Should the Lower Rate of Income Tax be 40%

[ChilledOut79]

I have read so many posts over the recent Months regarding adding VAT to education provision & Labour tax plans.

All these posts seem to have recurring theme to tax "someone else" more, so the net contributors (who already subsidise net recipients through tax take), have to pay even more in the name of funding the NHS/state schools etc.

It seems to me, If funding services are that much of a priority, we should increase the base rate of income tax to 40% for everyone.

This would fund all vital services and ensure all mainstream tax payers have the same skin in the game.

This. I don’t object to the NI cuts being reversed and paying a small amount more in income tax (once they’ve stopped holding the threshold rises). But those more fortunate whinging about paying too much when they are objectively paying a smaller % of their income when there are people in work not able to put food on their table to feed their kids can fuck off.

It would need to come with some sort of universal basic income policy or a huge increase in working benefits to make the policy work. Especially since lower welfare payments almost always means higher healthcare costs in the long term.

Many low paid workers are contributing directly through the work they do for low pay. If they were taxed more then these jobs would need to pay more so people could still make ends meet. So more funds would be required.

If 40% (only on their income over £50k) taxpayers are struggling to make ends meet then how do you think us on under £25k are doing? How do you think we will make ends meet with higher tax?

I think one of the biggest problems is that we tax people the same in differing geographical economies. Eg tax for someone working in London and earning £50k is the same as someone working in Cornwall or the midlands and earning £50k

in Cornwall, it would represent a good lifestyle, but in London not so much.

maybe we should have a basic level of tax at national level say 20% , then also a regional one - rate set to achieve a similar level of lifestyle, taking into account rent, travel costs, food etc

i think a lot of the “£50k is loads” comes from people who aren’t paying £2kpcm rent for a shitty 1 bed.

I don't think that's the answer either. Many many jobs pay better in London or have London weighting.

What would be better is affordable social housing.

Yes, but London weighting is taxed too.

I agree more social housing is needed. we need to level up not just money, but the standard of living it achieves.

in some cases this means pumping more infrastructure to run down areas, but in more expensive areas, maybe a tax credit weighting is needed to allow the areas not to become very wealthy enclaves.

I’m old enough to remember when social (council) houses weren’t all on estates, but were random houses all over the place. There was much more social integration.

i grew up in a council house in London. Next door, in an identical house, were a very wealthy family - solicitor and teacher. We were all friends. Their house was nicer re fittings and decor, but the mirror image to my house.

I know It is, but it's higher in the first place. I don't think it should also be taxed less.

I agree something needs to change but I don't think giving indivuals extra cash will make much of a difference when social housing etc doesn't exist.

Hate to burst your bubble, but I have several Scandinavian friends on exec salaries who chose to relocate to Switzerland (having a choice between staying or relocating with their role) due to the tax situation.

@ChilledOut79
What a disgusting post. Those ‘entitled people who expect others to pay their share’ were the ones who cleaned the toilets at your little darlings’ private school.
They are the ones who serve your darlings when they do grocery shopping, or serve them a pint/coffee when they are out.
Not all people are privileged enough to go to university or get other form of education, which would lead to successful, well paid career.
Calling them entitled is disgusting.

Sending children to private school is a luxury, not a right.
Expecting people who are already living in poverty to pay higher taxes so that you don’t have pay tax on your luxury is outrageous.

Newsflash: to pay income tax in the UK,you have to be working (or be on NI contributions based JSA)So those people are not entitled, they work, just like you.

They should bring back the 10% rate band for everything under £30k, then 25% for everything up to £55k, then 40% from £55k to £100k & then 45% from £100k. There should be a super tax on earnings over a million. Like op have said, go after the big corporations that avoid paying tax. Cut pension relief tax to basic rate, no higher rate relief for higher earners. A higher windfall tax on energy & oil companies & a wealth tax on the super wealthy, make the non dom rules watertight so if you live in this country all income no matter where it comes from is taxed, I'm looking at you Rishi. Make the Royal family be transparent with their income & tax every one of them, including the King & make him pay retrospective inheritance tax on what he inherited.
The biggest problem we have is HMRC were forced to shut down all local tax offices in favour of processing factories, you now can't see anyone face to face about your tax, the phonelines don't work because they don't have enough staff to answer them. In the old days you had the same person dealing with your tax, if you rang up or wrote in they dealt with it, it was a good service, now everything is done online, you can't ask for advice & your tax may be dealt with in an office at the other end of the country by many faceless people who don't know the full job, but work on a production line.

perhaps I'd have asked a slightly different question, along the lines of "Should everyone pay more in tax for the services they scream for"

If you had asked that question I would have said yes but your OP was one of the most tone deaf posts I have read in a long time.

Me too! However, people need or be paid a decent salary to begin with.

Newsflash: People salaries have already being taxed and the 20 percent is on top of this.

So basic rate tax of 40%, national insurance rate of 8% and universal income reduction of 55%. So for every extra £100 a person earns it will cost them £103. Great way to make work pay. What could possibly go wrong

Taxing people that much on nmw would see a lot more people in poverty.

Also a 48% reduction for any extra hours you do on minimum wage(that's before pensions contributions, so make that over 50%), Would mean people who are topped up by UC wouldnt bother, cause you would be working for nothing. You lose 55p for every £1 you earn on UC. Making it even harder to get off benefits.

I think VAT on private school fees should be 40%. OP can afford it.

That would bring lower earners to an unsustainable level though, requiring more help from the government!
My husband was a very high earner and said he would be happy to pay 50%. He already paid in the six figures in taxes but said over a certain threshold it was fair that he be taxed more.
Your personal allowance starts to fall if earning over £100k, so in effect pay more tax anyway.
But I think closing some loopholes with large corporations may be a better way to go.

@dottiehens
And?
The OP called people on low income ‘entitled’ and suggested they should pay more tax. Therefore I pointed out that since they are paying tax, they work just as she does. Calling them ‘entitled’ is disgusting.

When I was married we had a 6 figure income and couldn't afford private schools.
I am now on a low wage. I would struggle to pay food and energy (nevermind my car which I need to get to work) if taxed at 40%.
But I would be willing to pay more if I got more. So things like: NHS dentist, subsidised public transport etc.
But I would need : free energy, improved and free public transport to pay 40%

Ah so even less useful, a parasitical buy-to-let landlord.

You owe society much more than you realise.

My understanding is, the country that charge very high tax (Sweden?) have basically a socialist arrangement where school, childcare, medicine, travel, housing (?) is free. So you literally don't need to pay for anything other than food and clothes etc.

If, OP, you want to tax key workers on a minimal wage 40%, you will need to provide their housing, travel, childcare, dentists, etc. Then I guess it may work? Otherwise its just capitalist bullshit - stealing money from the poor to give to the rich (so little darlings Olivia and Felix can go to their nice public school and mummy can still afford another Birkin bag).

Housing isn't free in Sweden!

Well I bet its much more affordable than here. Also, I'm talking low wage/ key workers - I would imagine they get subsidised accommodation.

Housing is. Food isn't. Alcohol definitely isn't.

How are middle earners paying more and more? You pay 20% tax up to £45k on the element over the tax free limit just like everyone else then 40% on income over that. What more and more are you paying?

If you put the tax free limit up to £30k and took a substantial amount of people out of tax and then had 40% up to say £75k, with higher rates kicking in in steps above that, it would seem fairer maybe, but bringing in big changes to income tax always has unexpected consequences, and always upsets one section of society or another.