[Politics] The Labour Government

[chip]

Without wishing to appear pedantic, I believe most people support the policy, but are angry about the cut off level it's been implemented at.

There are a huge number of extremely wealthy getting the WFA that I'm not happy to pay for (and that is in no way minimising the issue around the implementation).

Out of interest where do you think the Government should be looking to raise money to address the critical state of so many areas of the country ?

Want to put any numbers to this or is it just better as a meaningless slogan? The reality is a small number of (whatever you define extremely wealthy) people who may get WFA,

There's an even huger number of extremely poor people who will now get nothing.

 

[dsr-burnley]

3. Employers NI rise is a tax rise. I don't believe it to be a tax on working people, and I'm happy to pay it.

How many employees do you have? And don't you think that when the next pay review comes round, you'll be likely to restrict their pay rise because of the extra NIC you will be paying? Or are you going to take the hit in full out of your profits?

 

[Guinness Boy]

I’d start by increasing tax on the wealthiest in society,

How do you define wealthy? What's the cut off? What if I earn only a small salary but win the lottery or a large bet or someone gifts me a house? You see how easy it is to do this sort of thing?

crack down on nom-doms,

Already done, in fact the Tories nicked it.

off-shore corporations and huge companies like Amazon who pay pennies in tax relative to their fair share.

How? Seems like we'd already be doing it if it was easy, no? Feels like a no brainer

What I wouldn’t be doing with any hope of not being a one term wonder would be scraping figurative pennies hitting the worst off in society.

And they aren't. That's a gross misrepresentation. Not all of the worst off are OAPs and not all OAPs are badly off. They've taken a universal benefit off millionaires and people with huge houses with no mortgage (Wait, are they wealthy? Should we exclude OAPs from this crack down on the wealthy?) and mis calculated the bottom rung. I've agreed with @Bozza that they should have taken longer over the implementation to make sure that people very close to the pension credit limit get more help. I've also suggested an alternative, which is the government mandates cheaper energy tariffs for the elderly. But that's anti-business retort the thread.

I fully appreciate you, @Guinness Boy and other Labour loyalists will not budge on this, or criticise anything your party does. That is your right. Much as it is for the hardcore Tory supporters on here. But there’s no point truly in having a reasoned debate where one side of the discussion thinks it’s their duty to defend everything the government does, right or wrong, because it’s their team.

As I saif to cjd I've voted Green, Lib Dem and abstained. Had I been a Labour member, which I never have, I would have left when Corbyn was in charge. The old man's a fool. But I like the centre left and Starmer will do far more good and far less harm than Johnson, Truss and Sunak combined. I'm very happy with that position and I'll defend it on here whether you like it or not.

 

[Bold Seagull]

How many employees do you have? And don't you think that when the next pay review comes round, you'll be likely to restrict their pay rise because of the extra NIC you will be paying? Or are you going to take the hit in full out of your profits?

What they’ve never had a cost rise before? Did you miss the last corporation tax rises?

Businesses have to cope with all sorts of different cost rises all the time. You’re making it sound like a business has never had to deal with a tax change before.

 

[Boroseagull]

Starmer - can't say what a working person is, can't say what a women is - but he knows a freebie when he sees one.

Maybe really confuse him by asking what a working women is?

 

[chip]

I've also suggested an alternative, which is the government mandates cheaper energy tariffs for the elderly. But that's anti-business retort the thread.

Damn you! I think that's a very sensible idea, just like the internet packages for OAPs and other groups. It would also be easy to do as it would be the suppliers problem to regulate the new tarrif. If it came with insulation and energy efficiency updates that would be even better. We already accept this in many areas such as ticket prices and insurance. Some people on PIP also get WFA so would make that easier too.

 

[Machiavelli]

How? Seems like we'd already be doing it if it was easy, no? Feels like a no brainer

For others reference, this is your response to the quite widely proposed suggestion that, to raise tax, US tech/MNCs should be targeted.

I also feel like it's a no-brainer but we're obviously missing something. What that is remains a mystery to me at least. I'd have thought that targeting sales to residents/deliveries in this country would be an apposite way to ensnare Amazon to pay tax. I'm interested in why this is unfeasible.

 

[tigertim68]

How do you define wealthy? What's the cut off? What if I earn only a small salary but win the lottery or a large bet or someone gifts me a house? You see how easy it is to do this sort of thing?



Already done, in fact the Tories nicked it.



How? Seems like we'd already be doing it if it was easy, no? Feels like a no brainer



And they aren't. That's a gross misrepresentation. Not all of the worst off are OAPs and not all OAPs are badly off. They've taken a universal benefit off millionaires and people with huge houses with no mortgage (Wait, are they wealthy? Should we exclude OAPs from this crack down on the wealthy?) and mis calculated the bottom rung. I've agreed with @Bozza that they should have taken longer over the implementation to make sure that people very close to the pension credit limit get more help. I've also suggested an alternative, which is the government mandates cheaper energy tariffs for the elderly. But that's anti-business retort the thread.





