NI and dividend tax set to rise.

[JackFish]

You’ll have to ask someone who thinks like a Tory.

Don't have to think like a Tory, just do a bit of Googling, the issue seems to be that there ways to avoid inheritance tax; family trusts, transfer of assets to family members, setting up of different legal entities such as companies to protect assets etc. These are all run of the mill processes that are difficult to legislate against as you can't stop companies being established and people investing in them for example. Taxes on earnings are the easiest and most secure way for any government to increase income.

Which is fine, but they could have increased the higher tax limit by 1% instead. That risks pissing off their voters though I suppose.

 

[exiledclaseboy]

You’ll have to ask someone who thinks like a Tory.

Don't have to think like a Tory, just do a bit of Googling, the issue seems to be that there ways to avoid inheritance tax; family trusts, transfer of assets to family members, setting up of different legal entities such as companies to protect assets etc. These are all run of the mill processes that are difficult to legislate against as you can't stop companies being established and people investing in them for example. Taxes on earnings are the easiest and most secure way for any government to increase income.

That would be super if the question had been “how to avoid inheritance tax”.

 

[Longlostjack]

An extra 2% annual charge on all domestic properties valued at over £750,000 with the money ring-fenced for NHS and Social Care. That would have helped to level up Britain Boris.

 

[Jackmanandboy]

Don't have to think like a Tory, just do a bit of Googling, the issue seems to be that there ways to avoid inheritance tax; family trusts, transfer of assets to family members, setting up of different legal entities such as companies to protect assets etc. These are all run of the mill processes that are difficult to legislate against as you can't stop companies being established and people investing in them for example. Taxes on earnings are the easiest and most secure way for any government to increase income.

That would be super if the question had been “how to avoid inheritance tax”.

Let me join the dots, why not use inheritance tax to fund the NHS was the question, the answer is that it can be avoided, albeit at a cost, the higher inheritance tax goes the more attractive the avoidance options are. The avoidance options are difficult to legislate for because they are everyday financial instruments in some cases.

 

[Itchysphincter]

You’ll have to ask someone who thinks like a Tory.

Don't have to think like a Tory, just do a bit of Googling, the issue seems to be that there ways to avoid inheritance tax; family trusts, transfer of assets to family members, setting up of different legal entities such as companies to protect assets etc. These are all run of the mill processes that are difficult to legislate against as you can't stop companies being established and people investing in them for example. Taxes on earnings are the easiest and most secure way for any government to increase income.

Agreed, but the highest earners are always let off the hook under this administration. We are a nation of turkeys voting for Christmas.

 

[Itchysphincter]

Don't have to think like a Tory, just do a bit of Googling, the issue seems to be that there ways to avoid inheritance tax; family trusts, transfer of assets to family members, setting up of different legal entities such as companies to protect assets etc. These are all run of the mill processes that are difficult to legislate against as you can't stop companies being established and people investing in them for example. Taxes on earnings are the easiest and most secure way for any government to increase income.

Which is fine, but they could have increased the higher tax limit by 1% instead. That risks pissing off their voters though I suppose.

Not necessarily. There is a jump from low earnings to high earnings, where high earnings isn’t that high. It should be tiered more constructively with different rates applied. The tax free allowance should be raised and the higher tax bracket could become medium bracket and for every extra 20,000 over that there could be other brackets attracting an extra 1 or 2 percent. It would make a huge difference the pot with little noticeable difference in the pocket.

Corporation tax is a key one - companies should be subject to tax rules in the countries they trade in, not the countries they’re registered in. Brexit is all about deregulation and cronyism - it’s pay dirt for mega corporations, tax avoidance and money laundering. People are voting for a government that wilfully hurts them.

 

[Professor]

Which is fine, but they could have increased the higher tax limit by 1% instead. That risks pissing off their voters though I suppose.

Not necessarily. There is a jump from low earnings to high earnings, where high earnings isn’t that high. It should be tiered more constructively with different rates applied. The tax free allowance should be raised and the higher tax bracket could become medium bracket and for every extra 20,000 over that there could be other brackets attracting an extra 1 or 2 percent. It would make a huge difference the pot with little noticeable difference in the pocket.

Corporation tax is a key one - companies should be subject to tax rules in the countries they trade in, not the countries they’re registered in. Brexit is all about deregulation and cronyism - it’s pay dirt for mega corporations, tax avoidance and money laundering. People are voting for a government that wilfully hurts them.

There will be an argument that multiple brackets make things complicated. It would be fairer, though for example, to have a single threshold of £10k, 10% tax below 20K, 20% on income 20-30k, 30% on income above 40K, 40% above 60K with 50% above 80K. Should remove the need for separate NI. The problem is, as JACKMANANDBOY suggests, is that there are so many loopholes. I live in an affluent area and there are plenty of ads in local rags and signs about for services related to tax avoidance. With NI removal and nor considering a person contribution someone earring 200K a year would still be on a 'take home' of close to 120K. Greed is big driver.

The use of NI is broadly unfair on the low waged and self-employed. Little cost to the mega-rich.

 

[KrunchyKarrot]

The way i see it is that we are just throwing another 12billion into a black hole, our lovely cherished NHS is not fit for purpose. I have recently had elderly relatives in Neath and Singleton, it is an absolute shambles I could expand but what is the point.

We are going to spend more on our useless NHS system than we take in income tax in a year, just think about that for a minute its mind blowing.

After waiting 20yrs for reform on social care all that Boris and co have come up with is a hike in NI. Where is the cost and benefit breakdown, and if we are paying executives nearly 300K which is more than the PM why are the not held accountable?

 

[Best_loser]

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2021/sep/08/gavin-williamson-apparently-confuses-marcus-rashford-and-maro-itoje

Next job for gav, minister for sport

 

[Professor]

The way i see it is that we are just throwing another 12billion into a black hole, our lovely cherished NHS is not fit for purpose. I have recently had elderly relatives in Neath and Singleton, it is an absolute shambles I could expand but what is the point.

We are going to spend more on our useless NHS system than we take in income tax in a year, just think about that for a minute its mind blowing.

After waiting 20yrs for reform on social care all that Boris and co have come up with is a hike in NI. Where is the cost and benefit breakdown, and if we are paying executives nearly 300K which is more than the PM why are the not held accountable?

Having worked in the NHS (as did my wife for many years), then there needs to be an intelligent discussion on the way forward in terms of structure and funding. Health Insurance is seen as a 'dirty word", and certainly in the US system where everything is 'for profit' leads to huge disparity in care. But statutory insurance systems can work when primarily in the public sector, offer a level of cover similar or indeed better than the UK system. This is how Germany and to an extent other Northern European countries work, where hospitals are 'not for profit' institutions, but run more efficiently than ours with top heavy management. Generally they are run by clinical directors with support, not managers or CEOs on inflated salaries. Insurance and tax is more in Germany, but they have services and social care more fit for purpose, better transport and much better state pensions. Better life quality and less of a richoor divide

 

[Pegojack]

This is a quintessential Boris Johnson solution to a massive national problem, in that it is both totally ineffective and grossly unjust.

The best decision I ever made was to move permanently to Spain in 2018. I watch on with great sadness as the Tories take my former home country right down the sh*tter. Are the British people ever going to wake up and smell the coffee? How's that Brexit going?

 

[KrunchyKarrot]

The way i see it is that we are just throwing another 12billion into a black hole, our lovely cherished NHS is not fit for purpose. I have recently had elderly relatives in Neath and Singleton, it is an absolute shambles I could expand but what is the point.

We are going to spend more on our useless NHS system than we take in income tax in a year, just think about that for a minute its mind blowing.

After waiting 20yrs for reform on social care all that Boris and co have come up with is a hike in NI. Where is the cost and benefit breakdown, and if we are paying executives nearly 300K which is more than the PM why are the not held accountable?

