The top 10% of taxpayers contribute 60% of income tax...

[MsPinkMarshmallow]

I'm fed up of hearing that "high earners" will be targeted by the next budget.

The top 10% of taxpayers pay 60% of income tax.

Don't piss them off. They'll just leave the UK or work less so they're taxed less.

Some more stats: in 2024-25, the top 1% of income tax payers earned 13.3 per cent of total income and paid 28.2 per cent of income tax

35% of adults in the UK pay no tax at all

More from the Taxpayers Alliance here:

https://www.taxpayersalliance.com/briefing_share_of_income_tax_paid_by_percentile

<stands back and awaits kicking>

You cannot just assume all other costs would be the same though, so it's a pointless question.

Then why would the business hire them? What's the logic?

Income contributes to wealth creation.

I use it to search the internet and use sources. I use the paid version as well. I then checked the sources and the numbers were right.

I even get the same numbers when using Gemini and copilot.

And now that I think about it. We weren't subsiding the company. They have razor thin margins anyway. We are not subsiding the company. We are subsiding individuals who have made poor financial decisions.

No-one should be on UC forever unless there's health issues.

Okay if you're on UC, needing a top up you should use it as a way to get to a better tomorrow. Not just stay on it.

No idea, the false perception that those motivated by money are the best leaders perhaps? Big charities are a prime example.

Any examples you can think of? I find it hard to believe that businesses and charities are all spending lots of money for that sake of it on people who are at bad at their jobs. You'd think they'd have worked it out by now!

Yes I can - the cost of my orange juice imported from Brazil will cost the same, my gas and electricity will cost the same. The cost of my car imported from Japan will cost the same.

So which society would you prefer to live in?

So you believe in theft? You think it's fair to take the stuff from Person A and give it to Person B?

I think it's better to reward outcomes rather than effort alone. If I put a lot of effort into a company that didn't at all provide what the market/consumer base wanted and it went bust should I be rewarded because I put a lot of effort into it?

I think the top rate of tax was 97% in the 1970s. Happy to be corrected.

The top 10% starts at c£70k. Which is much lower than most people realise.

Great question - but I did state "full time" in the post.

A civil servant managed it...

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2025/mar/14/polygamous-working-civil-servant-multiple-jobs-uk-defra-dhsc

I really do insist that I know how these models work. It is my full time job. Could you link me directly to the data rather than just saying you got AI to do it?

I won't engage with your second point as you just assert an opinion without any weight to it.

I always treat them professionally. I'm nice to the cleaners in the office. Say thanks to them. Ask them how their day as been. I don't obviously ever comment on their pay.

But it doesn't mean I think they should magically be entitled to any more money. And let's be honest most of us are replaceable anyway. Some people are probably hard to replace due to their talent and skill set. Some people it would take a bit of time to replace, some can be replaced just like that.

Maria, I'm beginning to think you're not arguing in good faith. I told you I work in AI as a 1% tax payer, and I also told you that I wanted the direct data on earnings, rather than to take your word for it about "what chatgpt said".

Why would you challenge this if you believe my talent and skill set is what rightly earns me my 1% wage?

These debates have to be in good faith, otherwise they're boring arguments.

Yes we should, they'll be fine, and they won't go away. You forgot an option

For those of you trying to restrict “income”, that is surely regressive in a society like UK where wealth is the determiner. Especially if you are both younger than some of us. The difference now appears in wealth inherited from parental generation primarily, which would absolutely mandate allowing young talented people who take risk to be rewarded for that risk.
A barista who has their own coffee shops and develops the eg Grind brand into supermarkets absolutely could do incredibly well. Seeing that now the market is moving to home coffees as NI stop the barista job working anymore. But to suggest my 17 year old who walks to the local cafe for a part time job should be paid a proper long term career wage is just absurd. She just won’t land a part time job anymore, if that were the case.

You're making those assumptions, you're setting up a scenario to produce the answer you want.

I haven't said anything whatsoever about restricting income or age.

I really appreciate the point you make; and I think flexibility in enabling those who are younger, older or have disabilities find meaningful work in this system is to be taken incredibly seriously. Thank you for highlighting this.

Your answers are getting more ridiculous, paying tax is not theft, by any stretch. However, playing your game, maybe the top level is actually stealing from the bottom by paying the top ridiculously more than the bottom.

These presumably weren't all full time jobs or jobs which involved working 8 hours a day, 5 days a week, for each one.

You clearly think you're better than them, the opposite may be true.

I agree that if employees of a business need subsidising by the taxpayer it's not a viable business. Businesses should pay living wages to their employees. I like the John Lewis type partnership model too whereby employees benefit from business profitability and have some say in how the business is run.

But people will behave in different ways, depending on how you incentivise them. As someone said, how come a sugar tax is supposedly a good idea because it stops people eating as much sugar but increasing tax for people who are already aggrieved at being taxed such a high percentage of the work THEY DO - let's not forget we are talking about people who work! - and we're all supposed to just suck it up?

This scenario would only work if it were replicated globally. Otherwise people will pack up and work in the USA where potential earnings were unlimited.

Edited, sorry meant to reply to @1dayatatime original post

https://corporate.sainsburys.co.uk/news/press-releases/preliminary-results-for-the-52-weeks-ended-1-march-2025

Here you go.

Bingo.