£12 billion in welfare cuts
Comments
-
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
With all that fruit, don't think you'll be constipated either.
0 -
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
Those who can afford it can make an up front payment and we could possibly go in and rescue them.
Did anyone read my link?
I'll do it again:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/07/corporate-welfare-a-93bn-handshakeseanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
With all that fruit, don't think you'll be constipated either.
I've never had a problem with emptying my bowels anyway, always comes out nice and large and firm.0 -
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
With all that fruit, don't think you'll be constipated either.
I've never had a problem with emptying my bowels anywhere, always comes out nice and large and firm.
So it is right then? You are full of sh1t. 0 -
Far too much detail Finchy.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0
-
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
Those who can afford it can make an up front payment and we could possibly go in and rescue them.
Did anyone read my link?
I'll do it again:
http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/jul/07/corporate-welfare-a-93bn-handshake
Definitely need an upfront payment from Stevo, if he wants to shake your hands after rescuing him, make sure you're not wearing a valuable wristwatch either, he'll have that before you know it. Always the same with these bloody cockneys.
Yes, I read your link this morning.0 -
I get the feeling that the day of economic reckoning will soon be upon us. China, Greece, Russia all floundering. Luckily we've got a bit of a strawberry and raspberry harvest going on in the back garden at the moment, not to mention quite a lot of mint. And when they're finished it won't be long until the local blackberry bushes and plum and cherry trees will be bearing fruit, so I don't think my family will starve, unlike all you London types who'll be scavenging for dead rats to eat.
With all that fruit, don't think you'll be constipated either.
I've never had a problem with emptying my bowels anyway, always comes out nice and large and firm.
So it is right then? You are full of sh1t.
No, I'm not full of sh1t, it passes through my system really quickly meaning I'm usually carry a fairly light load.0 -
I just wonder if China implodes, it will halt the decimation of the African Elephant.
Will they pull out of UK PLC and will there be a civil war? The corruption in China runs very very deep and sooner or later, the pack of cards is going to come down except we will be brought down with it.
I watched a programme where they showed government officials in executive positions receiving millions in subsidies as a lot of those industrial plants are making a loss. It is an eerily similar scenario as in the late twenties, where every Tom, Dick and Harry [insert oriental equivalent at your peril] is speculating on the stock exchange not having a clue as to what they are doing.
Seize the day...seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Ok Pina, I've looked at your link.
First off, I agree that everyone, individual or corporation should pay their due tax and have stated so many times.
Now the article appears to be a general rant. I'm not a tax expert, that's Stevo, but here are a couple of points that jump out.
Corporate tax benefits: £44bn Of the 93 major tax reliefs provided by the Treasury, 27 are aimed at business. The largest amount was spent allowing businesses to write off billions spent on plants, machinery and equipment among other item
As far as i am aware, tax is levied on profit. So such expenditure would be deducted from any balance sheet before tax.
Hidden transport subsidies: £15bn Unlike motorists and the petrol levies they are charged, airlines do not pay tax on fuel – support worth about £8.5bn a year, according to MPs on parliament’s transport select committee. Train companies also enjoy lower duty on fuel.
Is aircraft fuel not duty free world wide? Imposing a levy in isolation would surely force carriers to refuel elsewhere and relocate their hub.
In 2012, Amazon was attacked by MPs on parliament’s public accounts committee for avoiding UK tax. Yet in the same period, the online retailer was awarded £16.5m in grants by the administrations of Scotland and Wales to help build distribution centres. To link the Wales plant to the transport network, the Welsh assembly built the mile-long “Ffordd Amazon road” at an additional cost of £3m.
Welsh and Scottish Administrations? From the graph, Corporate subsidies, grants and tax breaks peaked on 08/09. Who was in power then?
Not defending anyone not paying tax but as I said, this article just seems to be a general rant.0 -
I just wonder if China implodes, it will halt the decimation of the African Elephant.
What is it with Orientals and animal body parts and cruelty?
I just don't get it.
Stay calm, Pina, don't go off on one and get in trouble again.0 -
I just wonder if China implodes, it will halt the decimation of the African Elephant.
What is it with Orientals and animal body parts and cruelty? I just don't get it.
Stay calm, Pina, don't go off on one and get in trouble again.
I was reading an article the other day (can't remember where), and the majority of Chinese people surveyed had absolutely no idea that animals were being slaughtered for the ivory, they thought the tusks and horns were just sawn off. The Chinese government is now trying to educate people about where it all comes from, because there really is growing awareness of the environment and animal rights in China.0 -
I just wonder if China implodes, it will halt the decimation of the African Elephant.
