Fazer Owners Club - Unofficial
General => General => Topic started by: chris.biker on 03 March 2014, 11:01:46 pm
-
It really winds me up when I hear this attitude to taxation, now do not get me wrong, it really winds me up when I see government, local government and quangos wasting public money on stupid or undeserving things ( very subjective).
But I am so glad I live in a civilisation where you get educated, your health is looked after, our nation is kept very much nearer to crime free.
So I pay tax which is a chunk of my earnings, but at the end if the day surely when most of us compare our life style to places round the world where the tax may well be less, our life style is fantastic, especially if you can moan about paying for your motorbike tax.
So the discussion should be about how our taxes are wasted.
-
I'd moan a lot less if road tax actually went... On the roads!!
-
I dont think road tax exists...it is vehicle excise duty.......or in other words......do what the foc we want with it duty.
& that's all i have to say...i'll give this thread 2 days until it becomes a bun fight when someone gets focced off at someone else dissing people on benefits ;)
-
Any government = beaurocracy = inefficiency = wasted taxes
I suppose at least we know our bunch of crooks (aka: politicians) aren't just blatantly spunking all our dosh on galleons and menageries a la Yanukovich!
Not a defence of our lot by a long stretch, god knows a lot of money is wasted, I'm just saying it could be so much worse.
-
Having said that, a number of years ago I worked for the Parks department of a local authority that shall remain unnamed and was always shocked by the feb/march spending spree which went on to get rid of the excess money left in the pot so that the following year's budget would not be lower, the thinking being that if the department can survive on less than the year's budget, then next year it would need a smaller budget. Nowhere in this mindset was the concept of saving accounted for and so there was never any money for the really big projects and a bodge job inevitably ensued. This short term thinking infuriated me, and I suspect it pervades all levels of government.
We could learn a lot from Norway!
Rant over, pint resumed.
-
I agree and I think most would agree that its not the tax that is the issue, its how its spent
-
Having said that, a number of years ago I worked for the Parks department of a local authority that shall remain unnamed and was always shocked by the feb/march spending spree which went on to get rid of the excess money left in the pot so that the following year's budget would not be lower, the thinking being that if the department can survive on less than the year's budget, then next year it would need a smaller budget. Nowhere in this mindset was the concept of saving accounted for and so there was never any money for the really big projects and a bodge job inevitably ensued. This short term thinking infuriated me, and I suspect it pervades all levels of government.
We could learn a lot from Norway!
Rant over, pint resumed.
Would that be the rather dark coloured pool borough council by chance ;)
At the end of the day whatever tax system is implemented it will be open to controversy and abuse.
The countries purse is not bottomless and as members we all have to help fund it and we all have the freedom of choice whether or not to.
For those feeling hard done by for having to pay a whole years tax £53 on a bike which sits in the garage for 9 months of the year, more fool you, don't sit there w*****g over it get out and ride the thing or as mentioned sorn it. Even better get rid, sell it. Or put up with it, the choice is yours
I haven't used the medical services for quite some years now but I still pay in to it. IT'S NOT FAIR!!!! best I move to a better country, like America. Much fairer system. Oh but wait a minute I have to hope I can get a job which pays for my health insurance because it's so fkn expensive. Surely not?
I don't have kids but I still pay for others brats to be educated and cared for. But that's life.
I haven't called the fire brigade out but I still pay for it and certainly wont be putting a match to my home in order to get get my fair share. My choice.
Personally I think the hardest done by are the smokers of this country, those who buy their cigs over the counter. They are slated for having the habit yet the British economy would suffer without them (probably). Otherwise if the government was that bothered about the health implications they would enforce a total ban. I gave up years ago btw. My choice ;)
'Everything is so much cheaper and better in other countries' well fekk off to those other countries. On your way there ask yourself why everyone from those other countries seem to all be heading this way, to God awful Britain.
The grass is always greener :)
Just thought I'd get soapbox time
At the end of the day I don't really give a shyte
I'm more annoyed about double glazing, solar panel salesmen and the pricing practices of large supermarkets. They're the real thieving bastards ;)
-
It's swings & roundabouts really. I'm pissed off I have to avoid a 15 meter long pothole riding up the A12, but I'm glad there's an NHS that spent probably a years salary (and then some) on keeping my son alive when he was born early.
