[Finance] Rachel Reeves to reveal £20bn shortfall left by Conservative Government

[Uh_huh_him]

I don’t because this is a one off tax payable on the situation someone was is in at the time it would be introduced and to pay for a hang over from a very extreme event (e.g COVID). The one off nature of it is key here and you couldn’t do anything to avoid paying it including making a decision to subsequently move.

Most of the data also shows that taxing the ultra rich more does not cause them to leave the country they live in.

If you tax the rich, they won't leave: US data contradicts millionaires' threats | Inequality | The Guardian

Does raising taxes on the rich really trigger their migration to more obliging states or countries? This study of every million-dollar earner in the US shows otherwise

amp.theguardian.com

For most asset rich millionaires and Billionaires, getting and staying rich is intimately connected to where they live. A lot of their money comes from businesses and assets which are based in the UK. In the longer term there is also nothing to stop us from closing loop holes that allow rich people to earn income from UK based assets but live elsewhere and pay no tax on them.

This, this 1000 times THIS!

Billionaires making their wealth from assets in this country, need to start footing their share of the tax bill..
It is they, more than any other group, that benefit from the system.

 

[Weststander]

I got the £20B from a bloke down the pub who claimed he knew what he was talking about (1.25)



But I noticed he was a bit slow to the bar when it was his round so

I thought you were specifically talking about this year’s NI cut. It cost £10b + £0.75b according to the evil BBC who used …. you guessed it …. the IFS.

 

[Weststander]

This, this 1000 times THIS!

Billionaires making their wealth from assets in this country, need to start footing their share of the tax bill..
It is they, more than any other group, that benefit from the system.

I’d add millionaires above a certain threshold eg £3m?

 

[WATFORD zero]

I thought you were specifically talking about this year’s NI cut. It cost £10b + £0.75b according to the evil BBC who used …. you guessed it …. the IFS.

View attachment 186350

Maybe £20B is a full year ? £11B for a partial year ?

Lies, damn lies and statistics

I think we are agreed though, it's a f***ing truckload of tax to be chucking about in a desperate bid to keep Rishi in power

 

[Weststander]

Maybe £20B is a full year ? £11B for a partial year ?

Lies, damn lies and statistics

I think we are agreed though, it's a f***ing truckload of tax

Interesting thread btw. And a cure for insomnia for hedonists

 

[Uh_huh_him]

I’d add millionaires above a certain threshold eg £3m?

I don't know enough about the subject to put a number on it, but IMO there needs to be a much greater focus on redistribution of the tax burden.
The "wealth makers" have been pandered to for the past 50 years.
It hasn't led to "prosperity for all" from the mythical trickle down effect.

 

[Right Brain Ronnie]

do you take yourself seriously?

So do you believe in Reeves and Starmer?
They sound like a comedy duo, don't they?
But it's not even funny, " you couldn't let them lie”

 

[Weststander]

I don't know enough about the subject to put a number on it, but IMO there needs to be a much greater focus on redistribution of the tax burden.
The "wealth makers" have been pandered to for the past 50 years.
It hasn't led to "prosperity for all" from the mythical trickle down effect.

Possibly two groupings.

Wealth creators who run businesses that help UK PLC, paying a shed load in company and personal taxes, employing folk. I don’t think we should knock these people. I see them ‘write the tax cheques’ with few qualms.

As opposed to a very wide and disparate array of immoral to criminal super wealthy. Many are foreigners residing here. The bottom line, they pay bugger all tax relative to the exponential growth in their wealth.

 

[WATFORD zero]

So do you believe in Reeves and Starmer?
They sound like a comedy duo, don't they?
But it's not even funny, " you couldn't let them lie”

I agree, but still funnier than @Is it PotG? and @Right Brain Ronnie

 

[Uh_huh_him]

Possibly two groupings.

Wealth creators who run businesses that help UK PLC, paying a shed load in company and personal taxes, employing folk. I don’t think we should knock these people. I see them ‘write the tax cheques’ with few qualms.

As opposed to a very wide and disparate array of immoral to criminal super wealthy. Many are foreigners residing here. The bottom line, they pay bugger all tax relative to the exponential growth in their wealth.

Exactly this.

If this group want to sell up and f*** off to somewhere more tax friendly, then they should be paying 45% on the profit from the sale of UK assets.
No reason for them to benefit from the system and not pay the full whack that someone working for the money would have to.

 

[Is it PotG?]

I agree, but still funnier than @Is it PotG? and @Right Brain Ronnie

I thought I couldn't laugh so much at the 8th time you did that one, but honestly I did have a slight Tenna dribble at the 9th.
Who was I with last time?

 

[Machiavelli]

I don't know enough about the subject to put a number on it, but IMO there needs to be a much greater focus on redistribution of the tax burden.
The "wealth makers" have been pandered to for the past 50 years.
It hasn't led to "prosperity for all" from the mythical trickle down effect.

