Reform, and the death of the Tory Party

[diplodicus]

Rich depends on your viewpoint.
Compared with a large part of the planet, we are all rich in the UK

 

[Pross]

Rich depends on your viewpoint.
Compared with a large part of the planet, we are all rich in the UK

True but pretty irrelevant in the context of UK taxation.

 

[BoldonLad]

I'd define rich as the point at which you can afford to engage an accountant to move your money tax efficiently overseas. I think that's at about £250k income.

Or we could go with top 1% which is about £175k income annually or household wealth of >£3.1m.

Shouldn’t “afford” be “it is financially worth while to engage an accountant …. Etc”.

£175k pa would not win many votes, if my family, friends, acquaintances are anything to go on, and they are mostly in the impoverished north.

If Household “wealth” includes the house, a few more will have to be on the scaffold. 😂

 

[BoldonLad]

Rich depends on your viewpoint.
Compared with a large part of the planet, we are all rich in the UK

By the same token, there is zero poverty in UK, or, indeed, Northern Europe.

 

[Stevo 666]

I'd define rich as the point at which you can afford to engage an accountant to move your money tax efficiently overseas. I think that's at about £250k income.

Or we could go with top 1% which is about £175k income annually or household wealth of >£3.1m.

When you say 'move your money tax efficiently overseas', what sort of scenarios are you thInking of? I'm assuming that you are familiar with the point about UK taxpayers being subject to tax on their worldwide income.

 

[icowden]

When you say 'move your money tax efficiently overseas', what sort of scenarios are you thInking of? I'm assuming that you are familiar with the point about UK taxpayers being subject to tax on their worldwide income.

I'm thinking of people doing a "Tice" or an "Ashcroft" as I believe it's known in the trade...

 

[icowden]

Shouldn’t “afford” be “it is financially worth while to engage an accountant …. Etc”.
£175k pa would not win many votes, if my family, friends, acquaintances are anything to go on, and they are mostly in the impoverished north.
If Household “wealth” includes the house, a few more will have to be on the scaffold. 😂

No - wealth is about income not the main property (second properties are fair game).
As you say, part of the challenge in the measure is that it is dependent on where you live.

If I moved to the impoverished North I would be a wealthy man. As it is, I'm not due to living in the massively overpriced South.

 

[Stevo 666]

I'm thinking of people doing a "Tice" or an "Ashcroft" as I believe it's known in the trade...

The Tice issue regards whether a company paid withholding tax, so not sure I see the connection between that and individuals 'moving their money overseas. Can't recall the Ashcroft details.

I think you are referring to your general feeling that people with money are all trying to avoid/evade tax and don't pay enough. It might be worth you looking at (1) the tax contributions from the top 1%, 0.1% etc and from the corporate sector and (2) HMRC's own numbers on the 'tax gap' which identifies reasons for the gap between what should be paid and what is actually paid across most main taxes. I can post a few links if needed.

 

[icowden]

I think you are referring to your general feeling that people with money are all trying to avoid/evade tax and don't pay enough.

Correct except it isn't a feeling. There is plenty of documentary evidence.

It might be worth you looking at (1) the tax contributions from the top 1%, 0.1% etc and from the corporate sector and (2) HMRC's own numbers on the 'tax gap' which identifies reasons for the gap between what should be paid and what is actually paid across most main taxes.

Yes, of course small businesses are a major share of the tax gap (60%) accounting for £28bn of the gap, but there are about 5.6 million businesses in that group. So that's about £5000 per business. HMRC recovered £5.2bn from the wealthy in 2023-24, however most of our 156 billionaires are unknowns. HMRC doesn't know how many of them pay tax in the UK nor how much tax they are avoiding.

Then you have the tax avoided by multinationals. Some of that has been fixed, but not all of it. In 2024 Amazon avoided £575 million in tax. In 2021 it was estimated that Facebook had avoided £330 million, Alphabet £452 million in 2019

 

[First Aspect]

Wealth and income are separable. Younhabe have one, the other, neither or both.

 

[Stevo 666]

Correct except it isn't a feeling. There is plenty of documentary evidence.



Yes, of course small businesses are a major share of the tax gap (60%) accounting for £28bn of the gap, but there are about 5.6 million businesses in that group. So that's about £5000 per business. HMRC recovered £5.2bn from the wealthy in 2023-24, however most of our 156 billionaires are unknowns. HMRC doesn't know how many of them pay tax in the UK nor how much tax they are avoiding.

Then you have the tax avoided by multinationals. Some of that has been fixed, but not all of it. In 2024 Amazon avoided £575 million in tax. In 2021 it was estimated that Facebook had avoided £330 million, Alphabet £452 million in 2019

On your first point, lets see your evidence.

On your second, how do you know that these billionaires are 'unknowns'. Plenty of them pay likely pay tax in numerous jurisdictions and then there is the point that a lot of their wealth is comprised by businesses that they own/have a stake in - if you want to tax them more then you also need to tax businesses more. How would you do that without putting large tax burdens on businesses owned by non-billionaires?

On your third point, firstly a quick reminder that avoidance is legal. Secondly how much of that is UK tax and can you back up those figures?

 

[icowden]

On your first point, lets see your evidence.

Just subscribe to Private Eye. They have been covering tax avoidance for years.

On your second, how do you know that these billionaires are 'unknowns'.

The Govt says so?
https://committees.parliament.uk/co...billionaires,is available for public spending.

Plenty of them pay likely pay tax in numerous jurisdictions and then there is the point that a lot of their wealth is comprised by businesses that they own/have a stake in - if you want to tax them more then you also need to tax businesses more. How would you do that without putting large tax burdens on businesses owned by non-billionaires?

Maybe some sort of sliding scale? I think we've used that approach somewhere before...

On your third point, firstly a quick reminder that avoidance is legal. Secondly how much of that is UK tax and can you back up those figures?

HMRC can, as can TaxWatch, Ethical Consumer, etc
https://www.taxwatchuk.org/seven-large-tech-groups-estimated-to-have-dodged-2bn-in-uk-tax-in-2021/

Believe it or not, I'm not just making stuff up as I go along.

 

[BoldonLad]

No - wealth is about income not the main property (second properties are fair game).
As you say, part of the challenge in the measure is that it is dependent on where you live.

If I moved to the impoverished North I would be a wealthy man. As it is, I'm not due to living in the massively overpriced South.

A move to the .impoverished North would not necessarily increase your income, so why would you become wealthy, if wealth is dependant on income.

Why is the word “wealthy” in use instead of “rich”?

 

[Stevo 666]

Just subscribe to Private Eye. They have been covering tax avoidance for years.

The Govt says so?
https://committees.parliament.uk/committee/127/public-accounts-committee/news/208347/taxing-the-wealthy-hmrc-does-not-know-how-many-billionaires-pay-tax-in-the-uk/#:~:text=Public Accounts Committee-,Taxing the wealthy: HMRC does not know how many billionaires,is available for public spending.

Maybe some sort of sliding scale? I think we've used that approach somewhere before...


HMRC can, as can TaxWatch, Ethical Consumer, etc
https://www.taxwatchuk.org/seven-large-tech-groups-estimated-to-have-dodged-2bn-in-uk-tax-in-2021/

Believe it or not, I'm not just making stuff up as I go along.

I didn't say you were, but you are a bit misguided.

1. I'm not subscribing to Private Eye, so you have provided no evidence.
2. It might say says more about HMRC's systems, but to be fair the billionaire tag relies on subjective valuations of their businesses to a large extent. They aren't just sitting on billions in cash that can be counted.
3. Sliding scale such as what? Also how would you do that without damaging economic growth? As we can see, RFA's tax policies have put a dampener on growth and you want to do more of it.
4. Taxwatch - NGO type outfit and hardly objective. The title of the article should give you a clue. And it uses some pretty generalised assumptions and questionable methodology which I guess you have not looked at too closely.

 

[bobzmyunkle]

I didn't say you were, but you are a bit misguided.

1. I'm not subscribing to Private Eye, so you have provided no evidence.
2. It might say says more about HMRC's systems, but to be fair the billionaire tag relies on subjective valuations of their businesses to a large extent. They aren't just sitting on billions in cash that can be counted.
3. Sliding scale such as what? Also how would you do that without damaging economic growth? As we can see, RFA's tax policies have put a dampener on growth and you want to do more of it.
4. Taxwatch - NGO type outfit and hardly objective. The title of the article should give you a clue. And it uses some pretty generalised assumptions and questionable methodology which I guess you have not looked at too closely.

Who knows why, but this comes to mind every time @stevo starts this sort of shite. (Obviously substitute Stevo for Geno) I am am a Geno fan. Stevo? Not so much.


View: https://open.spotify.com/track/6Q5iMxDEJ6uhMuxNP1f3f1