I agree and I think most would agree that its not the tax that is the issue, its how its spent
This. I don't really have a problem with paying the £75 ish VED but I'd prefer if it wasn't paying some dole-scroungers Sky bill and cigarette habit :uhuh
-
but I'd prefer if it wasn't paying some dole-scroungers Sky bill and cigarette habit :uhuh
Noggy get yaself a tent and crystal ball. You're going places :rollin
Never personally received a penny in state benefits and while in part I agree with your sentiment it is really up to the individual how they spend their payments if not specifically paid for set purpose like rent allowance etc. The annoyance comes imo when the individual spends it on sky tv, beer and fags and motorbikes then moans about getting a pittance and not enough to survive on.
-
Glad I didn't disappoint :D
Never personally received a penny in state benefits and while in part I agree with your sentiment it is really up to the individual how they spend their payments if not specifically paid for set purpose like rent allowance etc. The annoyance comes imo when the individual spends it on sky tv, beer and fags and motorbikes then moans about getting a pittance and not enough to survive on.
This is pretty much it. I'd prefer it to go on education or healthcare or something useful.
-
Yep, with you on that. I also believe the child benefit tax system should be altered - popping out kids for a living shouldn't have become an option. I don't think the allowance should be removed, but mitigated to prevent abuse of the system. I'm not saying I have any full proof ideas, but I'm thinking up to 3 or maybe 4 children then you receive the same benefit, higher than that then you are making a life choice* to support your children, not for the public to support your children
*Exceptions apply where appropriate
-
Naa leave benefits as is. Slap vehicle excise duty on prams and pushchairs.
-
Political discussions can only go one place :evil so I'm here to say my piece and then I'm out before it becomes a flame war.
I tend to agree with OP, I love this land - there are obvious reasons why many people try to immigrate here - and I'm thrilled at the fact that I can pay my 2 pennies (or whatever in tax) to make it what it is. Yeah, I mightn't have used 'my fair share' of systems (NHS, schools and so on) yet but who knows what tomorrow brings. The very fact that I can wake up tomorrow with a medical ailment, and have as much chance of survival as the next guy is a marvellous system.
It's important not to loop everyone in to the 'dole scroungers' bracket - there are many out there who can't work but still want to. If I lost my job tomorrow, having such a well set up system to fall back on is unbelievable security. But yes, it perhaps needs managing to stop abuse.
I disagree with smoking comments - the government is quite clearly working to stop smoking (and many people have quit or made the move to e-cigs because of this), but they can't just roll out of bed in the morning and say "that's it, no more smoking for anyone, put them all in jail if caught". It takes time, and planning. Yes, we might rely on the tax of cigs for now (hence you can't just stop it in a crack - it's going to sting to have zero tax from cigs but still have to fork out to pay for treatments that ex smokers need) but there will come a day when smoking is banned, and my bet is the government saves more on NHS treatment for smokers than it will gain in tax.
As for 'vehicle excise duty' - it's a tax, plain and simple. How can you tax the poor? You can't. So you tax the rich (or not quite as poor), and the way to do this is with vehicles - people who have a car are generally a lot better off than those with no access to a car.
There's a lot wrong with this country, and the government we live under. But there's also a great deal that's right with it. Long live Britannia.
-
I haven't used the medical services for quite some years now but I still pay in to it. IT'S NOT FAIR!!!!
You miss the point.
We have a staged system of vehicle taxation in this country where the most polluting or most damaging vehicles pay the most tax. All I'm asking is that that "staging" be applied to motorcycles as well, not least because they cause less congestion which is a positive benefit to road use.
-
I haven't used the medical services for quite some years now but I still pay in to it. IT'S NOT FAIR!!!!
You miss the point.
We have a staged system of vehicle taxation in this country where the most polluting or most damaging vehicles pay the most tax. All I'm asking is that that "staging" be applied to motorcycles as well, not least because they cause less congestion which is a positive benefit to road use.
