Is it time for a wealth tax?

[JohnD]

Yes, lets ask the top 5% to pay even more than half of all income tax.

Top?

Do you mean "richest?"

I suppose if a group earns 50% of the money in the country, and owns 50% of the wealth, they could reasonably be expected to pay 50% of the tax. Or 60% and 60%. Or 70% and 70%. Don't you?

I wonder how much the richest tax-dodgers pay.

 

[motorbiking]

No. I think people should try to earn their potential and be incentivised to do so.

Where would we be if half of those 5% buggered off? You don't seem to value their contribution.

You seem to think anyone richer than you is a fat cat that needs to be fleeced.

 

[ajohn]

Yes, lets ask the top 5% to pay even more than half of all income tax.

Where do you draw your top 5% line ?

 

[motorbiking]

Where do you draw your top 5% line ?

Govt figures:

Analysis of Government figures published yesterday shows that for the first time the richest workers, estimated as those earning more than £75,300 a year, will pay just over 50 per cent of the income tax collected by the Treasury.

https://www.telegraph.co.uk/tax/income-tax/half-income-tax-paid-top-five-per-cent/

I could help anyone with Half a brain willing to work hard to that level of income - easy peasy.

 

[JohnD]

those earning more than £75,300 a year

And in your opinion, those are the richest 5% in the country?

How much income tax do you think Lord Harmsworth pays?

 

[motorbiking]

You have a habit of taking someone's words, asking if they mean something else and then saying they are wrong. Which bit don't you get?

The answer to this thread - is not to go for the top, who have the ability to reclassify their wealth, but to improve the capability of the 2nd and 3rd quartile.

Here you make a huge difference.

 

[JohnD]

It's interesting that you come to a thread about "wealth" and try to divert it to "taxable income."

You don't really believe that Income Tax is the same as Wealth Tax, do you.

 

[motorbiking]

I've already dismissed the wealth tax as flawed. It would not account for regional variations and would be easily dodged a bit like council tax accelerators on holiday homes.

You then moved on to justify why its right for the top 5% of earners to pay 50% or more, then you ignored alternatives to improve the income of those in the middle.

Most of this is about attitude to opportunity, not being born with a Silver spoon

 

[ajohn]

And in your opinion, those are the richest 5% in the country?

Based on PAE etc that figure is correct. This goes back to that bar chart I posted. 75k isn't there but take 50k as an example effective tax take is 20%, Go to 100k and it's 30%. 150k and it's 35%. There after it's more or less 40% except some how or the other reduces a bit at 2m.

At the other end of the scale some one at 20k pays 10% and 20b in tax, Paying zero tax would have a significant effect in living standards but the 20b would need shifting some where else as would the 5b from those at 15k a year.

As things stand up to 50k pays 112b over that 95b. Not surprising really, more people but is the difference a real incentive?

But that's income tax and takes no notice of the rest. The rest makes life more difficult for the poorly paid. Then comes renting. Cost of that is a return of the money invested. Best available of late. I haven't looked at changes in capital gains tax for years but at one point being a 2nd home owner is nothing like renting a property and probably still is.

Not that anything will ever be done about how things have finished up for a variety of reasons as tax increases aren't a good way of getting elected.

 

[JohnD]

I've already dismissed the wealth tax as flawed.

That might be your opinion, but you have not proven your point in relation to wealth.

You keep talking about taxable income, which is not the same thing.

If you want a thread about income tax, perhaps you should post on an existing one, or start your own.

 

[motorbiking]

ahhh, got it so you want everyone to post their ideas and opinions, so you can knock them down, demand evidence etc, without ever posting your ideas and evidence. If so why ask..
Is it time for a wealth tax?
Seems like a binary question to me.

Maybe have a think about a better question.

 

[JohnD]

ahhh, got it so you want everyone to post their ideas and opinions,

When you have something useful to say about Wealth Tax, please do.

This is not a thread about Income Tax, which you obsess over.

 

[ajohn]

How much income tax do you think Lord Harmsworth pays?

Those people are needed so it's a question of what they do with their money and all sorts of other sources as well. Is it used productively or not. It goes to the best return or may even sit some where doing nothing. The other aspect is distributing the wealth elsewhere could only be a one off and wouldn't make as much difference to an average joe long term at all.

Corporation tax take in the UK 18/19 was ~ 57b plus 2b off shore. 125b from VAT.

Then there are aspects like this one. Latest figures on tax takes from some of them would be interesting

https://weownit.org.uk/blog/waste-privatisation-we-cant-afford

Ok they have an axe to grind but some truth is there. Utilities are generally not UK owned so tax havens figure.

Then this one
https://www.theguardian.com/comment...public-ownership-uk-utilities-nationalisation

One way of viewing this lot is the general public's view of gov debt while not realising it's just being diverted and not directly apparent. It keeps the headline figures down but we are still paying it / have it.

 

[ajohn]

When you have something useful to say about Wealth Tax, please do.

Tell us what form the wealth tax should take John. Or anybody else.

 

[Notch7]

No. I think people should try to earn their potential and be incentivised to do so.

Where would we be if half of those 5% buggered off? You don't seem to value their contribution.

You seem to think anyone richer than you is a fat cat that needs to be fleeced.

there is a balance that needs to be struck between allowing ambitious people to make money and making it worth while to stay in the UK, versus having a society that supports the poor and vulnerable.

There is nuance in the debate around 'reducing inequality' -we should drive towards creating a better society by giving more opportunity to the poor, but not doing it by envy politics and wanting to take from the rich.