What is it with Orientals and animal body parts and cruelty? I just don't get it.
Stay calm, Pina, don't go off on one and get in trouble again.
I was reading an article the other day (can't remember where), and the majority of Chinese people surveyed had absolutely no idea that animals were being slaughtered for the ivory, they thought the tusks and horns were just sawn off. The Chinese government is now trying to educate people about where it all comes from, because there really is growing awareness of the environment and animal rights in China.
I really hope so but I fear it may be too late for some species.
How can people think that you can simply remove tusks, horns or tiger organs? And besides, why would anyone think they had any special powers? Truly sad.0 -
Seem to have the lefties rattled Stevo. Mamba has seen the light and Rick is reduced to making things up.
Ha Ha! i will never support the tories, they are the party for the well off and have never understood/look down at people at the bottom of the pile, blaming them for their situation (which i accept, in some cases true) so the well off will remain pretty much the same and the poor take the hit, if the tories could, they d re introduce the poor house.
take the change in mtce grant to a loan? that is a direct dis-insentive not to go to uni/college, does it effect the well off...no.
Nothing wrong with increasing min/living wage, so i will be better off by £80 (i do not need this at all) but a single parent (woman) part time @20hrs with 2 kids, earning 8k per year, will be worse off by £1344 next tax year - should that single parent get off their lazy arse and work full time, they ll still be £772 worse off, how an earth can anyone think this is ok? - figures from the BBC calculator.
i dont know how these figures come out once the living wage increases kick in year on year but that is of little comfort if you cant afford to pay for food, heating etc0 -
Seem to have the lefties rattled Stevo. Mamba has seen the light and Rick is reduced to making things up.
Ha Ha!
not quite! Nothing wrong with increasing min/living wage.workers, so i will be better off by £80 (i do not need this at all) but a single parent (woman) part time @20hrs with 2 kids, earning 8k per year, will be worse off by £1344 next tax year - should that single parent get off their lazy ars* and work full time, they ll still be £772 worse off, how an earth can anyone think this is ok? - figures from the BBC calculator.
i dont know how these figures come out once the living wage increases kick in year on year but that is of little comfort if you cant afford to pay for food, heating etc.
Yes of course, you have a point.
I assume the child is not called Jesus and actually has a biological father?
Radical thought here...0 -
Seem to have the lefties rattled Stevo. Mamba has seen the light and Rick is reduced to making things up.
Ha Ha!
not quite! Nothing wrong with increasing min/living wage.workers, so i will be better off by £80 (i do not need this at all) but a single parent (woman) part time @20hrs with 2 kids, earning 8k per year, will be worse off by £1344 next tax year - should that single parent get off their lazy ars* and work full time, they ll still be £772 worse off, how an earth can anyone think this is ok? - figures from the BBC calculator.
i dont know how these figures come out once the living wage increases kick in year on year but that is of little comfort if you cant afford to pay for food, heating etc.
Yes of course, you have a point.
I assume the child is not called Jesus and actually has a biological father?
Radical thought here...
look, off course, the biological father should pay his dues but that doesnt always happen in the real world, my dad dissappeared off to NZ never to be heard off again.
so, a friend at work, her partner having rammed a mb phone into her mouth (which needed plastic surgry and not to the phone) then holding her head under water in the bath and breaking her jaw with his fists (this was ONE assualt of many) has never paid a cent to his ex and their 2 kids, no charges were ever laid as he made it clear he would kill her if she did.
when she married him, he wasnt like that and she had no idea that he would turn out to be a monster, who has escaped the CSA by lying and scheming his way around the benefits system.
you Bally, live in a fantasy world, where everyone is nice and behaves properly to each other, where kids dont have to leave home at 16 to escape physical or sexual abuse, have decent role models, where the mum/dad can read and write and do know how to cook/budget, well guess what? it isnt the world that many people live in.0 -
I just wonder if China implodes, it will halt the decimation of the African Elephant.
What is it with Orientals and animal body parts and cruelty? I just don't get it.
Stay calm, Pina, don't go off on one and get in trouble again.
I was reading an article the other day (can't remember where), and the majority of Chinese people surveyed had absolutely no idea that animals were being slaughtered for the ivory, they thought the tusks and horns were just sawn off. The Chinese government is now trying to educate people about where it all comes from, because there really is growing awareness of the environment and animal rights in China.
I really hope so but I fear it may be too late for some species.
How can people think that you can simply remove tusks, horns or tiger organs? And besides, why would anyone think they had any special powers? Truly sad.
It is not just for alleged special powers that the ivory is in demand. There is huge demand for carved ivory religious icons in the Philippines. It is encouraged and by the clergy of the Catholic church!Always be yourself, unless you can be Aaron Rodgers....Then always be Aaron Rodgers.0 -
Seem to have the lefties rattled Stevo. Mamba has seen the light and Rick is reduced to making things up.
Ha Ha!
not quite! Nothing wrong with increasing min/living wage.workers, so i will be better off by £80 (i do not need this at all) but a single parent (woman) part time @20hrs with 2 kids, earning 8k per year, will be worse off by £1344 next tax year - should that single parent get off their lazy ars* and work full time, they ll still be £772 worse off, how an earth can anyone think this is ok? - figures from the BBC calculator.
i dont know how these figures come out once the living wage increases kick in year on year but that is of little comfort if you cant afford to pay for food, heating etc.
Yes of course, you have a point.
I assume the child is not called Jesus and actually has a biological father?
Radical thought here...
look, off course, the biological father should pay his dues but that doesnt always happen in the real world, my dad dissappeared off to NZ never to be heard off again.
so, a friend at work, her partner having rammed a mb phone into her mouth (which needed plastic surgry and not to the phone) then holding her head under water in the bath and breaking her jaw with his fists (this was ONE assualt of many) has never paid a cent to his ex and their 2 kids, no charges were ever laid as he made it clear he would kill her if she did.
when she married him, he wasnt like that and she had no idea that he would turn out to be a monster, who has escaped the CSA by lying and scheming his way around the benefits system.
you Bally, live in a fantasy world, where everyone is nice and behaves properly to each other, where kids dont have to leave home at 16 to escape physical or sexual abuse, have decent role models, where the mum/dad can read and write and do know how to cook/budget, well guess what? it isnt the world that many people live in.
Mamba, you have no idea of the world I live in, my life experiences and what I have seen so don't make fatuous assumptions. I know that you came from a one parent family and that you (IT?) and your siblings made good. Well done for that.
Victims of domestic violence should receive all help available, from protection by the full extent of the law to financial assistance where required. Perhaps there would be more money available in the pot for such deserving cases if more absent fathers did contribute more.0 -
Regardless of your wishes to help less fortunate people like this woman, the fact remains is she WILL BE £1414 (she miscalculated her earnings first time round) worse off next year, where as a middle income earner will be better off, if she double her hours and income, she d still be £861 worse off.
As for helping victims of domestic violence, 33 refuges have been axed since 2010, 1000's are turned away, all due to to lack of sufficient funding and this was under the coallition, when some one votes tory, this is what they get, so, the assumption i make of you, is based on your wish to help others less fortunate than you, coupled with your right wing views, the 2 are incompatable.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-life/11074832/Domestic-violence-refuge-cuts-could-leave-victims-trapped-near-their-perpetrators.html0 -
We had joy, we had fun, we had lefties on the run...Seem to have the lefties rattled Stevo. Mamba has seen the light and Rick is reduced to making things up.
I've not finished yet, with the help of a few hard facts
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
What help to higher tax payers are you talking about here? I see nothing in the budget that solely benefits them and several things that hit them - non dom rules, dividend rate hikes, pension allowance restrictions and buy to let restrictions. Give us some hard facts rather than generalisations
You may want to check your facts about tax cutting: this budget raises nearly £30 billion in tax over the next 5 years - see para 1.7 in the link below:I ll tell you something here, next time round i am voting Tory, Osborne etc are more Socialist than Red Ed, a far higher minimum wage, action on buy to let mortage relief and a raid on higher tax pension contributions......
If he could curb his tax cutting measures which the UK clearly cannot afford, Osborne would make a great Labour leader.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/summer-budget-2015/summer-budget-2015
The economic success and prosperity being generated allows him to afford some of these measures that you approve of
i dont know what you ve been drinking but these measures i approve off are saving him money not costing him
higher wages mean less working benefits, tax raids on pension contributions and buy to let properties raise money for the exchequer, so of course he is rising money, thats hwat they all do, but the Tories/Media spent the election pooh hooing labours plans, only to out socialise them, once back in.... master class!
its the help to higher rate tax payers i do not approve off, they really dont need it and we cant afford it, despite the eco success you bang on about, i dont see it, london maybe but in the rest of the country? no.