As I saif to cjd I've voted Green, Lib Dem and abstained. Had I been a Labour member, which I never have, I would have left when Corbyn was in charge. The old man's a fool. But I like the centre left and Starmer will do far more good and far less harm than Johnson, Truss and Sunak combined. I'm very happy with that position and I'll defend it on here whether you like it or not.

All Starmer is doing , is turning the country in to a police state , no more free speech , political prisoners, it feels more like the USSR than the UK , if you are happy with that , then you all fool you ,

 

[Guinness Boy]

For others reference, this is your response to the quite widely proposed suggestion that, to raise tax, US tech/MNCs should be targeted.

I also feel like it's a no-brainer but we're obviously missing something. What that is remains a mystery to me at least. I'd have thought that targeting sales to residents/deliveries in this country would be an apposite way to ensnare Amazon to pay tax. I'm interested in why this is unfeasible.

Yes, it's my response to that part. I totally agree with @jcdenton08 on this point but the fact that successive governments haven't suggest it's neither easy, nor cost effective. Unless we're in for a surprise tomorrow.

 

[BrickTamland]

All Starmer is doing , is turning the country in to a police state , no more free speech , political prisoners, it feels more like the USSR than the UK , if you are happy with that , then you all fool you ,

 

[Half Time Pies]

How? Seems like we'd already be doing it if it was easy, no? Feels like a no brainer

Britain is the worlds biggest enabler of tax evasion and avoidance. We have ‘single-handedly’ done more to undermine world’s tax system than any other nation, of course we could do something about it, we just choose not to.

New ranking reveals corporate tax havens behind breakdown of global corporate tax system; toll of UK’s tax war exposed - Tax Justice Network

Researchers call for new tax rules to “tax corporations where employees work, not where ledgers hide”.

taxjustice.net

 

[Guinness Boy]

Damn you! I think that's a very sensible idea, just like the internet packages for OAPs and other groups. It would also be easy to do as it would be the suppliers problem to regulate the new tarrif. If it came with insulation and energy efficiency updates that would be even better. We already accept this in many areas such as ticket prices and insurance. Some people on PIP also get WFA so would make that easier too.

I suggested it way earlier in either this thread or the meltdown one. It's a bit hard to keep track of both plus their offshoots. It feels proportional. People with bigger houses have bigger bills but, once you hit state retirement age, they're calculated on a lower tariff. It's not much different to concession football tickets in many ways but passes the burden on to the supplier. Of course, they might increase the tariff on the rest of us but we could at least rest easy that it was, in a way, a contribution to retirement.

I'm not sure why jc brought up WFA again. In theory - removal of universal beneft - it makes sense. The way it's being a) implemented and b) sold to the public is wrong though, and there is a better solution, although not one that saves money for the country. If you went with this suggestion we'd need to find another way to balance the books.

 

[RandyWanger]

An interesting take on Capita Gains Tax:

https://archive.is/2024.10.28-081739/https://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/tax/capital-gains/labour-solve-black-hole-abolishing-just-one-tax/

Labour could solve its ‘black hole’ by abolishing just one tax​

TLDR:

High capital gains tax rates disproportionately affect start-ups, small businesses, and venture capital investment, limiting innovation, job creation, and economic dynamism.
Whereas reducing or abolishing capital gains tax would encourage more risk-taking and long-term investment, the type of investment the British economy sorely needs if it is to improve its economic growth and which labour says it wants.
Indeed, countries like Belgium, the Netherlands and New Zealand have no capital gains tax, and historical evidence shows reductions in capital gains tax rates can lead to increased tax revenues. For instance, when Ireland halved its capital gains tax rate in 1997, revenues doubled within two years.

 

[chip]

I suggested it way earlier in either this thread or the meltdown one. It's a bit hard to keep track of both plus their offshoots. It feels proportional. People with bigger houses have bigger bills but, once you hit state retirement age, they're calculated on a lower tariff. It's not much different to concession football tickets in many ways but passes the burden on to the supplier. Of course, they might increase the tariff on the rest of us but we could at least rest easy that it was, in a way, a contribution to retirement.

I'm not sure why jc brought up WFA again. In theory - removal of universal beneft - it makes sense. The way it's being a) implemented and b) sold to the public is wrong though, and there is a better solution, although not one that saves money for the country. If you went with this suggestion we'd need to find another way to balance the books.

It's imaginative thinking like this that we need more of. It would not be a tax and those paying more would know exactly what they were paying more for. That would be very difficult to argue against going on the evidence of this thread. You could see that as a social responsibility/obligation. We already have a green levy on our energy bills, no idea how much that raises or where it is spent.

EDIT: It turns out the green levy already does some of this: https://eciu.net/insights/2024/are-green-levies-going-up-in-april-2024

 

[Kinky Gerbil]

This is going to be a potential headache for the government.

