To think that taxing high earners even more would actually be a bit unfair?

[bubbleymummy]

I hear this suggested a lot on mumsnet and I really disagree with it. High earners are paying a huge contribution in tax already - thousands and sometimes 10s of thousands more than a lot of people who are clamouring for them to be taxed even more! Why should they be punished for having a highly paid job? How would you like handing nearly half your income over to the government? I think we should be thankful that we do have high earners who are already making a significant contribution. We would be a lot worse off if we drove them away with higher taxes!

Let taxes and benefit rates be set locally.

We'll see how much people care about "inequality" then.

The left would rather have the poor poorer along with the rich, rather than the poor richer, and the rich richer still. It is one (amongst many) reasons that their stupidity can be blithely dismissed.

Takver I wouldn't wish too hard!

If we had genuine competition amongst local authorities for local tax rates in the UK it would be the end of the Labour party.

"What I don't understand is why it is never recipicated. Why don't people who receive the benefits from higher earners taxes feel glad that we are contributing so much? Why is there so much resentment towards those of us who are paying a hell of a lot in and taking very little out?"

Part of a new social contract should be about this IMO. A shift for everybody from a sense of entitlement to a sense of shared responsibility.

I have all that I have by saving pretty much everything I earnt before children, marrying well and by being 5 years older than you that's all.
Nothing to do with my tax position.

Maybe we're not the right sex to play in the World Cup? Or we don't have model looks, or find it unethical to rip people off with certain sales techniques?

"And as for those people who still insist that all these jobs are out there which require no intelligence, qualifications or hard work, and which reap huge salaries.... why aren't you doing them then?"

YANBU I constantly hear this from people but I think there is very little scope for income tax rises. Our top rate of income tax is already quite high compared to our European counterparts and although this is necessary due to the deficit, I don't think it can go any higher without damaging competitiveness. In a globalising world having uncompetitive tax rates could do no end of damage to the economy.

Something that is forgotten in discussions about income tax is that employees' national insurance contributions are highest for income below the high tax rate bands (or thereabouts, not sure if they are quite in synch). I.e.

20% tax rate & 11% national insurance contributions = 31% total tax rate

40% tax rate & 1% national insurance contributions = 41% total tax rate

50% tax rate & 1% national insurance contributions = 51% total tax rate

So the difference between the 20% tax rate and the 40% tax rate is actually only 10%.

breathe you still pay as much NI on a higher tax rate:

20% + 11%
40% +12%

i.e. if you are a higher rate taxpayer you pay MORE NI - not proportionally on your salary but actually a higher proportion.

Not exactly fair is it? Do we take more services? Will we get more pension?

12% I mean

So 31% vs 52% for a higher rate tax payer.

breatheslowly That is just wrong. You pay extra NI, percentagewise, as your salary increases.

In fact, at a certain point, you stop getting tax relief on pension contributions too (thanks, Gordon!) so the effective tax rate is around 70%.

"Not exactly fair is it? Do we take more services? Will we get more pension?"

Your definition of fair appears to cover only immediate personal financial benefit. Do you really mean that?

Oh helloooo higher rate tax payers who are defending their 'right' to private education (got to be separate from the plebs, yah), yachts, big fat houses, etc, over ordinary hard working (but not so lucky) people's right (sense of entitlement?) to basic food, shelter and perhaps a bit o' heatin'. And old peoples' 'sense of entitlement' to having a meal, a bath and a clean bum.

NI contributions are 11% below about £44,000. Above that they are 1%. I'm not sure how that can possibly equate to a higher % of your income. I'm a bit surprised at people who apparently pay these tax/NI rates not understanding what they are.

"And old peoples' 'sense of entitlement' to having a meal, a bath and a clean bum."

Lifeinlimbo, it was me who used the phrase sense of entitlement and I was arguing for higher taxes to fund improved services, so I'm not really sure what you're trying to say.

FFG! Just because you don't earn £30k plus, doesn't mean you aren't working hard! There are plenty of people earning a lot less than half that for full time, who work bloody hard, and struggle. Try that before moaning about having to pay so much bloody tax. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE A JOB THAT PAID THAT MUCH! In fact, I am studying with the OU, while earning 10k a year, supporting a child as a lone parent, simply because one day I want to be in that position. IT IS NO DISINCENTIVE. If you really are that hard done by, and us lazy low paid scum have such an easy life, WHY DON'T YOU QUIT YOUR HIGH-PAID CAREERS, opening a space for those of us who would like a chance, and you can sit back and have a nice life cleaning toilets.

Oops - sorry, I was talking about the employer's rate, not employee's. Apologies.

"Oh helloooo higher rate tax payers who are defending their 'right' to private education (got to be separate from the plebs, yah), yachts, big fat houses, etc, over ordinary hard working (but not so lucky) people's right (sense of entitlement?) to basic food, shelter and perhaps a bit o' heatin'. And old peoples' 'sense of entitlement' to having a meal, a bath and a clean bum"

Are you serious???? Do you seriously think that about ALL higher rate tax payers?? Jeez H, my children go to local state primary, I live in a very modest terraced house, by the end of the month we are on beans on toast for tea.

I am a higher rate tax payer, by the time I pay my tax, NI, pension contributions, the money I need to pay to practice my profession, my disposable income is in the negative.

Of course, if employers didn't pay so much NI, they could afford to take on more staff, or pay existing staff more, or give their shareholders (that is you and me, largely, via pension funds) more dividends.

"Oh helloooo higher rate tax payers who are defending their 'right' to private education (got to be separate from the plebs, yah), yachts, big fat houses, etc, over ordinary hard working (but not so lucky) people's right (sense of entitlement?) to basic food, shelter and perhaps a bit o' heatin'. And old peoples' 'sense of entitlement' to having a meal, a bath and a clean bum"

Politics of envy in full swing I see

Lifeinlimbo - I cannot see anyone defending the right to private education, yachts (WTF think you may need slightly more than the salaries mentioned here!) so not sure where you got any of that from. As far as I can see the only person mentioning private education (x3) is mama - but as she explained that has nothing to do with being a higher rate tax payer.

Hmmmm think you have sorely the wrong idea what 50k can buy!

Toastie, get a grip dear!
When I was training for my high paid cushy job (NOT 10hr stressful nons top days) , I was in another country, there were NO benefits or housing, I worked 2 or 3 jobs, studied and trained, and mostly ate cheese sandwhiches!

YANBU

I agree, there are some delusions here about what £50K gets you once its been taxed.

Macdoodle I lived abroad when my xh left me and his son with nothing to live on. I couldn't get work to fit around childcare (or that paid enough to live on after childcare costs). There were no benefits there either (even though this is a relatively rich european country), and we would have been homeless and my 2 year old in an orpahanage if I hadn't come back to the uk. It was shite, and I don't see how that has any relevance, except to say that it is shite and we have a much better system here.