Yet more Tory sleaze….

[icowden]

It's widely reported that the overall tax burden is now higher than at any time since the post war years but I don't know how that is claculated.

I think it looks at the tax burden as a percentage of income. At the moment it is estimated to be about 35%.

https://ifs.org.uk/taxlab/key-questions/how-have-government-revenues-changed-over-time

Essentially we used to be a high income tax country until the Thatcher government lowered income taxes but massively hiked VAT. Then you have your NICs which have also increased. Council tax increased hugely compared to the old "rates". Then you get your fuel, alcohol etc duty which are diminishing somewhat but help to top up the coffers.

The biggest failing IMHO is not agreeing a taxation scheme with the tech giants like Amazon and Google etc which would be worth billions in tax. Dishi has just agreed a deal which will involved them paying less tax than they did previously when we were in the EU.

Labour like to tax the very rich, which sounds logical but is usually counterproductive as the very rich can afford to move their / themselves to another country so that the government get less tax than they did before. Personally I know I am lucky that my wages are high enough to be in the 40% tax bracket but equally it feels very galling that the government get £400 out of every £1000 I earn in that bracket. I am not rich. I don't own a Tesla or a nice mansion. I live in a smallish detached house in Surrey. But I am in a very comfortable position. I could be in a much nicer position if I uprooted the family and moved North (or East to Norfolk) but them's the breaks.

The "brackets" don't really work in my head. If you had a fixed rate of 20% for example then someone earning 10,000 per annum after the personal allowance would pay £2000 in tax, whilst someone on £100,000 would pay £20,000 in tax and someone on £1000000 would pay £200,000 in tax. So you do pay more, the more you earn anyway. There is a point where you get to super rich where perhaps a different approach is needed and many of the super rich are finding ways to divest some of their wealth for the good of humanity. Others are just bobbing up and down to space cos they want a rocket...

 

[Bromptonaut]

So you know as much as me then really?

No. I moved it on by mentioning reports.

I've now found a source based on UK Government (OBR) data.

https://www.statista.com/chart/24330/uk-tax-burden-as-share-gdp-timeline/

 

[BoldonLad]

Why not just put the 3% back on Income Tax instead of increasing a more regressive double-taxation rate?

VAT was introduced by the Conservatives at 10% in 1973, reduced to 8% by Labour in 1974, increased by Conservatives to 15% in 1979, increased by Conservatives to 17.5% in 1991, temporarily reduced to 15% by Labour in 2008 and increased by Conservatives to 20% in 2011.

Surely even the most die-hard Conservatives supporter can see an indefensible pattern there?


Thanks.

Wasn't / isn't VAT an EU tax?, with EU rules about what is taxed and what isn't?

 

[BoldonLad]

The "brackets" don't really work in my head. If you had a fixed rate of 20% for example then someone earning 10,000 per annum after the personal allowance would pay £2000 in tax, whilst someone on £100,000 would pay £20,000 in tax and someone on £1000000 would pay £200,000 in tax. So you do pay more, the more you earn anyway. There is a point where you get to super rich where perhaps a different approach is needed and many of the super rich are finding ways to divest some of their wealth for the good of humanity. Others are just bobbing up and down to space cos they want a rocket...

If you are talking of income tax, I don't really see why we cannot have a linear rising scale, starting at say 1% and rising in 1% increments. Not sure where we would set the "maximum". This would avoid "steps" where earning a few pounds extra results in a disproportionate increase in tax. The calculation of tax would be onerous, if doing it manually, but, I doubt, in this age of cheap computing power, there are many employers calculating payrolls manually.

But, IMHO, the biggest problem is tax avoidance, both by individuals and companies.

 

[Bromptonaut]

Wasn't / isn't VAT an EU tax?, with EU rules about what is taxed and what isn't?

VAT was introduced in 1973 and was, at least in part, a consequence of our accession to the EU. It replaced Purchase Tax which was supposedly only levied on luxury goods but the 'luxury' net was cast fairly wide.

 

[FishFright]

You did.

You don't come across as dim so have a read of the question again and answer with earnest.

It's important to be earnest.

I think we can all agree on the importance of being earnest

 

[icowden]

VAT was introduced in 1973 and was, at least in part, a consequence of our accession to the EU. It replaced Purchase Tax which was supposedly only levied on luxury goods but the 'luxury' net was cast fairly wide.

And indeed purchase tax had bands of 13, 22,36, and 55% depending on the product (apparently). It was replaced with VAT when we joined the EEC (not the EU) and set at 10%.

 

[mjr]

And indeed purchase tax had bands of 13, 22,36, and 55% depending on the product (apparently). It was replaced with VAT when we joined the EEC (not the EU) and set at 10%.

Purchase Tax (introduced under the Conservative Churchill...) had even been 100% on some things at some points. It was a messy system, open to obvious abuses, and the members agreed it was not allowed in the EEC. VAT was only an EU tax in that the members agreed it was allowed. It existed before the EEC in some.

Later, members agreed there should be a minimum basic rate (15% since 2006) and certain things cannot be exempt but this is agreed by member country ministers so blaming it on the EU would be "forum shopping".

But we've left the EU and the Conservatives have kept it, as well as their history of increasing it and keeping it above any agreed minimum.

 

[Xipe Totec]

We did this on the other side remember, I agree with ID cards.

I was only on the Other Side for about a month before it was nuked from orbit, so wasn't part of that conversation.

However this isn't about ID cards, I do not think there's a plan to introduce & issue such things. However, your government made up a bunch of provable lies about voter fraud, which is a phenomenon which historically borders upon the statistically non-existent in the UK. To combat this entirely made-up threat, they are introducing a requirement to produce a form of ID such as a driving license or passport if you wish to continue to exercise your democratic 'right' to vote.

Statistically that suggests that at least two million people who do not possess those forms of ID will be made unable to vote, predominantly from various groups who do not typically support the Tory Party. It has been described as blatant voter suppression. This, along with boundary changes that will reduce the overall number of seats, but somehow magically gift the Tories another 10 to 20, looks like nothing other than a bunch of crooks rigging an already rigged game.

 

[Deleted member 28]

No. I moved it on by mentioning reports.

I've now found a source based on UK Government (OBR) data.

https://www.statista.com/chart/24330/uk-tax-burden-as-share-gdp-timeline/

I've had a look at both the graphs above

I was only on the Other Side for about a month before it was nuked from orbit, so wasn't part of that conversation.

However this isn't about ID cards, I do not think there's a plan to introduce & issue such things. However, your government made up a bunch of provable lies about voter fraud, which is a phenomenon which historically borders upon the statistically non-existent in the UK. To combat this entirely made-up threat, they are introducing a requirement to produce a form of ID such as a driving license or passport if you wish to continue to exercise your democratic 'right' to vote.

Statistically that suggests that at least two million people who do not possess those forms of ID will be made unable to vote, predominantly from various groups who do not typically support the Tory Party. It has been described as blatant voter suppression. This, along with boundary changes that will reduce the overall number of seats, but somehow magically gift the Tories another 10 to 20, looks like nothing other than a bunch of crooks rigging an already rigged game.

Heard it all last time, old news I'm afraid.

 

[Bromptonaut]

I've had a look at both the graphs above

Heard it all last time, old news I'm afraid.

Really?

 

[Xipe Totec]

Heard it all last time, old news I'm afraid.

And in what way does that make it irrelevant?

 

[FishFright]

I was only on the Other Side for about a month before it was nuked from orbit, so wasn't part of that conversation.

However this isn't about ID cards, I do not think there's a plan to introduce & issue such things. However, your government made up a bunch of provable lies about voter fraud, which is a phenomenon which historically borders upon the statistically non-existent in the UK. To combat this entirely made-up threat, they are introducing a requirement to produce a form of ID such as a driving license or passport if you wish to continue to exercise your democratic 'right' to vote.

Statistically that suggests that at least two million people who do not possess those forms of ID will be made unable to vote, predominantly from various groups who do not typically support the Tory Party. It has been described as blatant voter suppression. This, along with boundary changes that will reduce the overall number of seats, but somehow magically gift the Tories another 10 to 20, looks like nothing other than a bunch of crooks rigging an already rigged game.

I'm one of those two million. Choosing not to travel far for a holiday and not needing a ton and a half to move me from A to B is a reason to try and deny my vote.

 

[Deleted member 28]

And in what way does that make it irrelevant?

Start a new thread then.

Didn't say it was irrelevant.

You're Pug man so I'm sure you remember the other forum well enough.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Oh look...and there's more!
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...10-party-during-may-2020-lockdown-say-sources

'Claims raise questions about whether there was rule-flouting culture over number of months' quelle surprise!