Help protect children from gaming harms.

Take our survey

Please or to access all these features

Politics

Some theories on recent issues

28 replies

butterfly133 · 23/06/2015 15:11

I’m new to mumsnet and used to post on a political board, so apols if this is really dull. (I came off it because it's totally polarised and there's no balanced chat going on).

My position is that I’ve voted both Labour and Conservative pretty much equally in my lifetime. I really battled with what to do this year because I felt that no one was offering what was needed and I have a feeling a lot of people might have been in the same boat.

The short version is that I was scared to vote Labour because I really thought they might bankrupt us and I was scared to vote Conservative because I think they are picking on the vulnerable. What a choice!

I think the super rich should be targeted in terms of wealth taxes. No party will do this - why not? I felt like Labour thought anyone earning over £40k was rich and the mansion tax seemed like a tax on the South East (though Londoners clearly are fine with it as the areas heavily affected voted Labour anyway). Ed M said he would tax non-doms but other than that, didn’t say anything about so called tax relief schemes.

I also think that a lot of people who wanted to vote Labour actually voted Conservative. If you look at where the Conservatives made gains, they must have done, mustn’t they? Lib Dems who felt they were betrayed by the Lib Dems joining a coalition can’t have voted Conservative because that makes no sense. Their votes would either have gone Green or Labour, surely? So the votes the Conservatives gained must have gone over from Labour. I would imagine the increase in the minimum earnings pre-paying tax would have some link to this - as well as fear of bankruptcy.

Plus, I think many believe the welfare state needs to be reformed but….I think many such people would have been on the march at the weekend. There’s a massive difference between believing in reform and picking on the vulnerable. I’m all for reform and encouraging people to be self sufficient. But cutting things like carers’ allowance – hell no! Makes no sense. If that's austerity, no, I'm not in favour of it. Cut waste, certainly, but not this sort of thing.

The super rich are paying to keep their tax bill as low as possible. I’m not asking that they pay 60% tax. I’m asking they pay the same tax as the rest of us. I don’t see why that is complicated. It doesn't make victims of them because they won't really notice. (in fairness, some of them do say that themselves).

Does anyone else think this way? I'd be really interested to hear from posters who aren't committed voters for any political party and just evaluate as they go along. Thanks!

OP posts:
Isitmebut · 23/06/2015 19:24

"We've even got people buying homes through company structures and avoiding the SDLT. Why is that even allowed?"

I think you'll find Osborne clamped down on that using a few budgets.

2011;
citywire.co.uk/money/government-closes-stamp-duty-avoidance-loophole/a481840

2012; ”Stamp duty avoidance comes under attack”
www.ft.com/cms/s/0/c489a8aa-737b-11e1-aab3-00144feab49a.html#axzz3duW8esuM

2014;

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/dec/03/george-osborne-stamp-duty-overhaul-autumn-statement

butterfly133 · 23/06/2015 16:39

Isitmebut - thank you for posting those links. However, I wonder if I haven't put my point across well.

you mention France. They were charging 75% after a certain point, weren't they? I'm not suggesting anything like that high.

I am aware that higher earners contribute more in tax already.

Also, you link to the OECD on tax evasion - I'm talking about ending the legal tax avoidance schemes, a totally different thing.

We've even got people buying homes through company structures and avoiding the SDLT. Why is that even allowed?

OP posts:
Isitmebut · 23/06/2015 16:26

butterfly133 .... clearly as you allude to (and as France found out), there are levels of taxation that not only bring in less tax, but many of the wealthy leave the country - so IF the object of the exercise is bring in more revenues to the coffers, it is a thin line between more or less revenues - especially if the wealthy if staying use legal tax planning rather than pay 'excessive' tax.

Without a political dialog, you might find the following links helpful, as more tax has been collected from the wealthy individuals and plans to stop Corporate tax avoidance are well under way.

May 2014: “HMRC crackdown yields record £23.9bn in additional tax”
www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-27576626

”The government has raised a record £23.9bn in additional tax for the year to the end of March as a result of a crackdown on tax avoidance.”

“Noose tightens around global tax evasion as OECD countries sign new agreement”
www.cityam.com/1414597567/noose-tightens-around-global-tax-evasion-oecd-countries-sign-new-agreement

"The OECD just took a step closer to fighting tax evasion on a global scale, with 51 territories agreeing to create “information exchanges” that will help track culprits down."

"The first signatories to the dull-sounding "multilateral competent authority agreement" – which include the UK and Ireland – will launch their information exchanges by September 2017. Others will follow in 2018."

Dec 2014; ”U.K. Financial Firms Paid the Most Tax Since 2007, Report Says”
www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2014-12-02/u-k-financial-firms-paid-the-most-tax-since-2007-report-says

”The U.K. financial-services industry contributed 65.6 billion pounds ($103 billion) in taxes in the last fiscal year, the highest since 2007, according to a report.”

Feb 2015: ”Britain's highest earners pay a quarter of nation's income tax”
www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11411790/Britains-highest-earners-pay-a-quarter-of-nations-income-tax.html

“New figures published by HMRC show that the proportion of the nation's tax bill paid by the richest has risen under the Coalition”