..to want to say to those who are whinging about the 50% tax rate

[vic77en]

..that they should fuck the fuck off?

At a time when lots of people are really struggling with high inflation, 20% VAT, high unemployment, lack of living wage etc etc.

If you're earning above the 50% threshold you are well off and can afford it.

I used to earn enough to pay 40% tax (this was before the 50% rate came in and I was nowhere near the 50% threshold) and did not begrudge paying this. If NI and VAT were factored in, over 50% of my income went in taxes. I still had high disposable income.

Rather than giving their views airtime, there should be a massive PR exercise on the benefits to all of us of living in a civil society where there is an economic safety net, NHS, free education (for under 18's at least still...)

AIBU or not?

I do care if they think they should get a tax break at the expense of the 60 million people in the country who earn less than that

As much as I hate the 50% tax rate and all it stands for, I also would care deeply if the government decided to scrap this banding and announced they were going to increase taxes elsewhere to compensate. In that situation you are correct that this would be a tax break at the expense of everyone else.

But they could lower said rate without affecting the rest of us. The 50% rate has always been merely a political stunt and from the outset was said to be temporary. Some believe it won't raise any additional revenues, others believe it will raise a little. Noone thinks it will raise a lot.

I'd have more sympathy if this rate increase truly would help stablise our deficit or helped us out of the recession. But all it does is poke the very people in the eyes we need the most and for little to no benefit.

I have been thinking about this. I was horrified when we moved to Belgium to find that I would lose nearly half my salary in tax/ss payments. I was not a higher rate tax payer in the UK. As it was, I had to swap a salary in £ to the same figure but in euros.

In fact, we have much less free cash, but have a much better standard of living. Our rent is regulated, education is good, medical care is fantastic. If I was made redundant tomorrow, I could claim a large percentage of my income for quite a while. Childcare - be that creche, or afterschool club, or farm holiday in the Ardennes, is TAX deductible. Extra curricular activities for dcs are cheap and freely available.

I love the UK, but we won't be moving back anytime soon.

agree with Portofino - it's all relative how tax rates and benefits contribute to quality of life. Headline taxes are lower in the U.S. but healthcare costs are enormous - so people can spend a huge part of their incomes on what we consider a basic service here.

Starlight - you cannot do a job share on being a top director or md or owner of a successful small business which is what top earners likely are. That is an odd perspective that shows no understanding of what high paid jobs entail.

Belgium sounds great!

I heartily agree that those extremely overpriviledged people who are earning such excessive salaries should not begrudge a few pence contribution to the rest of the society around them. They are part of society too, just humans like the rest of us.

I don't think Belgium is perfect by any means. I benefit much by being the parent of a young child. We get tax breaks, child benefit, cheap activities, parental leave etc

But also there doesn't seem to be this "work til you drop" mentality. My office is deserted at 5pm. People get in early, but if you feel the need to work late you do it from home.

Pom, the very nature of being a director is that you direct and delegate.

You cannot possibly make all the decisions, which is why you have staff and deputies etc. Just hire an additional deputy and halve your pay.

Those who say it isn't possible have no imagination and/or greed.

vic77 - WPP are moving back as the Tories have cut corporation tax, does that really assist your argument?
50% is a gross injustice and was only ever a political move by a Government in its death throes aimed at putting the Tories in a tight spot. it has done that. What has happened is the super-rich continue to pay very little tax as they will structure around it, whereas it hits those earning a reasonable amount. I know many people who have relocated and many more who will, and the country will suffer as a result. It's pretty clear the 50% doesn't make any proper money already - it's just a gesture.

yabvvu - and have no understanding. Let me put it to you this way. A private Dr - not priveleged in any way - has spent 7 years supporting themselves at college, with overnight shifts for no money or minimum wage, works for many years as a GP earning around £40K. A big salary you say - but not if your work always overruns so you can't use nurseries, you have to employ a nanny. You miss all Xmas plays, sports days, parents assemblies, work checking opportunities because of your job. You can never really have a good night out, because you might be called in to deal with a situation and you are always aware of that.

