Rishi pays tax at 22% and NI.

[GPTec1]

This really, £5m in earnings, tax 1m, rate at 22% and no National insurance.

Not bad is it? yet all we get from the 'right is "the wealthy pay enough already"

Do they?

I bet all those on/or have been striking in NHS, education, rail would love an overall rate of 22%.

Should we all pay tax at 22% ? regardless of earnings?

<eyes up all the PPE lot in government>

Great qualifications!

Please explain how rishi's success has been to the detriment of others? Especially given the >£1m he contributes in tax each year, compared to people who don't contribute at all?

Basically Sunak pays the same tax rate as a nurse because about 1.6 million he made were in capital gains. Capital gains tax rates are lower than income tax rates. It is a change Sunak advocated and voted for in 2016. As Prime Minister it would be easy for him to say that we should not tax income from work at a higher level than income gained not through work. Even Nigel Lawson did this under Margarete Thatcher so Sunak can't even claim that this is not a 'Tory' thing to do.

It's absolutely sickening that a multimillionaire prime minister pays the same effective tax rate as little old me.

And this in the cost of living crisis, junior doctors have just voted for another four day of strikes because Sunak pretends there is no money to pay them because him and the likes of him don't fancy paying their fair share in tax like everyone else who is employed has to do.

Equalising capital gains and income tax rates would bring in about £15 billion or so in extra revenue. But who needs that money in the public purse? Let's just have Rishi and his ilk keep it all- and they can now shove it in their pension schemes tax free as well.

All well deserved of course - unlike the rest of us. Pass me the sick bucket.

He’s not successful he’s was born rich and lucky.

If you have a country with a load of “Rishi’s” then you’re implying that it doesn’t matter that we have ordinary people on wages which aren’t enough to live on.

You seem to think that the contribution that people make to the economy is only measured by their tax take.

Which is silly because you then discount the importance of educators, healthcare workers, etc etc.

And if you’re in fiscal policy, working in HM Treasury then no wonder our economy is screwed and has been for a very long time.

@Believeitornot I agree with so much of what you’re saying but are you really eye rolling at @roarfeckingroarr credentials after you just told people to educate themselves? Like, I get the points you’re making but you shouldn’t dismiss different opinions as uneducated when you don’t know.

Do you only think a contribution is measured in terms of tax? It is a measurable contribution, but it doesn’t make it the only contribution.

You could have an army of people doing fuck all but it generates tax. Not enough doctors, nurses, teachers etc, but hey that’s ok, we’ve got tax!

Tax is nothing but a pile of cash. You have to convert it into something to actually generate value.

How can the Government fix the CoL crisis? (Genuine question, economics isn’t my strong point!)

Because a) PPE isn’t a decent grounding in economics and b) I see no evidence of a decent argument for redistribution/sorting out inequality.

That’s what I’m railing against. Being told I’m ideological - when I’m not. I’ve already said we need a mixed economy, nothing extreme.

So as soon as I’m called an ideologue- based on no evidence - I got annoyed.

@Irritateandunreasonable here we go again, bash the rich time!!!

Being told I’m ideological - when I’m not. I’ve already said we need a mixed economy, nothing extreme Yes I do understand, you were offering a fairly sensible approach. The thing is, it’s really hard to achieve that in practice. Voters think short term and so do politicians

Let’s just worship them instead!

And it’s a tragedy. I don’t understand why you’d become a politician without having a big vision. It’s why I struggle with so many politicians today - where is their vision? Or do they dare not share it because it’s unpalatable.

I'll use my £50k salary as an example, this year I will pay roughly £7k in income tax

Its reported Rishi paid approx. £140k in income tax this year

It would take me 20yrs of paying income tax to match his one year's tax contribution. In that time he will have paid £2.8m in income tax at the same rate.

So yeah, whatever, I cannot get pissed off about it

Well quite. I only mentioned because I hate the "educate yourself" line being rolled out by ideologues because they don't like disagreement.

No one is worshipping the rich FFS. Recognising contribution to society and not vilifying them for success is not worshipping,

🤣🤣🤣 Oh the poor loves!

Is your contribution only worthwhile based on the tax you pay?

Imagine if you had more people on higher salaries who could a) contribute to the economy and b) as a result of higher wages, pay more tax…

So what I’m saying, it’s more valuable to the economy for all sorts of reasons to have 50 teachers on £50k rather than 1 banker on £2.5m.

If we're talking about bashing anyone surely what Sunak is doing with his tax policies is 'bashing middle earners.' Those of us who are paying the same effective tax rate - or if you are earning over £50k - a higher effective tax rate - than a multi-millionaire Prime Minister.

How is pointing out that this is unfair 'bashing the rich' please? Surely we are the ones getting a bashing here - not the rich.

How am I ideological? Please do tell.

I accept that I was rude but ideological? Nope.

@NalafromtheLionKing fuck knows. Lockdown and extensive quantitative easing have done a lot of damage. Energy markets out of our control. We're in a downturn. I would be paid much more if I knew the answer.d

What I do know is that squeezing those who already feel squeezed has a limit, especially those who are financially mobile global citizens. Tax the rich even more is not the answer. This government is making things worse. I don't believe Labour have a credible plan.

The basic problem is that money from not working is taxed at a far lower rate compared to money from working.

As several PPs have pointed out, he had lots of capital gains, which are taxed at only 20% and do not get subjected to National Insurance contributions. This is not his fault, it was like that before he came into office, but he does belong to the party that supports lower CGT rates.

His “true” tax rate on his overall wealth increase is probably even lower, because CGT is only charged on REALISED capital gains where the underlying asset has been sold at a gain. UNREALISED capital gains, where an asset goes up in value but isn’t sold, are not taxed.

There are some reasons why it makes sense not to tax unrealised capital gains, or at least not at the same rate as realised capital gains. But overall, the low tax rate on capital gains means that people who get their income from their wealth pay MUCH lower tax rates than people who get their income from working.

Because high earners in the latter category already have a pretty high tax rate (at least 45%, and as much as 60%, on taxable earnings over £100k, with NI contributions on top of that as well), the only realistic way to collect more tax from the well-off would be to increase taxation on unearned income, for example by increasing the CGT rate. Labour unfortunately has its own problems, ranging from vilification of people with wealth, many of whom have earned it, to being captured by certain ideologies that defy common sense in areas unrelated to taxation. However, I think they are directionally correct in arguing that taxation of unearned income is too low relative to taxation of earned income.

@Believeitornot I'm assuming so by the way you write. You're talking about inequality and non financial contributions, rather than fiscal policy and what would work. You give no specifics of what to do, just "reduce inequality, tax the rich"

The energy market was not out of our control. We are paying the price of full privatisation - looking over the Channel should tell us that much.

Quantitative easing was brought in to protect the banks post 2007/8 and they were never made to properly pay that back or reinvest. And I think it’ll happen again.

Covid lockdowns cost us so much because our government were too late in taking measures plus had run the NHS down and neglected adult social care.

I would weep for our country.

It is going to take decades to unwind the damage.

And all you’ve said is “leave the rich alone”,

This is about inequality - and you reduce it by giving more power to ordinary workers to get better wages. You do that by various ways - eg have employee representation on boards is one but example.

And yes, we need to tax wealth.

I haven’t go into a wider discussion about fiscal policy - and I don’t really see what measures you suggest? Beyond “we need more Rishis”.

🤨