But if you were to stage them based on emissions like cars a Hayabusa would cost more than £200 a year. So what you're asking for is to be treated more favourably than other road users.
-
We have a staged system of vehicle taxation in this country where the most polluting or most damaging vehicles pay the most tax. All I'm asking is that that "staging" be applied to motorcycles as well, not least because they cause less congestion which is a positive benefit to road use.
Out of interest do you want stages set up purely for motorbikes, or for motorbikes to use the car stages?
Tax rates for a new, top band car are £1065 for the first year and then £490/year. I'm guessing a Fazer 600 would be about the middle, which would be somewhere in the region of £150-£200/year if similar bands were set up for bikes.
Or should they use the exact same bands as cars, in which case my 1100 would just about fall into the £10/pa group. Anything below a litre would be free, in which case why bother with the stages?
-
What would you change?
My bugbears are:
Cease VED. Put it on petrol
income tax - make it a flat percentage over a certain 'living' wage
Cease NI as a separate tax (including the 'employer contributions')
Stamp duty: the steps are ridiculous as the increased percentage applies to the whole amount - not just the amount over the threshold! Actually - why not make it a flat percentage over a certain amount.
Cease child benefit.
Re-introduce married person transferable tax allowances.
Cease tax free schemes like ISAs
Flat rate VAT - remove the anomalies like a lower rate for kids clothes, safety equipment, food, on and off-premises milk!
Basically make everything simpler and more transparent whilst removing the need for bureaucrats and expensive, complex IT systems. It is is simple and transparent then it is more likely to be fair as people can actually see where the money goes If it is simple it should be a damned site cheaper to administer.
What would you change?
-
In principle, I think would be open to a proposition to put VED on petrol, but it depends on what figures the government come up with
Income Tax - I disagree, the current system is fair in my opinion as it taxes the higher earners more and allows lower earners a bit of breathing room. I presume you mean to increase the tax free allowance and then increase the percentage there-after? The trouble is that to offset the lost revenue from raising the limit to a 'living' allowance, I would expect the tax percentage to sky-rocket thereafter.
Cease NI - Why? What alternative would you propose?
Stamp Duty - I don't know enough about this, so I won't comment :)
Cease Child Benefit - I commented on this above; I have no issues with Child Benefit, that is until it becomes abused and used as a method of escaping work. I would like to see a restructuring of this
Married Transferable Tax Allowance - Makes sense, but can't you already do this? Again, I don't know enough about it to make a proper judgement
Flat Rate VAT - For the most part it is. There are some exceptions and tax exemptions but maybe I haven't been exposed to these enough to see the problem.
Disclaimer: I in no way mean to offend anyone and I hope that any debates are provided with constructive criticism and ideas. Attacking the idea is fine (within reason) and backing it up is preferable, but attacking the person for the idea is wrong :)
-
Well I started this as a separate from motorcycle tax. Which it has done to the greater extent, but I guess this is a biking group. Bike tax I m happy enough with what I pay.
-
But if you were to stage them based on emissions like cars a Hayabusa would cost more than £200 a year. So what you're asking for is to be treated more favourably than other road users.
No, a system, based solely on emissions, doesn't take into account the wear and tear a vehicle causes to the road, nor the congestion that it contributes to.
Any reasonable system should take both pollution and road wear into account.
-
We have a staged system of vehicle taxation in this country where the most polluting or most damaging vehicles pay the most tax. All I'm asking is that that "staging" be applied to motorcycles as well, not least because they cause less congestion which is a positive benefit to road use.
Out of interest do you want stages set up purely for motorbikes, or for motorbikes to use the car stages?
[...]
Or should they use the exact same bands as cars, in which case my 1100 would just about fall into the £10/pa group. Anything below a litre would be free, in which case why bother with the stages?
See my post above.
-
Cease VED. Put it on petrol
I agree.
income tax - make it a flat percentage over a certain 'living' wage
So the less well off end up paying a bigger proportion of their disposable income whilst the wealthiest get a nice bonus?
Cease child benefit.
Why? Is this "If you can't afford kids, you shouldn't have them" attitude to stop the poor from breeding??
Re-introduce married person transferable tax allowances.
Fine, provided same-sex couples count as "married".
Cease tax free schemes like ISAs
Again, why? If you want things simplified, how are these complicated? There's no need to account for the interest on your tax return and the providers don't have to collect tax and pay it to the government.
Flat rate VAT - remove the anomalies like a lower rate for kids clothes, safety equipment, food, on and off-premises milk!
So, again, the poor in society get hit disproportionately hard as their children's clothes, their food, their heating and so on take a massive hike.
Voted Tory recently?
-
Cease VED. Put it on petrol
I agree.
income tax - make it a flat percentage over a certain 'living' wage
So the less well off end up paying a bigger proportion of their disposable income whilst the wealthiest get a nice bonus?
No bonus! If you overtax the wealthy, they will leave the country, case in point: France (one of their most successful actors, Gérard Depardieu is technically now Russian!) The wealthy put the most in to the system, and typically draw the least (no benefits, often use private health care etc).
On the stepped system, what about the unfortunate middle classes who end up just above that step? They are then clobbered with a disproportionate tax.
Cease child benefit.
Why? Is this "If you can't afford kids, you shouldn't have them" attitude to stop the poor from breeding??
I prefer the earlier suggestion: cap it at a set number of children to prevent benefit fraud.
Re-introduce married person transferable tax allowances.
Fine, provided same-sex couples count as "married".
Hasn't that already happened? It's certainly been giving Catholics and other Christians throughout the UK enough grief!! I personally prefer the French system of civil partnerships when it comes to law, as that removes the religious connotations attached to marriage. Wrong thread for THAT discusssion, but it's worth mentionning en passant.
Cease tax free schemes like ISAs
Again, why? If you want things simplified, how are these complicated? There's no need to account for the interest on your tax return and the providers don't have to collect tax and pay it to the government.
I think this ties in with the flat tax idea. You get taxed on all the money you have, but it's a flat rate.
Flat rate VAT - remove the anomalies like a lower rate for kids clothes, safety equipment, food, on and off-premises milk!
So, again, the poor in society get hit disproportionately hard as their children's clothes, their food, their heating and so on take a massive hike.
Voted Tory recently?
Flat rate VAT doesn't mean it needs to hike up (although it probably would)... rather ironic, considering VAT was originally a temporary tax....
But I have to agree with Graham on this particular point.
-
No, a system, based solely on emissions, doesn't take into account the wear and tear a vehicle causes to the road, nor the congestion that it contributes to.
Any reasonable system should take both pollution and road wear into account.
And how do you quantify those? As someone who filters at pretty much every opportunity, should I pay less tax than someone on the same bike who sits in a queue of traffic?
-
Cease VED. Put it on petrol
I agree.
Neither agree nor disagree but it would mean bikers getting severely hammered since you don't hear of many cars going for a 100 mile plus driveout on regular basis
Cease child benefit.
Why? Is this "If you can't afford kids, you shouldn't have them" attitude to stop the poor from breeding??
Tend to agree with Deadeye child allowance good but after 2 may be 4 do the maths and if can't afford don't have. This obviously is subject to circumstance on basis that those who could afford at time of having could become redundant but the point is obvious.
Re-introduce married person transferable tax allowances.
Fine, provided same-sex couples count as "married".
[size=78%]About time the single person got some bonuses too[/size]
Flat rate VAT - remove the anomalies like a lower rate for kids clothes, safety equipment, food, on and off-premises milk!
These are seen as essentials and the benefits are spread evenly regardless of financial status so why punish the poor
Voted Tory recently?
:rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin :rollin
-
No bonus! If you overtax the wealthy, they will leave the country, case in point: France (one of their most successful actors, Gérard Depardieu is technically now Russian!) The wealthy put the most in to the system, and typically draw the least (no benefits, often use private health care etc).
On the stepped system, what about the unfortunate middle classes who end up just above that step? They are then clobbered with a disproportionate tax.
You only get taxed the higher rate on the amount over the step/threshold (unlike the santander 123 account which pays interest on whole amount once savings pass the stated threshold ;)) and you'll find the rich pay amazing accountants to lose large sums of cash to reduce tax obligations
Cease tax free schemes like ISAs
Again, why? If you want things simplified, how are these complicated? There's no need to account for the interest on your tax return and the providers don't have to collect tax and pay it to the government.
