Is there money to do what Labour wants to do?

[AutismHelp1980]

The majority of us are feeling optimistic today and we should!

However my concern is, is there the money to do what Labour needs to do? I keep thinking back to Gordon Brown selling off our gold!

Interesting thank you. Accountant yesterday said different but a quick google tells me you are correct.

Still a bit concerned that farming in hand won’t be protected as it has been.

This wealth is very difficult to tax. Almost no one in that wealth bracket is British. Your yacht owner probably floats between tax havens most of the time and has no tax liabilities in the U.K.

And those who are move to tax havens and become non-domiciled in the U.K. so that they are only taxed on their U.K. income. The Sunak government put in a taper arrangement for how long someone can be non-dom for abd Starmer has promised to axe it. The concept is out of date and needs to go. It is a hang-over from the colonial era so that British subjects continued to pay tax in the British colony they came from, not the U.K. But there aren’t that many of them and we are told they being in a lot of investment. We shall have to see what the consequence of axing the status is.

One of our biggest issues at present is that Hint has increased corporation tax to 25%. That’s higher than Sweden, Denmark, Italy and most European economies. It’s double Ireland’s and the same as France, which is a notoriously sclerotic place to do business. Plus, we don’t have some of the world’s best skiing, vineyards and a Mediterranean climate, so we have to be more competitive in other ways if we want to prosper.

We have a friend (EU National who moved here in 1995) who emigrated to the UAE to grow his business. Low corporation tax, low red tape etc means he now has no employs 70 people, lives on the Palm and has a holiday house near Lake Como. Of course, Dubai let people move there easily, but they never get permanent residency and are never a burden on the state. They are guests making the most of an opportunity. It works for his business, but we lost all the tax revenue paid by all his employees and his business.

Well you can resolve that if you are concerned. The state opening of parliament is still some days away.

Yes, Brown changed the rules on PFI (PPP) to enable many more PFI schemes. In the 1990s under Major it was highly selective and by exception - in the 1980s under Thatcher (and before her) Treasury rules prevented PPP schemes which probably led to more privatisations than would otherwise have happened. What happened after Brown changed the rules was a massive deliberate policy change for expansion of PFI usage, civil servants didnt use PFI's appropriately.

It circumstances with good contractual arrangements, PFIs make a huge amount of sense - multiple European countries (sometimes cities) have PPP (PFI) schemes for water systems management for instance. What Brown did was to expand PFIs to stuff that should never have been privately financed and then on top of that didnt have the skills in Treasury to appropriately manage them, the early contracts were overseen by often inexperienced civil servants and were overly generous to the private sector. Towards the end of the Labour government in 2010, the PFI schemes had become better managed (eg new PFI contracts/procurements (not old ones)) were properly managed but the reputation was in tatters due to the awful early ones eg Metronet etc.

Good use of PPPs with appropriate risk transfer saves the government money, bad use does not. Ultimately where PPPs save money is when a private sector company is better able to manage project risk and is more efficient than the state at delivering outcomes. If governments are efficient, good at managing complex projects then PPPs make less sense.

The country would be much better off if much of the infrastructure which had been privatised had been let on 25 year PPPs, through specialist sector vehicles with hypothecated user pay revenue models however rules prevented this in the 1980s and economists thought comparative regulation would increase efficiency and drive down costs (which it did for the first 10-15 years). Interestingly regulators are now trying to crush returns in privatised companies and effectively make the companies run PPP competitions on new major capex projects.

I know one of the Directors of Economic Development for a UAE emirate, they are absolutely delighted with the Labour government. Its helping them attract substantial investment which would have gone into the UK. It started having an effect on investment in the UAE last year!

This doesn’t surprise me. I think Hammond and Hunt have been giving them reason to celebrate for several years. They must think we have a self-destruct wish.

Yes, of course better money management is the answer. However, the influx of people using resources and benefits for being on minimum wages if not cap considerably would be impossible. We can’t continue helping as much as we did. Wrong party in government for that.

So many people are rubbing their hands with glee at the prospect of the middle class/higher middle class income bracket getting taxed more. The VAT on private schools threads has people salivating with excitement. It’s just the usual race to the bottom on here.

My parents have already done this. Most inheritance tax can be avoided with the help of a good lawyer. My parents worked for every single penny. They’d rather use £20 notes to light the fires than give it to greasy Starmer fir the work-shy and feckless.

Ah right, 'if you don't like being taxed highly and paying for those who could but don't work or contribute, fuck off then'?

Yep. Let’s continue with the brain drain, don’t let the door hit you in the way out. Wonderful! Slow hand clap.

Well, say they'd pay more tax... as is already evident on this thread they have no intention of doing so, despite being given helpful links to do so because they're only that one voice, paying in the darkness. Go on those posters! Be that change! Pay away!

I tell my (incredibly bright) kids all the time to think globally. It’s absolutely ridiculous to talk of accepting high taxation for developing world infrastructure and crumbling public services. We are also to accept a police force who ignores gang violence and widespread theft but comes down very hard on being able to distinguish a man from a woman biologically.

if you are telling me Labour wiill be able to find a way to fairly tax that enables a rebuilding of the country without losing high value companies and individuals I am absolutely here for it.

Forgotten the PFI were still paying off at something like 550%.

I would fuck off gladly! Thank God we ensured we could be movable. Same for my kids who learnt several languages and are well travelled. We have been exploring for a while now and with the exception of Barcelona and California everywhere else considered first world is most appealing than here.

This

We’re already in debt, huge amounts.

Some posters on here need to read the post about Tories being magnanimous in defeat. Doesn’t seem it on here. Just sour grapes, quite sad really.

There is no point in donating extra tax, as it will never be done on a big enough scale. My £1000 won’t make a dent in anything I may as well chuck it in the bin, it’s far better donating to a local charity who can use money to make a difference. That doesn’t mean I’m not happy to pay extra tax if the rates rose

Perhaps, you know, they might not be grasping corrupt Tories. That has to be a good first step. Lets have the PPE millions back, might pay a few nurses.

I think the Conservatives have already done that. Taxation is the highest level for over 70 years currently.

Starmer talks about uniting the country but as a middle class family I feel nothing but resentment from his party and a desire to take our wealth and redistribute it in true Robin Hood style as if we were the ‘baddies’ for earning well through years of hard work.

I don’t seem how their slogans of ‘helping families’ apply at all to the middle classes. It just means you pay 45% tax on your higher earnings, so are more than paying for your fair state school place, though you don’t want to go to a state school for numerous reasons including being despised by the working classes for having money. Who wants their kid to sit in a class where the kids want to beat your child down to size? We’ve worked hard for that??? So you pay ££££ for a private school place and now 20% VAT because everyone hates ‘Lola and Hugo’. It feels like the Labour party just want to hurt the middle to upper middle classes. How is this uniting the country?

And as far as paying more tax for services is concerned. That would be great if I believed that there will be better services. How is more money going to solve the chaos in the NHS anyway? Just one example is their IT systems. They spent billions on trying to connect the systems and failed. This was in 2002 under Blair. I anticipate similar schemes across the public services and a complete sinking of money into the abyss

Everything in the country is broken. Councils are bankrupt, hospitals are crumbling, waiting lists are longer than ever, there's barely any NHS dentist provision, schools are without essentials and people can't feed their families even when working full time or two jobs. But god forbid someone other than the Tories might have a go.

Do you just ignore what you see around you as you go to your private treatment or schools? Is it ok for everything to go to shit as long as you hang onto more of your money? If things were properly funded and worked as they should you wouldn't need to opt out in the first place.

The Daily Mail would love you lot.

I would love to see them take on the big corporations for tax evasion but we all know this isn’t going to happen.They are just too strong. It will be the small businesses that are on the edge that suffer in all of this.

Anyone paying additional rate tax is already paying at least 50 grand a year in tax and NI. How much are you contributing towards maintaining the current shit services?