for specific spending that the government wants to do e.g. abolish the CB two child cap and people can direct their donation to that specific policy. We could have similar targets to maintain spend other areas such as education of disability benefits so people can donate to avoid cuts.

No I think the idea is that not only do you get prestige from the amount you GIVE but the amount you EARN/ OWN in the first place. So the gold/ platinum levels etc would just be about your tax level as a percentage not as an amount. Who cares if you paid £100 in tax if you're worth 20 mil? You can feel superior if you're a platinum level tax payer though.

You could certainly do 'Just Giving' style tax adverts but like with charity donations you wouldn't get to decide how the money is actually spent as that's just costly admin. Like if you donate to Battersea Dog's home you don't decide if they spend your money on nice dog toys or retarmacking the staff carpark.

Highlandflo · 17/10/2025 12:29

Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:22

These people literally state 'I would be happy to pay more tax'. I suspect they do mean that this would form part of a high taxation society but surely if all those that really believed in this put their money where their mouth is then we would end up with at least some of the benefits this would bring? Unless of course they actually mean that they want other people to pay a lot more tax and only then would they consider paying a bit more tax. This doesn't feel very community minded though does it?

It's also not how charity works. People donate irrespective of what other people are donating. They do so because they believe in the cause. Do people not genuinely believe in eradicating the two child CB cap or maintaining disability benefits at current levels? Do they think these causes aren't as important as charitable causes?

Show quote history

I think they mean “I would happily pay more tax so I would support tax levels being raised by the government”. I really think you are misunderstanding this form of expression.

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 12:28

Badbadbunny · 17/10/2025 12:21

What about all the unemployment caused if yachts, private jets/helicopters, multiple holiday home ownership etc was banned worldwide?? They're huge wealth generating activities for the countries involved. How would you even make it happen?

Show quote history

I did say I had no idea of fiscal policy or how it's implemented.

I'm frankly not concerned about unemployment in the Mediterranean due to a few super-yachts being let go.

I'm interested in the state of the UK.

Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:27

Badbadbunny · 17/10/2025 12:19

If so many people really want to voluntarily pay more tax, then lots of things they can do...

  1. Stop paying tradesmen in cash,
  2. Stop investing in ISAs,
  3. Stop buying duty free cigarettes, alcohol and perfurmes, etc,
  4. Stop cutting hours etc to stay under the cliff edge tax thresholds,
  5. etc etc

In reality, the vast majority of people are now conditioned to pay less tax and they actively take steps to do so.

I think it's incredibly naive to think that millions of people would voluntarily pay more tax!

Oh I agree, but I wonder if she made an official appeal and rewarded people that donated with certificates that this would encourage donations from a whole load of people that are probably avoiding tax elsewhere. It would swell the coffers even if people weren't actually doing all they can.

I think it's amazing what peer pressure and the desire to look like a good person and not be exposed as a hypocrite will do. Do you remember us all stood on a doorstep clapping for the NHS?

OP posts:
Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:23

PopperBo · 17/10/2025 12:21

I think it is more to do with many feeling their tax is wasted one way or another. If people could elect where this additional tax went perhaps even more would do so.

I want more spent on education personally.

Yes, that's why I thought of the individual targets with specific deliverables associated with them. So education would absolutely be one of them and it would be clear where this money would be spent and what cuts would no longer be made if enough money was raised.

OP posts:
Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:22

Highlandflo · 17/10/2025 12:16

OP I think you are taking the sentiment you hear expressed too literally and simplistically. Clearly those who say this are talking about a higher tax policy that they would be ok with. HTH.

These people literally state 'I would be happy to pay more tax'. I suspect they do mean that this would form part of a high taxation society but surely if all those that really believed in this put their money where their mouth is then we would end up with at least some of the benefits this would bring? Unless of course they actually mean that they want other people to pay a lot more tax and only then would they consider paying a bit more tax. This doesn't feel very community minded though does it?

It's also not how charity works. People donate irrespective of what other people are donating. They do so because they believe in the cause. Do people not genuinely believe in eradicating the two child CB cap or maintaining disability benefits at current levels? Do they think these causes aren't as important as charitable causes?

OP posts:
PopperBo · 17/10/2025 12:21

I think it is more to do with many feeling their tax is wasted one way or another. If people could elect where this additional tax went perhaps even more would do so.

I want more spent on education personally.

Badbadbunny · 17/10/2025 12:21

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 12:18

I think if you're successful, work very hard and/or are incredibly clever or talented and invent something brilliant, you should be able to enjoy the rewards of that...

...up to about £10m.

No-one needs more than that. No-one needs a yacht in the Med. You can be rich, sure, be not obscenely so. How this could be organised fiscally I have no idea. But I just wish society would start to judge and disapprove of extreme wealth. I differentiate between that and people who have made sacrifices to be high earners and deserve a comfortable, even luxurious lifestyle...within sane limits.

I think many decent wealthy people want to be rich in a rich country, not rich in a poor country.

What about all the unemployment caused if yachts, private jets/helicopters, multiple holiday home ownership etc was banned worldwide?? They're huge wealth generating activities for the countries involved. How would you even make it happen?

TMMC1 · 17/10/2025 12:19

Pinkearedcows · 17/10/2025 11:57

What would that achieve apart from a massive class action lawsuit and an uptick in the benefits bill? More people would be entitled to Council Tax benefit and Pension Credit, especially in cases of pensioners with disabilities etc. Also female ex civil servants who are more likely to have worked part-time and not be entitled to a full state pension.

Edited
Show quote history

Just following her mandate for everyone being equal. She want fairness but it's very lopsided!

Badbadbunny · 17/10/2025 12:19

If so many people really want to voluntarily pay more tax, then lots of things they can do...

