Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Money matters

Find financial and money-saving discussions including debt and pension chat on our Money forum. If you're looking for ways to make your money to go further, sign up to our Moneysaver emails here.

Another look at income tax

6 replies

Glitter220 · 04/10/2010 16:07

Someone sent this to me last week. I didn't read it at first thinking "boring" but actually its quite thought provoking.

Its meant as a light hearted look at income tax but seems to me there is a serious message behind it if you can be bothered, like me, to read to the end :)

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100...

If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this...

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay £1.
The sixth would pay £3.
The seventh would pay £7..
The eighth would pay £12.
The ninth would pay £18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay £59.

So, that's what they decided to do..

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve ball.

"Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by £20". Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.

So the first four men were unaffected.

They would still drink for free. But what about the other six men? The paying customers?

How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share?

They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage the poorer he was, to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using, and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay.

And so the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% saving).

The sixth now paid £2 instead of £3 (33% saving).

The seventh now paid £5 instead of £7 (28% saving).

The eighth now paid £9 instead of £12 (25% saving).

The ninth now paid £14 instead of £18 (22% saving).

The tenth now paid £50 instead of £59 (15% saving).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings.

"I only got a pound out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man.

He pointed to the tenth man, ?but he got £9!"

"Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a pound too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!"

"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £9 back, when I got only £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"

"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!"

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when the time came to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works.

The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction.

Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore.

In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

OP posts:
mranchovy · 05/10/2010 02:00

That is a fascinating allegory. Unfortunately it originally appeared at least six years ago with the same numbers - in US Dollars. I don't know how the tax profile in the US in 2006 compares with the UK in 2010, or even if the figures were ever accurate anywhere (they look excessively skewed to me).

Has anyone got some recent UK data for average tax rate by decile? It would be good to update this story which has appeared on blogs on the BBC and Telegraph web sites without any caveat as to the underlying data (journalists ignoring the quality of the data where there is a good story? Surely not!)

mranchovy · 05/10/2010 02:01

That is a fascinating allegory. Unfortunately it originally appeared at least six years ago with the same numbers - in US Dollars. I don't know how the tax profile in the US in 2006 compares with the UK in 2010, or even if the figures were ever accurate anywhere (they look excessively skewed to me).

Has anyone got some recent UK data for average tax rate by decile? It would be good to update this story which has appeared on blogs on the BBC and Telegraph web sites without any caveat as to the underlying data (journalists ignoring the quality of the data where there is a good story? Surely not!)

mranchovy · 05/10/2010 02:56

Well according to this table, the top decile in the UK does indeed provide about 56% of the current income tax receipt, so the story is not fat off for the 10th man.

The bottom half apparently provide 11% but these data just look at income tax, I suspect if you add in child benefit and tax credit then the net receipt from the bottom half is indeed next to nothing.

LucindaCarlisle · 06/10/2010 10:42

That story first appeared in 1909

claricebeansmum · 06/10/2010 10:51

I had not seen that before but think it is a useful allegory. DS and I have been having long conversations about tax at the moment and he'll enjoy this. It does not matter the exact figures - it shows how if you continue to load the tax burden onto one sector of society they will revolt.

HarryAlffa · 11/10/2010 13:56

The "allegory" fails because it takes the tax system in isolation.
The rich need society in order to be, or become, rich.
The poor make up most of society.
The rich need the poor, it is the poor who generate wealth.
The rich direct wealth, and are then able to direct much of the generated wealth into their bonus pockets.

That's what I think anyway!

New posts on this thread. Refresh page
Swipe left for the next trending thread