Budget 2024

[1nvest]

You would pay some tax but very little. Tax rates would be lower including VAT so it may net out for low earners.

I recall Michael Portillo talking to one of the Singaporian Finance Ministers. Their model is that everybody pays just a little bit in income tax - and it seems to work very well for them. I used to be a fan of the personal allowance, but now I think the UK should change its model, broaden the tax base and simplify the whole system.

Income tax is a relatively new thing (talking in decades). Prior to that and it was considered none of others business how much they earned or had saved. Taxes were raised on businesses and via sales (purchase) tax.

But that was in a era where they didn't pursue policies such as double-up GP's wages so that most opted to move to part time working, and where even on their work days often they phone in to advise the desk clerk to get a locum in as they wont be in that day. Throwing more money at the NHS = more of public purse milked often with less actual work being done. NHS admin staff on 6 digit salaries/golden pensions etc.

Nor policies that promote low wage being paid, state/tax-payer tops those up, or where otherwise the wages are too low to even cover rent. Importing low wage workers in preference to developing ones own population/children.

Micro management, digital currency, street cameras/facial recognition, road cameras/number plate recognition, all of your internet/search activities recorded, all of your financial transactions recorded ... by the state, and the state and absolute control, can target confiscations/restrictions down to individuals in accordance with what that state opines to be good/bad. No longer your money/wealth, just a loan. Everyone becomes a slave/prisoner within that open prison system. But where the younger gen don't care about that, have nothing to hide, don't mind every aspect of their lives/assets being public (or state) known. At least they wont have cared until a particular style of state rises to power/control - only to then realise how entrapped they've become.

[1nvest]

It would have been better if Hunt had cut NI by 4p, and cut the grant to councils by the equivalent of 2p but given them the freedom to charge up to 4p in local NI.

Cut income taxation altogether. LT/KK opted to direct towards the increase the top 1% that contribute a third of total tax take, preferably to double/treble that number, no income/NI payable by others. Tax spending (business sales tax, the more you have/spend, the more you contribute). Have HMRC direct its focus towards attracting/directing the economy, taxation of dividend withholdings (capital flowing abroad), amount of import taxation on specific items so as to promote domestic economic expansion rather than contraction. Instead of HMRC spending all its time on domestic tax chasing pennies from pensioners who haven't correctly filled in their SA and have over-run the time/date so they also have to pay a fixed penalty out of their small pension.

This country would repeatedly prefer to clobber those that accumulate enough to fund paying for their own childrens education rather than being state funded, or for their own health issues/treatment ...etc. Have everyone equally funded by the state, and where those with a million should forfeit that to allocate 1.5p each to everyone else. Consequence, those with a million flight the country to somewhere more friendly/supportive of having the top 1% paying a third of the total tax take, and where if that number is 3x'd then 3% of the population pay all of the tax.

The Tories were on the right path under LT, but that was massively poorly directed, but under RS/Hunt have ditched Brexit, gifted NI away, are more old Labour than even old Labour, wasteful, incompetent.

[Arborbridge]

Once more, you are the joker Unbelievable.

You clearly have no ambition. What hope for the country?

At the age of 78 my ambition is limited to living longer

[Nimrod103]

You clearly have no ambition. What hope for the country?

At the age of 78 my ambition is limited to living longer

So I gather from your comment about living on £10,000/year that perhaps you were talking about pensioners who live on the state pension alone?
They had the opportunity during their working lives to get better pension benefits. If they couldn't be bothered that shouldn't mean that they have now to be supported by taxpayers (although I think if their income is only £10,000/year, they are able to claim all sorts of welfare and support payments. I stand to be corrected on this).

Several people (including apparently the Chancellor of the Exchequer) have advocated combining NI and income tax. Yet NI is/was designed to raise money and entitlement for the state pension and unemployment benefits. Hence it would seem a bit ridiculous for people of pension age to be paying such a levy. I just see these moves as the first steps by the Treasury to making the state pension a welfare benefit only given to the poor - like it is in Australia.

[MuddyBoots]

I get what you're saying 1nvest, except that if migrants are entitled to the same benefits as the rest of us, why would they have a better work ethic ? What's to stop them working as long as the rules require it, then start playing the overburdened system which they can see going on all around them.

A competing migrant worker from a poorer country may very well be prepared to live a few years in shared/small accommodation, spend little, accumulate enough to return to their homeland relatively rich. Resulting in a situation of where employers favour migrant workers over Brits, a situation that ultimate leads to collapse, QED the Spanish Empire, where when their gold (assets) ran out they were dragged down to being poor, with little in the way of domestic assets/resources/skills.

Some (im) migrants do send money abroad to relatives. Your mention of returning to their homeland is interesting, I'd like to see some stats to show how many do. There are countries which have a system of having temporary workers on visas with no entitlement to permanent residency or citizenship - Saudi and its neighbours comes to mind. But they have oil so maybe a different scenario.

I don't know about the Spanish example. If they had enough profitable work needing doing to import migrants, why did they have to rely on the gold reserves to get by? Were the aristocracy living beyond their means? In those days I can't imagine them having an overstretched welfare state to support like we do.

[MuddyBoots]

Several people (including apparently the Chancellor of the Exchequer) have advocated combining NI and income tax. Yet NI is/was designed to raise money and entitlement for the state pension and unemployment benefits. Hence it would seem a bit ridiculous for people of pension age to be paying such a levy. I just see these moves as the first steps by the Treasury to making the state pension a welfare benefit only given to the poor - like it is in Australia.

The idea of merging NICs and IT reminds me of an even more radical pipe dream I had about merging income tax with corporation tax so everybody plays by the same rules, human and non-human entities alike. The basic rate of IT and CT are already the same at 20%, there's some wrinkles in my plan are around deductible expenses (humans have few), tax-free allowances and higher rate bands.

[Hallucigenia]

The idea of merging NICs and IT reminds me of an even more radical pipe dream I had about merging income tax with corporation tax so everybody plays by the same rules, human and non-human entities alike. The basic rate of IT and CT are already the same at 20%, there's some wrinkles in my plan are around deductible expenses (humans have few), tax-free allowances and higher rate bands.

More pressing is synchronising CGT and income tax to avoid the huge amount of energy that goes into arbitraging between the two.

[Lootman]

The idea of merging NICs and IT reminds me of an even more radical pipe dream I had about merging income tax with corporation tax so everybody plays by the same rules, human and non-human entities alike. The basic rate of IT and CT are already the same at 20%, there's some wrinkles in my plan are around deductible expenses (humans have few), tax-free allowances and higher rate bands.

More pressing is synchronising CGT and income tax to avoid the huge amount of energy that goes into arbitraging between the two.

Huge amount? Most folks are not in a position to do that. I am, as it happens, but most cannot.

There are sound reasons why CGT rates are lower. And not just in the UK but in many places.

Not least because gains are not assured like wages are. It involves taking risk. And why do that if it is taxed the same as merely showing up for work every day?

[Nimrod103]

More pressing is synchronising CGT and income tax to avoid the huge amount of energy that goes into arbitraging between the two.

Huge amount? Most folks are not in a position to do that. I am, as it happens, but most cannot.

There are sound reasons why CGT rates are lower. And not just in the UK but in many places.

Not least because gains are not assured like wages are. It involves taking risk. And why do that if it is taxed the same as merely showing up for work every day?

CGT is just a tax on the increase in asset prices caused by Government debauching the currency. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? It is an iniquitous tax.

[Lootman]

Huge amount? Most folks are not in a position to do that. I am, as it happens, but most cannot.

There are sound reasons why CGT rates are lower. And not just in the UK but in many places.

Not least because gains are not assured like wages are. It involves taking risk. And why do that if it is taxed the same as merely showing up for work every day?

CGT is just a tax on the increase in asset prices caused by Government debauching the currency. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? It is an iniquitous tax.

Indeed, a tax on inflation, risk-taking and wealth creation.

[MrFoolish]

CGT is just a tax on the increase in asset prices caused by Government debauching the currency. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? It is an iniquitous tax.

