to think that 6000 per month is excessive for the government to take off my pay for tax?

[tootaxed]

Surely there should be a maximum limit that each person has to pay as tax? Six grand per month in tax is just excessive imo. And that is before NI contributions etc. If the government set a maximum tax limit they would take more care over how they spent their central funds. And I wouldn't have to work so many hours away from my DCs only to have 72 bloody grand a year taken off my income to fund their mis-spending.

Lol Floss well said!

Tootaxed - I am very sorry about your DD and DH, it's extremely sad that they are in this situation.

But it has nothing to do with the tax policies of this country, which is what you remarked on in your OP.

The fact remains that people in the bottom income bracket contribute more to this country's coffers than people in the top income bracket, despite the fact that they have benefited less from the system. (And please note - I'm not talking about how much they have received from the system - I'm talking about how much they have benefited, a completely different kettle of fish.)

To turn things around, if you have a cap on the amount of tax you should pay, should you also have a cap on the amount of work you can have done on the NHS? If someone is chronically sick or disabled and needs constant care, should we cut off the funds after they've received a certain value of care each year?

No - obviously not. You should receive care in proportion to how badly off you are. Likewise you should pay tax in proportion to how well off you are.

flossish - I bet you didn't actually choose your profession "because it is low paid". I bet you chose it as it was what you wanted to do. I don't know what it is that you do but that is your choice.

I didn't "choose a rich twat rather than the bloke I fell in love with". I fell in love with a guy. He happens to earn a very good salary. He worked hard at school and at uni and again in his career. We now reap the benefits.

I hate threads like this that make me feel guilty for the fact that my husband works hard and is in a profession where he is very well rewarded. I know full well that lots and lots of people work just as hard in professions that are not as well rewarded. Just because that is the way things are doesn't mean that I (or anyone else in a similar position) feels that it is right. But I really fail to see why people who have worked hard to get to where they are should be made to feel so bad for earning a good salary.

I think it's really good that women can see what some other women earn so they can ensure their daughters pick good careers rather than working in call centres, that they aspire to be leading surgeons rather than nurses or whatever. Far too many girls have very very low aspirations. They need good high earning role models of women.

(What's Bulgaria like? 10% tax sounds more palatable).

Lol Xenia. Bulgaria is nice. But not exciting. We moved from there to Hungary. Paying 52% with tax and social insurance.

surely yuor accountant or company you work for would make sure you weren't being taxed incorrectly. maybe you need to look into this?
just bear in mind that what you are upset about is being taxed way more than most people earn in a year.....does come across a little ungrateful. but i'm only jealous cos i'd have to work for a year to pay 2 months of your tax!

Personally I would far rather my daughter have a role model of someone who is happy and furfilled with their chosen life path rather than someone earning stacks of money and working all the hours in the day.

sorry fulfilled.

I don't think people are having a go because she earns a lot, they are having a go because she has the cheek to complain about paying tax on her income. As if high earners are some sort of special case who should be relieved of the obligations that apply to mere mortals.

Mind you, that does appear to be the line taken by government, if you look at the treatment afforded to non-doms. FINALLY, after lots of criticism, they are doing something about it - but it's a pathetic, token gesture.

absolutely agree Xenia that girls often have low expectations , even nowadays ,and high earning role models are a good thing.

No problem with that fulfilled person earning a lot of money though but wouldn't want her role models to be restricted in terms of earning potential.

ignore me. didn't read the whole thread and what i have posted just now is redundant.

I rarely think anyone actually aspires to work in a call centre though Xenia. I agree positive female role models are a good thing but this doesn't necessarily mean high earning surely? A good career and high wages don't always equate and it depends on your values what you consider a 'good' career.

It could be worse. Think of all those investment bankers when their £400,000 annual bonus gets dropped into their pay packet. They must be so depressed.

Jim Rogers who founded the Quantum fund with George Soros lives in Singapore and still has to pay tax in the USA. Now that does seem unreasonable.

