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.

This is scare tactics and making excuses for companies and individuals not doing their bit.

It is not scare tactics, its called globalisation.

It is unfair in two ways. One in that a family with two earners on 75K will pay far less than a family with one earner on 150k.

Second, it targets revenue from employment disproportionately.
100k salary - 45% tax
100k inheritance - 0% tax
100k in capital gains on sale of home - 0% tax
100k capital gain on sale of business - 10% tax
100k gain on share sales - 20% tax.
100k lottery win - 0% tax
100k on the horses - 0% tax

@Kursk Not everyone can be rich, so socialism makes everyone equally poor
Well, not everyone. You sure won't see senior union staff or Labour party members down the RFQS aisle in Asda alongside their brothers who are paying their dues...

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

Slightly less trips to Waitrose innit*

This attitude is exactly why Tories will reign and Labour have less than no chance of getting in.

yes, other than Corbyn doing too much, too fast, we're being presented with one set of income tax rises and when the rubber hits the road, we'll be faced with many more tax rises whilst Corbyn and McDonnell continue chasing their pipe dreams.

Whilst I do luxuriate in occupying the moral high ground of being happy to pay more tax, I'm not happy to keep having our income taxes go up repeatedly, and for spending on things I don't think are priorities.

It's clear it's not only the rich that are worried - if I was on any salary really, I'd be worried that Corbyn's plans are so unrealistic at some point every single person is going to have to pay more, or face unemployment (see under min wage, corporation tax increases).

In terms of costing, I saw a thing on FB which claimed (to best of my recollection) that wonderful Labour were only going to cost the country £63billion, whereas the wicked evil Tories were going to shaft the population for a whacking £73billion.

Unfortunately the poster did not respond to my question about why there was a "(2016-2022)" footnote under the Conservatives spending and no equivalent annotation under the Labour column.

So was the 63bn for one year versus 73bn over 6?

Tuition fees. One of the reasons people were anti the increase originally was the inter generational unfairness - the huge increase from £3k to £9k per year.

I think there is an unfairness problem if generation 2012-2017 (or whichever year - I think withdrawal is going to be phased?) has to repay their c £50k of tuition fee plus maintenance loans plus interest throughout much of their working lives - while simultaneously paying tax to pay for free tuition for the next lot. (Free tuition only of course - I see there isn't a commitment to abolish loans for maintenance, although grants will be reinstated - presumably means tested as before.)

I know people are just supposed generously to say, great, abolition of tuition fees, but whether everyone who has paid the £27k will feel that way will be interesting to see.

Looks like another success on costings by Labour then by the look of it its got the 50p army in here frothing

I'm not happy to keep having our income taxes go up repeatedly

there has been no indication of this.

Looks like another success on costings by Labour then by the look of it its got the 50p army in here frothing

Yes that's right, everyone that doesn't agree with you is either being paid to post or is a troll...

This is a big tax hike and for people who have organised their life around the current tax levels, it will have a massive impact. I am absolutely left leaning, and would be happy to accept some form of tax rise. I will never be that person who tries to avoid the system. But the proposed increases are too significant for me, so they won't be getting my vote: the Lib Dems will instead (who are proposing a much more reasonable middle ground).

JustAnotherPoster I think you'll find that more coherent arguments than that will be needed, if Labour's meltdown is ever going to be turned around ...

"What happened to no impact on those under £80k"?

That only applies to income tax. I expect shortly someone will focus on the impact on reversing the iht cuts, at least in London and the south east where property prices have soared. True that many mners don't agree with inheritance, so it's unlikely to affect the vote on these threads! But previous Chancellors of Ex have obviously recognised that it is a significant issue to many.

make what will they do when, as the IFS predicts, they don't get in the money they need because people move/change behaviour etc?
If they want to keep their promises they will have to further increase taxes.

They are already borrowing a lot for capital spend on top of which there will be more for nationalising railways and utilities and are doing nothing to decrease the annual deficit as the tax increases cover new spend.

the Lib Dems will instead (who are proposing a much more reasonable middle ground).

Yes they do seem have gone for much more of the middle ground on this.

I've read the labour manifesto and didn't see that they'd put any figures on new income tax rates - where are people getting these numbers from?

Coatings are detailed in a separate document here for those who haven't seen it: www.labour.org.uk/page/-/Images/manifesto-2017/Funding%20Britain%27s%20Future.PDF Not as detailed as I'd like but I haven't seen how this compares to any other party's yet.

Figures I used were as per BBC reporting
www.bbc.co.uk/news/election-2017-39930865

Not as detailed as I'd like

Nor it as detailed as they promised. Every question was 'wait for the manifesro' when asked about railways or the water nationalisations yet no costings at all for them.

I know people are just supposed generously to say, great, abolition of tuition fees, but whether everyone who has paid the £27k will feel that way will be interesting to see.

True, true.

I would prefer the people who have paid £9k have the equivalent debt of £6k/year wiped off.

£3k/year was a much more sustainable level of tuition fee.

'Paul Johnson, of the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said it was "genuinely uncertain" whether increases to income tax would raise the £6.4bn Labour has earmarked, adding that they represented a "big increase" for high earners'

What the IFS have said if anyone is interested.

Tip of the Labour iceberg. They'd be up at 70% within a couple of years.

makeourfuture - want to share how much tax you pay?

yes, the littering of 'unprecedented' through all of the IFS election publications tells you that the reason most of these huge step changes haven't been tried in recent times is because they are likely to have adverse effects, but it's hard to prove from recent history as nobody has been stupid enough to run on policies like this since, er, 1983.

Changes would lead to the Highest level of tax in over 70 years per the IFS.

"I would prefer the people who have paid £9k have the equivalent debt of £6k/year wiped off."

Agree Kokusai - it would be fairer to do that and then maybe continue with £3k a year fees for the near future. Going from £9k to £27k to £0k for a three year course in the space of 10 yrs would be generationally unfair I think.

That then raises the question of whether you also reimburse those who paid upfront. (A hypothetical question I admit!)

I've got a question about how this is such a big change?

In the current tax year, if one person earns £150,000 gross a year, they'll be paying £53,3000 a year in tax (roughly, without allowances etc). The new tax rule would apparently mean that they are paying £3700 more in tax?

Is that really unacceptable, when the person would be taking home around £90k?