Which taxes should Burnham put up?

Rather than increasing any taxes, redistribution of company profits to workers through better wages and reward schemes rather than to ever rising shareholder dividends would impact both individuals and communities as this money would be likely spent locally. Unlike corporate shareholders whose spending might be elsewhere or just left in an account to accumulate more wealth.

Tax all benefits. Anyone receiving over lowest tax banding in benefits gets it taxed.

I basically agree that the most obvious thing to do before raising taxes is to cut spending. We can never raise enough tax to fund this crazy spending train we have found ourselves on so it is the only sustainable approach.

I would:

• means test all disability benefits unless the needs of the disability are associated with very high costs. The idea that disability should be cost neutral to the individual needs to be eradicated completely and it should be more than the state will help with the costs of a disability if you really can't meet the needs yourself. Yes, it's crap and unfair but that's life and a quarter of us will have these challenges in our life. We simply can't afford to insulate us all from this in the same way the state won't and can't insulate you from being born less intelligent or less wealth than your peers.
• stop the triple lock on pensions

• stop throwing money at bonkers levelling up schemes that are very unlikely to deliver benefits to the regions
• stop funding university courses and student loans for courses with low employment prospects.
• reduce benefits for NEETs and focus on making them productive
• stop giving in to strikes by train drivers and consultants. We can't afford to pay them more!

I’d go one further and make people show they are being attended before they qualify. This is a ridiculous benefit whereby it’s given if you need someone to attend but don’t need to have someone attending. I mean, wtf?

My sibling got the highest rate for my DM, which is about £400 a month, so she must have the overnight uplift. There has not been a single carer going in because she doesn’t need one. What she wrote on those forms i have no idea.

As a pp said, what is the point of increasing taxes when it will get eaten up by ever increasing welfare expenses… there will never be any end to the need for more and more tax pounds, most of which is coming from a small % of people: why should they foot the bill for everyone?

It becomes a vicious circle of taking money from working people (and I include high earners in that who can’t take much more of the squeeze) and giving it to pensioners and people who don’t work, or work very little because working more means they lose benefits. When will it end unless some really drastic decisions are made to drop the triple lock, sorry pensioners! (But that will impact me too in 15-20 years). Or tighten who gets pip, and I would probably remove adhd/ anxiety from the list of conditions as we’re getting to a stage where we could have as many people claiming benefits as there are working and that seems wrong to me. And then you’d have to tax these workers even more to pay for the ever increasing welfare bill…, crazy situation to be in.

None until after he tackles welfare spending

Perfectly put!

The amount it would cost Amazon to keep operating here but move key infrastructure to somewhere like Ireland is far, far less than they would have to pay in the sort of tax rises people are demanding.

The simple answer is that if you invest money you take a risk that you may lose on your investment. Whereas if you work you take no risk on your hours - you still get paid regardless.

And a basic rule of finance is that the higher the risk then the higher the return and vice versa. As for the rebate on losses this only applies if you subsequently make a profit in future, you don't automatically get the money back, whereas if you make a capital gain then you are automatically taxed.

If you Capital Gains tax businesses or investments at the same rate as income then you remove the incentive to start businesses or invest thereby slowing the economy for everyone.

If you want to increase the money available to run the state, why is your question how to increase taxes, when increasing growth will do the job much better?

The question should be what at he can do to increase growth.

And one of the best ways to increase growth is to cut taxes!

Why not?

Whilst I fully agree with your sentiment in going after Covid loan fraud (the scale of the fraud was at least close to £11 billion), sadly I think it will cost more to recover it than it would claw back.

Much of £11bn Covid scheme fraud 'beyond recovery', report says https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c075vjxyx3no

LA's are paying through the nose for SEN provision because those very same LA's closed all the specialist schools, while wanging on about "inclusion" being best for children. It also happened to be cheaper, of course... unfortunately the children who absolutely needed specialist education then, still need it today. They just have nowhere to go now.

My DS school costs much more than that fwiw. I'd still prefer him to attend the local primary for free, but that will never happen.

CMS needs an overhaul. Seems to be easy for non-resident parents to duck out of paying their dues. Self employed and those working through limited company can run rings round the CMS.

If the non-resident parent leaves the UK, it’s extremely difficult to receive child maintenance. There is something called REMO, but I have never heard of anyone using it.

Good point about care for the elderly. My father has been in care for the last 7 years a cost of £1550 per month. His state pension and NHS pension covers that.

His younger brother, who had claimed benefits since age 38, ended up in the same care home for free.

This is a classic issue - a company bases itself in a country with a low tax regime (and that country receives significant tax income from such companies as a result of that tax regime) but pays some tax in another country where they operate. Then the country in which it operates rather than saying ‘clearly we should have lower corporate tax regimes to encourage them to base themselves here’, says ‘let’s tax them even more so they move more of their operations overseas’.

Hmm - I don't think that would work out too well for say Blackpool or other areas of high unemployment and high benefits.

Agree with earlier poster talking about CMS and making fathers pay a fair amount. I get really cross when a poster wants or has to leave a partner or spouse and the immediate response is to claim benefits. If the father has gone totally AWOL there’s often no alternative at least temporarily. But the practically bankrupt state shouldn’t be paying, the non resident parent should be. Other countries annexe support through the PAYE system or equivalent.

Also agree with poster about care for the elderly. It needs to be tapered at least, those who have saved get taken to the cleaners, those who for one reason or another haven’t any assets get care paid for. I do wonder why we bother.

@DeftPlumLurker

that there are some who are 'gaming the system'.

It’s been happening for as long as I can remember. When I was a child, two of my father’s siblings were better off claiming benefits than he was working for the NHS.

I have a cousin who has three children from different fathers. The child maintenance alone exceeds £2K a month. Then there is UC.

The mind boggles

The whole 'Amazon must pay their taxes' argument is so dumb.

They employ 75,000 people in the UK and pay several billions of pounds every year in tax.

Many homes and even business are now dependant on them.

We need them FAR more than they need us.

I was a bit shocked by that ADHD story as well.

There definitely seems to be a theory, and I have to say my personal experience backs this up, that there are some who are 'gaming the system'.

What do you mean ‘properly funding benefits’? You mean people on benefits taking home more than those working to paying the extra 2pm on income tax?

Good question. Working must pay more than benefits. If it doesn’t, there’s no incentive for people to work.

This. I’d like to see a move to land tax rather than council tax, and wealth tax on the super wealthy - see C4 documentary tonight.

I'd like to see him implementing a local income tax with different tiers for different goods and services. The benefit system has to be looked at - it's not sustainable in its current form - and the phasing out of cash.

Absolutely nothing. The country has to start living within its means.

headline in the times yesterday- there’s 100k people on out of work benefits for ADHD. 6 out of 10 young people are NEETS. This is a travesty. Money should be spent supporting these young people into work and undoing the damage the min wage and NIC changes did to youth employment.

What do you mean ‘properly funding benefits’? You mean people on benefits taking home more than those working to paying the extra 2pm on income tax?

And what would you tell the unions when nurses, teachers, cleaners, bin men, carers etc ask for a pay rise to compensate for the reduction in their take home pay?

2p on income tax would be a good start.

And spend the money on properly funding benefits.