People were correctly sent to jail, but I imagine we will see a lot of appeals over the next few weeks.

Axel Rudakubana: Southport murders accused facing terror charge

Axel Rudakubana is accused of producing the poison ricin and possessing a study of an al-Qaeda training manual.

www.bbc.co.uk

*Im not defending rioters.

 

[abc]

What they’ve never had a cost rise before? Did you miss the last corporation tax rises?

Businesses have to cope with all sorts of different cost rises all the time. You’re making it sound like a business has never had to deal with a tax change before.

Corp tax is paid on profits. If a business makes a profit, it pays tax. Fair enough.

Emp NI is paid before making a profit and is therefore a cost that has to be mitigated in order to make a profit. This can have very negative impacts (see my earlier post) for employees, business and the whole economy.

 

[Giraffe]

This is going to be a potential headache for the government.

People were correctly sent to jail, but I imagine we will see a lot of appeals over the next few weeks.

Axel Rudakubana: Southport murders accused facing terror charge

Axel Rudakubana is accused of producing the poison ricin and possessing a study of an al-Qaeda training manual.

www.bbc.co.uk

*Im not defending rioters.

I actually think this is the biggest problem they face to date. It's been a shocking cover up from the start of this terrible incident and undermines the public's trust in the law and the Government. Yvette Cooper will be accused of lying to MPs, which is the big thing they accused the Tories of. They needed to come in and be whiter and whiter, and instead they've been just as bad. Integrity is a crucial reason why they got voted in.

 

[Bozza]

How many employees do you have? And don't you think that when the next pay review comes round, you'll be likely to restrict their pay rise because of the extra NIC you will be paying? Or are you going to take the hit in full out of your profits?

It's just me.

The company and I may be distinct legal entities, but financially, it's really one and the same thing, and I've no issue with paying a bit more.

I've only ever worked in giant corporations where I've been one of many thousands or by myself, so I'm unqualified to speak for SMEs, some of whom I've read are concerned about the apparent uplift we'll hear about tomorrow.

 

[The Clamp]

If I were wealthy there’s not a chance on earth I’d live in the UK.

It’s a decaying country.

Beyond saving .


When you go abroad to EU countries, you get a stark reminder of how far we have sunk since Brexit.

 

[WATFORD zero]

Ah - he's back - must have been quite a meal.

As you're on top of the numbers, can you let us know how much the rise to a £3 cap will be costing, and how it's being funded.

But, more importantly for me personally, as I take serious offence at someone intimating I'm a liar, can I please have that list of multiple tax rises that I have spoken against please, particularly given:

1. The WFP change is not a tax rise, but the removal of a benefit. As stated numerous times, I'm absolutely supportive of the removal of the universality of the benefit which meant many wealthy people have been receiving £200/£300 they have no need for. However, as also stated numerous times, I'm in full agreement with the likes of Age UK and Martin Lewis that the implementation of the policy is dangerous and cruel. It leaves many very poor and vulnerable people fearing for this winter and will almost certainly result in ill health and death.

2. The bus cap change is not a tax rise, but a subsidy shift. I've provided no view on whether it should continue at the current level - I remain completely open-minded. Government money is finite and needs to be directed in the best way possible. Your numbers on how much the rise to £3 will cost, and how that expenditure is being funded will be great in helping me understand that.

3. Employers NI rise is a tax rise. I don't believe it to be a tax on working people, and I'm happy to pay it.

So - the list of taxes I have posted I am against please, and there's no need to cover 1-3 above, as I already have.

I'm going to try and persuade a demented old lady that the weather is nice enough to go outside this afternoon, so please excuse the apparent tardiness of my response, but I will reply to your list later this afternoon/evening.

Firstly, I hope you managed to persuade your mum to go out in the sun this afternoon

It was from one of your posts earlier that I discovered that the bus cap cost £300 million last year, I had no idea until you told posted it. And as you know nobody knows how it's being funded until tomorrow.

I haven't intimated you're a liar anywhere. The WFP we have agreed on many times. You posted that you thought Employers NI would be a problem for SMEs although you have said that you'll be happy to pay your own. We'll find out tomorrow but even with an increase in employers NI it is unlikely to go back up to what SMEs were paying until January this year.

I'm sorry if I specifically aimed my annoyance at you and claimed you had argued against all tax increases when you haven't. This thread has recently turned into a constant stream of posters giving reasons why every single measure that is being proposed shouldn't be implemented and I obviously thought you had contributed some of this which you hadn't.

There is very little, if any recognition of the state the country is in and what is required. It's as @Guinness Boy said above "it's mostly a thread full of people who don't want to pay for public services".

Even you said

No - that's utter nonsense, if only for the VAT/fuel duty example.

But you won't change your mind, and I'm hoping that no further taxes paid by this working person are increased on Wednesday.

But I'm assuming there was an element of tongue-in-cheek.