LEAVE the Conservative Party and save your country!
Comments
-
https://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in
It's interesting to see whether the facts respect your feelings. Have to admit I was surprised about where my household fell on this graph.0 -
Nice to see that we're off the scale. I wonder if Stevo will respect me now.kingstongraham said:https://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in
It's interesting to see whether the facts respect your feelings. Have to admit I was surprised about where my household fell on this graph.1 -
I imagine that most on here will find that they are higher than they expect.kingstongraham said:https://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in
It's interesting to see whether the facts respect your feelings. Have to admit I was surprised about where my household fell on this graph.
Much, much higher in some cases. Not so average after all.
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 -
This year, I'm in the lowest 1%. That doesn't surprise me though,0
-
Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.0 -
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Bompy, you have my sympathy on this onebompington said:
Nice to see that we're off the scale. I wonder if Stevo will respect me now.kingstongraham said:https://www.ifs.org.uk/tools_and_resources/where_do_you_fit_in
It's interesting to see whether the facts respect your feelings. Have to admit I was surprised about where my household fell on this graph.
"I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
Fair enough, although income tax specifically is not that different at much lower rates: in fact in Scotland we're paying 41% on anything over about £43K.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.0 -
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.0 -
It is a tax in my book. Taxed in, taxed out.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.0 -
Like savings, you mean?TheBigBean said:
It is a tax in my book. Taxed in, taxed out.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.0 -
They're not taxed out.kingstongraham said:
Like savings, you mean?TheBigBean said:
It is a tax in my book. Taxed in, taxed out.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.0 -
I'm an idiot, I was thinking about savings income which is obviously entirely different.TheBigBean said:
They're not taxed out.kingstongraham said:
Like savings, you mean?TheBigBean said:
It is a tax in my book. Taxed in, taxed out.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.
Why not use savings then? Only taxed once and none of the restrictions.0 -
That's definitely not true. I'm still admiring one of your posts on another thread.kingstongraham said:
I'm an idiot,
Well, at the moment, I'm in the lowest 1%, so I don't need to worry about it. In a hypothetical world where this becomes an issue, then I would put £10k in the pension and keep the rest in savings for precisely the reason you mention. I would also expect everyone else to do that which is why I don't think the policy makes much sense.kingstongraham said:
I was thinking about savings income which is obviously entirely different.
Why not use savings then? Only taxed once and none of the restrictions.0 -
Two out of the three mentioned above are not taxes as such, rather withdrawal of allowances. However the end effect is the same - you pay more tax.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.
The tax deduction for additional pension confributions was definitely an incentive for me to top up my pension funds when it made financial sense to do that.
And it makes no difference to self assessment as you just plug the numbers into the HMRC website and it spits out an amount to pay at the end."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
The complication for self assessment is only down to the carry forward of allowances from the previous 3 years. This relies on you not having maxed out in the previous years. That bit is not done within this year's calculation.Stevo_666 said:
Two out of the three mentioned above are not taxes as such, rather withdrawal of allowances. However the end effect is the same - you pay more tax.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.
The tax deduction for additional pension confributions was definitely an incentive for me to top up my pension funds when it made financial sense to do that.
And it makes no difference to self assessment as you just plug the numbers into the HMRC website and it spits out an amount to pay at the end.0 -
This, we live pretty modestly for a number of reasons but, when I see graphs and stats about average earnings etc. I do wonder how so many people afford the lifestyles they do.Jezyboy said:Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.
I know many have simply been more financially successful than me but I’m sure there must be a lot who are exposed to extreme levels of debt.
I have enough money to do stuff, but have to pick and choose. Some just seem to have it all. Glad none of the kids were into branded clothes.0 -
It is also complicated because you need to make the pension contribution in the financial year, but in the case of the self-employed your income is not known until later on.kingstongraham said:
The complication for self assessment is only down to the carry forward of allowances from the previous 3 years. This relies on you not having maxed out in the previous years. That bit is not done within this year's calculation.Stevo_666 said:
Two out of the three mentioned above are not taxes as such, rather withdrawal of allowances. However the end effect is the same - you pay more tax.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.
The tax deduction for additional pension confributions was definitely an incentive for me to top up my pension funds when it made financial sense to do that.
And it makes no difference to self assessment as you just plug the numbers into the HMRC website and it spits out an amount to pay at the end.0 -
Huge numbers of people have no money behind them - the stats produced at the start of lockdown were truly shocking. They'd rather have a couple of new cars on the driveway every 3/4 years, the latest phone, all the TV subscription channels etc, etc, but haven't any rainy day money or financial protection. All show and built on sand.morstar said:
This, we live pretty modestly for a number of reasons but, when I see graphs and stats about average earnings etc. I do wonder how so many people afford the lifestyles they do.Jezyboy said:Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.
I know many have simply been more financially successful than me but I’m sure there must be a lot who are exposed to extreme levels of debt.
