Re: General Election 2010
 

No it's not. Tax avoidance is illegal, tax planning is not. :D

Savings (except tax free ones which are limited) attract direct taxation removed at source by your bank. If you self assess, you have to declare this so they can take some more.

As for direct vs indirect taxation, if this kind of study is what you are referring to then yes the bottom 10% pay more, but the other 90% are nicely graded which shows the system works in general. Note that the bottom 10% are not in full time employment as the average earnings are below NMW.

So do you advocate a flat taxation system?

Edit: I can think of a number of reasons why the bottom decile could be misleading. The study (warning: left wing focus group) uses original income (salary, pension, investment income etc). If you live off capital, you can have a very low income by this measure, but a very high spending power. Not saying this is the whole story, but should be factored in.

Re: General Election 2010
 

:lol: If I had a pound for every time I heard that at my work, I'd be the one having to plan around the tax with my money.

Just looking about online, who is it that is offering £11,500 Tax free allowance and 31% flat rate tax and NI?

Re: General Election 2010
 

Other than tax-free savings (e.g. pensions), savings are made net of tax, i.e. from disposable income. It is the interest on those savings which is taxed at source.

My point is that you have to have spare disposable income in order to be able to save this way. Lower income group hardly save anything at all because they have to spend their money on normal living expenses. Most of these expenses are subject to indirect taxation.

Re: General Election 2010
 

No, of course not :rolleyes:

What I am saying is that the more direct taxation of income, suitably graded according to income, the less need for indirect taxation. This would be fairer.

I'm not saying "no indirect taxation", though, e.g. taxing ciggies to fund the NHS would get my vote. As would hypothcating certain taxation income.

Re: General Election 2010
 

Ah, I misunderstood your original post.

Why not - everybody pays x% on all "deemed income" and no indirect taxation. Everybody pays the same percentage - seems fair to me.

It only fails when the government try to use indirect taxation to control public habits - fuel usage, smoking, drinking.

Re: General Election 2010
 

Because I believe that higher income groups should pay more tax.

Re: General Election 2010
 

Sorry Jabba, must disagree.

Everyone should have a livable tax free allowance, say £15,000 after that charge everyone a single flat rate of 50%. allowances transferable between partners

chances are most households with a couple of kids would pay no tax, rich pay, middle income pays about what they currently pay

Re: General Election 2010
 

Paying more gross is not a problem, paying vastly more as a percentage of income is (to me). Everybody works hard for their money, and I find it strange that people assume those on higher income should pay a high rate just because they earn more.

If the system becomes too skewed, as I said in an earlier post, it drives the wealth offshore where HMRC can't get their mitts at it at all. There are more accountants looking at how to avoid taxation than there are involved in the collection of it. The less fair it is (rate terms, not total contribution) the more people will look to avoid (not plan ;))

Re: General Election 2010
 

Ill vote BNP seeming as they will:

1. Raise speed limits on motorways
2. Keep our currency
3. Stop immigration completely
4. Bring back Corporal and Capital Punishment.

I feel these 4 things are what is needed in this country and this party is the only party to offer them.

Re: General Election 2010
 

:lol: