There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
These 143 comments are related to the topic:
Tories "back to work " benefits card no gambling
Tories "back to work " benefits card no gambling
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 143
|
By:
Wealth doesn't work like that. Nobody has £100Bn in an offshore account and leaves all of their wealth in cash.
What you would do though is hire expensive advisers and you would take your wealth where you could retain most of it, and eventually pass it on to your benefactors. Which would mean the UK was near the foot of the possible options. |
|
By:
It's a completely unrealistic hypothetical, obviously. But if you converted BTC to sterling, the person or people that had that assumed value in sterling have passed it to you.
It depends upon how your portfolio is constructed, and the performance, but someone or people will get fees for managing it. Assuming you are mortal, it will be passed on to your beneficiaries. The impact of that depends up the jurisdiction. It does happen like that in the real world. Billionaires spend an awful lot of money, and pay an awful lot of tax. Plenty of the mega rich 'lose' it all. |
|
By:
fecking forum, doesn't happen like that.
|
|
By:
As I just watched a race in Listowel, think JPM. And how much he spends on his jump racing hobby.
|
|
By:
JPM hasn't paid tax in Ireland since 1995. He's based in Switzerland
|
|
By:
What has Macca got to do with getting layabouts back to work?
|
|
By:
Switzerland has mandatory wealth taxes. Not sure how that works for JPM. Probably not very effectively
|
|
By:
According to th elatest study I've jus made up he reduces the number of layabouts in the UK by 2 thanks to Henderson on Jonjo employing 1 extra person each.
|
|
By:
The money/power game is ****, and as George Carling used to say,
"It's one big big club, and you ain't in it" |
|
By:
In fact the entire horse racing industry is pretty much 'trickle down'.
|
|
By:
The 'creation of money' into circultion not taught in schools for hundreds of years.
Fractional reserve banking, 'money' created and circulated as debt. You sign a mortgage agreement - Is it your signature that creates the loan, or does the lender have it in reserve? I deposit a tenner's worth of gold with you, youz realise I'm unlikely to ask for it back for many a year so you lend as the banker 10 x the value of it to 'other' lenders and charge 10% interest on every other tenner you lend. |
|
By:
circulation*
|
|
By:
Nothing unusual about that.
Gordon Brown and other politicians cheated the system by 'creating' money and lending it out at effective negative borrowing rates. They got away with it as the pain it creates comes much further down the line, when borrowing rates normalise, and inflation catches up. |
|
By:
Britain's benefits bonanza has worsened since Labour swept to power, with a car scheme handing 13,000 premium motors to claimants last year.
New analysis exposes the sheer scale of the handouts, with 3.23 million people now claiming Personal Independence Payments (PIP) even as taxes sit at their highest level since WW2. The high-end cars dolled out to claimants include Mercedes, BMWs and Audis, and four in every five PIP claimants also trouser a mobility handout worth between £30.30 and £80 a week.  |
|
By:
The PIP scheme is broken but this "even as taxes sit at their highest level since WW2." is deliberately complete BS. Top rates of tax were 90%+ in the US and UK in the 50s.
It doesn't matter what the tax rates are for the super rich though. They don't pay tax. All their money is in offshore holding accounts and current tax law doesn't address it. |
|
By:
And if that is clearly complete BS, I suspect the other figures are too.
|
|
By:
Hotel Britannia.
|
|
By:
The PIP scheme is broken but this "even as taxes sit at their highest level since WW2." is deliberately complete BS. Top rates of tax were 90%+ in the US and UK in the 50s.
This calculation is the tax take out of THE WHOLE ECONOMY. Not about bespoke rates. Of the top of my head, it is pushing 40% Not from 'professional' gamblers, obviously :) |
|
By:
Or PIP claimants, since that is handed out tax free and not means tested
|
|
By:
Here you go. From the horse's mouth...
In 2025/26, UK government raised around £1,232 billion (£1.232 trillion) in receipts – income from taxes and other sources. This is equivalent to around 40% of the size of the UK economy, as measured by GDP. Receipts were last consistently around 39%-40% of GDP in the early-1980s. https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-briefings/cbp-8513/ |
|
By:
To any layman highest level means tax rate. Anything else is deliberately misleading
|
|
By:
A lot of people are ignorant on this stuff. The highest level means the highest level (not highest rate)
|
|
By:
Not just the 50s. 1979 it was 25% up to £750 all the up to 83% over £24k.
The super rich weren't paying that ofc, just normal people. The difference bewteen 1983 and 2026 is that in 1983 there were only a very few super rich people so it didn't effect the economy too much. Now there are far more so it is. |
|
By:
no it means rate of tax. Not tax take (which will have several different ways of calculating to produce whatever figures you want) whereas tax rate has only one. You can't fudge the figure
|
|
By:
It's like going around in circles. If the 'rates' are too high, less tax is collected as people change their behaviour. Quite radically if the rates are pernicious.
There is a tolerance on the level across the economy. We've already reached it. Hence wealthy people ditching the country. Nowadays of course, the level includes all of the sneaky taxes and scalping. Not just headline top rates. Since the late 1940s public sector current receipts have fluctuated between 31% and 43% of GDP, with peaks in the early 1950s, late 1960s, mid-late 1970s, early 1980s and now. Receipts were smallest relative to the size of the economy in 1993/94. The composition of tax revenues has changed. Relatively more revenue is now raised from general taxes on goods and services (largely VAT) than was the case in 1965. Relatively less is raised from taxes on specific goods and services, such as excise duties, than was the case in 1965. Taxes on individual incomes (largely income tax) have raised the largest revenues in all years. |
|
By:
Increasing VAT on employment decreases the incentive to employ people.
Almost like it's deliberate. |
|
By:
How much tax is collected is not objective if rates are higher or lower is subjective. Tax rates are objective and what normal people consider
|
|
By:
Cider, how is VAT applied to employment other than employment agencies or secondment?
|
|
By:
How did I know what they were referencing? This is common terminology. Nobody who knows what they are talking about is going to say income tax is at the highest rate since WW2. And they didn't.
|
|
By:
There's not much cash in the economy now. Digital forensics and cross border co-operation means avoiding and evading tax should be much harder than it was. What you need is effective tax laws.
|
|
By:
You just can't see past your ideology. TAX THE RICH ! TAKE ALL OF THEIR STUFF ! IT'S NOT FAIR !
|
|
By:
Not just income tax. Corporation tax too was much higher. Were any tax rates lower?
|
|
By:
If we had a functional state, people wouldn't mind paying a bit more tax.
It couldn't get much more dysfunctional right now, could it? |
|
By:
The rich aren't paying tax. Got nowt to with ideology. Everyone should pay tax
|
|
By:
Almost like it's deliberate.
|
|
By:
I don't know how this will format
THE FULL LIST OF BRITAIN’S TOP 50 TAXPAYERS TAX LIST RANK NAME BUSINESS SECTOR TAX LIABILITY 2017/18 (£m) RICH LIST RANK 2018 WEALTH (£m) 1 Stephen Rubin and family Sportswear 181.6 49 2,820 2 Denise, John and Peter Coates Gambling 156.0 21 5,754 3 Sir James Dyson and family Household goods and technology 127.8 12 9,500 4 Bruno Schroder and family Finance 114.3 24 5,239 5 Jim Ratcliffe Chemicals 110.5 1 21,050 6 The Weston family Retailing 76.0 9 10,050 7 Sir Chris Hohn Hedge fund 64.8 136= 1,000 8 Sir Peter Wood Insurance 53.7 172 781 9 James Benamor Finance 52.2 337= 380 10 Baroness Howard de Walden and family Property 44.1 30 4,015 11 Tom Morris and family Discount stores 39.2 37 3,490 12= John Reece Chemicals 36.8 16= 7,000 12= Andy Currie Chemicals 36.8 16= 7,000 14 Peter Hargreaves Finance 35.6 42 3,164 15 Glenn Gordon and family Spirits 35.1 55 2,572 16 John Bloor Construction and property 34.9 73 1,858 17 Lord Edmiston Car sales and property 34.4 133 1,040 18 Ross Turner Hedge fund 33.6 410= 300 19 Carrie and Francois Perrodo and family Oil, gas and wine 32.6 22 5,556 20 Mike Ashley Sports equipment and fashion 30.4 58 2,437 21 Peter Harris and family Hotels and caravan parks 30.3 167= 800 22 The Duke of Westminster & The Grosvenor family Property 27.2 10 9,964 23 The Cadogan family Property 26.4 20 6,700 24 Simon, Bobby and Robin Arora Discount stores 25.6 60 2,300 25 Chris and Sarah Dawson Discount stores 25.4 71 1,960 26 Steve Morgan Construction 24.3 150 942 27 Henry Moser Finance 24.0 134= 1,010 28 David Harding Hedge fund 23.6 136= 1,000 29 Julian Dunkerton Fashion 23.4 297 441 30 The Clark family (car dealers) Car sales 22.3 120= 1,175 31 Patrick McKenna Finance and media 22.2 n/a 32 Tony Pidgley Construction 21.9 399= 310 33 James and John Martin and family Ejection seats 21.4 178 765 34 Sten Mortstedt Property 21.2 205 675 35 Stephen Butt and family Finance 21.0 180= 750 36 Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou and family Aviation 20.7 48 2,950 37 Daren Whitaker Construction 19.2 n/a 38 Bernard Lewis and family Fashion and property 18.6 63 2,125 39= Philip Day Fashion 17.7 115= 1,200 39= Neil Moffitt Restaurants 17.7 n/a 41 Sir Charles Dunstone Mobile phones 16.9 153 918 42 Charles Rolls Drinks 16.8 372= 340 43 Eugene Kaspersky Anti-virus software 16.6 n/a 44 John Kirkland and family Construction 16.4 242= 530 45 Charles Cayzer and family Finance 15.7 149 949 46 John Whittaker and family Property 15.6 61 2,250 47 The Warburton family Baking 14.5 238 545 48 Peter Cruddas and family Finance 12.9 206 661 49 David and Victoria Beckham Football and fashion 12.7 372= 340 50 Clinton, Spencer and John McCarthy Construction 12.1 213 635 |
|
By:
despite what reform/tory,s try to convince their lemmings 24/7 , PIP isnt an out of work benefit so if it was means tested ,nothing to top anyone means testing THE STATE PENSION,
so what % of those happy to see PIP means tested do you think would agree to the STATE PENSION been means tested ? over 60% of reform voter,s are against disability benefit,s been cut |
|
By:
Interestingly my dad went to school with Stephen Rubin.
Don't confuse the highest taxpayers with the most wealthy. Thet are massively different |
|
By:
I don't want to go after those wealthy folk that are paying tax. I want to go after those who aren't, of which there are far more
|
|
By:
You stated 'the rich don't pay tax'.
|