To think £100k pa is NOT 'the squeezed middle'?

[ArsenicFaceCream]

Link

The article is very confidently attributing the definition to Danny Dorling, but did he really name this figure?!

These women are fools.

The school grade story was brought to us by Charley, Suzanne

Suppose you are an experienced NHS physio on 25K and you take on a couple of private clients to about £100 per week (3-4 extra clients?). That would gross up around 5K per annum - but since you're not paying tax that is more like 7K equivalent to top line.

If you have DC say £20pw CB would add another 4K tax free to the headline. I am not familiar with tax credits thresholds, but when we were in a band it added substantially to our income. My physio is now easily taking home the equivalent to a 50% higher wage than their nominal wage which is being used to calculate these averages.

suzanne you got the wrong poster.

If you have DC say £20pw CB would add another 4K tax free to the headline.

No it wouldn't. It's about £1k pa.

Look.

So far you have identified crime as one way someone on a median income might top up their income.

Now you mention Child benefit and tax credits. What's your point matron?

Apologies, Partymatron, I re direct my post to Charley

Really? I though one of the main themes of this thread was berating those families for what they spent their income on and that they were very 'rich', the other theme seems to be about teachers?

I don't think you've heard either of those things from me.

OTOH I am rather impatient with anyone who can't understand that the key to balancing a household budget is to take income, rather than aspirational 'expectations' as the starting point.

My DH and I are both SE and in jobs where 'cash in hand' would be possible. But it really doesn't happen. We are almost never paid cash. If we are we declare it all, as does everyone we know in our line of work.

AFAIK an NHS physio doing private clients would be mad not to declare it. One because it's probably in the contract of his/her main (NHS) job to do so, but also because anyone using that service might well be claiming it as a business expense if they are SE, and so it would be very traceable by HMRC.

All these people not declaring substantial amounts of under the counter income, is no one tempted to report them to the inland revenue?

Yes I would!

AFAIK an NHS physio doing private clients would be mad not to declare it. One because it's probably in the contract of his/her main (NHS) job to do so, but also because anyone using that service might well be claiming it as a business expense if they are SE, and so it would be very traceable by HMRC.

YY. Not to mention insurance/medical negligence/professioal registration ramifications. You'd have to be an idiot to risk it for a couple of grand, wouldn't you?

You only have to look on the lone parent board to see that self employed people seem to have many many opportunities to not declare income in order to avoid paying maintenance

I have been asked many many times by workmen if I will be paying in cash... I love how when someone mentions something like benefit fraud or self employment that all the liberals come out saying it is very very rare and not even worth considering.

You only have to look on the lone parent board to see that self employed people seem to have many many opportunities to not declare income in order to avoid paying maintenance

What child support avoiding men tend to do handcream is take income as dividends, leave profit in the company and/or pay new partners substantial salaries. All quite legal. All avoid CM liability. I gather my EXH does all three

It's not tax avoidance. Just 'support your child' avoidance.

The CB - apologies for confusion. I was basing it on how much the CB cut cost us off top line income - but we have 3 DC & top rate tax.

It might be crime and tax credits - but it widespread enough to be very relevant to the question 'how can 100K feel tight if people do just fine on 25K?

I have just reported the local nail bar tbh. They provided a rubbish service, they dont speak enough English to know what is being asked for and they take cash only.

I have been asked many many times by workmen if I will be paying in cash... I love how when someone mentions something like benefit fraud or self employment that all the liberals come out saying it is very very rare and not even worth considering.

I'm not saying 'very very rare'. I can believe maybe 3-4% of the adult populace do it (?)

Which isn't a large enough number to dismiss the problems of a national median wage of £27kpa (gross) with the retort that since a small minority of people are tax fraudsters, i.e. criminals, a low median income figure is not a cause for concern.

The physio I know moonlights as a personal trainer. No idea if he declares or not - but his DW says they couldn't manage without it.

It's not tax avoidance. Just 'support your child' avoidance.

I mean evasion. Clearly structures with dividends etc are tax minimization arrangements in any case.

I have just reported the local nail bar tbh. They provided a rubbish service, they dont speak enough English to know what is being asked for and they take cash only.

Which is the way to deal with criminals, of course.

Accepting that tax evasion is so commonplace, we should build policy around it would be madness.

It might be crime and tax credits - but it widespread enough to be very relevant to the question 'how can 100K feel tight if people do just fine on 25K?

I doubt they are managing "just fine" *Matron". I think they are struggling.

But the fact that a h/hold on that income would qualify for modest tax credit award etc is just another symptom of the mess we are in it; It is official (government) recognition that a family cannot be expected to scrape by on that wage.

Obviously there are problems with the welfare system and the NHS, that doesn't mean that some of them can't be addressed or it would be better not to have either of them