Taxing the super rich

[CharliesRightPeg]

The top 1% of earners pay 28% of all income tax.
The top 10% pay nearly 60%.
The top half pay about 90%.
So the bottom half pay just 10%.
The top 1% pays the same in total as the bottom 85%.

Not sure what the figures are for overall taxes but the super rich certainly pay a good proportion of the overall income tax take.

Yes but when the super rich receive more income than the bottom 50%
Also if that tax was paid at the right rate and it would more than double

 

[Henkeman]

There's a certain kind of person who isn't thinking about how to maximise the tax take, or what is fair - they just want to punish those who have been more successful than them. Thus, even if someone is paying hundreds of millions in tax, it isn't enough. That they're paying more tax in a year than the moaner earns in their life doesn't matter, it isn't enough.

They don't deserve their success, they didn't work hard for it, and if only things had been slightly different for the moaner, then they too coulda been a big spender. It really isn't fair, they must be punished mercilessly, until they earn the same as the moaner. That it isn't possible is beside the point.

Oh and I'm surprised the idea of a tax on sales instead of profits has come up. It's the stupidest idea there is. Start up businesses would collapse after a year, no one would take on staff. It's crackers. Tax on profits is the only way.

 

[Chippy_boy]

There's a certain kind of person who isn't thinking about how to maximise the tax take, or what is fair - they just want to punish those who have been more successful than them. Thus, even if someone is paying hundreds of millions in tax, it isn't enough. That they're paying more tax in a year than the moaner earns in their life doesn't matter, it isn't enough.

They don't deserve their success, they didn't work hard for it, and if only things had been slightly different for the moaner, then they too coulda been a big spender. It really isn't fair, they must be punished mercilessly, until they earn the same as the moaner. That it isn't possible is beside the point.

Oh and I'm surprised the idea of a tax on sales instead of profits has come up. It's the stupidest idea there is. Start up businesses would collapse after a year, no one would take on staff. It's crackers. Tax on profits is the only way.

Spot on.

I am not a high earner by any means, although I am fortunate (at the moment, in fact I was out of work for 18 months previously) to have a well-paid job. But what I am not is bitter and resentful of those earning hundreds of thousands or even millions a year. Fair play to them, and good luck.

Of course they should pay a reasonable amount of tax and the vast majority of them do. There's no excuse for tax evasion. But the idea that we should simply tax them endlessly more and more to pay for stuff for "other people" is (a) morally unjustified and (b) doesn't work anyway - raising the rates too high becomes counter-productive as people then work harder to avoid paying it. Reasonable rates (like 45%) have a better collection rate.

 

[Henkeman]

Spot on.

I am not a high earner by any means, although I am fortunate (at the moment, in fact I was out of work for 18 months previously) to have a well-paid job. But what I am not is bitter and resentful of those earning hundreds of thousands or even millions a year. Fair play to them, and good luck.

Of course they should pay a reasonable amount of tax and the vast majority of them do. There's no excuse for tax evasion. But the idea that we should simply tax them endlessly more and more to pay for stuff for "other people" is (a) morally unjustified and (b) doesn't work anyway - raising the rates too high becomes counter-productive as people then work harder to avoid paying it. Reasonable rates (like 45%) have a better collection rate.

I'm going through the process of setting up an additional business which should be a great opportunity. If it goes well, I will make a lot of money. And I will then pay a lot of tax, and I'll create some jobs for people who will then earn decent money and pay a fair bit of tax as well.

Those who want punitive rates of tax would mean I wouldn't bother, jobs wouldn't get created and all that tax I will generate won't get paid. We can all be poor together. Happy now? The idiots.

 

[Chippy_boy]

Those who want punitive rates of tax would mean I wouldn't bother, jobs wouldn't get created and all that tax I will generate won't get paid. We can all be poor together. Happy now? The idiots.

It's one of the most unpleasant aspects of the psyche of rather too many people in the UK, this bitterness and resentment and desire for other people to suffer, rather than for everyone to do better. Of course it's not a universal trait, but I think it is more prevalent in the UK than for example in the US where success is admired and you're more likely to have nice comments about your Porsche, as opposed to a key being run down the side of it.

 

[KS55]

Well under the current system, she'd pay £120m in tax per year.

Are you SERIOUSLY suggesting that is not enough?

Not suggesting anything at all, mate. Was just interested in what ppl thought, in the light of a poss Labour gov soon. Most on here seem to be against higher taxes, but increased fairness in the tax code, making avoidance more difficult. Generally I would agree with that, but it is interesting to note that the Laffer curve was not apparent recently. When the top rate was reduced to 45%, gov expected increased tax take, but it actually went down suggesting that 50% is acceptable to most.
Final point, nobody mentioned Stoke City and their filthy oil, sorry betting, money!

 

[Bert Trautmanns Helemet]

I'm going through the process of setting up an additional business which should be a great opportunity. If it goes well, I will make a lot of money. And I will then pay a lot of tax, and I'll create some jobs for people who will then earn decent money and pay a fair bit of tax as well.

Those who want punitive rates of tax would mean I wouldn't bother, jobs wouldn't get created and all that tax I will generate won't get paid. We can all be poor together. Happy now? The idiots.

It's the politics of envy. Classic left wing thinking. To punish the successful is good and the right thing to do.

 

[Henkeman]

Not suggesting anything at all, mate. Was just interested in what ppl thought, in the light of a poss Labour gov soon. Most on here seem to be against higher taxes, but increased fairness in the tax code, making avoidance more difficult. Generally I would agree with that, but it is interesting to note that the Laffer curve was not apparent recently. When the top rate was reduced to 45%, gov expected increased tax take, but it actually went down suggesting that 50% is acceptable to most.
Final point, nobody mentioned Stoke City and their filthy oil, sorry betting, money!

That's not quite true, they were suggesting it wouldn't make much difference to the tax take. The various studies done indicate there's very little difference overall, but trying to find these things out is exceptionally difficult, because tax tends to go up in a recession and down in a boom, which skews the relative studies - i.e. you'd expect the tax take to rise in a boom irrespective of moving it up or down a few points, and fall in a recession.

In that particular instance, the Treasury notably said they were "surfing the Laffer Curve" implying it was pretty much the optimal level to maximise revenue.

 

[west didsblue]

It's one of the most unpleasant aspects of the psyche of rather too many people in the UK, this bitterness and resentment and desire for other people to suffer, rather than for everyone to do better. Of course it's not a universal trait, but I think it is more prevalent in the UK than for example in the US where success is admired and you're more likely to have nice comments about your Porsche, as opposed to a key being run down the side of it.

Not sure I agree. Trump got voted in by the people you describe.

 

[KS55]

In that particular instance, the Treasury notably said they were "surfing the Laffer Curve" implying it was pretty much the optimal level to maximise revenue.

Well, they would, wouldn't they? But thanks for your clarification.