I suspect you are paying the max you can into your pension fund so that the governemnt tops the amount up at your marginal tax rate. Deduct your annual pension tax saving from your annual tax bill and it might not seem so bad.

Left the thread last night so didn't respond then

""No-one has to work 100 hours a week unless they are being paid sweat shop rates."

That remark is so touchingly naive and oddly illogical that I barely know where to start ...

I've worked 100 hour weeks. Rarely but I've worked them. It is in fact usually illegal to work more than (I think) 48 hours a week over a 17 week period. Illegal that is if your employer has not OBLIGED you to contract out of it ..."

I am not naive or illogical, just have different priorities. You don't want to work 100 hours, then change your job, change your lifestyle and don't. It may seem impossible, but it really is just shifting your perceptions. DH is currently miserable in his job, at the moment we don't want to change our lifestyle, so we are opting for the miserable choice. It is entirely possible to make the change though even though it would mean shifting our finances and way of life.

I am trying to feel vaguely sympathetic today though as I know people can still show me sympathy when I have cocked up my finances and we are struggling for food for a week because I forgot to transfer the money for a bill etc.

There is such a myth that anyone earning a "high" salary like the OP is some kind of Bon Vivant living the jet setting lifestyle - this thread is so indicative of that. Realistically they are just v hard working normally v tired on a bit of a treadmill. Does that really warrant this kind of venom?

Agree with hercules1. My children presumably have lots of very high earning role models. Plenty of our friends earn an awful lot. I rather hope they'll choose to do something that they find rewarding and meaningful, not just something that pays well. I'll spend my time pointing out that once you've got enough for a decent basic standard of living money doesn't buy you happiness.

CrushwithEyeliner- the OP is paying more in tax every month than many families earn in months of hard work. There's some sort of myth in the City that the huge salaries are justified because they 'work hard'. There are people working every bit as hard (and in many cases a lot harder) in jobs that do not reward nearly as well financially and they're paying proportionately more of their earnings in tax.

Perhaps a case of needing to choose the audience you want to moan to a bit more sensitively.

I was trying to help by asking if she was employed for a start. There may be things that can be done to reduce the tax even if my Bulgarian option (10%) isn't taken up. Property is cheap there too. Mind you whether it's attractive is another matter. But they do have coastal areas. You can even ski there.

(Yes I read that article about the man who founded the Quantum fund with Soros - he also said he had at first decided never to have children as his parents found 5 so tough going but then late on - he's in his 60s and has a small girl and another on the way and presumably his 3rd wife is an oriental bride, he found children were a huge pleasure).

Loads of people who make a lot of money work long hours. Even my ex husband who as a teacher then also did in effect a second job - I think he had in addition to teaching 30 pupils a week plus his other musical engagements would often work 70 hours a week and if you add on the work all of us as parents do as child care weeks when you get up at 5.30am with the baby and "finish" at 1 or 2am are not uncommon. But you do that if you want to get on in many professions and that's why people end up those kinds of income levels. Not everyone wants to do that but I must add that it can be fun, if there's a deal on, the adrenalin is flowing etc. Let's not knock long hours for those that like them and they as sure as Hell are more fun than no pay and baby minding 365 day a year.

Xenia I don't know why you presume his wife is an oriental bride? Isn't that a bit of a leap?

They moved to Thailand. He wants his children to learn Chinese. He's in his 60s and doesn't look that great. Rupert Murdoch married a much younger Chinese girl in his 60s or 70s and had 2 more children etc. Just seemed to be the trend. We will now discover his 3rd wife is older than he is and earns more and I will eat my hat.....laughing as I type. Perhaps I need to move to Thailand with a man 20 years younger than I am.

Xenia - Actually he moved to Singapore-not Thailand. One of reasons was he wanted his child to learn to speak Chinese and in the article he talked about employing a Chinese speaker to teach the child. His wife is 40 and called Paige Parker.

I don't think it's that unusual for 60 year old men to marry 40 year old women, even if they aren't that wealthy.