ISA's are a teaser the choice is the individuals some think it a con so don't use their allowance. Others, the sensible buy into the system and pay a little less tax. At the end of day the sensible gain from the tax reduction the Government gain tax monies from the suspicious and the suspicious lose by paying higher rate of tax :)
-
By a flat rate of income tax I do mean just that. Say 30 percent (remember that ni would be included). The richer don't get a bonus. They do get to keep more of what they have earned. However rich people would still pay more tax than poor people (as it is a percentage). The current yoyo of net take home money is ludicrous and needs simplifying.
I have kid (and number 2 is on the way). However child benefit is a nonsense really, I'd be interested to see how much needs to be taken in tax by the government to pay out the 80 quid a month. I'd rather pay less to the state in the first place and manage my own budgeting without the inefficient middle man thanks very much! The truly poor would be the ones to miss out here. That would be those who have income of zero to an amount where the efficiency of scraping the scheme breaks even.
My basic premise is that tax is too complicated. On purpose. It is so us tax payers don't realise just how much is taken from us.
-
I can't see that tax model working unless there were drastic changes to other taxes to compensate. Since NI is 11% we are already taxed 31% on anything above 10k (as of the latest tax allowance). So raising that tax free allowance to, what? £20k maybe? For a living - which is doable. I would then expect to see income tax skyrocket to 50%+
The richer do get a bonus though - at the moment the tiered system means its 20% on anything between your tax allowance and £32k, then 40% on anything from £32k to £150k and then 45% on anything above £150k
So; assuming a 'rich' person is on £200k per year (gross - before tax), under the current system this is how it breaks down;
£200k minus tax free allowance (assume £10k) = £190k
20% Tax = £32k * 0.20 = £6400
40% Tax = £118k * 0.40 = £47200 (118k is 150k minus the 32k that tax has already been paid on)
45% Tax = £40k * 0.45 = £18000 (40k is the remainder of the total 190k income minus 150k that tax has already been paid on)
Total Tax = £71,600
Under your new system, we would raise the tax free allowance - for the sake of this lets go over the top and make that £12k (the higher this is, the less tax this 'individual' would pay)
So, taxable income is now 200k - 12k = 188k
With a flat rate of 30%, this means;
Total Tax = £188k * 0.30 = £56,400
That's a 15k drop in tax payments for the 'rich' - a 20% difference for this made up individual
This becomes more of a problem for the government the more you earn plus by raising the tax free allowance they lose out on a huge amount of money because a very large majority will be paying in to that first 20% base rate at the moment...
Sorry this went on a bit, I'm just trying to see if there is any way that that system could every work properly? A staged setup (like our current one) is the only way to distribute the volume of taxation such that everything doesn't fall to pieces, as far as I can see.
-
I'd have the personal allowance higher. I see no point having people pay tax to then return it to them via benefits or tax credits. Scrap all of the benefits and tax credits then the tax take doesn't need to be so high.
Not sure where the net effect of benefits vs tax is zero (especially as it is complex due to circumstances and benefits) but there are some interesting examples out there.
There does need to be safety net to catch those made unemployed, sick ill etc, exactly where that should be is part of the issue.
Simpler, so cheaper and easier to administer systems would lower tax. Would also make accounting cheaper for businesses and individuals. Also a cut of benefits (but remember - this is balanced by those in work paying less tax) seems a sensible way forward to me.
The alternative of high tax with government redistribution of wealth is not attractive to me. If you work hard and earn, why shouldn't you be better off? If you earn a lot why shouldn't you be able to leave this earnt money to your children (or anyone you choose to for that matter)?
I'm not a socialist! I am someone from a working class background who has worked hard to get an average salary. I see that if I work a bit harder I'll only see 50% of that money actually come to me. I can't afford foreign holidays at the moment so don't consider myself 'rich'.
