To think the Tories are clever?

[ClassicLib]

They are introducing a massive pension tax cuts for their rich mates in the city, and selling it by claiming that it might also persuade a few rich NHS consultants to delay their retirement to their second homes in France for a couple of years.
And who is paying for this? Why you & me, of course, because our basic rate & higher rate tax allowances are being frozen until 2028. This is actually a massive income tax increase for ordinary working people, of course. And the media have fallen for their spin.
That’s smart politics…

Yes and I had replied to that. The conversation had moved on. I completely understand if you aren’t able to respond to the point as it had developed. Clearly you don’t know the answer and are falling back on insults instead.

I wonder if perhaps some posters don't realise that someone on a higher income is more likely to pay more of their income into a pension, as they have more disposable income, thus paying a lower proportion of tax.
Or that someone on a higher income is more likely to save money in an ISA, which unlike buying products in a shop doesn't get taxed again.

You’re obsessed with insults, God knows why when there haven’t been any.

Well, assuming that its most likely that someone on 100k lives in a better house and will own it.... council tax.

@Alexandra2001 see the links I posted upthread. Here is a graph again. Anybody who has a young child who earns between £100k and £135k will have less take home pay than someone earning £99k who also has a child. So no incentive to work more at all.

Also, other countries don’t have the level of negative contributors. Many people in this country are economically inactive or take more than they put in. As a country we literally cannot afford to lose the people who pay the most tax from the work force.

Even on just income tax rates alone I'm not aware of another country whose system goes 0%, 20%, 40%, 60%, 45%. How does that make any sense? The argument isn't just about the level of taxes - although I don't know of another country that levies a 100%+ tax at any level of income, happy to be corrected though! - it's about bottlenecks and a dysfunctional and completely irrational system that creates huge disincentives to work. For the very people who we really, really need to work more as they pay the majority of the tax.

@Alexandra2001 the point is to bring more people back into work, or increase hours by reducing barriers (pension caps, reducing the burden of childcare costs, eliminating penalties for working while also claiming a disability). If everyone worked to their fullest potential we would have a more productive economy. That’s the principle, and I support it, though like others on this board don’t think it goes far enough.

Labour hates it because it means wealthy people (however loosely defined - they seem to include anyone above average wage) are able to accumulate more wealth. What they ignore b overlook is that the majority of these are salaried employees or small business owners (vs. generational wealth). When I make the decision to work more hours, I am also generating income that otherwise wouldn’t exist for HMRC or for the other small businesses that benefit from my employment, as well as more money for the broader economy.

I am a case study for reduced productivity due to the disincentives this budget seeks to address. I left full time employment when my twins turned 1 because of childcare costs, choosing instead to work freelance for very few hours while they were young. I am now in a position where I could significantly increase my business, but it is not in my interest to work more than £100k (ish after deductions and pension) since the marginal work is not worth the decreasing margin of profit.

will the budget fix everything? No, of course not. A great deal more needs to be done to properly drive growth, as well as reducing disincentives towards work. BUT it is a step in the right direction. Labour’s sole strategy for ‘fixing’ the UK seems to be bleeding the marginally better off, which is decidedly anti-growth.

Thats down to low wages and who decides these? yep the wealthy.

"Many" people are not "inactive" its a relatively small number of people once you strip out students, the sick and non working parents of v young children.

Plus if we are truly reliant on people towards the end of their working lives... we really are screwed.

Bottom line is we are (still) a relatively low tax economy and yet still have appalling productivity and growth.

You’ve completely missed the point and you’re ignoring what people have explained to you. That in combination with having some of the highest taxes in the world - capping the productive people we really need to work (not the generational rich). Capping the very people who pay most of the tax.

I’m waiting for a country which taxes people over 100% and lowers the tax take by stopping people working.

I am a case study for reduced productivity due to the disincentives this budget seeks to address. I left full time employment when my twins turned 1 because of childcare costs, choosing instead to work freelance for very few hours while they were young. I am now in a position where I could significantly increase my business, but it is not in my interest to work more than £100k (ish after deductions and pension) since the marginal work is not worth the decreasing margin of profit

Well the Tories have been in for 13 years and yet we have the highest childcare costs in Europe and no staff.... but apparently its Labours fault!!!!

Can you point to any Lab policy under Starmer where he is wanting to increase tax rates for high earners or that they hate wealth creators?

The opposite is true of Labour now.

But But Jeremy Corbyn is a socialist and wants to shake the magic money tree and make the rich pay more taxes and doesn't know what a woman is.

