Labours Increase in personal tax over £80k

[OliviaPopeRules]

So Labour have finally announced their 'moderate' tax increase for people over £80k.
These changes mean that if you have a household where one person earns £150k you will pay tax of £58k approx. but if you have a household of 2 people earning £75k you will pay total tax of approx. £37k.

I appreciate a lot of people will think tough shit, you earns lot so screw you but can someone really explain to me how this is not just a tax to punish.

And yes I understand people on lower incomes and disability support and other benefits need to more support and I personally have no problem paying extra tax but this makes the tax system so unequal for couples/ families with only 1 person working.

No costings for all the nationalisations either apparently.

All count as capital spending so any money will be borrowed to cover them from what I understand.

Not everyone can be rich, so socialism makes everyone equally poor

All count as capital spending so any money will be borrowed to cover them from what I understand.

Not necessarily which is why they have left an open goal and will be pulled apart by the Tories and LibDems.

2 working household equals more childcare costs to enable both to work so fair in my opinion

Labour are a political irrelevance, they have no chance whatsoever of being elected into Government.
But yes, the money would be, as ever, printed and borrowed from the future.

£21k of childcare? Maybe in extreme circumstance but very rarely at this level for a sustained period of time unless you are paying for private schooling.

sonnet there are plenty of two working households with no children

Something's got to give. If that's what it takes, we need to suck it up.

Sonnet, crazy argument. Are you basing your support for a tax system on an assumption that everyone has at least one child and close together?

I don't see anything unreasonable in asking high earners to pay a little bit more to help out others who are less fortunate.

We all want things like the NHS to be properly funded, for example. The money has to come from somewhere!

And don't forget, it's only the proportion of the salary that's over £80K that gets the higher rate of tax.

Good point about childcare costs being missed aswell is under the new rules if either parent has income below £100k they will get 30 hours free. So 2 people earning £75k will get 30 hours free childcare.

So all these nationalisations are going to be paid for by massive borrowing?

And its working families that pay most of the interest on the national debt and the wealthy that benefit from it, so wealth distribution from poor to rich. What happened to no impact on those under £80k? Dangerous dangerous idiot.

And don't forget, it's only the proportion of the salary that's over £80K that gets the higher rate of tax.

I'm talking about the difference between 2 people and 1 person in a household working. This change will make the variance even bigger.
How is £21k of a difference justifiable.

That's how tax works, though - not just for people earning over £80,000, but for those earning over any other tax bracket. You can transfer married person's tax allowance if only one of you works, and that can save up to 844.50.

Saying that people on very high incomes can pay more isn't about 'screw you' - I don't feel that way at all. If you look at the Danish system of taxation, where people pay roughly 45% of their wages in tax, the lower gap between rich and poor and the better infrastructure results in the highest happiness scores in the whole world.

www.usnews.com/news/best-countries/articles/2016-01-20/why-danes-happily-pay-high-rates-of-taxes

"The reason behind the high level of support for the welfare state in Denmark is the awareness of the fact that the welfare model turns our collective wealth into well-being. We are not paying taxes. We are investing in our society. We are purchasing quality of life."

Or we can do as we are doing at present, and create a society where poor people have shoddy services and rich people pay vast amounts of their income to go private.

for fucks sake, someone has to pay more tax/ better this than benefit cuts

Slightly less trips to Waitrose innit

So all these nationalisations are going to be paid for by massive borrowing?

Seems like it. With no idea as to how much that would actually be.

State education and state healthcare. A benefits system. Mental health care. No university fees.

I'll pay a bit more.

"I'm talking about the difference between 2 people and 1 person in a household working."

Because that's how income tax works.

You can transfer married person's tax allowance if only one of you works, and that can save up to 844.50.

Not if you earn and pay tax at 40% you can't so that is incorrect.

Or we can do as we are doing at present, and create a society where poor people have shoddy services and rich people pay vast amounts of their income to go private.

Or you could try and be more fair and tax wealth not income. Or increase tax 1% for people earning over £50k. Of allow married and cohabiting couples to share allowances and bands.

The grown ups, of whom mr Corbyn is not one but our current chancellor I suspect is, understand that one of the problems in relation to income taxation is the tax base is decreasing as more people enter self-employment. This trend shows no sign of abating and these proposals, if enacted, seem likely to promote it.
He's a dull bulb, that there Jeremy

Because that's how income tax works.

I know how tax works thanks and asking whether it is fair and also whether this change, making the variance even bigger, is fair.

Privatisation is actually costing us a fortune. We pay billions in subsidies and the profits never come back.

Increasing tax percentage actually has the bizzare effect of lowering tax take.
Therefore jc is operating a policy which gives him less to spend on poorer people.
I don't think that is helpful.

I've not looked into it properly but I completely agree it doesn't seem fair.

And I sat this as someone who is not a high earner.