To be sick of politicians using 'fairness' as justification for tax rises?

Except that wasn't what was said at all. This was specifically about the two child cap and the fact that almost half of families are exempt from the general benefit cap because there is a disabled family member. This is fact. The more children you have the more likely it is that one will be disabled. This is just common sense and supported by statistics. What is so awful in noting this?

As a business owner I pay employee NIC, corporation tax and business rates. I also create many jobs and they all pay tax on their PAYE (as do I). I'm a top rate tax payer - there's no magic tax loophole where I can make wads of cash and not pay tax on it.

Small businesses are the lifeblood of the economy and many business owners (myself included) work their arses off to build and grow them. We also deal with massive amounts of stress and financial insecurity. This kind of anti-business chat is really annoying.

It’s physically hard, I used to work double shifts and my back was constantly in agony, my feet killed. It’s unsociable hours, you have to work evenings, weekends, over Christmas and on bank holidays. That’s hard. It might not be academic but it’s exhausting, badly paid and you miss out on a lot of events with family and friend ps. Not to mention dealing with the general public, the behind the scenes in the kitchens is stressful too.

It is not defeatist to say that not everyone is going to be employed. There are not enough jobs out there.

Just a 🤏 bit defeatist.

Except that wasn't what was said at all. This was specifically about the two child cap and the fact that almost half of families are exempt from the general benefit cap because there is a disabled family member. This is fact. The more children you have the more likely it is that one will be disabled. This is just common sense and supported by statistics. What is so awful in noting this?

In what jobs?
According to ONS figures, there are 2.5 jobseekers (so people actively looking for work) to every vacancy.

Yep this is what I was saying earlier on. I earn a high salary and don’t work hard.

why do you need to OP, when I don’t?

What if you're wrong though?

I don't think people who question the trajectory of a benefits heavy society necessarily do so on the basis of their own circumstances. Maybe it's about a bigger picture.

Personally, I think it's an absolute waste to see so many working age adults not working. With encouragement, they could improve their own standard of living/emotional well being and (in numbers) would improve the areas we all live in.

Why is this a competition? There is no real way to measure what work is hard or not. Why is it, on MN, that only high earners are working "hard"?

I know I would find waitressing really hard work. Having to "mask" for a shift, be on your feet etc. I would hate it, and find it hard work. I could go home, but be wiped out for the rest of day and struggle to do much else apart from recover.
That is the reality for a lot of people in low paid jobs that do not have responsibility over things like hundreds of employees, or a massive budgets. But they still work hard.

Not read the thread but I imagine it's the usual whining from people pretending to be on huge incomes, dehumanising people whose contributions don't meet some imaginary bar and a load of guff about "personal responsibility"?

Contributing what you can constitutes fairness so the op is on dodgy ground before you even get past the title. But people have always whinged about doing their bit because their greed dictates that they want to keep everything to themselves. Nothing new under the sun.

Not read the thread but I imagine it's the usual whining from people pretending to be on huge incomes, dehumanising people whose contributions don't meet some imaginary bar and a load of guff about "personal responsibility"?

Contributing what you can constitutes fairness so the op is on dodgy ground before you even get past the title. But people have always whinged about doing their bit because their greed dictates that they want to keep everything to themselves. Nothing new under the sun.

Not read the thread but I imagine it's the usual whining from people pretending to be on huge incomes, dehumanising people whose contributions don't meet some imaginary bar and a load of guff about "personal responsibility"?

Contributing what you can constitutes fairness so the op is on dodgy ground before you even get past the title. But people have always whinged about doing their bit because their greed dictates that they want to keep everything to themselves. Nothing new under the sun.

As my mum would say, it’s better than a poke in the eye with a blunt stick!

I can’t believe the amount of people prepared to make the counter factual argument that business owners pay the same rate of tax as employees.

They pay a lower rate on average, and that is a fact. Of course, that doesn’t go for every single business or business owner, and the scale of tax efficiency grows with the size of the business. But anecdote doesn’t trump data and, if you do even a tiny bit of research, you will find that is correct.

You can argue whether it is a good thing (and I do think true entrepreneurs should be lauded and rewarded) but you can’t argue whether it is a thing. It is.

The reason is the flexibility. A business owner can split their income between leaving money in the business, taking dividends and taking a salary to optimise tax efficiency.

And there are all sorts of ways of getting money out of the business other than a full sale such as selling a portion via private equity or the business loaning money at a low interest rate until it is sold.

Why is this a competition? There is no real way to measure what work is hard or not. Why is it, on MN, that only high earners are working "hard"?

I know I would find waitressing really hard work. Having to "mask" for a shift, be on your feet etc. I would hate it, and find it hard work. I could go home, but be wiped out for the rest of day and struggle to do much else apart from recover.
That is the reality for a lot of people in low paid jobs that do not have responsibility over things like hundreds of employees, or a massive budgets. But they still work hard.

I do think it’s funny how many people want to ignore me because they don’t like what I post, so they think I am confused!

my quote about top earners paying 12% net tax was a search for UK, not U.S.

And I don’t have any idea why someone seems to think that I believe that you can sell the same business annually.

No, I am not an accountant and nor have I run a business, but I have for most of my life paid tax at the highest rate and I invest in both publicly traded shares and small private equities, and I can see the tax advantages accruing to the owners.

It is a fact that most (successful) business owners will pay themselves a small salary, so they won’t hit the higher tax bands and the rest as a mixture of dividends and pension contributions (although a lot of that benefit has recently been destroyed).

Although, yes, you do pay corporate tax on profits and then tax again when you receive the dividend, it is still a lot less than the personal tax bands (about 5% if you are paying tax at the highest rate).

And, as for taking capital gains, you can sell a share in your business via private equity if you have a medium size successful business. Most small private equity companies will look at any business with a net worth of over 5 million, which means an EBITDA of under one million at a reason ratio. That isn’t a huge business by any means. So, yes, you can release bits of your business over time. It isn’t all or nothing.

If I am wrong, I am happy to be challenged with actual facts, but not dismissed with nebulous accusations of having no idea what I am talking about.

Do people seriously believe that owners of medium (with medium starting quite low) to large successful businesses pay a net tax rate of 45%? Why do you think a wealth tax is being mooted (although will never happen)?

A child is a human in their own right. They should look to cover their costs from cradle to grave if they can. That way you aren't a burden on society. Do you think that's wrong? Why should this be all our aim?

I wish we could ban the phrase “net contributor”. Not sure what I am - teacher, but claim 2 x child benefit and DLA for DS. I hope being in education for 26 years means my contribution to society is worth my “pay”. Not all benefit claimants are abusing the system. Yes they exist - I grew up in a benefit lifestyle household - but I am not unique in being socially mobile.

What helped to lift me out of poverty were good teachers who cares for me, FSM, a bursary to catch a bus to college, no uni fee, bursary at uni - all this would be under “welfare”.