What is labour coming for next?

[MikeRafone]

I reckon after 12 years of dozen fuel duty that drivers will be next

what tax will the collect next to fill the black hole

I agree and that’s basically what I said originally - they are almost obliged to do whatever they can to legally avoid paying tax out of a duty to make as much money as possible for their shareholders.

And I also agree, it is the laws that need to change. Given the relationship between politics and big business, I have little faith in that ever happening though.

Judging by what the Prime Minister has been saying, it would appear that Labour will becoming for racist thugs next.

@RationalityIsHard they really aren't any more given the focus on ESG. For example, here is Barclays Tax Strategy (other examples are available - I picked Barclays as they have something of a reputation for aggressive tax practices in some quarters). The focus now is on positive outcomes for stakeholders rather than the narrower category of shareholders.

home.barclays/content/dam/home-barclays/documents/investor-relations/reports-and-events/annual-reports/2023/Barclays%20Country%20Snapshot%202023.pdf

Actions speak louder than words and I have even less faith in corporate mission statements than I do in politicians. ‘Let’s wait and see’ is the best I can do.

What is ESG by the way?

All parties have said there needs to be a major overhaul at various times. The problem is that to do so would be a multi year programme, and none of them will start it as they know they could be out in 5 years. Total overhaul would likely take longer.

Farage's version of overhaul (read - selling it all off) could possibly be undertaken in a shorter time period, but would not be of benefit to the people.

I used to think that the electorate were smart enough to not fall for such populist rhetoric that has no substance, but after Brexshit, I am not so sure anymore.

So I had a Google. ESG I can see is Environmental, Social and Governance. All sounds very nice and aspirational but I remain to be convinced that it's not just the latest corporate fad after they've presumably sorted diversity, equity and inclusion (why do these things always come in threes?).

Thanks for the link by the way. I'll have to take a look at it later as for some reason PDF links never work properly on the tablet. Barclays weren't one of the corporations I was thinking of and I've never read a tax strategy before - presumably it's a fair bit different to a mission statement - but I hope it proves interesting and I like to think I remain open minded.

Anyway, I appreciate the civilized discussion - not something you can always take for granted these days. Have a good evening.

@RationalityIsHard thank you & likewise - always happy to have a genuine, civilised discussion with open-minded people such as yourself, and I try to keep an open mind myself!

There is no incentive to work hard in this country. My husband and I have worked our fingers to the bone to raise our companies off the ground. We have paid for everything our selves with never a hand out and now the government want to tax us to death. If we closed our business and sacked over 40 people, just got a job at Tesco (other supermarkets are available) claimed benefits we would probably take home the same money. It’s so short sighted to keep taxing people who are doing well as we just won’t do well then everyone loses out.

All GP practices are private businesses. You want to get rid of all of those?

Why is it still overs 60's when the retirement age hasn't been that for years?

Hopefully the Barnett formula.

This thread reveals some interesting thinking about how people should chose to spend or not spend their own money and how much money they should be allowed to work for.

From looking at the thread it seems that the two different approaches can be explained as follows: the left thinks that all the money you earn belongs to the State and the State then chooses how much of it you can keep (and the limits on what you can spend it on).

And the right believe that you own all your own money, the State choses what proportion to take in taxation and you can chose how to spend the rest of your own money.

Everything else follows from which side you are on. Which explains some of the posts above which may seem outlandish to some and reasonable to others.

I don’t know how anyone can think all the money citizens earn belongs to the state. That’s communism. No one voted in a communist government and I know that I for one would not live or work in the UK if it was governed by a communist regime.

The money we earn obviously doesn't belong to the state; it's just a way each side looks at things. You can clearly see it in this thread. Continuation of state control/attempt to influence of the use of income that has already been taxed.

I thought your post was really insightful. I’m not criticising what you said, but rather the views on state control on the thread.

This is going to sound brutal, and it really isn't meant to. I think you are confusing working hard (long hours) with working effectively (being profitable). If you really are able to close down and take home the same working in Tesco, and this looks like it will be a continuous position, then there is something wrong with your business unless you get more than standard time off, or have a good exit strategy, or some other less tangible benefit.

If you are sacrificing your own income in order to keep other people employed, that is admirable, however probably isn't in your long term interest.

I know an excellent business coach if you would like to speak to him?

If we take too much out of our business we are taxed even more so it’s pointless. Once you calculate universal credit, free childcare, child benefit plus a full time average wage we would be on about the same as we take out now. I just wanted to point out that taxing to death business owners is very short sighted. We had no handouts setting up or whilst building our business so why should we accept the crippling taxation in this country.

@Booboo38 get a job if you would be better off. Although if you are talking about an average wage of £33k you would not be entitled to UC unless you needed childcare or you were renting.

@Booboo38 by the way there is rarely such a thing as free childcare. The government does not pay enough so you get charged a marked up fee for snacks, lunches, etc. Generally the truly free nursery places are run by charities who only give places to those with lots of extra needs to get into work.
You can get child benefit if self employed unless you earn over £60k. So if you are taking home that much you would not get any UC, and a wage above £60k is way above average.

It actually really annoys people talking rubbish like you are. If earning above £60k is too low for you, sell your business and get a job. No one is stopping you. You make your own decisions, take responsibility for them.

Are you saying that you don't want to take too much as a wage on the basis that it will make you less eligible for benefits? I hope I have misunderstood you.

If you are, on the other hand, saying that you don't wish to pay tax, so are choosing to earn less, then that's very valid. I've always said to people who don't want to pay tax that they should just get a lower paid job.

Also, our levels of taxation in the UK are low compared to many other countries. Running your own business is the most tax efficient way to generate income. Business owners in the UK are certainly not taxed to death. I have been a business owner, and an employee on a realitvely high wage, and would infinitely prefer to be the business owner from the tax perspective. From the headache perspective, not so much.

I think what you were saying is that Tesco wage plus benefits would equal what you earn now.

Hourly wage in Tesco's will be increased to £12.02 per hour. Presumably OP has a mortgage so not entitlement to benefits there. She also presumably has under £16k in savings, if she has more she is not entitled to universal credit at all. So she would get child benefit for each child, and 85% of the cost of childcare.
If working 40 hours a week she would earn £25k minus tax and NI and any pension. Child benefit is £25.60 per week for first child and £16.95 for each child. So lets assume she has 2 children and so would get an additional £ 2212 per year, plus 85% of childcare costs.
If she has a partner they will have to work or stay at home. If they stay at home she will get no childcare costs accept the "free" hours most people get. If he works they are likely to earn too much for 85% of childcare costs.
The most likely is that Op as a single parent with 2 kids will get £25k gross plus £2212 child benefit, plus 85% of childcare costs for a 40 hour working week that will include weekends and evenings. If this is better than running your business, you should sell your business.

No we do not claim any benefits, never have and hopefully will never have to. I think I was clear on that in my og post.

Grossly inaccurate.