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>

Coming back to this I have heard this idea before but it’s not really progressed past I would link the two salaries, but I’m keen to know real world impact.

How would you get people keen to set up businesses here rather than somewhere else?

Did you bother to read the Guardian article?

It's not about restrictions, but dividing more fairly.

You have misunderstood - the point about the £80k equity partner is that he owns a share of the business, i.e. he doesn't draw a salary at all, his take-home is based on doing enough legal work to pay all his staff salaries and other overheads (office, licences for legal research tools, business rates, PI insurance) whilst risking his own capital. I estimate that £80k is probably the very top of the tree for a high street solicitor, and most will earn less.

I wouldn't risk my house for a middle management salary of £80k, but next time we want to divorce, settle a dispute our purchase a house, we should all be grateful that some solicitors do. They are certainly not "paid too much" as your pp stated.

Focusing on the city pay of £1m plus better supports your argument, but no EP is getting paid that unless they are bringing in business to the firm of many multiples of that value (and the minute that stops, they are unceremoniously removed). Equally, I don't believe that any NQ is worth £150k, although they are worked like donkeys and I have seen more than one young lawyer absolutely crack under the strain of being available 24/7/365 and sleeping in a pod in the office night after night.

It's true that I pay my cleaner well, because she is reliable and trustworthy, and I depend on her. However, I do not think it's remotely reasonable for a role requiring 6 years training and studying to a professional level to be paid the same as a role requiring no skills or qualifications. We cannot all be cleaners, but what is the incentive not to do a simple, manual job, with our working time directive rights intact, when there are no material benefits associated with a challenging an high-risk one?

When working households run out of money - they save, they send less.
When the government runs out of money it rinses households who already pay tax to cover the households who don't.
It's not fair.

No idea what you're on about, but I'm sure you do - happy to accept that there is a range of salaries within the definition of lawyer. 👍

We have the minimum wage for this. And yes I appreciate that some companies evade the minimum wage but that’s a question of closing look holes and tightening protections.

The minimum wage isn't enough to live on, unless you're part of a scenario with other income or crazy low outgoings, sadly.

I'd just like to point out after 13 pages of back and forth that it's entirely possible to raise the tax revenues needed for a decent society by decreasing tax rates. It's been proven to work.

I sent you the link? What are you about?

That's a really great question.

Firstly, let's define "set up here", as this is ambiguous. Do you mean just physically open some shops here? Or actually establish themselves as a UK-based company (or arm of a company)?

Getting businesses to establish themselves here for tax purposes is already a huge problem as I'm sure you're aware, with multiple loopholes exploited by 1000's of companies, costing us literal billions each year. The point is - these companies already don't pay their correct tax. Here I refer to things like transfer pricing, attributing profits to lower tax countries etc. Even if we don't enact this idea of linked salaries, I think it's crucial that we shut this loophole anyway.

With the above, it has already been shown when other European countries sought to close these loopholes, the business remained. Similar scare tactics were used - "if you force these companies to pay their corporation tax, they'll leave!" - but they didn't. However, the UK still trails its heels on shutting these loopholes.

People will set up business here because there's a huge, affluent market (speaking in world terms).

I sent that message before you sent a link. I won't engage with you further as I'm not enjoying talking to you when you're acting like this.

The minimum wage isn’t enough to live on because housing costs have been allowed to get totally out of control. If new social housing (not ‘affordable’ housing) had been built to replace that sold off disastrously under right to buy, this would have made far more difference than a few pence on minimum wage, or on tax.

Ha ha ha. Sure.

Minimum wage just isn't enough, especially in various parts of the South. I say this as Northerner.

I think it depends where the starting point is. If the you're getting taxed 90% then maybe yeah. But maybe not so much when you're around 40%-50%

Well yes, housing costs, energy costs, food costs, big business still making profits.

I mean someone starting an SME, taking a risk, hoping for a reward.

I also mean companies that can set up anywhere, eg look at ROI and their surplus when they cut CT.

Behaviour is linked to financial incentives, it’s hard to envisage what the society based on the linked salaries would look like in reality.

Do we lose too much and have little growth and fewer jobs? Idk it seems a hard task to map it out.

The top aren't stealing. Their employer is paying them what they agreed to.

Lower wage people are getting paid what they were agreed to.

It'd be theft if the employer wasn't paying people what was agreed upon in their labour contract.

Yes, there's a sweet spot. It's like pricing a product - too high and people stop buying it, too low and you make no profit.

Not sure this government even has this concept on its radar though. And if it did, I'm sure the backbenchers would be up in arms.

Sorry, not a direct response to anything you've said (all good points).

Maybe I'm naive but I can see lots of decent people willing to support companies who actually are trying to treat all their workers well, and who value their staff, not just pretending they care or obviously seeing them as dispensable.

Haha sorry sent too soon

The reason I earn mid-6 figures is because I work for an American company abroad. Something I would stress is that British wages are noticeably low. This includes with adjustment for e.g. healthcare.

Many American companies know that British people come cheap for the level of education we have - this is complete common knowledge. We could even ask for more and still be considered cheap.

I don't think we need to undersell ourselves, or our country.

Doesn't necessarily even have to be increase revenue if we get some good economic growth 📈