Having worked in the NHS (as did my wife for many years), then there needs to be an intelligent discussion on the way forward in terms of structure and funding. Health Insurance is seen as a 'dirty word", and certainly in the US system where everything is 'for profit' leads to huge disparity in care. But statutory insurance systems can work when primarily in the public sector, offer a level of cover similar or indeed better than the UK system. This is how Germany and to an extent other Northern European countries work, where hospitals are 'not for profit' institutions, but run more efficiently than ours with top heavy management. Generally they are run by clinical directors with support, not managers or CEOs on inflated salaries. Insurance and tax is more in Germany, but they have services and social care more fit for purpose, better transport and much better state pensions. Better life quality and less of a richoor divide

Couldnt agree more, but will politicians have the gonads to restructure our failing system which is regarded by many as sacrosanct. Drakeford is in an ideal position in Wales to reform and modernise set practices, instead we are going backwards faster with only Wee Burnie keeping us off the bottom. Heard a quote a while back now which went along the lines off " if our NHS is so wonderful why isnt it copied around the world"

My 90yr old Father is very poorly at the moment and we are waiting on biopsy results for over 2 weeks. In that time they have literally thrown him out of the ward as thet were worried about covid. He then collapsed and we had to take him back in, not by ambulance as that would have taked 6-7 hours????????????????????

 

[Longlostjack]

The way i see it is that we are just throwing another 12billion into a black hole, our lovely cherished NHS is not fit for purpose. I have recently had elderly relatives in Neath and Singleton, it is an absolute shambles I could expand but what is the point.

We are going to spend more on our useless NHS system than we take in income tax in a year, just think about that for a minute its mind blowing.

After waiting 20yrs for reform on social care all that Boris and co have come up with is a hike in NI. Where is the cost and benefit breakdown, and if we are paying executives nearly 300K which is more than the PM why are the not held accountable?

Having worked in the NHS (as did my wife for many years), then there needs to be an intelligent discussion on the way forward in terms of structure and funding. Health Insurance is seen as a 'dirty word", and certainly in the US system where everything is 'for profit' leads to huge disparity in care. But statutory insurance systems can work when primarily in the public sector, offer a level of cover similar or indeed better than the UK system. This is how Germany and to an extent other Northern European countries work, where hospitals are 'not for profit' institutions, but run more efficiently than ours with top heavy management. Generally they are run by clinical directors with support, not managers or CEOs on inflated salaries. Insurance and tax is more in Germany, but they have services and social care more fit for purpose, better transport and much better state pensions. Better life quality and less of a richoor divide

I’d agree with all of that Professor with the exception of the State Pension. It’s badly in need of reform. They are currently looking at the Swedish model of the State administering a capital fund that invests in shares. Previous legislation has been all about keeping the insurance lobby happy.

 

[J_B]

The NHS needs to be taken out of politics and the inevitable short termism that results.
We need an adult debate about what the country can and can't afford and then a long term plan which governments of any colour adhere to. Spending will have a floor and be higher depending on the state of the economy. The plan should be drawn up by health professionals, patient representatives and politicians.

Yes, I live on fantasy Island. I would do similar for education as well which also suffers from governments only interested in the next five years at most and not at all interested in the long term.

 

[monmouth]

The NHS needs to be taken out of politics and the inevitable short termism that results.
We need an adult debate about what the country can and can't afford and then a long term plan which governments of any colour adhere to. Spending will have a floor and be higher depending on the state of the economy. The plan should be drawn up by health professionals, patient representatives and politicians.

Yes, I live on fantasy Island. I would do similar for education as well which also suffers from governments only interested in the next five years at most and not at all interested in the long term.

What happened with COVID and before that the financial crash, plus all the ridiculous wars that Britain should have had no part in, shows that there was indeed a magic money tree and we could have had any education and health system we wanted. The fact we haven’t says everything about the priorities of politicians. The last 10 years con of austerity was the icing on the cake.