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?

"Couldn't it just as easily be that they don't feel their taxes are being spent wisely, and that they want better services that they could use like healthcare and education?"

I agree, outraged, that feeling somewhat about the use of public money is another reason for feeling very pissed of about HRT (in addition to the issue of feeling that one's time is better spent working productively for one's family - work in kind which isn't taxed - than working for others).

Surely that's something that could annoy any one of us though? (what taxes are spent on). I didn't get the impression that was what the OP was about though.

Of course it could annoy any one of us. But personally I can understand why it would be more annoying if you pay a lot in compared to if you pay very little in. Anyway, there was nothing at all in the OP to suggest what she thinks of other people. Nothing.

I think quite a lot of women I know feel pretty pissed off at seeing all their earnings disappear on incompetent public services and incompetent childcare...

It's even worse in France no?

The second earner gets no allowance and their income is added to the first. So if the first earner is a HRT payer, then the second earner will have all their salary taxed at HR?

If I remember correctly form my time there (may have changed now).

In general those that don't have to pay progressive tax argue for it. Funny that.

Possibly, but many of those who do pay higher rate tax argue for it as well. Myself included.

I don't agree with how my taxes are being spent at the moment. I hate the priorities of the coalition government. But that doesn't change my view that, as a relatively high earner, I should put more into the communal pot.

" But personally I can understand why it would be more annoying if you pay a lot in compared to if you pay very little in" Surely what matters is what you have left to spend?

Jinsei, but you would still be putting more into the pot on a flat rate.

Maybe there should be the option for people to voluntarily pay more tax if they want :)

i am a higher rate tax payer. i can afford it. i should pay.

pretty simple really.

winnie- stop whingeing.

No one is saying ou shouldn't pay tax coral.

The reason for an equal tax band is self evident for growing the economy. the wealthier we are we employ more people through our spending. e'g to send 3 children to school with fees and extras for holidays approaching 100k a year means earning in the region of 200k just to cover the school fees, Of this 100K is being spent on the unemployed. pensions for those who never saved, their housing their healthcare, and he other 100K is getting injected into the economy through further spending on the schools food suppliers, teachers wages etc. The more disposable income I have the more I inject back into the economy through increased spending and saving's My money in the bank is lent out by the banks at a rate of 10 to 1.

The poor on the other hand are being subsidised for their housing their healthcare their education and the feckless do nothing with all that except expect more entitlement and more credits or more bedrooms because they had another child. If the responsible chose to have another child they plan ahead thy consider if they can afford to buy a new house with an extra bedroom maybe costing 20 to 100k depending on the area of the UK etc. etc. And don't forget the adage of those extra children will be paying our pensions one day is a load of old tosh. The sensible have never relied on the state handout and always planned ahead for their dotage. The real injustice is the amount of endless handouts to the feckless yet the victims of Robert Maxwell the pension scheme robber or Scottish Widows got pennies in the pound compensation from poor government oversight.

Those who pay a lot in get very little out of the system.

Jinsei, but you would still be putting more into the pot on a flat rate.

Yes, I know that, but it makes sense to me that I pay a lower rate of tax on the income that I need to survive, and a higher rate on that which is left over for luxuries.

I would still far rather have a high salary on which I pay a high rate of tax than a low one on which I paid very little tax.

People who are HRT and say they are not bothered about paying high taxes should a) Consider moving to Sweden or Denmark and enjoy the benefits of high taxes with good state provisions or b) vote for low taxes and happily donate to their charity of choice etc with their increased disposable income.

I wonder how many of those people would actually opt in to pay more tax if it was voluntary...

DowagersHump Thanks for the link. I am very surprised she said that. Understand her complaining about state schools though, the one she went to before the Brit school was pretty dreadful.

I do indeed feel pissed off that ALL my earnings disappear on bringing up two children on my own because their father decided to bugger off to have a fun life.

I give plenty to charity already, thanks, but why would I vote for a low flat-rate tax that lets others off the hook. I would happily contribute voluntarily, but I want others to contribute too.

You may say that that's not my decision, but we live in a democracy and I will continue to vote for parties that believe in progressive taxation.

That's exactly it, wordfactory - second earners pay tax at the first earner's marginal rate if the first earner is a higher rate tax payer and so their take home pay is severely curtailed.

Having said that, one of my cousins in London, who is a HRT as is her DH, finds that the costs of decent childcare (proper nanny who can do homework and music practice etc, plus some flexible options to cover travel etc) plus cleaner more or less wipes out her income. I suppose she at least has the consolation that her nanny has skills that she herself doesn't (much less likely in France!).

yakbutter. Ad hominem!!

Bonsoir you would have thouht that was a huge disincentive to work...yet so many wome in France do work, and full time. Is that cultural rather than gaining much financially?

But yes, here in the UK the costs of child care and help around the house etc is absurdly high. Lots of women throw the towel in because the net gain each month is low. You need a very highly paid job to make it worth it in bald fiscal terms...

That said, many women still wnat the independence, and of course pension provision. Also, the costs lessen once DC are older.

Tough choice though.

wordfactory - ah, but you are missing a crucial element of the equation. Women here do very badly indeed upon divorce - almost no alimony in France (even if their husbands are super high earners). Most women keep on working as an insurance policy.

It's all a huge sexist swindle, if you want my opinion!

I did very badly out of divorce in the UK. I got custody of the mortgage, two children to bring up solo, and had to buy my ExH out of the house to bring up his DCs in.

Oh happy days.