I have enough money to do stuff, but have to pick and choose. Some just seem to have it all. Glad none of the kids were into branded clothes.
I do wonder if that may start to change post Covid and people realise they need to build up emergency funds. Minimum should be 3 months of outgoings, but ideally 6-12 months of earnings.0 -
Careful now. I suggested that in March and was lambasted.Dorset_Boy said:
Huge numbers of people have no money behind them - the stats produced at the start of lockdown were truly shocking. They'd rather have a couple of new cars on the driveway every 3/4 years, the latest phone, all the TV subscription channels etc, etc, but haven't any rainy day money or financial protection. All show and built on sand.morstar said:
This, we live pretty modestly for a number of reasons but, when I see graphs and stats about average earnings etc. I do wonder how so many people afford the lifestyles they do.Jezyboy said:Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.
I know many have simply been more financially successful than me but I’m sure there must be a lot who are exposed to extreme levels of debt.
I have enough money to do stuff, but have to pick and choose. Some just seem to have it all. Glad none of the kids were into branded clothes.
I do wonder if that may start to change post Covid and people realise they need to build up emergency funds. Minimum should be 3 months of outgoings, but ideally 6-12 months of earnings.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 -
I've been a member of The Conservative Party for 25 years. Generally my views are right of centre.
I have resigned my membership because of the terrible handling of the Coronavirus situation. Yes, the government (or rather, the taxpayer) has handed out tens of billions. But I think the handling of the CV medical situation has been nothing short of calamitous. There should have been multiple short and sharp lock downs, like they are doing in Wales.
Boris Johnson is a catastrophic, bumbling leader. He is all wind and blue sky with nothing of substance to substantiate his narrative. He is more like Chamberlain and not at all like his hero Churchill.
Steve0 -
Fair point, that does require a bit of fiddling with spreadsheets if it needs to be done. TBH I hadn't thought that would be an issue for most people given that up to £150k pa income, people have £40k a year pension contribution allowance to play with.kingstongraham said:
The complication for self assessment is only down to the carry forward of allowances from the previous 3 years. This relies on you not having maxed out in the previous years. That bit is not done within this year's calculation.Stevo_666 said:
Two out of the three mentioned above are not taxes as such, rather withdrawal of allowances. However the end effect is the same - you pay more tax.kingstongraham said:
The withdrawal of the pension allowance - that's not a tax, and there surely comes a point where the subsidy isn't needed to encourage saving. It's a struggle to feel sympathy on that one. It does make the calculation more complicated when doing self assessment.Stevo_666 said:
Not so much what I regard as high but when the extra tax impact is felt, so:kingstongraham said:
What would you consider to be the start of the higher end of the pay scales?Stevo_666 said:
Not enough to start seeing the impact of what happens at the higher end of the pay scales. There are a few thresholds on the way up where people start to notice the difference.rick_chasey said:
Why how much do you think I earn? 🤨Stevo_666 said:
It is certainly factually correct but it is never enough for people like Rick. (Well, maybe until he starts earning a decent whack and gets shafted).surrey_commuter said:
How can than not be true?rick_chasey said:
That’s not the jist. I just remembered you used the “wealthy pay more tax” argument in the past.Stevo_666 said:
It's a statement of the bleeding obvious. The jist seems to be 'but they're not paying enough' given that you posted it.rick_chasey said:
What do you think the guy is saying?Stevo_666 said:
Based on that tweet I can only assume that the author is not a tax professional.surrey_commuter said:
This is what I don’t get about Twitter, so tell me if I am wrongrick_chasey said:
Prageru tweets to say that income taxes are fairer than sales tax
Gabriel Zucman replies using words that imply he is disagreeing whilst posting up one supportive stat and one irrelevant one
Your comment on it is “quite” which if I did not know your opinions would be meaningless.
I think I have just explained it to myself. Quoting individual tweets is meaningless as they are part of an ongoing narrative
It’s a comment on wealth distribution
That said, Twatter is a poor medium for complex area like tax.
Also, you haven't explained what you think the Twitter bloke meant...
- Withdrawal of personal allowance between £100k-£123k
- Top rate of tax from £150k
- Withdrawal of majority of the pension allowance from £150k-£210k
Once you're at that level it gets expensive and the normal tax benefit of contributing to your pension won't work (in fact most people will pay tax on the contributions their employer makes even if they don't add anything).
So similar to what BB said apart from the child allowance.
The tax deduction for additional pension confributions was definitely an incentive for me to top up my pension funds when it made financial sense to do that.
And it makes no difference to self assessment as you just plug the numbers into the HMRC website and it spits out an amount to pay at the end."I spent most of my money on birds, booze and fast cars: the rest of it I just squandered." [George Best]0 -
I think there is a danger of conflating two issues though.pblakeney said:
Careful now. I suggested that in March and was lambasted.Dorset_Boy said:
Huge numbers of people have no money behind them - the stats produced at the start of lockdown were truly shocking. They'd rather have a couple of new cars on the driveway every 3/4 years, the latest phone, all the TV subscription channels etc, etc, but haven't any rainy day money or financial protection. All show and built on sand.morstar said:
This, we live pretty modestly for a number of reasons but, when I see graphs and stats about average earnings etc. I do wonder how so many people afford the lifestyles they do.Jezyboy said:Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.
I know many have simply been more financially successful than me but I’m sure there must be a lot who are exposed to extreme levels of debt.
I have enough money to do stuff, but have to pick and choose. Some just seem to have it all. Glad none of the kids were into branded clothes.
I do wonder if that may start to change post Covid and people realise they need to build up emergency funds. Minimum should be 3 months of outgoings, but ideally 6-12 months of earnings.
Some people only just (or don’t even) have enough to get by. The idea of saving those sorts of sums isn’t possible.
Very different from having the wherewithal to do so and still leveraging yourself to the max.
0 -
Of course there are many people who only earn enough to barely cover the basics, but it is clear I am not referring to them. They don't have the new cars every few years etc etc.morstar said:
I think there is a danger of conflating two issues though.pblakeney said:
Careful now. I suggested that in March and was lambasted.Dorset_Boy said:
Huge numbers of people have no money behind them - the stats produced at the start of lockdown were truly shocking. They'd rather have a couple of new cars on the driveway every 3/4 years, the latest phone, all the TV subscription channels etc, etc, but haven't any rainy day money or financial protection. All show and built on sand.morstar said:
This, we live pretty modestly for a number of reasons but, when I see graphs and stats about average earnings etc. I do wonder how so many people afford the lifestyles they do.Jezyboy said:Ah the regular reminder that being a young ish couple with a pretty modest salary and no children puts you way beyond where you feel it should.
Or the reminder that other people must be more relaxed about person debt given their cars and houses.
I know many have simply been more financially successful than me but I’m sure there must be a lot who are exposed to extreme levels of debt.
I have enough money to do stuff, but have to pick and choose. Some just seem to have it all. Glad none of the kids were into branded clothes.
I do wonder if that may start to change post Covid and people realise they need to build up emergency funds. Minimum should be 3 months of outgoings, but ideally 6-12 months of earnings.
Some people only just (or don’t even) have enough to get by. The idea of saving those sorts of sums isn’t possible.
Very different from having the wherewithal to do so and still leveraging yourself to the max.
However it is really important that as a nation some financial literacy is learnt because well over 80% of the population come across as financially illiterate.1 -
Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.1
-
YesJezyboy said:Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.
0 -
Yes, once they have sorted out their finances they could still afford the luxuries. Problen is buying the luxuries on credit and then something goes wrong, or a pandemic comes along and you are up the creek without your paddle.Jezyboy said:Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.
Ultimately it's down to sheer greed and impatience, wanting things yesterday rather than putting the foundations in place first.1 -
It's structural today rather than individual.Dorset_Boy said:
Yes, once they have sorted out their finances they could still afford the luxuries. Problen is buying the luxuries on credit and then something goes wrong, or a pandemic comes along and you are up the creek without your paddle.Jezyboy said:Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.
Ultimately it's down to sheer greed and impatience, wanting things yesterday rather than putting the foundations in place first.
With so many using credit for cars, holidays, etc people have realised that they will be bailed out when a 'black swan' event arrives as the government won't allow this level of bankruptcies to occur due to the knock-on countrywide economic effects.
It is the reason rates are at record lows and will stay there. They cannot be moved higher due to the way it would strangle the economy. It's a long term downward spiral.
How this problem gets solved I don't know, except for kicking the can further down the road.1 -
I would expect very few could afford the new cars without credit.Dorset_Boy said:
Yes, once they have sorted out their finances they could still afford the luxuries. Problen is buying the luxuries on credit and then something goes wrong, or a pandemic comes along and you are up the creek without your paddle.Jezyboy said:Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.
Ultimately it's down to sheer greed and impatience, wanting things yesterday rather than putting the foundations in place first.
I would argue that if this is such an issue then the banks giving credit are the ones that bear responsibility.
0 -
When I was growing up the only people with new cars were the likes of doctors, lawyers etc and sales reps. What has changed is that there in now a distinct lack of personal responsibility.Jezyboy said:
I would expect very few could afford the new cars without credit.Dorset_Boy said:
Yes, once they have sorted out their finances they could still afford the luxuries. Problen is buying the luxuries on credit and then something goes wrong, or a pandemic comes along and you are up the creek without your paddle.Jezyboy said:Given large bits of the world economy revolve around people taking holidays they can't quite afford, getting a new expensive phone every two years and a new car every 4, would it be a good thing for them to learn financial literacy.
Ultimately it's down to sheer greed and impatience, wanting things yesterday rather than putting the foundations in place first.
I would argue that if this is such an issue then the banks giving credit are the ones that bear responsibility.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
