Tax reform?

[diy_fun_uk]

I'm struggling to see how such a person would not already be paying class 4.

See the 'what tax do landlords pay now?' section of this article. Maybe explains? I say maybe cause I'm not completely sure what the mechanics of all this would be!

Landlord tax raid: Rachel Reeves' National Insurance plan explained

We explain what taxes landlords currently pay, and what they could face under the new proposals.

www.thisismoney.co.uk

 

[motorbiking]

See the 'what tax do landlords pay now?' section of this article. Maybe explains? I say maybe cause I'm not completely sure what the mechanics of all this would be!

Landlord tax raid: Rachel Reeves' National Insurance plan explained

We explain what taxes landlords currently pay, and what they could face under the new proposals.

www.thisismoney.co.uk

So 2% extra tax for the typical person who has a rental as a side line, but given a large proportion of LL are over 65, I wonder if they are planning to charge National Insurance for people who do not currently pay and why not charge NI on taxable interest on savings too?

 

[diy_fun_uk]

So 2% extra tax for the typical person who has a rental as a side line, but given a large proportion of LL are over 65, I wonder if they are planning to charge National Insurance for people who do not currently pay and why not charge NI on taxable interest on savings too?

They risk further stagnation of the economy. Apparently they are (or were) looking at some form of additional tax on house sales. As the talking head on Politics Live stated, all this risks doing is stagnating things e.g. some folk won't move out of larger homes if they don't absolutely have to if there are additional taxes to pay, meaning those needing to upsize have less options.

It's the same with private LLs. They seem hell-bent (like the Sh1te National Party up here) on forcing more and more out the game, meanwhile they still aren't building enough affordable housing to plug the gap this would leave. Nor can they get it through their thick skulls that some people actually want to private rent!

It seems Labour wants to tax its way to filling the fiscal black hole rather than growing the economy.

 

[Notch7]

If changing Council tax was that easy, it would have been done years ago - and the reason it hasn’t been done because it’ll upset too many of the electorate.

They just need to increase income tax by 1p in the pound, remove the upper limit for NI, remove the taper for the personal allowance above £100k, make the 40% tax point £80k, the 45% tax point £125k

And levy NI on all income INCLUDING pensioners above the personal allowance

That does seem a pretty sensible proposition.
I hate the way taxation is used as a tool for bribing voters, rather than a sensible tool to fairly raise revenue.


IF Labour had gone into the election campaign in 2024 and just said: “look public funds are in a right sh1t state, we are gonna have to increase taxes” would they have still won?


Labours pledge to not raise VAT, income tax Employees NI has made them spend the last year tying themselves in knots

 

[Murdochcat]

Labours pledge to not raise VAT, income tax Employees NI has made them spend the last year tying themselves in knots

Quite so and when Sunak accused Labour of increasing taxes, Starmer accused Sunak of lying.

Seems Sunak was right on the money

Everybody with half a brain or more knew what would happen and I simply hate the smoke and mirrors approach they ALL seem to want to try .........

 

[motorbiking]

They risk further stagnation of the economy. Apparently they are (or were) looking at some form of additional tax on house sales. As the talking head on Politics Live stated, all this risks doing is stagnating things e.g. some folk won't move out of larger homes if they don't absolutely have to if there are additional taxes to pay, meaning those needing to upsize have less options.

Boomer tax - your house went up in value and we want a cut.

It's the same with private LLs. They seem hell-bent (like the Sh1te National Party up here) on forcing more and more out the game, meanwhile they still aren't building enough affordable housing to plug the gap this would leave. Nor can they get it through their thick skulls that some people actually want to private rent!

2% on LL profits and guess what 2% on rents.

It seems Labour wants to tax its way to filling the fiscal black hole rather than growing the economy.

Or get small private landlords out of the sector. Most of whom provide a good service.

 

[diy_fun_uk]

Boomer tax - your house went up in value and we want a cut.

2% on LL profits and guess what 2% on rents.

Or get small private landlords out of the sector. Most of whom provide a good service.