You take a cut in salary to do your consultancy. You get your consultancy and either you stay in this 24 hour a day on call existence or you go private. If you go private, you get a turnover of £50K - £100K a year, but only after building a reputation for several years and taking no salary for some of them. For that £50K you've achieved after several years, you pay clinic fees, staff costs, people don't turn up for 25% of appointments. The situation I know at the moment is that a Dr of 20 years experience takes home probably twice as much as me, a secretary. For the past 20 years I have worked 9 to 5 with no responsibility and certainly nothing that kept me awake at night. the Dr I work for for every £1 she makes after all her experience she loses 50% tax, 12.8% personal NI and 11?% company national insurance. She's left with approx 23% of the £1 she worked for and still has to pay petrol and clinic hire. She works 7 days a week - seeing patients in the day and writing reports into the early hours of the night.

You really have no idea.

Neither do you avoider, they don't lose 50% for every £1. It's 40% tax on every £1 above the higher rate threshold (around £40k?), 20% below that and nothing below the personal allowance. If the doc earned over £150k then it's 50% for every pound over the £150k. Not every pound.

Novice, a professional perspective is not the be all and end all of knowledge. Gosh how ignorant. I'll take Evan Davis over any Banker on the banking crisis any day. And your comments were initially about how the extra £100k on top of £700k wasn't enough for you, you couldn't be arsed. This makes you happy to be crass, I still pity you but am not remotely amused.

Your choice was actually about work/life balance. So the choice was really to spend time with your children or not, I'm not sure why you waded in with crap about your earning and £40k wouldn't be enough for you.....

starlight - that is ludicrous and a very old fashioned view of a director. Directors arrive where they are due to their capabilities - you cannot therefore replace half of them with someone on half the wage. They do make all the decisions which is exactly why they should get paid as much if the business is successful.

If you are an integral part of a successful business generating lots of cash why the f*ck shouldn't you be rewarded accordingly? Otherwise none would do it, there would be no commerce and we'd all be up shit creek without a paddle.

none = noone

Amicissima brilliant post if I may say. I am always gobsmacked at those who hate, " the rich" and want to pound them for every penny. They clearly have never heard of biting the hand that feeds.

Starlight, I did laugh at your idea, sorry. DH is a Director. I would show him your post but he left at 5 am so can't.

The idea that he could job share is hilarious. Besides, we like having lots of money even if we have to pay lots of tax. Life is far less of a strain.

Avoider - it doesn't sound like you are talking about the UK system there? For a start, most GPs earn more than 40k, and it is a specialty in itself. You don't do all your GP training and then think 'hang on a minute I want to work in hospital medicine instead.
Well you could in theory, but it is rare I expect because you would have to drop down onto a junior salary to learn your new specialty and then fight your way up to a consultant position. And not all consultants are on call 24/7 - far from it.

There is definitely an element emerging on this thread for whom the 50% bracket is a moral issue, and actually I find that pretty disgusting. What right do the government have to remove your money just because they think you shouldn't have it, rather than because it is raising essential revenue?

We don't mind paying tax as i truly believe in the Bevan report and it's findings. However, the proles resentment of 'fat cats' is incredibly misguided as is direct by the media. Everyone loves a bad guy and politicians want to deflect attention from their tenuous positions.

Amicissima makes some very valid points but the 90 day rule is not that fixed. IF, the tax payer has family that reside in the UK and maintains strong links the 90 day they may still be liable for tax under the current review at HMRC. This tax grab could result in more people leaving who contribute to the economy in subsidiary services. We have a few friends watching this very carefully and making contingency plans to leave.

Funny as some of us, Ali, are happy to pay.

Posie - please read what I said. If it actually works and raises revenue then great, carry on. But if it doesn't then it should be scrapped, rather than kept because people don't deserve to have that much money.

amicissima Yup. The top 1% pay nearly a quarter of all the income tax we get. The top 10% (inc the previous group) pay half of all income tax we take.

In that context it's pretty obvious you only have to have very few of those rich taxpayers to (as OP put it) "fuck the fuck off" before our revenues are severely affected.

Who are we going to tax then? The poor? The middle classes?

Like it or not, rich people have choices because they have the money to make things happen. You may argue it's their moral obligation to pay more etc etc but it's kind of hard to convince them if they've "fuck the fucked off"

Posie, you are a sahm. Your husband earns the salary. Have you asked him whether he minds paying the extra tax? You seem to be coming from a very unusual perspective.

Niceguy2 - Ahh some logic and reason. We need these rich people and we need their businesses.

Personal income tax is a small part of national revenue compared to corporation tax.

If the small few who f off also redomicile their companies, move elements of their businesses and redeploy staff abroad, then we are very f'ed. And more so if such examples lead others to move away from Britain, or found their businesses elsewhere.

I haven't seen anything which suggests those who are actually subject to this tax rate whinging about it. The complaining seems to be coming, with supporting evidence, from economists who are taking a wider view on what stimulus measures would be beneficial for the UK.

'but not if your work always overruns so you can't use nurseries, you have to employ a nanny. You miss all Xmas plays, sports days, parents assemblies, work checking opportunities because of your job. You can never really have a good night out, because you might be called in to deal with a situation and you are always aware of that.

' That is a hard existence but I managed that on £16k working for a charity where most of my famillies were borerline social services cases and had my number. You I presume, like I did, do it in a great part for the love of it. Yes when I was called at 11pm to see if DH could fix someone's fridge 9er no) it was a PITA but not as much as the buzz of making a massive difference to famillies who would otherwise slip through the system. Had I not ahd Dh and Mum able to juggle chidlcare it would have been impossible fo course becuase you can't pay a Nanny, even where I hail from, on that money.

I do think the tax system is messed up. I am and always have been happy to pay tax (we were pushing HR when DH was amde redundant). I know some people are so well off theya re protected for life but most people are vulnerable to potentially needing the system themselves, or their chidlren needing it, and terhe's a huge element of common sense as well as altruism in keeping the system working (not saying it does work mind, know it fails many of the people who need it most whilst supporting those who are able but not willing to make any effort to self support).

But equally we know that high incomes DO come with associated costs- from work and commuting to chidlcare at unsociable hours- and I am coming around to the idea that increasingly higher tax rates is unfair, and that the TC system well run balances a lot of the system by making sure the poorer famillies ahve chidlcare support. We all know I presume TC are not well run; just as my third child faces a dx of autism we are told our income will drop by £200 (working poor I guess you'd term us but in reality more complex) and franly when I am trying to get 3 with autism out the door and being told by the Head that the remaining one has probable ADHD the last thing I need is to be told that I have enough time to sort out how to save that amonth- not with teh social hosuing deficit anyway.

Actually I think that's it for me: I;d be happy to see a drop in tax for HR payers as long as it ws combined with a social housing increase that enabled people on lowest incomes to cope without the money they will lose in cuts. Only, locally at least the people protested that they didn;t want affordable hosuing of any kind in their village and they won.

get that balance right though- the housing safety net and the incentivising tax system- and you've cracked it.

Is the rise in hatred of rich people possibly a result of the rise of the private landlord? I have some really very well off friends(not GP level, multi millionaires) adn the only time we don;t agree is when we discuss hosuing - on one hand I have famillies I have helped unable to get either a private rental becuase of silly anomallies (self employed, two part time incomes rather than one FT etc) or a social house (waiitng list) and have ahd to watch them celebrate Christmas in a one room hostel full of addicts with a newborn child, on the otehr they talk purely in terms of income streams and commodity and there's a v ery obvious and glaring gap.

Sorry stream of consciousness post. Talking gibberish as ever.