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>

Apparently other countries do this, not sure which.

@Kuretake - “The uplift in my pension plus ISA totalled just over £20k this month?”
Is that stocks and shares and funds that happened to have gone up in one month primarily, but may well go down in the future? Do you take the realised gains out of the ISA or just leave them there?

I don’t know either. Never heard of it. I know that if you are an US citizen you pay tax in relation to your whole income regardless of where you earn it - maybe that’s what it’s meant here?

It's now illegal for companies to exploit young people with non-paying internships - which used to be a way to build their experience from zero - but you think it's fine for the government to do it.

Capitalising on young mothers' fear of losing their place on the career ladder. Despicable.

Companies are much more open to hiring 'return-to-work-ers' these day anyway,, so that control-through-fear won't work now.

Oh hilarious, they've included 16-21 year olds???

That group obviously need taking out, but the stats are being deliberately constructed, I'm sure we both understand the bias of that pressure group.

If someone pays no income tax, they either earn nothing or below the threshold - of course they pay no income tax. Still pay VAT.

Disagree.
Council tax should be retained and made fairer.

Why should someone living in an expensive area in a flat worth £800K in order to access work, pay the same council tax as a £200 million mansion? Band G should be split into at least four more bands, with homes worth up to a million being taxed the same as today, and the more expensive properties attracting progressively larger payments according to their value.

Typo in my post above —Revolut founder saved hundreds of millions (not hundreds of billions) in UK CGT.

Most estimates in the £1.5-4bn range.

Correct, I am bearing some risk although it's a very vanilla/ low risk fund. I take realised gains as needed (tax free) or leave to compound if not needed.

I can't have kids, do I get to opt out of paying for education? Libraries? Free school meals?

No. Nor do the wealthy.

It affects the lowest earners in the same way. If I don’t get a pay rise this year I will be dropping down to 4 days a week instead of 5, because I will only loose about £60 a month. That’s worth it for 4 days a month freedom.

Taking money - benefits - from state income which other taxpayers have worked to make then hand over to the government - isn't the same as stopping the government from taking what belongs to you.

It's the difference between pick-pocketing someone (taking benefits when you could work) versus stopping the pick-pocketer (organising your finances to minimise tax).

Sure, in both cases you end up with more money - but it's ethically completely different.

Again, thanks for exemplifying.
Lots of folk who receive benefits also pay tax, and may even have paid lots and lots of tax in the past.

The proposal is for Council Tax to double on band G and above - so houses worth around £800k and above could see their bill increasing from £4k a year to £8k a year.

I imagine those living in the £200m mansion could easily absorb the increase. This proposal will hit the middle classes again, especially the elderly with low incomes and families with low disposable incomes.

Sounds perfectly fair to me.

If you don't like it then jog on...

What you seem to grasp its that to a high earner paying a bit more tax means maybe one less holiday, if they notice it at all.

While to the average worker paying more tax would mean struggling with being able to buy food, keep a roof over their head or afford heating.

For once the hapless Reeves is also correct to think about charging those who decide to leave and move their assets out rather than contribute to life in this country.

If I was in charge I would link council tax to an indexed last sold price I think. The bands are all over the place.

I think it rather depends on what they spend it on and I don’t trust this government to spend it wisely.

Wouldn't that stall the housing market though and lead to lower economic growth? If you bought your house years ago you would be very reluctant to move as you would end up paying a lot more council tax in your new property.

It give a high incentive to become a high tax payer but at very little cost to the country. Win win.

I went into a high paying industry to give a better life to me and my family and made some big sacrifices early on in my career to get to my current salary.

I'm proud of my achievements for what it affords me and those I love but I don't want to be taxed more to help people I don't know. Closing up the loopholes that allow a bigger pension will just unlock another way of avoiding tax. There are loads of routes left untapped. I don't want to live in a communist country.

If someone said they were giving away a grand to the first person to reach a set of co ordinates I'm sure plenty of people would rush to it. We're all selfish

Nobody wants to be taxed more to help people they don't know, but they also recognise that paying tax is necessary for a functional society, and that higher earners need to pay more.

Yes that’s my point.

My suggestion is fairer than what has been proposed and ensures that those with the broadest shoulders pay the most.

It would ensure that a working couple with the kids in an £800K London flat pay what they already pay.

They're the most mobile and can leave easily, we need more top rate people to come here and pay a small amount, otherwise the middle earners have to pick up the slack and it's not 1% more it's 5-10% more to raise the same amount as 1% on non doms costs.

Ok I agree with you then! However the reality is that your suggestion will not happen becuase it wil not raise enough tax as there are very few properties in the multimillion pound tax bracket.

You had your own education (or the option of it, if your parents sent you private).

The state manages our tax-paying and benefit-recieving over our whole lifetime, because they have the scale to do that. Each individual gets their own education paid for when they're not yet taxpayers, then pays tax over their working life which covers their education costs snd their pension (if they are a contributor), and then get their pension when they are no longer working.

If someone has 5 siblings, each child gets their education and pension paid for and that is balanced by each of them paying tax during their working life. The net cost to the state is no different to an only child. And no different whether or not you have children yourself.

The only people who could argue that they shouldn't pay for education are those who come to the UK as adults. But they want to come here, so it's part of the price we demand.

I agree that the cliff edges can be problematic for people but I don’t think everyone I know on over £100k will be leaving in droves. I certainly won’t.

What it does do is really make people (mostly women) strongly consider the pros and cons of tipping over the 100k level for boardroom representation which is important for us all to have a diverse representation.

This is my main thought around higher rate taxpayers.

Saying that people won’t work for wages where 60% are taxed is ridiculous though as that money is often more ‘extra’ money so shouldnt be taxed proportionally.

I am happy to pay taxes, we should all share responsibility for the vulnerable in society. It won’t change the way I vote, where I live or how I think on this matter