AIBU to ask a question about Tax paying and what is fair?

[Taxquestions]

Regular but name changed for this thread - Pom Bears, Water Gun, Penguin Date etc.

Although this is not a thread about a thread, I read a thread today which really raised my eyebrows about some people's beliefs on what tax payers should really be paying in tax. I am interested in all views.

One of the contributors seemed to believe that tax payers should be taxed so highly that their eventual income stream would be nearer an average salary i.e if you earn't 100K you should be paying 75% back in tax.

I read things like "well they don't actually pay the higher rate".....errm looking at my P60 I can assure you they (I) do "well they have accountants to lower the rate for them" how exactly would this be? HMRC are scrupulous, there are FSA rules and regulations and there isn't any way to "fudge" the system - if you are not in this system please tell me where on earth you get the opinion that everything is fraudulent.

I wonder what the general opinion is to someone like me...I earn over 100K a year, work bloody hard for it, have very little tax free allowance (in fact I think it is more like 0), don't take up a NHS space as have private medical insurance, don't take up a school space as my children are in private for non snobby reasons despite the opinion that some hold. I employ over 100 people, am a fair manager/employer who pays above the national/international average and I contribute a substantial sum of my very hard earned income every year in both Tax and NI contributions. I don't have a final salary pension scheme and will be in the same position as everyone else who has either worked without a final salary pension or those who have never worked come retirement (subject to any savings).

So mumsnet do you think I should be penalised more for loving my job, being good at it and wanting to work hence being afforded the salary I am "lucky" to earn? Should I go out to work just to put more into the tax pot?

So as not to drip feed whilst I put "lucky" - it has been far from it, I am working class through and through left school early with no qualifications and worked my way up the ladder. This makes no difference to me but just to clarify for those that might also assume I was born with a silver spoon in my mouth :)

Georgina - are you implying that I am lying with your statement that true self made people are VERY rare? Please expand on your statement as I am fascinated to know where the family/friendship connections have been in my career.

Nearthewindymill - your DH is an excellent example of why tax should stay at the rate it is, can the UK afford for people like you to move overseas, I think not!

We should just stop them leaving the uk

"We should just stop them leaving the uk"

House arrest?

We have immigration law we can have emigration law.

Ha ha.

You made a funny, yes?

Nope.

itsbetter - good one! very funny :)

Ooops posted too soon, so it is not a funny? Sorry....

Probably already been said but at 9 pages I'm too lazy to. RFTT.

If it's your own company and you're earning over 100k pa, if I was your accountant I would be recommending a tax scheme.

Flame me.

fairyfuckwings
I do not think it is OP's company
AND
maybe they already have .... without the tax scheme it might have been £600,000 ....

OP
I agree with Georgina about truly "self made" people.
They are as rare as hens teeth.
These are the people who company was founded by them from scratch, without parental or family startup funds and now employs other people.

Richard Branson is nearly one (parental connection and not needing to earn a living at the outset helped),
Gerald Ratner was one
Clive Sinclair was one
Alan Sugar is one

Philip Green is not
Stelios is not
NOBODY currently in the finance industry started from scratch
Meejah is hereditary (like politics)

the current crop are all in tech
Bill Gates
Mark Zuckerberg
Jeff Bezos
Elon Musk

I completely disagree about the 'self-made' point. I come from a generation of 'self-made' professionals - most people I know of from school were the first in their families to go on to further education or to buy their homes and enter the professions.

Interestingly, two of my friends' mums went back to uni when we were in school and qualified as teachers, and then went on to buy their homes, and a number of my friends' parents (including mine) benefitted hugely from right to buy, but my peers from school who are now HRT-payers did it themselves. I married up but would still say I built my business on my own merits.

wilson
Being the first to University and enter the professions is not the same as "self made"
it is joining an existing organisation
not starting a new organisation

by definition, "self made" people are rarely from the professions - as starting a new legal chambers or accounting practice after training with an established firm most definitely comprises use of connections and the finance that got through the training

Sorry, yes TiP but most of us have gone on to start our own businesses and employ other people.

Both DH and I have set up our own businesses.
He was the first in his family to go to Uni
his business is truly innovative and the niche was created by him (and others are following him into it)
I'm an accountant

he is self made
I'm not

Talkin - I agree with you about truly self made people, I think you have hit the nail on the head. I don't think that I ultimately have the skills, confidence or balls to take some of the risks and challenges some of the truly self made people have.

However I never said I was "self made" I just said I had worked hard and worked my way up from a pretty dire start when I left school, to get to the position I am in today. Georgina introduced the "self made" comment and said she was skeptical about it and implied that friend/family and connections come into it. As it was on my thread and no one else had referred to it I assumed she was accusing me of somehow lying about how I have managed to get into the role I am in now.

There are no connections other than peers and clients that I have met during my career .

I think it's worth remembering that if you earn £100,000 you are in the top 2-3% of the country. IOW 97% of people earn less than you. In fact 75% are on less than £35,000.

A certain amount of good fortune has to be allowed for, because otherwise you'd be saying that you are more clever, more hardworking etc than 97% of people, and that simply would not be true. Capitalism by it's pyramid structure, relies on and reinforces inequality, and how it chooses what is valuable and what isn't is not based on intelligence or hard work but by what can be turned into a commodity and sold.

Which isn't to say that I begrudge you a penny of your earnings, nor do I think you should be paying huge amounts of tax. You may be more privileged than most, but you are still ultimately a individual worker who has earned their money. It's big business I'd like to see taxed much more heavily.

It's big business I'd like to see taxed much more heavily.
sadly that is the LEAST likely to happen
because taxes on business profits are the least effective of all

the most fficient taxes are those on land and buildings - that cannot move
or on consumption - which is easy to tax as it happens

companies like Amazon pay bugger all CT because their PCTCT (in the parlance) is bugger all
but the business rates and payroll taxes they pay are HUGE

True, but the tax bill waived to Vodafone recently would have saved the country the entire amount George Osborne slashed off the welfare bill.

Ah yes, Dave Hartnett, lets not go there shall we

the most beautiful comeuppance ever

What he did was illegal, but he and Sir John Bourne were corrupt
( and FWIW I've posted that on accountancy forums using my name and letters )

Ha ha ha - great video!

One of the few men my DH has bad mouthed and they are few and far between.