Tax cuts for the rich, hurrah!

[fillyboy]

No it wasn't. It was a decision due to risk taking and some famous results.

Yes it was.

Bankers' bonuses - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

On 26 June 2013, the European Parliament and Council of the European Union passed the "EU banker bonus cap",[7][8] which took effect on 1 January 2014.[9] In December 2013, the European Banking Authority issued a final draft regulation to determine who a "material risk taker" is, which was expected to take effect in the first half of 2014.[10] In September 2013, the United Kingdom sued over the cap.[11]

On February 25, 2014, the EU's two legislative bodies, the European Parliament and the European Council, agreed to restrict retail asset managers' bonuses. The agreed upon Directive would restrict the form of bonuses requiring at least 50% of bonus amounts to be paid in shares of the fund under management, and at least 40% of bonus amounts must be deferred for three years.[12]

On 20 November 2014, the Advocate General of the European Court of Justice (ECJ), Niilo Jääskinen, published his legal opinion that the EU cap was legitimate. Although the Advocate General's advice is not binding, the ECJ almost invariably follows it. The UK government subsequently announced that it was withdrawing its legal challenge to the cap. The Chancellor of the Exchequer, George Osborne, said in a statement: "I'm not going to spend taxpayers' money on a legal challenge now unlikely to succeed. The fact remains these are badly designed rules that are pushing up bankers' pay not reducing it. These rules may be legal but they are entirely self-defeating, so we need to find another way to end rewards for failure in our banks".[13]

In March 2015, guidelines were proposed by the European Banking Authority (EBA) that increased the range of applications for the EU bonus cap. For banks the guidance removed the ability to use certain allowances that regulators believed were being used to circumvent the cap. The guidelines are due to come into force on January 1 2016. The guidance advised that they should be applied to compensation for the 2016 performance year.[14]

 

[fillyboy]

What F****** stupid announcement today - can't call it a Budget or even a spending spree.
I'd have been happier to see a small increase in personal tax, a windfall tax to energy companies and a sensible increase in benefits. IMHO all today will do is put us all into more debt; the country today, the people on change of government.

It's s**t or bust time basically, growth is the only thing that will pull us out of the quagmire, they've torn up the conventional rule book and thrown everything including the kitchen sink at achieving it, it's very brave, or very stupid.
Anyway, there's an election in two years time, if it doesn't work out JohnD's lot will get in, the poor will be rich and rich will be strung up from lamp posts.

 

[JohnD]

rich will be strung up from lamp posts.

Nonsense.

 

[Nige F]

To quote M. Thatcher.......Just rejoice and be thankful ( and buy your house )

 

[Mottie]

And, as you see, the person earning ten times as much gains, not ten times as much, but more than twenty times as much.

That’s the whole point of getting a well paid job, isn’t it?

 

[Ihavenojob]

nd, as you see, the person earning ten times as much gains, not ten times as much, but more than twenty times as much.

How much more tax does the higher earner pay, twice as much? three times as much?
Take home pay after tax and NI on £200,000 is £114,822
Take home pay after tax and NI on £20,000 is £17,173

 

[JohnD]

Take home pay after tax and NI on £200,000 is £114,822
Take home pay after tax and NI on £20,000 is £17,173

And which would you rather have?

 

[Ihavenojob]

And which would you rather have?

The best paid job, though I would feel cheated having to pay such a large percentage as opposed to lower paid, rather unfair. Though I could always get a lower paid job and bleat about it, but at least it would be a job with an income.

 

[Dork Lard]

As a high net worth individual my accountant tells me I've done quite well today.

Even though I'm not a mouth breathing, interbred, neanderthal with a mono brow & have more than a rudimentary understanding of economics , I still fail to understand how removing the cap on a bankers bonus will trickle down into the lower rungs of folk who will still face the choice of heat or eat this winter.

 

[ellal]

600,000 people will apparently get on average a 'windfall' of £10k...

It'll cost billions a year...

But to put that into perspective many millions of people can no longer access dental care...

To revert back to 2010 levels would cost about £850 million a year...

So lets keep the majority suffering in order to reward the few

The corrupt tories don't even bother hiding their hatred of that majority anymore...

What we're heading for is probably a period of serious social unrest.

Which might not be a bad thing in the long run!

 

[Bod ...]

This has amazed me. Give to the rich and they will save it have foreign holidays and foreign investment. Give the the less we'll off and the pensioners and they will spend creating a money go round.

I do understand the theory of attracting wealth but I can't see it trickling down enough to improve the lives of the poorer paid.

It's crap .... Liz is going to lose me if this don't work.

 

[ajohn]

The budget was always going to be about growth

The last fiscal event of this size was followed by the 70's inflation levels.

The tax cuts don't cover inflation for lots of people and other factors are likely to wipe them out for all fairly soon.

The BofE reckons we are in a recession. Our blue folder carrying man reckons it's a technical one. There is no way they will mislead the financial sector eg our amazing post covid recovery rate post worst of covid. It missed an important factor.

The bankers cap. A city man reckons it's hoped to bring back business from the US that has been lost. Also mentioned that the sector pays 10% of taxes.

Best hope maybe is economic zones. Used before and can result in business moving rather than bringing in more.Here we are - higher power costs and inflation than others. If there were loads moving in it would probable lead to worker shortages in some areas = wage increases.

LOL Sunak has left them some scope for more debt. The IFS reckons that if things go wrong we could finish up in a debt trap we can't afford to get out of. The level of debt does depend on prices.

Interesting comment about the domestic fuel cap. It's £500 higher than some might expect. Sunak's idea - not sure how that relates but could be the reason.

Some don't see any real trickle down due to the tax cut amounts in total

A word that is being used - along with a certain lady's style however she had other features in her policies.

Reaganomics: Definition, Policies, and Impact

Reaganomics is a popular term referring to the economic policies of President Ronald Reagan that impacted government spending, regulation, and taxes.

www.investopedia.com

 

[ajohn]

Yes it was.

You don't think the UK agreed with it then? Actually I believe the bankers did too - nice pay rise and less risk.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

It's s**t or bust time basically, growth is the only thing that will pull us out of the quagmire, they've torn up the conventional rule book and thrown everything including the kitchen sink at achieving it, it's very brave, or very stupid.
Anyway, there's an election in two years time, if it doesn't work out JohnD's lot will get in, the poor will be rich and rich will be strung up from lamp posts.

if it's the right thing to do, why didn't Boris do it ? Was he right and Truss is wrong, or vice versa ? It's not the Party policy it's an individual's policy. Or rather a big promise to get the big job with.

the Tories have got nobody else to blame, but a severe change of direction means the previous lot were wrong. Or this is wrong.

we were paying for his mess, we are now in danger of paying for her mess.

pity the markets don't like the move. That usually indicates if it is considered he right move or not.

time will tell.

 

[carmanmemoranda]

That’s the whole point of getting a well paid job, isn’t it?

Can everybody have a well paid job? Or to get one do you have to make money from the backs of the lower paid ?