Tax Changes

[JohnD]

"Hunt to drop most of Kwarteng’s fiscal plans
Jim Pickard in London

Jeremy Hunt, in his first full day as UK chancellor, confirmed on that he will drop most of the tax measures in the disastrous fiscal statement of September 23 — apart from a £13bn cut to national insurance and £1.5bn in stamp duty changes.

Corporation tax will now rise from 19p to 25p and a cut to the lower rate of income tax of 1 percentage point April will be delayed.

The government will reverse plans to cut dividend taxes, make payroll reform, a freeze in alcohol duty and introduce a VAT-free shopping scheme for overseas visitors.

“We will reverse almost all the tax measures that were in the growth plan,” he said on Monday in a televised address. “At a time when markets are rightly demanding a commitment to sustainable finances it is not right to borrow to fund this.”

Subscribe to read | Financial Times

News, analysis and comment from the Financial Times, the worldʼs leading global business publication

www.ft.com

 

[Mottie]

And do you agree with this?

 

[JohnD]

Do you?

It does have the advantage that the next government will have less work to do in rolling back the damage done by Johnson and Truss.

 

[Ihavenojob]

And do you agree with this?

That is very naive of you to expect an answer from King Troll.

 

[Pat ex]

So Truss criticises Labour's proposal of support for energy prices for only 6 months, trumpeting the 2 years support proposed by Kwasi Kwarteng.
And one of the first things that Jeremey Hunt does, is to adopt Labour's plans for energy support.
You couldn't make it up!

 

[JohnD]

Do you?

Expecting a reply from mottie?

 

[carmanmemoranda]

And do you agree with this?

do you consider this good news? That recent thread of yours?

for it to be good newsnow, means it wasn't when announced originally

 

[Odds]

As Inflation reaches 10% the Tories had better find a rabbit in the pot or this winter will bring more than just discontent.

 

[Mottie]

Do you?

Expecting a reply from mottie?

Yes, better news that option one. There are only two options on offer. Asking someone which they prefer of the two should be a simple question. Instead, I’m getting swervy "I pick option no Tories" option, so have another go. Which of the two do you think is best (or least damaging if you like) for the country? Remember, you only have budget one and budget two to choose from. You can’t add a budget of your own. No swerving, no going off track, no asking further questions, no saying 'neither', just a simple one or two. Try it, if you can.

 

[Pat ex]

Which of the two do you think is best (or least damaging if you like) for the country? Remember, you only have budget one and budget two to choose from. You can’t add a budget of your own. No swerving, no going off track, no asking further questions, no saying 'neither', just a simple one or two. Try it, if you can.

More ridiculous options.
Pick what you want to eat:
1. Horse sh!t
2. Cow sh!t.
No swerving now, choose one of the options.

Do you understand how ridiculously childish your strategy is?

 

[Mottie]

More ridiculous options.
Pick what you want to eat:
1. Horse sh!t
2. Cow sh!t.
No swerving now, choose one of the options.

Do you understand how ridiculously childish your strategy is?

Not really. You give two options. I have to pick one so I wouldn’t expect someone to say "We shouldn’t have horses or cows sh!tting."

 

[Pat ex]

Not really. You give two options. I have to pick one so I wouldn’t expect someone to say "We shouldn’t have horses or cows sh!tting."

Swerve almighty.
Choose one of the other.

 

[Mottie]

Horse sh!t. Your turn to answer my question now.

 

[Pat ex]

Horse sh!t. Your turn to answer my question now.

Nah, the example was an illustration of how childish your strategy was.

Apart from that your 'options' were based on your false premise:
You initially claimed that we were moaning about option 1, and we're still moaning about option 2. I demonstrated how that was a false premise.
You based your question on that false premise.

 

[Mottie]

Nah, the example was an illustration of how childish your strategy was.

Apart from that your 'options' were based on your false premise:
You initially claimed that we were moaning about option 1, and we're still moaning about option 2. I demonstrated how that was a false premise.
You based your question on that false premise.

So, a swerve from you and silence from JD. Strange how many on here demand an answer from me but swerve/avoid/ignore a question from me. You, JD and ellal spring to mind. Birds if a feather and all that….