Also can you clarify one thing - when you talk about 'higher taxpayers', do you mean people who pay the 40% tax rate?"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Aside from how the unbiased Guardian calculates the alleged subsidies there are a few points here.Ok Pina, I've looked at your link.
First off, I agree that everyone, individual or corporation should pay their due tax and have stated so many times.
Now the article appears to be a general rant. I'm not a tax expert, that's Stevo, but here are a couple of points that jump out.
Corporate tax benefits: £44bn Of the 93 major tax reliefs provided by the Treasury, 27 are aimed at business. The largest amount was spent allowing businesses to write off billions spent on plants, machinery and equipment among other item
As far as i am aware, tax is levied on profit. So such expenditure would be deducted from any balance sheet before tax.
Hidden transport subsidies: £15bn Unlike motorists and the petrol levies they are charged, airlines do not pay tax on fuel – support worth about £8.5bn a year, according to MPs on parliament’s transport select committee. Train companies also enjoy lower duty on fuel.
Is aircraft fuel not duty free world wide? Imposing a levy in isolation would surely force carriers to refuel elsewhere and relocate their hub.
In 2012, Amazon was attacked by MPs on parliament’s public accounts committee for avoiding UK tax. Yet in the same period, the online retailer was awarded £16.5m in grants by the administrations of Scotland and Wales to help build distribution centres. To link the Wales plant to the transport network, the Welsh assembly built the mile-long “Ffordd Amazon road” at an additional cost of £3m.
Welsh and Scottish Administrations? From the graph, Corporate subsidies, grants and tax breaks peaked on 08/09. Who was in power then?
Not defending anyone not paying tax but as I said, this article just seems to be a general rant.
What Pinno forgets or conveniently ignores is that corporation tax makes up less than 10% of the tax revenues of this country:
The usual leftie implication is that these are some form of handouts out to the Tories mates. The reality is that if you want to attract business and investment you need to make the UK an attractive place to do business and invest. Corporate tax is a bit of a 'loss leader' - it attracts business and then the UK benefits from all the VAT, income tax, NI, Customs duty etc that flows from the increased economic activity and employment that is created. As you can see from the graph above, the tax take from these other taxes is far higher so overall these subsidies benefit the UK/exchequer.
The UK gets it. And I am involved in projects that are doing exactly that - which benefit the UK tax revenues at the expense of tax revenues in less business friendly jurisdictions (with an overall advantage to my Group). So don't tell me it's not true
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
IFS and various other organisations plus the KPMG based BBC calculator, put lower earners being hardest hit, regardless of the eventual increase in wages to £9 hr in 2020 or if they increase their hours.
I am a higher rate tax payer @ 40% and i will be better off, due to changes in the threshold i assume? i dont think that is right, especially when services, to say battered women are being cut back and have also been under the coalition.
the changes to pensions and buy to let, whilst a minor financial inconvienience, wont actually give them sleepless nights and coupons to the local food bank will it?0 -
obvious why Osborn has done this, he can get far more from many more people by hitting the less well off, also, poorer people have lost faith in politics (esp labour), so tend not to vote, middle and high income people (and pensioners) do vote and are vocal, look how they all kicked off when child benefit looked like it would be taken off them ?0
-
You have to concede that the Tories hijacked a few Labour policies.
Is it solely down to how much corporation tax yields? If we all have to endure austerity and the cuts associated with it, why shouldn't everybody (including corporations) pay their way?
Fine, loss leaders to attract and generate business. However, does that not make UK PLC a middle man? London is a financial hub but much of the financial activity is as a global gateway buying and selling funds. portfolio's, money. Is it not a fickle premise open to the chance that some government somewhere could create the environment to attract all of this 'business' away from London or the global climate change in such a way it ebbs sharply?
A 2.5% increase in corporation tax (not too much of a stretch?) would yield £65.5bn, £14.25bn difference - it would easily cover the 12bn in welfare cuts. Why set VAT so high? If you are looking for business incentives, a lower VAT rate may generate a disproportionate increase in business revenue and assist small businesses no end.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
Whether you are a 40% taxpayer is not the point, it is whether you think a certain type of taxpayer is not deserving of any help from the government via the tax system.IFS and various other organisations plus the KPMG based BBC calculator, put lower earners being hardest hit, regardless of the eventual increase in wages to £9 hr in 2020 or if they increase their hours.
I am a higher rate tax payer @ 40% and i will be better off, due to changes in the threshold i assume? i dont think that is right, especially when services, to say battered women are being cut back and have also been under the coalition.
the changes to pensions and buy to let, whilst a minor financial inconvienience, wont actually give them sleepless nights and coupons to the local food bank will it?
You said before that you want wages to rise so that less benefits need to be paid. Osbourne has mandated minimum wage rises over the next few years and yet in the same breath you are complaining that benefits are being cut.
You also in other threads make the point that large population rises are to the detriment of the UK. And yet the generosity of our benefits system appears to be one of the main factors that makes large numbers of immigrants make determined efforts get into the UK - from of all places France, which you would expect to have a very generous benefits system given its hard line left wing government. But you still complain about benefits cuts.
The rebalancing of wages and benefits is the right thing to do in the longer term. There will always be winners and losers from changes like this. But as I have said before, the proposed £12bn of cuts merely takes the benefit bill back to where it was in the latter stages of the Brown administration. I don't recall those on the left complaining about benefits levels then."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Whether you are a 40% taxpayer is not the point, it is whether you think a certain type of taxpayer is not deserving of any help from the government via the tax system.IFS and various other organisations plus the KPMG based BBC calculator, put lower earners being hardest hit, regardless of the eventual increase in wages to £9 hr in 2020 or if they increase their hours.
I am a higher rate tax payer @ 40% and i will be better off, due to changes in the threshold i assume? i dont think that is right, especially when services, to say battered women are being cut back and have also been under the coalition.
the changes to pensions and buy to let, whilst a minor financial inconvienience, wont actually give them sleepless nights and coupons to the local food bank will it?
You said before that you want wages to rise so that less benefits need to be paid. Osbourne has mandated minimum wage rises over the next few years and yet in the same breath you are complaining that benefits are being cut.
You also in other threads make the point that large population rises are to the detriment of the UK. And yet the generosity of our benefits system appears to be one of the main factors that makes large numbers of immigrants make determined efforts get into the UK - from of all places France, which you would expect to have a very generous benefits system given its hard line left wing government. But you still complain about benefits cuts.
The rebalancing of wages and benefits is the right thing to do in the longer term. There will always be winners and losers from changes like this. But as I have said before, the proposed £12bn of cuts merely takes the benefit bill back to where it was in the latter stages of the Brown administration. I don't recall those on the left complaining about benefits levels then.
Far more people rely on benefits now than in the Brown administration, the working tax credit system seemingly has been used by employers to suppress wages.
Its not just benefits that attract migrants, we give citizenship, housing, education and health care away easily too, France and Germany take a different view to migrant benefits, we dont.
these changes wont effect migrant movements into the UK
the rebalancing of wages/benefits is of course a very important thing to do but penalising 3million of the countries poorest families BEFORE wages can catch up is the wrong way to do this, it may also prove counter productive as out of work benefits will not be hit, so many might decide work doesnt pay?
Its easy for me and you to say "of course there will be winners and losers" we can afford any minor financial lost, many will not be so fortunate.0 -
Hey Jack. How you doing?The above may be fact, or fiction, I may be serious, I may be jesting.
I am not sure. You have no chance.Veronese68 wrote:PB is the most sensible person on here.0 -
You imply that corporations don't pay their way - what's your evidence for that? I've posted links before that show how the top 100 companies in the UK contribute around £80bn per year to government revenue - somewhere around 10% of the total.You have to concede that the Tories hijacked a few Labour policies.
Is it solely down to how much corporation tax yields? If we all have to endure austerity and the cuts associated with it, why shouldn't everybody (including corporations) pay their way?
Fine, loss leaders to attract and generate business. However, does that not make UK PLC a middle man? London is a financial hub but much of the financial activity is as a global gateway buying and selling funds. portfolio's, money. Is it not a fickle premise open to the chance that some government somewhere could create the environment to attract all of this 'business' away from London or the global climate change in such a way it ebbs sharply?
A 2.5% increase in corporation tax (not too much of a stretch?) would yield £65.5bn, £14.25bn difference - it would easily cover the 12bn in welfare cuts. Why set VAT so high? If you are looking for business incentives, a lower VAT rate may generate a disproportionate increase in business revenue and assist small businesses no end.
As for your tax rate questions, you raise some interesting points.
1. Why set the VAT rate so high?
Our darling leaders in the EU madate a minuimum rate of 15% and a max of 25% so we are in the middle (although below the EU average of around 21%). So you know who to blame now. Interestingly the highest VAT rates are found in the Nordics (all 25% apart from Finland at 24%) which you have previously held up as a model of 'how it should be done'. Still sure about that?
2. Why not raise corporate tax rates?
I tried to explain this above. Countries use corporate tax rates as one of the levers to attract investment -tax competition is a fact of life. The point being is that sensibly run countries realise that the drop in corporate tax rates is more than offset by the additional investment and economic activity and the other larger taxes that flow from that - governments do their sums on this and are largely coming to the same conclusion. The UK is not alone in dropping corporate rates over recent years - most other countries have done the same thing - including Germany, Sweden, Denmark, Finland to name but a few.
It does not necessarily mean that corporate tax revenues fall when the rate drops. Counterintuitive, but apart from the lower incentive to avoid tax, you get multinationals actively trying to shift income into the more tax friendly countries either by increased economic activity here, and/or by changing their tax strategy. I have been involved in projects that do both of those in my Group in the very recent past - as mentioned above, this has increased UK tax revenues - corporate tax, income tax, VAT etc. Other countries which are less business friendly have lost out by a larger amount so overall my Group and the UK are winners. You can thank me some other time...
Here is some info from the EU on VAT (pg 5) and corporate tax rates - including how corp tax rates have dropped in most EU countries over recent years (pg 7). This is to back up some of the points I make above.
http://ec.europa.eu/taxation_customs/resources/documents/taxation/gen_info/economic_analysis/tax_structures/2014/presentation.pdf"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I'll look at your link later. In Sweden (and I can only really cite this Scandinavian country) , they don't have all the victorianesque taxes, highlighted in your pie chart. The list of taxes and duties is remarkable.
I paid 55% tax and little else apart from VAT on certain items and my phone bill.
No TV license
No road Tax Well, that is I cycled everywhere and wouldn't have had to if I had a car.
No heating bill (included in the rental cost)
No electricity bill. Ditto.
No council tax etc etc..
The 55% rate means that it was definitely a PAYG system. Okay, it grove a tiny percentage away to Monaco and other tax havens but the tax revenue from the working populace is huge.
I would not mind paying 55% if it weren't for all the other duties and taxes. If I worked it out adding all the excesses, I am probably paying somewhere in the region of 50+ % as it stands but it the current tax rates are disproportionate to income. Council tax should go on income not property value for example. The more you earn, the more you pay surely? If we do not increase people's disposable income, we are not going to generate wealth, especially at the lower levels and especially when housing and rental prices are so exorbitant.seanoconn - gruagach craic!0 -
You said before that you want wages to rise so that less benefits need to be paid. Osbourne has mandated minimum wage rises over the next few years and yet in the same breath you are complaining that benefits are being cut.
But are the cuts in benefits larger than the pay rise? Of course, people who are in FT work shouldn't need benefits, but with housing and transport as expensive as it is, we're stuck with it until we can improve wages and productivity.You also in other threads make the point that large population rises are to the detriment of the UK. And yet the generosity of our benefits system appears to be one of the main factors that makes large numbers of immigrants make determined efforts get into the UK - from of all places France, which you would expect to have a very generous benefits system given its hard line left wing government. But you still complain about benefits cuts.
Britain attracts about the average number of immigrants per capita of a western EU member. Sorry, I could only find statistics for 1 year, but it really doesn't vary that much over time.The rebalancing of wages and benefits is the right thing to do in the longer term. There will always be winners and losers from changes like this. But as I have said before, the proposed £12bn of cuts merely takes the benefit bill back to where it was in the latter stages of the Brown administration. I don't recall those on the left complaining about benefits levels then.
It depends how many people are genuinely in need of them. When you say the benefits bill, are you counting pensions, for example? Because there are more pensioners now than there were then. What about people in low-paid work, how has that changed since 2010?
I agree that rebalancing wages and benefits is the right thing to do, but as I have said before on these pages, for that you'd need to stop vast numbers of teenagers leaving our school system without any useful qualifications. Even if you could wave a magic wand and transform our school system into one which succeeds with every single pupil, it would still take many years to undo the damage of mass educational failure over the years. Unfortunately, limiting public sector pay rises to 1% for the next few years, at a time when schools are already struggling to find enough qualified teachers and the school age population is increasing, I can see things getting far worse in the education system in the future.0