  1. Stop paying tradesmen in cash,
  2. Stop investing in ISAs,
  3. Stop buying duty free cigarettes, alcohol and perfurmes, etc,
  4. Stop cutting hours etc to stay under the cliff edge tax thresholds,
  5. etc etc

In reality, the vast majority of people are now conditioned to pay less tax and they actively take steps to do so.

I think it's incredibly naive to think that millions of people would voluntarily pay more tax!

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 12:18

I think if you're successful, work very hard and/or are incredibly clever or talented and invent something brilliant, you should be able to enjoy the rewards of that...

...up to about £10m.

No-one needs more than that. No-one needs a yacht in the Med. You can be rich, sure, be not obscenely so. How this could be organised fiscally I have no idea. But I just wish society would start to judge and disapprove of extreme wealth. I differentiate between that and people who have made sacrifices to be high earners and deserve a comfortable, even luxurious lifestyle...within sane limits.

I think many decent wealthy people want to be rich in a rich country, not rich in a poor country.

Highlandflo · 17/10/2025 12:16

OP I think you are taking the sentiment you hear expressed too literally and simplistically. Clearly those who say this are talking about a higher tax policy that they would be ok with. HTH.

CoffeeCantata · 17/10/2025 12:14

outofofficeagain · 17/10/2025 10:48

I am probably one of those people. I run my own business. I had a call from a company offering me all sorts of tax efficient schemes. I said no. When he launched into his script about ‘we all want to pay less tax’ I told him I didn’t and actually wanted hospitals and schools. Many people do the same.

It’s not being morally superior.

But your suggestion is like trashing the place just because there will be other people volunteering to clean it up because they don’t like living in shit.

I agree. I say this to tradesmen who come out with the old line 'We don't want the taxman to get it now, do we?' when demanding to be paid in cash. I avoid these people if at all possible.

I've always had to pay my tax! PAYE etc. And I want hospitals, roads, schools, police etc etc.

Don't they?

Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:08

Just to add some statistics. If a quarter of the population volunteered £1000 a year then this would give Reeves £17.5 billion. You would still get almost £2billion if a quarter of the population donated £100 on average

OP posts:
LeanToWhatToDo · 17/10/2025 12:02

I think it would. There are some supremely rich villages who spend a long time trying to plant their way to victory, so having another target to get them through St Peter's gates would be a winner, I think!

Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 12:00

LeanToWhatToDo · 17/10/2025 11:58

You could bring back the thermometer style boards at local churches, for local charities, then whole villages could have a Golden Bush or something awarded from the gov...

Show quote history

Ha it sounds ridiculous but I do wonder if there is something in this. People donate huge amounts to charitable causes they feel passionately about. The government funds some of our most vital services. If we literally spelled out the gap and asked those that could afford to donate to do so then would this really make no difference at all?

OP posts:
Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 11:58

LarkspurLane · 17/10/2025 11:56

Do you advertise the fact every time you do a good deed?

I'm curious if you do, and if you feel better for it.

Show quote history

I don't personally but I am only human and do like to acknowledge good deeds done by myself or others. Why not?

Also it is a form of accountability. Using the Gary Neville example, if he had a certificate then he could prove that he isn't a complete hypocrite and give him more credibility. He is actively walking the walk.

Nobody would be forced to publicise their donation. It wouldn't be mandatory

OP posts:
LeanToWhatToDo · 17/10/2025 11:58

Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 11:56

Also just to add to the idea. We could have 'Just Giving' style target for specific spending that the government wants to do e.g. abolish the CB two child cap and people can direct their donation to that specific policy. We could have similar targets to maintain spend other areas such as education of disability benefits so people can donate to avoid cuts.

You could bring back the thermometer style boards at local churches, for local charities, then whole villages could have a Golden Bush or something awarded from the gov...

Pinkearedcows · 17/10/2025 11:57

TMMC1 · 17/10/2025 11:33

She wants fairness and flat line so why isn't she stopping civil service pensions with immediate effect?

What would that achieve apart from a massive class action lawsuit and an uptick in the benefits bill? More people would be entitled to Council Tax benefit and Pension Credit, especially in cases of pensioners with disabilities etc. Also female ex civil servants who are more likely to have worked part-time and not be entitled to a full state pension.

GeneralPeter · 17/10/2025 11:57

outofofficeagain · 17/10/2025 10:48

I am probably one of those people. I run my own business. I had a call from a company offering me all sorts of tax efficient schemes. I said no. When he launched into his script about ‘we all want to pay less tax’ I told him I didn’t and actually wanted hospitals and schools. Many people do the same.

It’s not being morally superior.

But your suggestion is like trashing the place just because there will be other people volunteering to clean it up because they don’t like living in shit.

Isn’t it more like publicising a litter-picking volunteering opportunity?

At the moment 60% of the litter-picking is done by the same 10% of people. 30% is done by the same 1%.

They are the people best-suited to litter-picking, certainly, but we might still feel a society where people volunteer to pick litter is better than one where people volunteer extra shifts for the ones already doing most of it.

Original poster
Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 11:56

Also just to add to the idea. We could have 'Just Giving' style target for specific spending that the government wants to do e.g. abolish the CB two child cap and people can direct their donation to that specific policy. We could have similar targets to maintain spend other areas such as education of disability benefits so people can donate to avoid cuts.

OP posts:
LarkspurLane · 17/10/2025 11:56

Marshmallow4545 · 17/10/2025 11:52

Your certificate or badge can say exactly how much you paid. That way people are incentivised to give more to look like you're not being stingy. People like Gary Neville will have to volunteer quite a lot to not look like a hypocrite.

Show quote history

Do you advertise the fact every time you do a good deed?

I'm curious if you do, and if you feel better for it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread