..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?

So surely WIOAIG you could be helped significantly during these expensive childrearing years by a childcare tax relief that also helps out people on lower incomes and people working generally?

A far more egalitarian approach and 'we're all in it togetehr' message?

I don't earn enough to pay 50% tax but if I did I would be pretty pissed off about it. Half your wages! I know people who do earn that amount and they work bloody bloody hard. I pay 40% tax and it hurts.

OP - if you think people complaining about paying 50% should fuck off, does that give them the right to tell people on benefits and paying lower rates of tax to get the fuck off their arses and get a decent education/job?

Not in neither category but think you are being unreasonable.

Agree with sentiments of workingitoutasigo.

Workingitout Yes, I agree you giving up work wouldn't help the economy. Interesting to hear from you and wonder what you will do (if you are seriously considering giving it all up rather than a hypothetical response!).
But also interested what you think should happen? More borrowing? More service cuts? More tax for the poor?

The difficulty with higher rates of tax is that, eventually, they actually yield less cash to the government (google "Laffer Curve"). Setting high rates for high earners is more of political statement than economic solution.

Nobody gets taxed half their wages though. It is all on a scale, 20%, then 40% then 50% on anything over £150k

Don't forget that it's the amount of money they earn rather than the rate at which tax is taken that should matter.

People earning over 150 k a year are making more than 65 quid an hour on average, if they work an extra hour at that rate , they still get over 30 pounds.

And remember that if richer people don't pay more tax, then everyone else has to, so that's still money out of the economy. In fact poorer people spend more of their money ( as they can afford to save less), so depriving them of income has a greater effect on the economy.

And no you would be unlikely to be better off on benefits

We're classed as 'cap exempt' due to the presence of 2 (will be 3 when ds4 dx'd) disabled children but even then we struggle.

Should we lose the house nobody would let to us, social housing is in amssively short supply so a stay in homless accom, with 2 / 3 children in foster care ebcuase of the risks of the accom (shared toilets, kitches etc) would be the result.

trust me very few people are better off on benefits, benefits, even when just linked to lower income earning, are crap and unstable and miserable.

"There is no evidence at all to suggest people leave the UK to pay less tax"

Um, well if you ask any tax advisors you know they will tell you that this statement is utterly inaccurate!

cookcleanerchaufferetc. If said benefits claimant/lower rate taxpayer is whinging at you about their low take home pay or benefit, feel free to tell them to get off their arse if that's what you want to say to them.
I am a lower tax rate payer, say it to me if you like.

Also you lose your personal allowance once you earn over £100k now (it tapers off between 100k and 114k, and you get no personal allowance at all above 114k) - which is an effective tax tax of 60% for the money you earn between 100 and 114k.

Interestingly in some other countries the rich are asking to be taxed more, at least temporarily, in a gesture of solidarity. This isn't the best article on it but does explain here

I don't think people would mind so much - it's just that you don't get much for your money. Many people earning that much don't use schools or the health service. Yes there are a lot of greedy wankers but unfortunately they're often also wealth creators for other people. It turns into a 60 per cent tax in the end so out of 150 k you're taking home 60k. That would very much annoy me. Unless you're a banker who is personally to blame for the bad decisions made five years ago I think it's punitive. The whole crap overspend mess is due to Labour so it's wrong to blame high earners if we don't have enough services. The take is going to be relatively tiny compared to the negative impact.

I tend to agree with the OP. There was a time when high earners paid 90% tax not a measly 50% so they should stop whingeing and bleating about how they are hard done by.

People in the top 1% bracket are also those most likely to be using elaborate tax avoidance schemes to minimise their tax. So, it seems unlikely that they are as severely affected as they would have us believe. And, in fact a lot of businesses/business people don't seem to pay any tax at all or at least a much smaller percentage than the vast majority of UK tax-payers.

These wealth creators really do believe that they are a special case as if only they are clever/highly intelligent, work hard, work long hours and don't get paid over-time. Mostly, they don't know much about the rest of society or mix socially with ordainary tax-payers and frankly don't give a shit about them.

Cutting back the 50% tax rate will only save the treasury £1 billion which is a tiny amount of the total tax take - well thats £10 million over a decade which is half of what the NHS is being asked to save each year which we are also told is a small saving to be made.

It's nonsense

I think that money that comes in through the spending route is more of an economic stimulus than money that comes in via taxation.

here's another one

Well at the moment, over 300,000 at least are here. Does anyone really think someone earning £200k would leave their home for the sake of £5k?

Or £300,000 for the sake of £15k? (if my maths is correct)

Blueberties It turns into a 60 per cent tax in the end so out of 150 k you're taking home 60k
No. It doesn't

I think the reason why people are moaning about the 50% rate is that economists are saying it is costing us more money in new business etc, than it is making.

Paying 50% tax is one thing, paying 50% tax for the country to be worse off purely for political reasons is another. I can understand anyone being pissed off about that.

Am liking Vic's post: can say it to me too, carer with 2 disabled kids and one beinga ssessed, hardly under educated- one dissertation away from my MA. Married to somene who has seen off redundancy in a very high employment area (think IDS get on the bus talk) by studying FT and setting up won business.

Blue one thing redundancy / Sn world taught me is that not needing to use services today does not always equate to not needing them next week.

Tbh high earners also often employ people not just in business but in personal services, in consumer spend, building and home improvement and so on. If they have more money and spend it, excellent. Far more use being spent on the local builder/painter decorator/dry cleaner/jewellryshop/restaurants than it would be going into the vast and wasteful tax pot.

Besides economic policy is also political and sends a message of a fair and just country if we're not allowing the rich to have so much, the feeling of economics is sometimes as important as the actual economics.

You don't take home £60k out of £150k if you pay 60%.......

VV77 yes you are right it's 50 pc on everything over a certain amount isn't it. So your NI is 15 k and your tax would be don't know. But I stand by the rest of my reasoning - put more money in people's pockets and they'll spend it - I'm a believer in that.

Peachy - I understand your point.