Have a read of Piketty. He's quite dull, but his command of the shifts in wealth distribution across the world over centuries is second to none. In the final chapter -- ch17 -- of Capital and Ideology he lays out a new way of treating assets/wealth/income which he terms 'participatory socialism' but is not too dissimilar to the kinds of things that the self-described 'right wing reactionary' @Weststander is advocating on this thread. Here's a handy start for you:

United Kingdom - WID - World Inequality Database

United Kingdom The source for global inequality data. Open access, high quality wealth and income inequality data developed by an international academic consortium.

wid.world

 

[rogersix]

Arundel bypass shelved again.

Poor transportation links is a blocker to economic growth. Shortermism at its best.

the tory shorttermism cannot be turned round in the short term

 

[Weststander]

Have a read of Piketty. He's quite dull, but his command of the shifts in wealth distribution across the world over centuries is second to none. In the final chapter -- ch17 -- of Capital and Ideology he lays out a new way of treating assets/wealth/income which he terms 'participatory socialism' but is not too dissimilar to the kinds of things that the self-described 'right wing reactionary' @Weststander is advocating on this thread. Here's a handy start for you:

United Kingdom - WID - World Inequality Database

United Kingdom The source for global inequality data. Open access, high quality wealth and income inequality data developed by an international academic consortium.

wid.world

Floating voter, this time for Siân Berry, with eclectic views. Reacting to sh1t.

 

[Greenbag50]

Couple of things.
1. You assume your son is not going to live anywhere else and hang on until you die so he can only ever live in one house!
2. You assume that's where he wants to live for the rest of his life!!

As for IHT, your son has done nothing to earn that income other than by fate of birth. Why shouldn't he have to pay income on that windfall?

Would you be happier with a wealth tax?

Because I, as the owner of the property who has paid for it, says that it’s now his.

 

[drew]

Because I, as the owner of the property who has paid for it, says that it’s now his.

Do you think your estate will be subject to IHT anyway? You didn't reply to Bodian's post when he stated that only about 4% of estates pay IHT anyway. Also, without knowing your personal circumstances, if you are married and if you died before your partner, they receive your entire estate free of IHT. When they pass away, the threshold will be double the individual allowance. If that includes your house, I think that will be £1m tax free.

A lot of people moan about IHT without even being close for their estate to actually pay it!!!

 

[Herr Tubthumper]

Rubbish….. you’re taking about the high end of earners. The top 5%.
I am not in that bracket, far from it.
Parents (me, my wife) work bloody hard for 40 years to provide for their kids. I want to leave my kids something they can build their life from, from my hard work.
Why is hard work, ambition, hard work, be better than your parents, somehow seen to weathly and the state needs to take more to be penalised??
You should always strive and encourage your kids to better than you were.

I remember reading that to be a net contributor to the UK, you will need to earn over £2.5m in your lifetime. This covers all the services you will have benefited from, from birth to death. If you earned over this then I don’t have an issue with you keeping your house and passing it on. Anything below 5m, for you and your wife, then surely your estate should pay the balance?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Do you think your estate will be subject to IHT anyway? You didn't reply to Bodian's post when he stated that only about 4% of estates pay IHT anyway. Also, without knowing your personal circumstances, if you are married and if you died before your partner, they receive your entire estate free of IHT. When they pass away, the threshold will be double the individual allowance. If that includes your house, I think that will be £1m tax free.

A lot of people moan about IHT without even being close for their estate to actually pay it!!!

I was worried about it, till I looked into it and found it won't affect me or my dependents.

 

[dsr-burnley]

I don’t because this is a one off tax payable on the situation someone was is in at the time it would be introduced and to pay for a hang over from a very extreme event (e.g COVID). The one off nature of it is key here and you couldn’t do anything to avoid paying it including making a decision to subsequently move.

Most of the data also shows that taxing the ultra rich more does not cause them to leave the country they live in.

If you tax the rich, they won't leave: US data contradicts millionaires' threats | Inequality | The Guardian

Does raising taxes on the rich really trigger their migration to more obliging states or countries? This study of every million-dollar earner in the US shows otherwise

amp.theguardian.com

For most asset rich millionaires and Billionaires, getting and staying rich is intimately connected to where they live. A lot of their money comes from businesses and assets which are based in the UK. In the longer term there is also nothing to stop us from closing loop holes that allow rich people to earn income from UK based assets but live elsewhere and pay no tax on them.

If the UK government decides that they want to take a percentage of the worldwide assets of someone who lives in another country, who is a citizen of another country, and those assets are in another country, they're going to struggle.

They won't want to put a charge on shares in a UK company, because if they do, so many companies would re-register abroad.

 

[fly high]

I notice Labour have promptly bottled the social care crisis, like every government does, and just hope it will go away if they ignore it for long enough. It won't.

Just wait until you or your partner or your parents and relatives have dementia, and watch all your/their money disappear into an enormous black hole, in a care home where you never expected to end up.

It's coming for some of you....

A friend's Mum recently had to go into a care home because of dementia, her house is being sold to pay for her care. The house is only worth £275,000, the weekly bill for her care is £1,600. That money isn't going to last long so what happens after it runs out. It wouldn't surprise me if her family were pressurised into pay towards it.