-
An interesting graphic:
http://www.paydayloan.co.uk/Resources/tax-calculator.html (http://www.paydayloan.co.uk/Resources/tax-calculator.html)
It doesn't include car / motorbike VED
-
Just to cheer every one up.....don't forget the tax you pay when you spend your money. Lol
I may be a defeatist but the only way I get to pay less tax is by having less money. So I guess I I'll have to grin and bear it.
-
I do resent paying tax on my savings as I have already paid tax when I earned them.
Isas were intruduced to encourage people to save, but now what this country need is people to spend
-
I do resent paying tax on my savings as I have already paid tax when I earned them.
Isas were intruduced to encourage people to save, but now what this country need is people to spend
But you're paying tax on the interest earned on your savings aren't you? Which is income tax as you're making money?
-
Making money? Hardly, with the way interest rates and inflation are sitting!
-
Making money? Hardly, with the way interest rates and inflation are sitting!
Hardly, but you are. If you stick £1000 in a savings account for a year you'll have £1005 at the end so you pay income tax on the £5 you earn.
-
Unfortunately that £1005 can by then probably buy you less than the £1000 you saved and then you pay tax....
-
Unfortunately that £1005 can by then probably buy you less than the £1000 you saved and then you pay tax....
But that's down to inflation, not tax...
-
So what you are saying is we would be better off spending our savings now on things we will need in the future... things like a new bike. :D
-
Great idea
-
Once you've paid the tax on the 5 quid, what you've got left will buy less than the £1000 you had at the start of the year, thanks to inflation. Yes you've got more money, as in more pounds, but less wealth, which ultimately is the important thing, and what we mean when we say we're making money. We are getting less rich.
-
Once you've paid the tax on the 5 quid, what you've got left will buy less than the £1000 you had at the start of the year, thanks to inflation. Yes you've got more money, as in more pounds, but less wealth, which ultimately is the important thing, and what we mean when we say we're making money. We are getting less rich.
Yes, which is down to the pony interest rate. Once that starts to go up again then savings will be making money. Until then it's as you say.
So what you are saying is we would be better off spending our savings now on things we will need in the future... things like a new bike. :D
Exactly :D
-
If taxes were significantly reduced do not think in the long term wages would also reduce. So foccers of the future would be having the same debate but arguing against flat rate tax.
-
So this goes around the same old loop, benefit scroungers, And how we would tax each other. :\
No mention of Bank bail outs, Rail subsidies oil industry subsidies, I mean if these companies need subsidies how come they can pay share holders dividends ?
If I run a company into the ground does the government give me free insurance, for when I fuck a job up?
Shore up my dodgy practices.
Does the government allow me to keep the big house fast cars and massive wine seller I obtained with the bonuses I paid myself while running my company into the ground?
Does the government allow me to retire or continue in my job on a massive salary still receiving all my benefits?
Does the government Tax office ask me to pop in to the office and discuss how much Tax I would like to pay ?
And what if the government does get it's act together and start to sort this out.
Well I just threaten to fuck off somewhere else lol.
What happens if I fuck up is I end up homeless and skint (been there done that)
What happens is the banks fuck up, I ended up homeless and skint.
All I ask is fair treatment from the tax system.
will it happen never ???????????? :rolleyes
-
Razgruff -------for PM gets, my vote
-
Definitely touched on some important points. There are sooo many things "wrong" (by opinion) that its hard to keep track of them all... I wonder if that's something the government relies on... make us all squabble over which issues are more important / relevant
Anyway, I digress. If you like the idea of trying to run your own government and enjoy games, I've heard some interesting things about a game called Democracy 3 - it's simulation engine seems quite interesting. http://store.steampowered.com/app/245470/ (http://store.steampowered.com/app/245470/)
I haven't personally tried it as it's price tag is a bit too high for me to bite, but thought I'd mention it
-
Pah, complaining about taxes...
I live in a country that has 42% tax rate, I pay about £200 per year road tax for my bike, 21% VAT and have to pay for private medical insurance.
Would I move back to the UK, no way!
My lifestyle here is sooo much better, hardly any crime, no hospital waiting lists, better benefit system, clean streets, no yobs etc etc etc...
