Does earning more than £60k a year make you rich especially in London?

[Payinglotsoftax]

Labour has said that as part of their manifesto they will target earners over £60k for higher taxes. My personal view is that Jeremy Corbyn targeting those earning more than £60k a year will target some families without a high standard of living particularly in London and the south east. AIBU?

[MiltopMighty]

That's certainly not what I am saying AllllGooone

And increasing taxes over 70k would affect us.

[histinyhandsarefrozen]

Why won't they go for inheritance or property? Why won't they go all out for tax avoiders/evaders?
Nah, too difficult.

He's not 'coming for the rich' - he's just taxing salaried workers more.

[SouthWestmom]

We are on 75 in SE and have bills totalling 3800 before food, including mortgage and debt and activities and all bills like utilities and insurances.
So, debt free, we'd be really okay.

[SouthWestmom]

Correction - really ok but not rich.

[Crumbs1]

I think public sector workers have been hugely targeted and had a really raw deal over the past 10 years - blamed for failings in underfunded services, seen pensions decimated and wages frozen. Public sector relatively high earners (high compared to minimum wage earners certainly ) are vilified in the press when those who genuinely earn a small fortune are able to avoid taxes, use clever accounting to increase personal wealth and create charitable trust funds for school fees etc so get additional tax free entitlements.
Middle earners may well have struggled for years to get to a higher paid role and yet are the ones who would lose out if tax above 60k was increased. Doing so at such a low salary would probably increase the need for housing benefits, child tax credits etc. Many families would struggle.
We do need higher taxes to fund decent public services but they should come from inheritance, VAT and chasing domicile non tax payers on earnings from abroad.

[Munchkin1412]

Not in London. You couldn't afford to pay rent and childcare and live on that.

[Floweringjasmine]

*Today 16:49 AvonBarksdale99

How do the people on 70k saying it's not a lot think people on the not unreasonable wage of 20-25k get by?!

Do you get child benefit and tax credits on 20k compared to 70k?

[shortsaint]

Someone I respect always told me that income tax was the only fair form of taxation.

People always think of their own income - what about VAT which everyone has to pay? No one bats an eyelid at that being 17.5%!

£70K IS a large income. And those people quote Heath insurance and nursery fees and school fees.

Nursery fees are for just a few years. We have a state education sector. And NHS.

If you do not pay taxes where does this come from? FFS.

[shortsaint]

Also it's high tax on income OVER a set amount. Everyone pays nothing to start with, then another rate, then a rate over £47K whatever.

Politicians should be targeting massive tax avoidance schemes. Richest person I know is an accountant who specialises in tax (avoidance). Spends more on school fees than a friend who is a teacher. How wrong is that?

[MiltopMighty]

No, not everyone pays nothing to start with. You lose the tax free income once you are over a certain income.

[Floweringjasmine]

*Today 20:38 MiltopMighty

No, not everyone pays nothing to start with. You lose the tax free income once you are over a certain income

True, I think over £150k is it? You have no tax free income at all.

[histinyhandsarefrozen]

Income tax was the only form of fair taxation
Absolute bollocks.

[shortsaint]

But everyone ('normal') has a tax free allowance - your tax code - around £8000? - if you earn over £150K (who the hell does? At least not on paye?) I have NO problem with losing that perk.

[Crumbs1]

Actually plenty of PAYE earn 150K plus - headteachers, consultants, directors of nursing of some bigger trusts etc.
What has to be remembered is the length of time to get to that pay grade, the years of study, the sacrifices. Also as you earn more you have more work related expectations and expenditure. Drinks for staff at Christmas, conference costs, staff presents, clothing, reasonable car etc. You also tend to work far, far more hours - the average director of nursing would be doing a 70 hour plus week and on call at all times, a head of a secondary might be on 100k plus but it's a 24 hour a day, seven day a week job with a constant risk a poor Ofsted or dip in results will see you lose your job.
Then there's the issue of single versus dual income. If there is one earner on 70k they'll be taxed higher than two earners both on 50k despite a higher household income.
Only fair way is taxing spending - catches people fiddling tax, black market earnings, couples who are claiming to be two separate households and dodgy accounting.

[HopelesslydevotedtoGu]

The people I've known who are properly rich are rich through assets, not income.

Property and other assets that rise in value and/ or produce a passive income (where they don't have to personally do much for the money). Often inherited, so they have done fuck all to deserve it. And paying limited tax as there are plenty of loopholes.

I know a few high earners who have a pleasant lifestyle, but nothing compared to the asset rich people. And they are working, paying a chunk of income tax.

Why the focus on increasing income tax? Why not tax assets more?

[celtiethree]

Tax free allowance starts being removed at £100k. From 100 to approx 120k you pay an effective rate of tax of 60%.

[Shortdarkandfeisty]

Shortsaint, vat is 20% not 17.5%

[shortsaint]

Totally disagree. That's the classic 'I earn more because I work harder' argument. One my richer friends often use. And I always say - well would you swap with that delivery driver or your cleaner on minimum wage? Are they slackers then?

With seniority comes responsibility, but really - good car, paying out for staff etc? That's kind of a first work problem no?

Tax HAS to be paid to sustain what we expect from a civilised society. Income tax seems fair to me.

[Crumbs1]

So shortsaint would you be happy when doctors decide not to be GPs as they lose the money from incredibly long hours, years of study and a life in public service?
Would it be OK if heads were paid the same as class teachers - so schools which already struggle to recruit to management posts stop having head teachers because the extra responsibility isn't worth the meagre increase in your pocket?
How do we catch those who manage to escape income tax? Burden falls unfairly on public sector managers again.
When people criticise relatively high earning public sector workers I always ask what stopped them applying?

[shortsaint]

I totally support all public sector workers - and frequently defend high paid public sector workers. Why should high pay just be in the private sector?

I also support paying taxes. I am sorry if you are personally affected. But the demonisation of the public sector is a Tory media led myth. And yes, they have penalised the middle earners. But also absolutely persecuted low income people and supported the rich getting richer. I hate that. I support state education and the NHS and local councils.

FWIW I don't support Corbyn! But am a natural lefty.

[Crumbs1]

Shortsaint, we are nearly as one!

[tovelitime]

Plenty of people on over £150k are PAYE, pretty much anyone who works at a relatively senior level in financial services in London, lawyers, accountants, head teachers. All paid through PAYE, no option to do otherwise

[MsJuniper]

Epoxy what you are saying is quite right, however it's fair to acknowledge that it's a crazy situation in London because so much property has been bought for investment by the super-rich. On under 70k we could only get a mortgage for £200k so we had to go for SO (our rental was being sold) and the SO properties were all valued at £600k+ so the rent+mortgage is still very high (about the same as rent alone would have been). If there were modest houses being built in London for reasonable prices, we'd have gone for one no question! We don't take holidays and have no spare cash at all, shop in Aldi, buy 2nd hand clothes etc.

A household income of £70k (i.e. 2 x average FT London incomes) should make us rich and certainly makes us better off than lots of people (which we are hugely thankful for having lived on tiny incomes in the past) but it is the unique situation of London that means we are not in real terms.

[MsJuniper]

Sorry I wrote that hours ago so it was referring to a comment from then.

To add re. Crumbs comment, I have worked my way up to the head of a small charity, gained experience & training, work long hours every day, am expected to attend evening events, pay for staff drinks etc on £28k per year, not £150k+. I also think what I do is far easier than care workers on mw.

[ActuallyThatsSUPREMECommander]

There used to be notorious tax loopholes for employees with normal but high paying jobs (accountants, lawyers etc) but I think they've pretty much been extinguished now, so there's a lot of people in the City in the 100-250 grand bracket paying standard PAYE