The Tax Thread

thistle_

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

Dorset_Boy

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

pangolin

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Seems to be in the right ballpark if you look at that chart. Unless the thinking is that nurses were well overpaid prior to 2010.

rick_chasey

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

As I said, if you take it in the context of the prior freeze, which has reduced their real earnings substantially, then you can see why they would anchor their pay rise that high.

You are not stupid enough to not realise a union asking for 12.5% publicly does not mean they expect 12.5%.

If they asked 3% they'll sure as sh!t not get that either.

FWIW the change to making staff pay for parking costs them more than this pay increase.

Public support for nurses has never been higher, and rightly so, so why not use it as a time to get a more decent pay packet? Good on 'em.

kingstongraham

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

N0bodyOfTheGoat

Sunak & co. were happy to spaff money last year on Covid slush funds for their mates to produce substandard equipment and Test'n'Trace etc., but now the thanks the NHS staff get is a measly 1% wage increase when prices are spiralling out of control since January and to top it off, he freezes Personal Tax Allowance at £12570 until April 2026... Brutally punishing the low wage earners, who will have increasingly less disposable income to help businesses recover after Covid.

After almost a year of borrowing Corbyn's magic money tree, it looks like we're about to see another austerity period, let's hope it last far less than 2010-2019.

pangolin

N0bodyOfTheGoat said:

Sunak & co. were happy to spaff money last year on Covid slush funds for their mates to produce substandard equipment and Test'n'Trace etc., but now the thanks the NHS staff get is a measly 1% wage increase when prices are spiralling out of control since January and to top it off, he freezes Personal Tax Allowance at £12570 until April 2026... Brutally punishing the low wage earners, who will have increasingly less disposable income to help businesses recover after Covid.

After almost a year of borrowing Corbyn's magic money tree, it looks like we're about to see another austerity period, let's hope it last far less than 2010-2019.

Narrator: It didn't

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

surrey_commuter

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

Amazon is mentioned as it already has plans for expansion so will now be able to offset them against tax

surrey_commuter

N0bodyOfTheGoat said:

Sunak & co. were happy to spaff money last year on Covid slush funds for their mates to produce substandard equipment and Test'n'Trace etc., but now the thanks the NHS staff get is a measly 1% wage increase when prices are spiralling out of control since January and to top it off, he freezes Personal Tax Allowance at £12570 until April 2026... Brutally punishing the low wage earners, who will have increasingly less disposable income to help businesses recover after Covid.

After almost a year of borrowing Corbyn's magic money tree, it looks like we're about to see another austerity period, let's hope it last far less than 2010-2019.

Really do not think that qualifies as “brutally”

surrey_commuter

pangolin said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Seems to be in the right ballpark if you look at that chart. Unless the thinking is that nurses were well overpaid prior to 2010.

Does that include pension benefits?

pangolin

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Seems to be in the right ballpark if you look at that chart. Unless the thinking is that nurses were well overpaid prior to 2010.

Does that include pension benefits?

No idea to be honest. Have they gone up over that time period?

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

thistle_

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Spend now pay later (2023) is how I saw it described.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Dorset_Boy

pangolin said:

surrey_commuter said:

pangolin said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Seems to be in the right ballpark if you look at that chart. Unless the thinking is that nurses were well overpaid prior to 2010.

Does that include pension benefits?

No idea to be honest. Have they gone up over that time period?

Relative to the defined contribution (money purchase) pensions of the private sector, then probably yes, but it is complicated, in part due to the 2015 pension freedoms.

thistle_

Dorset_Boy said:

Relative to the defined contribution (money purchase) pensions of the private sector, then probably yes.

Somehow mine went down in value last year, it might have last year as well I'll have to check.
Sounds like a good one for the CEO's monthly Q&A session.

feelgoodlost

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Public support for nurses has never been higher, and rightly so, so why not use it as a time to get a more decent pay packet? Good on 'em.

Not if reading any of the comments on Twitter is to go by. Makes for depressing reading.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Because 100% of qualifying assets usually get tax depreciated over a period. This change shortens the period and adds an extra 30%. The 100% is timing, hence mostly.

And your point is?

rjsterry

feelgoodlost said:

rick_chasey said:

Dorset_Boy said:

rick_chasey said:

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

In the context of the length of the freeze prior and the pandemic you can see why they'd anchor the negotiations that high.