I could go on and on about the advantages of living in a 'more expensive' country but I'd just make you jealous :rollin
The UK only looks good when your 'in it', step outside for a while and you'll see that the system isn't that great after all. There is no great in Great Britain anymore :o
-
very much nearer to crime free , where do you live , I'm moving to your part of the country .
But I am so glad I live in a civilisation where you get educated, your health is looked after, our nation is kept very much nearer to crime free.
-
very much nearer to crime free , where do you live , I'm moving to your part of the country .
But I am so glad I live in a civilisation where you get educated, your health is looked after, our nation is kept very much nearer to crime free.
Well I live in a nice bit i guess, but I would like to think Britain's worst spots are far better than many parts in the world.
-
I agree there are far worst places to live than Britain , although after the weekend I have an axe and a wrecking bar under the bed . As for tax if I was earning £150k a year I would be happy to pay 50% tax but I know I would be in a minority on that , although I don't believe all the rich would flee abroad as it was higher under Thatcher and they did alright out of it .
I'm also glad we are allowed to express different opinions and have a moan , nobody will ever agree on tax .
very much nearer to crime free , where do you live , I'm moving to your part of the country .
But I am so glad I live in a civilisation where you get educated, your health is looked after, our nation is kept very much nearer to crime free.
Well I live in a nice bit i guess, but I would like to think Britain's worst spots are far better than many parts in the world.
-
No bonus! If you overtax the wealthy, they will leave the country, case in point: France (one of their most successful actors, Gérard Depardieu is technically now Russian!) The wealthy put the most in to the system, and typically draw the least (no benefits, often use private health care etc).
I'm not talking about ridiculous levels of taxation (eg back in the 1970s in the UK it was theoretically possible to be on a 95% tax rate (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxman)!) but it seems fair to me that the biggest burden falls on those with the broadest shoulders.
And I disagree that the wealthy put the most in, they simply can afford to save more which the less well-off cannot.
On the stepped system, what about the unfortunate middle classes who end up just above that step? They are then clobbered with a disproportionate tax.
No, because all earnings up to that threshold pay tax at the lower percentage and only that which is earned above the threshold gets taxed at the higher rate.
Cease child benefit.
Why? Is this "If you can't afford kids, you shouldn't have them" attitude to stop the poor from breeding??
I prefer the earlier suggestion: cap it at a set number of children to prevent benefit fraud.
So if you have more than the state approved number of children, you're a benefits fraudster???
Cease tax free schemes like ISAs
Again, why? If you want things simplified, how are these complicated? There's no need to account for the interest on your tax return and the providers don't have to collect tax and pay it to the government.
I think this ties in with the flat tax idea. You get taxed on all the money you have, but it's a flat rate.
Which hits the less well off harder.
Flat rate VAT doesn't mean it needs to hike up (although it probably would)...
IIRC The UK had to fight to get exemptions on books and childrens' clothes and a reduced level of VAT on things like gas and electricity, the original EU plan was for *everything* to be charged at one rate and part of the agreement was that no other goods would be included subsequently.
But, again, VAT hits the less well off harder.
-
No, a system, based solely on emissions, doesn't take into account the wear and tear a vehicle causes to the road, nor the congestion that it contributes to.
Any reasonable system should take both pollution and road wear into account.
And how do you quantify those? As someone who filters at pretty much every opportunity, should I pay less tax than someone on the same bike who sits in a queue of traffic?
You take an average figure, of course, unless you want a system where the Government monitors every journey you make?
-
By a flat rate of income tax I do mean just that. Say 30 percent (remember that ni would be included). The richer don't get a bonus. They do get to keep more of what they have earned. However rich people would still pay more tax than poor people (as it is a percentage).
Which is great if you're rich, you get more money and can afford to save, thus earning interest too.
Unfortunately if you're less well-off, you get screwed because you're having to use a bigger proportion of your income simply to pay day to day expenses and cannot afford to save.
-
If you stick £1000 in a savings account for a year you'll have £1005 at the end so you pay income tax on the £5 you earn.
Then you've got it in the wrong account!
You can get 1.75% tax free from an ISA (http://www.moneysavingexpert.com/savings/best-cash-isa) for £17.50 interest all of which you get to keep.