This is kind of what Thornberry was alluding to. She said to the effect 'if people are making money by not doing anything, it should maybe be the case this is taxed as we do with earnings through work.'

She further asserted this is what other countries already do. tbh I can't be ar5ed fact checking this.

 

[Notch7]

Quite so and when Sunak accused Labour of increasing taxes, Starmer accused Sunak of lying.

Seems Sunak was right on the money

Everybody with half a brain or more knew what would happen and I simply hate the smoke and mirrors approach they ALL seem to want to try .........

Labour tried to say they would raise taxes because the right wing media would attack them relentlessly

In the same fashion Jeremy Hunt tried to call the Conservatives “the party of low tax” when he announced the NI cut - overlooking the £80b of stealth taxes Conservatives put in place since 2019


What would happen if a party said: “we are gonna have to put taxes up, it’s that or cut public services even more”

 

[Notch7]

Boomer tax - your house went up in value and we want a cut

A very sensible idea.

Somebody has got to come up with a way of making houses affordable for first time buyers.

2% on LL profits and guess what 2% on rents

Increasing tax for landlords is not a solution at all

Some idiots on the left….like Corbyn keep calling for a rent cap. That would create a market distortion that would crash the sector

 

[Brigadier]

Boomer tax - your house went up in value and we want a cut.

It is a crazy situation when one of the core essentials of life - a home - has been allowed (encouraged even) to become an investment.

What's worse, attractive in that its increase regularly outstrips that of other "vehicles", and is pretty stable to boot.

 

[festive]

Festive is aware that "wages" are, for most people, taxed, and "wealth," not.

Bear in mind that the poor are unlikely to own property, and will generally have zero or tiny pension funds.

The opposite is true of the rich.

In other news,


Download as PDF

1.Main points​

In the period April 2020 to March 2022:

• Median household wealth in Great Britain was £293,700.
• The wealthiest 10% of households had household wealth of £1,200,500 or more, while the least wealthy 10% had £16,500 or less.
• Median household wealth varied by region, with the largest difference seen between the South East (£489,800) and the North East (£179,900).
• Net property wealth made up the largest proportion of household wealth (40%), followed by private pension wealth (35%), while net financial wealth (14%) and physical wealth (10%) made up much smaller proportions.

There are so many misconceptions and assumptions here i don't know where to start.

Lets just say for example someone has worked hard all their life, and now have little to no pension at retirement. You think it's ok for the government as a reward for their lifelong dediction to not taking that holiday to not drink/smoke have those kids, work through their holiday enititement, not claim redundancy benefits when maybe out of work etc. Those people. You think they're fair game to have that 'wealth' ie money they've already been taxed on, now taken away from them for just being sensible and making good choices, possibly big sacrifices to not be a burden on society and more so, able to control their retirement with their own hard earned pot, their house to which they may sell, scale down and drawn some of that money for retirement?

If you think that's ok, we are worlds apart. I do not resent anyone being wealthy, apart from of course the gangsters and tyrants of this world. The rest arguably most have accumulated wealth by hard work and elements of sacrifice i mentioned above. No such thing as easy money in this world. Why should they give it up.

Remember also that top bracket you mention contribute most to the economy, without them, we are all screwed.

It's like being taxed on capital gains or passive income. You have invariably invested taxed earnings as opposed to spaffing it up the wall, and your reward is you have to give more of the money you already paid tax on to be retaxed again and given to people who invariably don't give a sh't and have just thrown in the towel to a benefit life. Its absurd.

For example, in my spare time i run something about giving back to the community, i wont give too much detail, but i do, i don't benefit hell it costs me but i do it. Arguably i should be given tax relief for being such a good citizen, imagine that, asking the taxman, for such a thing, he likely imply i was using it to avoid tax in some way, we are never given a break to just breathe, just a small break where you can earn your own money without having to give a large portion away. Yes thats right earn even more and you lose your allowance completely, how and who ever made up that rule? WHo approved it? I would guess somebody so 'rich' that would never affect them, they don't care.

 

[motorbiking]

It is a crazy situation when one of the core essentials of life - a home - has been allowed (encouraged even) to become an investment.

What's worse, attractive in that its increase regularly outstrips that of other "vehicles", and is pretty stable to boot.

People need growth in their homes as pensions and care home funds. Taxing these in new "innovative" ways will drive profits for Equity Release firms and increase the tax burden on future tax payers.

 

[Charlie George]

There are so many misconceptions and assumptions here i don't know where to start.

Lets just say for example someone has worked hard all their life, and now have little to no pension at retirement. You think it's ok for the government as a reward for their lifelong dediction to not taking that holiday to not drink/smoke have those kids, work through their holiday enititement, not claim redundancy benefits when maybe out of work etc. Those people. You think they're fair game to have that 'wealth' ie money they've already been taxed on, now taken away from them for just being sensible and making good choices, possibly big sacrifices to not be a burden on society and more so, able to control their retirement with their own hard earned pot, their house to which they may sell, scale down and drawn some of that money for retirement?

If you think that's ok, we are worlds apart. I do not resent anyone being wealthy, apart from of course the gangsters and tyrants of this world. The rest arguably most have accumulated wealth by hard work and elements of sacrifice i mentioned above. No such thing as easy money in this world. Why should they give it up.

Remember also that top bracket you mention contribute most to the economy, without them, we are all screwed.

It's like being taxed on capital gains or passive income. You have invariably invested taxed earnings as opposed to spaffing it up the wall, and your reward is you have to give more of the money you already paid tax on to be retaxed again and given to people who invariably don't give a sh't and have just thrown in the towel to a benefit life. Its absurd.

I know a few people just like this, cash poor and asset rich, one person i know well, drives an old banger never goes on holiday etc, mortgage just paid off at 62, now on min wage due to health issues, if he got a big bill now he would either have to sell up or get an equity loan, doesn't seem fair does it?
What happens if you rent? would you be liable or the landlord, and if landlord would that not just increase the rent, and what about social housing(if included), how much would they pay?

 

[motorbiking]

There are so many misconceptions and assumptions here i don't know where to start.

Lets just say for example someone has worked hard all their life, and now have little to no pension at retirement. You think it's ok for the government as a reward for their lifelong dediction to not taking that holiday to not drink/smoke have those kids, work through their holiday enititement, not claim redundancy benefits when maybe out of work etc. Those people. You think they're fair game to have that 'wealth' ie money they've already been taxed on, now taken away from them for just being sensible and making good choices, possibly big sacrifices to not be a burden on society and more so, able to control their retirement with their own hard earned pot, their house to which they may sell, scale down and drawn some of that money for retirement?

If you think that's ok, we are worlds apart. I do not resent anyone being wealthy, apart from of course the gangsters and tyrants of this world. The rest arguably most have accumulated wealth by hard work and elements of sacrifice i mentioned above. No such thing as easy money in this world. Why should they give it up.

Remember also that top bracket you mention contribute most to the economy, without them, we are all screwed.

It's like being taxed on capital gains or passive income. You have invariably invested taxed earnings as opposed to spaffing it up the wall, and your reward is you have to give more of the money you already paid tax on to be retaxed again and given to people who invariably don't give a sh't and have just thrown in the towel to a benefit life. Its absurd.

For example, in my spare time i run something about giving back to the community, i wont give too much detail, but i do, i don't benefit hell it costs me but i do it. Arguably i should be given tax relief for being such a good citizen, imagine that, asking the taxman, for such a thing, he likely imply i was using it to avoid tax in some way, we are never given a break to just breathe, just a small break where you can earn your own money without having to give a large portion away. Yes thats right earn even more and you lose your allowance completely, how and who ever made up that rule? WHo approved it? I would guess somebody so 'rich' that would never affect them, they don't care.

It boils down to asking others to pay more taxes to fund the services they benefit from, but have never paid sufficient tax to fund. It's human nature to want things for free.

 

[Brigadier]

People need growth in their homes as pensions and care home funds. Taxing these in new "innovative" ways will drive profits for Equity Release firms and increase the tax burden on future tax payers.

Chicken and egg.

The increasing value of houses hasn't solved a problem: it has contributed to it.


But, we are where we are.