If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
thinktank proposes new income tax and inheritance tax system
Former Member
Posts: 1,876,323 The Mix Honorary Guru
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/3588612.stm
i cant find the other article to go with this, but theyre thinking of raising the threshold of the upper rate of tax to £100k from £34k and then making that rate 50% so anyone under 100k does better and anyone over 100k pays more
they also want to introduce 3 bands of inheritance tax, and keeping the threshold at £263k but starting at 22% progressive going up to 50% by £808k
what do you reckon?
personally i think the inheritance tax threshhold should be raised loads, as it was introduced to kill the upper classes of this country, not the average family
the income tax proposals sound alrite i think-ish
i cant find the other article to go with this, but theyre thinking of raising the threshold of the upper rate of tax to £100k from £34k and then making that rate 50% so anyone under 100k does better and anyone over 100k pays more
they also want to introduce 3 bands of inheritance tax, and keeping the threshold at £263k but starting at 22% progressive going up to 50% by £808k
what do you reckon?
personally i think the inheritance tax threshhold should be raised loads, as it was introduced to kill the upper classes of this country, not the average family
the income tax proposals sound alrite i think-ish
0
Comments
Anyway inheritance tax won’t be scrapped, still even if it’s kept the thresholds should be as you say raised a lot as house prices have gone up so much.
Anyway the rich get out of paying inheritance tax if they plan in advance. I read for instance that Princess Margaret used expensive accountants so that her family avoided paying it. There’s all sorts of loopholes that expensive accountants can exploit so inheritance tax rarely hits the rich that hard.
and it was put in to destroy the upper class of country which has all but done, but should be kept, but at a high threshold
and its not as if it really screws anyone over, leaving them really broke is it....
also encourages people to plan their death better!
As if it is not about robbing live people but just a some kind of arithmetical exercise.
As if it is not a discussion board for bright young Englishmen but a council of mafia planning how to make its racket more profitable.
What democracy turns people into… *sigh…*
I agree.
A friend of mine's grandmother started giving her grandkids outragous amounts of money to birthdays (Who gets the equivalent of £2500 for a usual 15th birthday?) some years ago. Turns out that her health was getting weaker, and she wanted her kids and grandkids to enjoy what she had, rather than getting it taxed, once she died.
Someone saves up all their lives in order to give their children and their grandchildren a better start in life, and suddenly the government wades in and thinks it is entitled to 40% of it. It si disgraceful.
The rationale behind inheritance tax was to prevent the very very rich, the plutocrats, from hoarding money; the tax was designed to redistribute the money back into the economy, to keep the economy alive. If money gets concentrated in too few hands an economy will collapse.
It is disgraceful that now a three-bed semi in parts of the South East will trigger inheritance tax. These are people who ahve worked all their lives, and now the children won't even get the family home. My parents' three-bed semi in Bradford was 2/3 of the way to triggering inheritance tax, but when they bought it it was worth £16,500. Where's the justice in that?
i agree kerm, but thats why the threshhold should be raised to a million or something, stops rich people hoarding money
What about the upper rate though, the other aspect of the suggestion.
I have a personal interest because I fit into that bracket. In my area that sort of salary won't go far towards buying a house and yet I am considered to be a "high earner".
Salaries have moved on a long way since that limit was originally set and I do think that it's time that it was reviewd, certainly I believe that the people suffering from it are those who earn a "Middle range" income.
I would also advocate changing the lower rates too...
not quite, keep it for the extremely rich......... (its original purpose)
So they're better with their finance than the regular person. Shall they be punished for that?
But, the ‘extremely rich’ can avoid it anyway. They can afford an army of accountants to exploit just about every loophole there is to avoid taxes. Offshore trust funds, secret anonymous offshore bank accounts, etc.
And if the ‘extremely rich’ have became rich fairly and legally I don’t see the need to punish them for it. Why punish somebody like say Richard Branson? He employs thousands of people in the UK, he will no doubt pay a lot in taxes in this country and he is helping the British economy…
No, but if they are going to own half of Wales they should have to pay for it.
Inheritance tax was brought in to make the plutocrats stop hoarding money, that is what it's purpose should revert to.
There should be more tax brackets than upper and lower in income tax, the lowest rate should drop to 10% and then it should gradually increase in line with salary. If you are near the income tax boundary sometimes there is no incentive to work that extra shift or three, because you will lose most of that extyra earnings in tax.
It won't happen though- Blair, like all Labour Prime Ministers, just loves taxing people until the pips squeak.
I hope he gets HIV.
The 10% rate band already exists dude, after you have had your personal allowance (£4745) the next £2020 is taxed at 10%:p
Oh yes, of course. I forgot.
Well it should be extended then:p
Damn good plan I say!
Indeed :razz:
Taxation is the only thing that leave me confused. Which is bad, but bollocks to that.
Vote out Labour, GET THEM OUT NOW!
T'missus' family have built their own home, in dribs and drabs, over the last 20 years. They built it up from a muddy field on a fell in the northern Lakes, but because of the market now her family will not be able to keep it. It will have to be sold to pay the tax bill.
Things won't change because New Labour need to tax the poor to pay for the rich. I hope every single New Labour MP or party official gets HIV and dies an excruciatingly painful death. I have the champagne on ice for Blair's death already.
In theory yes.
Being more pragmatic, one has to be careful about uber-high levels of taxation on the highest incomes. Tax them too highly and they just move their money offshore- it was no coincidence that when Lawson lowered the highest band of tax to 40% the revenue from the top 1% of earners went up by something in the region of £40million.
Surely there is something that can be done about that though? I can only think of extremes at the moment though...removal of citizenship for example? I'll come back when I've had a sane idea... It does make me sick though these uber rich dodging taxes.
They don't dodge tax, they just aren't going to be twatted just because they earn money.
In the late 1970s the highest rate of tax was running at 70%. Why should anyone have to give up nearly three-quarters of what they earn to pay for dole scroungers?
It is an undisputed fact in the immense majority of cases that the richer the person, the more greedy and selfish they become.
Take one look at the Rupert Murdoch empire. That man must have cheated the different countries where he has businesses of hundreds of millions of Pounds (at least) in taxes by his endless offshore schemes. He's probably deprived this very country of a high 8-figure sum in taxes over the years- money that could have been used to finance some of the new hospitals and to recruit some of the new doctors and nurses The S*n always moans about the lack of.
You know it would not just dole money though, it would be used for public services and the like.
Tax is a necessary evil, but tax is theft.
For all you know those people could be paying their taxes, just as everyone else does, and pay extreme amounts to charity (which a lot do).
Yes there is a problem with people placing money/firms/themselves overseas, but it's a sign that taxation is not ideal and doesn't pay off for the high end of the earners, so why should they bother?
In the 1970s it was used by the Labour administration to give huge pay rises to their greedy Union militant comrades.
Nothing very much ever changes- it isn't used to improve things.
It isn't just dole money, but having been on the dole for three months now, I am even more firmly of the belief that anyone who can afford to run Sky TV off it is on the fiddle.