To feel that having nearly half of your salary taken away is just not right?

[WinnieTheWho]

I don't earn enough to pay tax & NI but my DH has a pretty good job & salary for which he works BLOODY hard. I was horrified to work out after last pay day that for EVERY £1 he earned, he only kept 60 pence. This is due to a combination of paying very high income tax and NI, as well losing all of his personal allowance because he might get a bonus at the end of the year! It just seems that if you work hard to get paid well and you are a PAYE taxpayer, the Government & HMRC will just shaft you from all angles. It just makes me wonder why we bother? So... AM I BEING UNREASONABLE?

Op didn't say that only HRT payers work hard. She just said that her husband works hard. There's nothing wrong with saying that, he probably does work hard.

Cos what? You think all immigrants are scrounging off benefits or something? I think you'll find its not the case. They come to work. And then they pay tax.

No, its the on-costs of provisioning eg multiple language services, the extra resources dealing with an influx of people who need many services, lots of kids entering school with little schooling/English not 1st language etc etc.

All of these have a huge impact on the costs of providing these public services that are not there in more homogenous/lower immigration level countries.

Btw I am in favour of immigration, I just find many people don't understand that there are on-costs of this that need to be paid for.

I read it that way, outraged. If the op thought everyone worked hard she wouldn't have mentioned it.

I disagree perception. Neither of us can really know what was going on in the OPs head when she wrote that, but I don't see how a comment about her DHs tax/work situation can explain her opinion about everyone else's tax/work situation.

I believe my dh works hard for his money, but by me saying that you cannot automatically assume that I think that no one else works hard and he has the monopoly on it. That would be crap.

It may be an incorrect reading on my part, but tbh this is an attitude I have seen on here before - that because someone works hard they should not have to contribute as much tax as they do.

Few people are really going to have sympathy with that kind of selfishness are they? Most high earners I know consider that they are lucky to be in the position of earning the money they do and are fortunate to be a position where they need to pay that level of tax.

No, its the on-costs of provisioning eg multiple language services, the extra resources dealing with an influx of people who need many services, lots of kids entering school with little schooling/English not 1st language etc etc.

All of these have a huge impact on the costs of providing these public services that are not there in more homogenous/lower immigration level countries.

In Sweden all immigrants are entitled to free full time language tuition within 3 months of requesting it. In my area there is no waiting list, you can register and start the next day. Immigrant children are entitled to weekly lessons in their mother tongue, my daughter had a 1 to 1 English lesson every week. Plus all none Swedish speakers have the legal right to an interpreter at any meetings with public bodies eg schools, doctors, council, tax office, immigration etc.

*non Swedish speakers

I think high earners should pay high rates of tax, but they should also be getting good services for that money.

Yes, I think the UK has gone down the line of lower taxes buying less good services, and high earners pay more to sort themselves out.

I have a lot of sympathy with that position tbh, but I don't think it's selfishness. Like I just said, dh could have been a HRT payer by now but actually it wouldn't have benefited him or us at all. And as we have recently had to pay a fortune for private healthcare because the the treatment he was getting on the NHS could genuinely be a real threat to his eyesight, I think we made the right descision. My social conscious was pricking very sharply when we decided to go down the private route, but not enough to make us feel guilty for not paying more to receive a crap service.

In Sweden all immigrants are entitled to free full time language tuition within 3 months

Meh, the Swedish model is breaking down as we speak under these costs. I think you are enjoying the last of the best years.

Where have you been your whole life ?!
Are you on the planet ?

By the way yabu.
Welcome to earth.

There is an interesting article in the Economist on the growth of state spending within the economy.

www.economist.com/node/18359896

Part of the debate about tax has to be what sort of state do we want and how is it delivered.

I am a HRT payer and I don't think we get value for money. For example, I am waiting for a hospital appointment for one of my children, the GP referred us nearly 2 months ago and we still haven't had a a date for an appointment. When I rang the hospital they claimed they hadn't received the referral. I am sure this sort of inefficiency is multiplied across the NHS and it is a waste of money.

I am not sure that a bunch of bureaucrats and middle managers are really the best people to spend our money (especially when they are all employed through their own consultancy firms and so paying less tax).

People with higher salaries obviously pay more tax. I don't think people have a problem with the fact that they are paying more than others because they earn more. I think there is a problem with the idea that because you earn more you should pay a higher proportion of your earnings. Why is that fair? Sure, you can all bang on about "oh, you can afford it" (not necessarily true, as previously discussed) but does that make it fair? It's like being punished for having a good job IMO.

Seems there are lots of similarities between Norway and Sweden.

My husband (when we moved to Norway, we are back in Britain now) got a free full time language course, lasting 9 months. Immigrants have a duty to take the course, their visa status depends on it! He got to know many immigrants this way. Many came from war torn places where they had received little or no education, and some were illiterate. There was an extensive program to get them all up to speed. The course included cultural knowledge, job hunting skills, and information about the tax system, benefits, a trip to the county hall to meet the mayor, etc. Upon completing the language course, some went on to take Gcse/Alevel qualification at the adult education (also free) and further on to vocational courses such as care assistants.