I expect those kinds of rises in my job (which I appreciate is an entirely different context) as an absolute minimum and less I take as my firm telling me to leave.

That's completely different as you are trying to climb the greasy pole.

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

Public support for nurses has never been higher, and rightly so, so why not use it as a time to get a more decent pay packet? Good on 'em.

Not if reading any of the comments on Twitter is to go by. Makes for depressing reading.

Twitter is not representative, even of the views expressed on Twitter.

secretsam

Pross said:

Didn't know where best to put this but I caught the end of an interview with a nurse and doctor about NHS pay and I'm sure the nurse said that any rise below 12.5% will be unacceptable. I can't help thinking if that is an expectation they will be disappointed. Do I think nurses are underpaid? Yes but a 12.5% rise is just not realistic (there was also the usual comment about "real terms paycuts" which always grates no matter who uses it).

But that's what's happened. Austerity was piled onto the public sector, and as a result, real-terms wages fell significantly in the period 2010-2020. Something like 10%.
Nurses (along with teachers, social care workers, etc) are poorly paid in industries and sectors where recruitment is an issue.
"Real Terms pay cuts" are absolutely sound economic concepts, and an entirely reasonable position.
No good sticking your head in your sand, and pretending that they aren't.

rjsterry

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Because 100% of qualifying assets usually get tax depreciated over a period. This change shortens the period and adds an extra 30%. The 100% is timing, hence mostly.

And your point is?

Presumably the extra 30% will only be available for a limited period as well. "Spend it; don't save it"

secretsam

Dorset_Boy said:

The nurses union are suggesting a 12.5% increase for the same role.
That would be like you asking for 12.5% for not generating any more profit for your employer.

There's aiming for the stars and hoping to reach the moon, but in the current world, it is the union that has lost touch with reality more so than the Government.

You're insinuating that the nurses' value to healthcare has fallen by 12.5% over the last decade?
There is no 'profit' in healthcare, it's all about value. Nursing and healthcare productivity has stayed constant or risen for years.

kingstongraham

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Because 100% of qualifying assets usually get tax depreciated over a period. This change shortens the period and adds an extra 30%. The 100% is timing, hence mostly.

And your point is?

I don't know why you always think someone has a point to argue about, don't be so defensive. I know you're an expert in this area.

So if a company invests 10 million, how much less would they pay compared with how much they would have expected to pay before this? And does this change dependent on whether they are a profitable business now, or will be profitable in 5 years time?

kingstongraham

But if you want a point, I'd it definitely the best possible use of a giveaway to give a break to bt and amazon who made money from the pandemic and already have investments planned? Without any targeted offsetting increase?

I've no idea what that would be, because I haven't the expertise or inclination, but you should be able to think of something.

Jezyboy

Honestly think that the 1 per cent rise is just part of a planned u turn

Stevo_666

rjsterry said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Because 100% of qualifying assets usually get tax depreciated over a period. This change shortens the period and adds an extra 30%. The 100% is timing, hence mostly.

And your point is?

Presumably the extra 30% will only be available for a limited period as well. "Spend it; don't save it"

Yep, 2 year window to incentivise investment.

Still not sure what KG is trying to get at though.

Stevo_666

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

Stevo_666 said:

kingstongraham said:

thistle_ said:

This super deduction thing sounds interesting.

It's being reported as the thing that will enable Amazon to get its UK corporation tax back down to zero.

If they invest in succient qualifying assets, same as for any other company. Also bear in mind this is mostly a cash flow timing difference.

It's not a cash flow timing difference if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent, is it?

Thats why I said 'mostly'. Its available to all companies, so whats your point here?

How is it even partly a timing issue if the deduction is 130% of the amount spent?

Because 100% of qualifying assets usually get tax depreciated over a period. This change shortens the period and adds an extra 30%. The 100% is timing, hence mostly.

And your point is?

I don't know why you always think someone has a point to argue about, don't be so defensive. I know you're an expert in this area.

So if a company invests 10 million, how much less would they pay compared with how much they would have expected to pay before this? And does this change dependent on whether they are a profitable business now, or will be profitable in 5 years time?

Just asking a question. If you can't answer it just say so.

kingstongraham

Actually forget it. I'll ask Google, they are less touchy.