Tax reform?

The Laffer curve is a theory. There was no evidence behind it.
Not true, from what I've seen. It was demonstrated on that napkin. It's working out on the non doms too, we're told.
Increase income tax to 99% , people don't declare it or don't work at all, or go abroad, etc. You get less money in.

We found the same with Supertax back in the day.
 
Last edited:
An aside - the plumber's and sparks are rejoicing in the US. They'll be starting to get tips routinely, up to $25k tax free.
It's not meant to be those workers and it's all supposed to be declared, but we know what'll happen
Tips in the US are ridiculous already.
They take it v. seriously.

 
Look up the LAFFER CURVE.
It's not a myth put about by the rich.
The only ones Laffing are the people making up this tax legislation, i would assume, the intention being, its never going to affect them.

Before we add any more Tax or changes we should have an independant oversight body:

Lets call it the "Independent Tax Oversight Commission" (ITOC)
It would be a statutory body to review HMRC policy/enforcement for fairness & proportionality.

What would it cover?

Mandatory Fairness Impact Assessments
All major tax changes must be assessed for equality, and proportionality before rollout.

Stronger Appeals & Complaints
Tax Tribunal resourced for faster cases.

Adjudicator given binding powers, not just recommendations.
Transparency & Reporting, too many times we see little to no resolve on enquiries in the favour of the tax payer, lets actually make these reports impartial and independant.

Publish quarterly enforcement stats (appeals upheld, overturned, compensation).
Public-facing “Tax Enforcement Dashboard, with an API where we can all review and monitor trends and data.

Cultural & Governance Reform
HMRC KPIs to balance fairness, service, and compliance — not only revenue.
Stronger whistleblower protections.
Enhanced Parliamentary Oversight

Standing Committee on Tax Fairness with power to review ITOC findings and call HMRC execs to answer to any complaints and obey recommendations from ITOC.
 
I can see why you think others should pay more.
I can see why you hope to continue getting an easy ride.

I have no objection to people like myself paying more.

Tax is the price of the admission ticket to live in a civilised society.
 
I'm suggesting you don't understand the information you think you have.

I am happy to go through the arithmetic, using your figures, and you can point out the misunderstanding.

The other day you presented your formula, where you claimed that 2.6% of each individual's income tax and NI went to helping asylum seekers.

You later claimed that this meant £5k of your income tax and NI went to asylum seekers.

Which means that 2.6% of your total income tax and NI is £5k. This means your total income tax and NI is about £190K.

Today you claimed that you pay 44% in tax and NI.

Which means that your income is £432k.
 
I can see why you hope to continue getting an easy ride.

I have no objection to people like myself paying more.

Tax is the price of the admission ticket to live in a civilised society.
You talk of an admission ticket...

Would you go to a concert and expect your admission ticket that cost £20 to give you the same view as a £200 one?
Or perhaps a you want to stay at a hotel and expect your £100 a night budget to get you the penthouse suite.

Of course we all want a penthouse for £100
 
The Laffer curve is a theory. There was no evidence behind it.
There are only two points on the curve that can reasonably be supposed to be correct.

Nobody knows the shape of the curve.

So it's not actually much use.
 
You later claimed that this meant £5k of your income tax and NI went to asylum seekers.

Which means that 2.6% of your total income tax and NI is £5k. This means your total income tax and NI is about £190K.
this is incorrect.
 
Would you go to a concert and expect your admission ticket that cost £20 to give you the same view as a £200 one?

If my house was on fire, and the fire service was funded by the public out of taxation, I would expect the fire service to help me. I would not expect them to provide less help to my neighbour who pays less tax.

If my neighbour was murdered, I would expect a publicly funded police force to make an effort to hunt down his killer.

That's a civilised society.

An unfamiliar concept to you, obviously.
 
If my house was on fire, and the fire service was funded by the public out of taxation, I would expect the fire service to help me. I would not expect them to provide less help to my neighbour who pays less tax.

If my neighbour was murdered, I would expect a publicly funded police force to make an effort to hunt down his killer.

That's a civilised society.

An unfamiliar concept to you, obviously.
Are you happy with a service that is good enough most of the time or do you want the very best service that other people's money can buy?
 
No, it's arithmetic.

You shouldn't boast about these things if you don't want people to use the figures.

Just tell me which figure is wrong. The £5k or the 2.6%. Both provided by you.
Go back and look at the post where you think I said £5k and then come back and apologise.
 
It matters not how they fiddle it. 44% is just a pipe dream. Some of those millionaires only pay themselves £12k per year "wages" .
Is that what you do? I don't know anyone who pretends to pay themselves below minimum wage and gets away with the rest in dividends and capital
 
Back
Top