@Alexandra2001 labour studiously avoid laying out any actual policy proposals recently - cunning plan or lack of one? They have said they would reinstate the pension caps, and previous proposals (las 5 years) was to increase the marginal rate for anyone over £80k.

I also think you are off in claiming the UK is a ‘low tax’ country - suppose it depends on what you choose as a comparator. At any rate, it isn’t whether taxes are on average high or low that matters, rather how they are structured and what incentives/ disincentives they introduce.

Can you point to any Lab policy under Starmer where he is wanting to increase tax rates for high earners or that they hate wealth creators?

Rachel Reeves was asked in her recent interview with Mumsnet what she would do about these huge disincentives and bottlenecks in the tax system caused by the withdrawal of the personal allowance, withdrawal of child benefit etc - and the absurdity of these being applied on an individual not household basis, massively decreasing work incentives for those who are net contributers to the tax system - and she scoffed and said she had no plan to fix the issue.

I tried reading your links, they are behind a paywall, surprise.

I don't get how we trebled the number of millionaires, increased the number of billionaires... yet apparently the tax rate over 100k is over 100%...

You don't have to pay into a pension or have children but then if you do, have them bought up in a nursery and then doubtless boarding school... i mean, why the fuck have them?

Good film on now bye.

The UK is very low tax for one proportion of the population, and extremely high tax for another. Honestly if people aren't even satisfied with 100% tax, what do they want next? A kidney?

Rubbish, these issues have occurred under 13 years of the Tories, so you think Tories hate the wealthy etc too.

I didn’t post any links? Still waiting for that country that taxes over 100% can’t answer it can you?

Let's not vote them in.

The part that enraged me is when the cunt that is Liz Truss went to cut the taxes of the rich.

I tried reading your links, they are behind a paywall, surprise.

One of them was from the Guardian, no paywall. I posted a graph from one of the others, too, showing the 100%+ tax rate.

I don't get how we trebled the number of millionaires, increased the number of billionaires... yet apparently the tax rate over 100k is over 100%...

It's not millionnaires paying the 100% tax, it's people with professional jobs and small business owners who have mortgages, normal cars, shop in tesco and are struggling with inflation like everyone else. Millionnaires can avoid tax and generally take their income through dividends etc not PAYE.

You don't have to pay into a pension or have children but then if you do, have them bought up in a nursery and then doubtless boarding school... i mean, why the fuck have them?

What? So people who have higher salaries or use childcare shouldn't have children? If you think people earning £100k are paying for boarding schools you are living on another planet.

Good film on now bye.

Okaaaay. Say you haven't read the thread, people try to fill you in and then that. So rude.

They don’t understand economics that’s why. We aren’t talking about the millionaires or billionaires with huge wealth. We are talking about those who have studied hard for a profession, worked their way up and yes get paid well, yet they pay the most tax out of everyone. That fact that people can’t see the issue with a 35k pay rise and you’d take home less - is the reason the economy is tanking. The highest tax contributors are lowering productivity to stop working for a net loss; it’s not rocket science.

@Alexandra2001 movie not so good?

I don’t think any of us love Tory performance. I just know that as ineffective as they are, they are still better than Labour. All through Brexit and immigration debates and the incompetence of Boris and Truss I have desperately looked to Labour to step up and provide a competent moderate alternative. But they stick to their core platform rather than reaching for a broader audience. I think their economic policies would be a disaster personally and nationally (yes, even worse than Truss), so I cannot support.

I think their economic policies would be a disaster personally and nationally

Sadly for you UK business disagrees with you. The chairman of Tesco announced his intention of voting Labour yesterday.

Rubbish, these issues have occurred under 13 years of the Tories, so you think Tories hate the wealthy etc too.

It's not rubbish. She said she had no intention to fix the issue. So she's just as useless as the Conservatives.

I stated specifically earlier in the thread that the Conservatives were the ones who implemented many of the policies causing these problems like the withdrawal of child benefit and personal allowance. And that it was laughable that they haven't fixed it.

The Conservatives don't hate the wealthy. People earning £100k are not wealthy. They are solicitors, accountants, train drivers, head teachers, builders etc. These people the Conservatives hate and want to tax to death as they have been for years, hence the stagnation and falling productivity in the economy. The wealthy pay a far lower percentage of tax.

Sadly neither party seems to care whatsoever for the people in between who are the net contributers keeping the economy afloat, and want to tax them ever more. Which is why many have now cut their hours as there is literally no point in working more when the tax rate is over 100%. Surely you can understand that nobody would bother to do that?