Most of my husbands friends from his course now work in nursing homes and hospitals. In fact, one of them is now my mums care worker at her nursing home.

There is a shortage of carehome staff, care in the community and nurses, and courses leading to careers in these areas are free. They lead to well paid jobs and integration into society.

I should add that in Norway, the disparity between "Rich and poor" is not so big as in the UK. The salaries follow a fairly even structure, and the differences between salaries for people working in shops, or in nursing homes, or in banks and offices are not that big. Even a directors salary (unless you live in Oslo) is not as high. Houses are fairly even in size, and usually range between £200.000 and £500.000. In perspective, a teachers starting salary is 42k, and fishermen are regarded "top earners". Most our friends had a combined pre tax income of between 80 and 100k. These are "normal" people, on "normal" salaries. But yes, taxed at 44%. Good job there are no private schools, or private healthcare around to deplete their "holiday funds"
The norm is one car per family, and one holiday per year.

Most families consist of two full time working adults. All school meals are free. After school care is a set fee of £120 per month, a full time nursery place with food, open from 7 am till 5 pm) is a standard £250 per month. Sibling discounts apply. I dont know anybody who would pay for a cleaner, usually the couple do their house cleaning together after work on Friday, so the house is spick and span for the weekend.

Not really sure why we returned to the uk.
(Aside from absolutely loving it here. )

You pay a higher proportion because you earn more than nearly everyone else. Of course that is fair - people don't need more than they need.

The op's point isn't that high earners shouldn't pay tax. It's more to do with the fact that PAYE taxpayers on high salaries seem to be penalised from every angle by HM Government. They sometimes lose their personal tax free allowance, meaning that they pay tax on every single pound they earn. They pay a much larger proportion of their tax in the 40% bracket than in the 20% bracket and on top of that they pay a huge amount of National Insurance on that high salary. All of which takes a very large chunk of their monthly earnings. In op's case it is a total of 40% of DH's entire monthly salary. Of course everyone should pay taxes, but it does seem that people are penalised disproportionately by once they start to get above a certain salary bracket and the OP questions whether it is in fact worth trying for that promotion or moving for for a more highly paid job, when ultimately you may be no better off from a financial standpoint.
I'm sure that if every poster who thinks OP is BU had £40 taken off for EVERY £100 that came into their household they would be somewhat disappointed too.

Not really sure why we returned to the uk.

Possibly because Scandinavia is nice ... but dull. eg There's so little crime that the builders working on our house leave all their tools and machinery out on the front lawn and pavement when they home at night. Which is great. But not as entertaining at the 2 old dears fighting over the last small trolley in Morrison's carpark. :o

Perception, what about the things that people need in return for their taxes? We all need decent healthcare, many of us need decent schools, but we don't have access to those things.

It is not fair that high earners pay extra tax but then pay again because they can't get a place for their dc at their local school, or they can't get an operation without waiting months for it.

Norway does seem to have a lot of benefits, but not only is tax high there but the cost of living is very high too. The difference is that they see what they are paying for and benefit from it.

If you follow that logic perception than all these multi millionaires should be paying an even higher rate as they don't need it.
Or perhaps they should just be made to give away half their salary to charity.

£5 for a punnet of blueberries from Chile, midwinter in the Arctic, that is what you are paying for.....

It is true that taxes are higher, salaries are higher, cost of living is higher, the living standard is higher. Most people have all their needs met, and are comfortably off. I think when you can see a direct correlation between paying taxes, and the fact that every body has equal chance of a good well paid job, decent housing and schools, and high standard of health care, you are pretty "happy" to pay tax. You see where your money is going, that is true.

And with university education, and all higher education in fact being free, and with low cost loans and grants from the state, everybody regardless of their background or their parents income, have a fair chance of a good education also.

As an amusing aside, I am SO happy with my mums nursing home. Her room is 25meter square, with an en-suite bathroom. She has views to a lovely rose garden. The living room is nice and bright and with qood furniture. There are only 9 residents, all calm elderly people with dementia. They are offered wine with their supper on the weekend, and Baylis and other liqueur during holidays and festivities. Why take all the good things in life away just because you have dementia and live in care? My husband commented that her care home was like a 4 star hotel. It is also a state facility, it is paid from 75% of minimum state pension. Now that my mum has all her needs met by the care home, be it hair dresser or foot therapy, she only gets 25% of her pension to do with as she pleases, so, in effect just sitting there in her bank account.

I don't understand some peoples opinions about peoples salaries - if someone is in a high level job and has trained/taken a huge number of exams etc etc to get there should they just have a massive chunk of their wages taken away so they only earn the same as say a receptionist (nothing against receptionists but generally low(ish) paid) as they don't need it.

Surely not - you earn what you earn, people often make the decision on their career path and may choose a highly paid job or maybe a lower paid one just because they love it. What is wrong with that. Yes people should pay tax at whatever level the government decides but if people earn a lot then they should be allowed to earn a lot (less their tax) and the people who truly need it should receive the benfits they need - simple as that really.

I've always thought 50% must to be tipping point. Once the state start to take more than half of what you earn, then it begins to be a punishment rather than a fair and effective way to raise taxes.