So you admit there was no skill or hard work behind the gains.

But if you like me to get out my violin for you, give some examples of where you've had to pay this supposedly unfair tax.

[JohnB]

If there were skill or hard work behind the gains, that would be a reason to tax them, as is done for income. But why have a tax that generates revenue based on inflation?

[MrFoolish]

If there were skill or hard work behind the gains, that would be a reason to tax them, as is done for income. But why have a tax that generates revenue based on inflation?

What's the point in sitting on assets if you are not doing anything with them? Examples please.

[Arborbridge]

Empathy is a critical factor which distinguishes us from the lower animals. It has been a valuable mechanism in the survival and development of the human race. This thread shows that some of us are in danger of losing this most human of traits.

I suspect that this could be true of the Tory voter and right wing generally.


Arb.

[JohnB]

If there were skill or hard work behind the gains, that would be a reason to tax them, as is done for income. But why have a tax that generates revenue based on inflation?

What's the point in sitting on assets if you are not doing anything with them? Examples please.

Eh? How can you do something with stock market investments? I suppose you could leave property empty, but few do. You could switch commodity holdings into bars and make statues I suppose.

[Nimrod103]

Empathy is a critical factor which distinguishes us from the lower animals. It has been a valuable mechanism in the survival and development of the human race. This thread shows that some of us are in danger of losing this most human of traits.

I suspect that this could be true of the Tory voter and right wing generally.


Arb.

This is not the politics board.

[Nimrod103]

CGT is just a tax on the increase in asset prices caused by Government debauching the currency. Why is that such a difficult concept for people to understand? It is an iniquitous tax.

So you admit there was no skill or hard work behind the gains.

But if you like me to get out my violin for you, give some examples of where you've had to pay this supposedly unfair tax.

Gains in monetary terms due to inflation require no skill, but are not "real" gains. They do not buy you an extra pound of rice.
Gains in "real" terms usually do require skill or hard work, and a big element of risk.

[MrFoolish]

What's the point in sitting on assets if you are not doing anything with them? Examples please.

Eh? How can you do something with stock market investments? I suppose you could leave property empty, but few do. You could switch commodity holdings into bars and make statues I suppose.

Taxes are supposed to encourage actions that are useful to the country, as well as raising revenue.

As you say, buying shares on the secondary market doesn't achieve much. Especially if they are the US shares beloved by Lootman.

And people do actually leave property empty. A popular trick for Russians with London properties for example. And I know someone who casually keeps a house empty because he expects the value to keep going up. Meanwhile we have increasing numbers of people living rough.

You already have ISAs, pensions and CGT thresholds. You haven't really made the case for any further generosity.

[MrFoolish]

Gains in monetary terms due to inflation require no skill, but are not "real" gains. They do not buy you an extra pound of rice.
Gains in "real" terms usually do require skill or hard work, and a big element of risk.

Yes, I know all this. So I'll ask again. What assets are you sitting on that are going to cause you a CGT problem? Or are you worrying on behalf of the owner of the Telegraph?

[Nimrod103]

Eh? How can you do something with stock market investments? I suppose you could leave property empty, but few do. You could switch commodity holdings into bars and make statues I suppose.

Taxes are supposed to encourage actions that are useful to the country, as well as raising revenue.

As you say, buying shares on the secondary market doesn't achieve much. Especially if they are the US shares beloved by Lootman.

And people do actually leave property empty. A popular trick for Russians with London properties for example. And I know someone who casually keeps a house empty because he expects the value to keep going up. Meanwhile we have increasing numbers of people living rough.

You already have ISAs, pensions and CGT thresholds. You haven't really made the case for any further generosity.

ISAs have low limits, and are still subject to stamp duty tax. Pensions are mostly just deferred taxation, and CGT thresholds have largely been abolished.
People do leave property empty, but in my neighbourhood is rare, and usually caused by probate or planning permission delays.

All political parties seem to want greater investment, and you write that 'Taxes are supposed to encourage actions that are useful to the country', so why are investment returns heavily taxed in the UK. As mentioned before, many countries do not tax gains, and so they prosper.