Page 7 | AIBU to refuse extra hours when most of the pay goes in tax?

oldFoolMe · 2026-05-12T10:46:02+00:00

Would you work extra hours if you had to pay 67% tax on it? Thats without additional childcare, or commuting costs.

Sleightofhandtwistoffate · 12/05/2026 12:33

HoldMyWine · 12/05/2026 12:30

I’ve dropped a day at work to pay less tax. It wasn’t worth my while.

Edited

Same here - it’s not worth me working 5 days a week as it will take my salary over £100k. Also no point me trying to get any more promotions as again it will take me over the £100k.

Sweetpeasaremadeforbees · 12/05/2026 12:33

I think it depends on whether or not any money would come in useful.

If the extra stress outweighs the money, don't do it.

PurpleAxe · 12/05/2026 12:32

Nope, I lowered my hours. Not putting in 100% time/effort for less than 50% reward.

MidnightPatrol · 12/05/2026 12:32

StephQ1 · 12/05/2026 12:29

But the issue is that this 5% pay more income tax than the entire bottom 50% combined. They literally bankroll the majority of the population. If they start paying less tax then everyone else is in deep trouble.

Show quote history

This is what people miss… incentivising this group to work more is in everyone’s interests.

It’s madness to have created this income band in which working more delivers so little - or even costs you money.

Original poster

oldFoolMe · 12/05/2026 12:31

Interestingly its the lowest and highest earners paying the highest percentage that then end up going part time. UC claimants in effect lose 67% of any money earned, without childcare so may even be worse off. 20% tax, 8% NI then 55% taper rate. The highest tax payers pay above and beyond anything reasonable and lose childcare and child benefit so no point in working full time to be marginally better off. What a flawed system. I’m somewhere in the middle not applying for promotion, with the additional stress and need to be on call for it to take me into a higher tax bracket.

OP posts:

HoldMyWine · 12/05/2026 12:30

I’ve dropped a day at work to pay less tax. It wasn’t worth my while.

StephQ1 · 12/05/2026 12:29

TheSmallAssassin · 12/05/2026 12:20

I can't get worked up over it, this doesn't affect 95% of the population.

But the issue is that this 5% pay more income tax than the entire bottom 50% combined. They literally bankroll the majority of the population. If they start paying less tax then everyone else is in deep trouble.

SomethingFun · 12/05/2026 12:28

Hankunamatata · 12/05/2026 12:10

Isnt stats wise only 4% of people in england earn over 100k?

But perhaps this number would be higher if there wasn’t a cliff edge there - imagine if 10% of tax payers were earning and paying tax on £110k because they weren’t being fucked by earning an amount in a particular window.

Araminta1003 · 12/05/2026 12:28

The top 5% pay 50% off income tax! So yes, it affects everyone!

wobblychristmastree · 12/05/2026 12:27

Generally no and I do turn down work in Feb and March because of this.
but what are your pension contributions look like? You could put it in your pension to give it a boost

Skippp · 12/05/2026 12:27

Indeed. If someone is earning £120k and drops their income (stops working so many hours or puts in their pension) to below £100 to avoid paying 67% tax the government gets no extra money. If they dropped their income tax rate to even 45% a the person kept their hours the same the government would be £9k better off.

Araminta1003 · 12/05/2026 12:22

It does affect the 95% because the top 10 per cent are funding the country disproportionally. So if they do not and become inefficient deliberately due to tax policy, then the bottom suffer the most and so do services. It is why you get recessions.

TheSmallAssassin · 12/05/2026 12:20

I can't get worked up over it, this doesn't affect 95% of the population.

Skippp · 12/05/2026 12:10

Well at least in Scotland you still get childcare hours on over £100k. For now. But they’re heading for a massive fiscal reckoning in Scotland soon and they must be in the list for the chop.

Hankunamatata · 12/05/2026 12:10

Isnt stats wise only 4% of people in england earn over 100k?

SomethingFun · 12/05/2026 12:08

I wouldn’t personally especially if you are relying on any childcare support which stops at £100k. If you aren’t and turning it down would stop you earning over £125k in the future then it might be worth gritting your teeth.

It’s so counterproductive, high earners paying into pensions, going part time, taking unpaid leave etc instead of just letting people pay a normal rate of tax and not losing childcare help.

Skippp · 12/05/2026 12:08

MidnightPatrol · 12/05/2026 12:06

They just need to scrap the removal of the personal allowance. It makes no sense for tax to go up, then down again.

No one seems brave enough to do this, as it will lead to cries of ‘tax breaks for the rich’, despite its negative incentives (and being completely illogical or fair).

Move the additional rate down to £100k if they really must.

Show quote history

Even if they gave everyone the personal allowance and upped the top rate of tax people would scream about tax cuts for the rich. Even if they were shown the way that it would boost tax take. A lot of people LOATE rich people, even when they pay lots of tax.

Stoicandhappy · 12/05/2026 12:08

Yes, because it’s pensionable and I am close to retirement

Cypire · 12/05/2026 12:07

No

I would maybe cut my hours.you aren't going to get this time back in your life.

MidnightPatrol · 12/05/2026 12:06

Skippp · 12/05/2026 11:59

That’s the marginal tax rate in Scotland on earnings between £100-125k

Show quote history

They just need to scrap the removal of the personal allowance. It makes no sense for tax to go up, then down again.

No one seems brave enough to do this, as it will lead to cries of ‘tax breaks for the rich’, despite its negative incentives (and being completely illogical or fair).

Move the additional rate down to £100k if they really must.

EmeraldShamrock000 · 12/05/2026 12:04

No, of course not.
I might work extra if they converted them
into extra holiday days off.

arethereanyleftatall · 12/05/2026 12:04

Nope, and when enough of our higher contributors do this more and more, maybe the left will start to understand that you can’t just ‘tax the rich’ because at some point, they’ll just say no.

Skippp · 12/05/2026 12:02

It’s the reason I work part time.

FinchiePink · 12/05/2026 12:02

Skippp · 12/05/2026 11:59

That’s the marginal tax rate in Scotland on earnings between £100-125k

Show quote history

Ah, my apologies. I'm trained and work in E&W tax so that's where my mind defaults.

MidnightPatrol · 12/05/2026 12:02

I agree, what’s the point.

Every other parent I know is cutting hours and using pension contributions to avoid an effective 100%+ tax rate.

The country talks about growth but then heavily incentivises its biggest tax payers to… work less.

I lose £25,000 net if I earn a penny over £100k. Equivalent to earning a 60k salary instead. To regain that lost £25k net, I need to earn £155k. Utter madness.

The worst part is that the £100k threshold has been stuck there for 17 years, no accounting for inflation whatsoever, and yet it’s now creating an effective upper limit on earnings for many.