Considering he earned over 200k, 38% isn't enough.. Last I checked the higher tax band was 45%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Dragon
Printable View
Considering he earned over 200k, 38% isn't enough.. Last I checked the higher tax band was 45%.Quote:
Originally Posted by Barry Dragon
I'm going to reply to your message because I feel sorry for you - you try so hard to be controversial and attract attention, but hardly anyone ever bothers to reply to you and when they do, they laugh.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
I was listening to a tax specialist on the radio first thing this morning who said, that on the information given by him so far, Cameron has done nothing wrong, but he was puzzled why he hadn't just published his tax return, because he said failing to do so after going so far will only attract more questions - the rather colourful turn of phrase he used which made me grateful I hadn't ate anything after getting up was that it was as if Cameron was doing the dance of the seven veils :hehe:.
Are you into fisting ?Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
Shut it old man.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Only with my girlfrend. You have no chance pal.Quote:
Originally Posted by SLUDGE FACTORY
:hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
Whatever, if anything after this latest fiasco, one thing for sure is that, those who earn big dough will continue to look for loopholes and scams avoiding tax payment, perhaps the tax levies should be looked at in a different way, it will never apply to the majority of us but, a tax system of say 20% max would give wealthy individuals the incentive to pay it rather than avoid it ? 20% of something has to be better than 0% of 10 million. High taxation of the rich just doesn't get results intended, a new way of looking at tax is long overdue IMO.Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
And what happens when, in the course of time, 20% feels a bit too high to them. Do we keep halving it until they are happy..?Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
:hehe:Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
I just think that a tax system based on the Magna Carta is a little outdated, we need wealthy, creative people to stay in the country and pay a fair return, taxing them at the rates we have isn't working, society will always dictate that some will do anything to avoid putting anything back into society but IMO, we need to Incentivise to get the majority on side.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
We are the majority. We are on side, our tax is removed before we even see our pay. The lines need to be drawn more clearly in the sand so that what the public sees as aggressive tax avoidance becomes illegal and punishable (we after all are apparently in control of this country). People like you would have us believe that the world is full of countries where these people could choose to live, the reality is, if Europe takes a hard line then there are perhaps a handful of desirable places left in the world.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
Let's not tackle the problem of tax havens by becoming one ffs.
Let us not forget that if we are talking about the super wealthy who avoid tax we are talking about people who would rather see another million quid (that they will never touch, see or spend) pile up in their account than see it spent on a hospital or a school. I am sick to death of being told we need to work with people like that. We have had years of governments working with them and letting them decide tax policy and it hasnt worked.
Carrot or stick, well if we all have sticks...
Ouch... :biggrin:Quote:
Originally Posted by the other bob wilson
Europe take a hard Line ? I'd be interested in hearing what Europe should be doing, you are quite happy deride my thought on the issue, I'm all ears........................................ and have plenty of time.Quote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
:hehe: :hehe: :wave:Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
You punch your wife in the face ?Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
What a big baby
Well I am at work on my lunch break but...Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
For a start. Europe is the traditional mecca of tax havens. More transparency is already being talked about and quite frankly a stop to your line of a 'competitive tax system', which is failed thinking that just serves to create a multi country system where inequality grows and grows.
I can't tell you the ins and outs of closing the opportunities for avoiding tax just like you can't tell anyone why a top rate of 20% would work.
We are becoming the international equivilant of the 97p store. There are more angles to remaining competitive than price and frankly focussing on that alone just sells Britain short as a place to do business.
The further we underfund health and education the less and less competitive we become regardless of whatever next year's bargain basement tax rate will be.
What's the point in lowering the tax to 20%? It's still more than they would pay elsewhere
Quote:
Originally Posted by City123
Because tax avoidance is on many levels. So being under 20% would be the lowest in the G 7 or 10 (cant remember which). So those with some (but not much) morals would look at moving their tax affairs to the UK. So they still look like a responsible company paying tax, but doing so at a lower (slightly) rate.
Evidence is clear that lowering tax rates can increase tax revenues. But only to a certain point, to get technical, its moving towards an equilibrium. There will be rate at which lowering would eventually reduce tax revenues, but where we are now it would increase tax revenues.
The distribution of wealth in the UK is there for anybody to look upQuote:
Originally Posted by Eric Cartman
The collection of Taxes does not align with the distribution of wealth, this episode surrounding Cameron has just focussed to the masses that are usually too busy watching x-factor what many already know.
I totally fall in with, if you earn more, then, you can afford to pay more however, to just take an arbitrary 50/60/70% tax is always going to mean that individuals will look at any means to avoid paying it, shysters they may be but, the country is losing the tax revenue which, it cannot afford to lose, as you say to keep the health service going etc.
My 20% figure is not a calculated figure to prove anything; it痴 just my way of saying a small %age of something is better than 0%age of nothing and that the taxation laws need to be updated from Laws that were thought out in 1215. And, Long before the health service, long before unemployment benefits, long before the European Union, long before mass immigration, we have a changing world; I just think we have to change our ideas of how we deal with change.
I知 basically non political and dislike one party as much as another. It could be argued that lowering taxes may result in more tax being collected, I知 sure there are some on here who would have more of an idea about it than myself, I知 only advocating a change of some very draconian methods.
30 million people are on PAYE, for the vast majority of people, the system very much works. I don't follow your references to the Magna Carta so maybe you could explain how our overly complex taxation system shows any resemblance to the primitive system of taxation that was enacted back then.Quote:
Originally Posted by Nelsonca61
You are advocating the lure of a carrot and I am advocating the threat of a stick. Every day folk don't get massaged into paying their taxes, why should it be any different for those lucky enough to want for nothing... I guess we will never agree.
Back to your point on us losing the 'creative wealthy', perhaps, although the imminent brain drain we are facing back in reality involves the chronic underfunding and mismanagement of the health and education sectors. I can't see how lowering the top rate of tax to 20% will help us to meet those needs.
The current right wing lot liquidated Rangers in 2012.. That must have been some kick in the nuts for you servile hun wanksQuote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
same club pal. it was the holding company that was liqidated not the club. the club goes on and retains its world record history.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilkers
Record winners of the "Who Gives a ****" leagueQuote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
Make sure she takes her rings off.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
champions of europe in 1972 and finalists in 2008.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kiffa
OK mate...So Rangers are the only incorporated ltd company that can survive liquidation :hehe:. What happened to you happened to County and Merthyr, out of business and starting from scratch as a new bottom of the pile pheonix tribute act...Next trophy you win will be your firstQuote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
Well done them...Shame right now they dont exist.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
you really don't understand corporate law do you? holding company not club went bust. 2 different entitties.club survives intact.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilkers
Just checked with guiness, the world record is:Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilkers
World record for most people not to give two shits about a football club
I do..I regularly set up ltd co's and mvl once they've served their purpose, you cannot separate the function from the legal corporate entity..There was no holding company behind Rangers. It's utter fairytale bollux. Rangers paid the price and died as a consequence of cheating the UK exchequer.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
tell that to uefa, fifa, the bbc and the sfa who all recognise us as the same club with non-broken history. the rangers website will tell you the same as well. you are wrong and know nothing about corprate law, just admit it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Pilkers
Not really. "Cup Winners Cup" winners in 1972 and losing UEFA Cup finalists in 2008.Quote:
Originally Posted by kingbillyboy
:sherlock: