The new IR35 regime

[russell]

The bottom line is this, if I am to be taxed as an employee I want the same rights, so I'll be wanting all my sick/holiday pay for any contract I am taxed as an employee. This is why ir35 will never be enforced, they best they can hope for is for bedwetter contractors to pay up without a fight.

[doodab]

Nonsense.

Companies will be walking over broken glass to move to this low tax country.

Er, no they won't, because we aren't talking about lowering corporate taxes at all. And there are more important things than raw tax rates. Like infrastructure, and the level of education of the workforce. If you can't actually make money the amount of tax you pay on it is fairly unimportant.

]Private rail companies will cover the costs of rail transport, not the tax payer. This means that the people who actually use the trains are paying for it, but they will have more money in their pockets because they'll be paying less tax.

I'd agree that the subsidy is a joke, that's largely because the original privatization was a joke. Unfortunately, aside from the fact it's all in a contract somewhere, if you eliminate the subsidy you're going to see perhaps 30% increase in rail fares + the cost of rail freight plus a reduction in "uneconomic" services, which will push people onto the roads. These will then need investing in. So the saving is debatable.

Likewise, people who benefit from tertiary education can pay for it.

If we want to be competitive we cannot afford to restrict education to those who can afford it.

The idea is that if things reflect the true cost or operation people decide rationally if it is worthwhile doing or not and not based on somebody else footing the bill.

Yes it's a great idea. If people were rational it might even work.

[KentPhilip]

The bottom line is this, if I am to be taxed as an employee I want the same rights, so I'll be wanting all my sick/holiday pay for any contract I am taxed as an employee. This is why ir35 will never be enforced, they best they can hope for is for bedwetter contractors to pay up without a fight.

I thought it already had been.
HMRC have won a number of cases..

[Bagpuss]

There are plenty of very respected economists who have the same principles as myself.

Milton Friedman would be a good place to start.

I shall quote the good woman... "if they attack one personally, it means they have not a single political argument left"

Monetarism is a busted flush..

JSTOR: An Error Occurred Setting Your User Cookie

[Robinho]

Er, no they won't, because we aren't talking about lowering corporate taxes at all. And there are more important things than raw tax rates. Like infrastructure, and the level of education of the workforce.

I actually mentioned i would eliminate Corporate Tax too earlier (for other reasons) - it doesn't actually bring a lot in (10% of all revenue). But of course companies go places where income tax is low. As well as sales tax/VAT. Very few companies don't have employees and don't sell things. All taxes have to be considered.

I'd agree that the subsidy is a joke, that's largely because the original privatization was a joke. Unfortunately, aside from the fact it's all in a contract somewhere, if you eliminate the subsidy you're going to see perhaps 30% increase in rail fares + the cost of rail freight plus a reduction in "uneconomic" services, which will push people onto the roads. These will then need investing in. So the saving is debatable.

Well i mentioned that i would make sure road tax covers all the costs of covering roads, so if people started driving they would have the same problem. What it would eliminate is needless travel. There would be a trend towards proximity becoming more important, as well as things like home-working.

If we want to be competitive we cannot afford to restrict education to those who can afford it.

Student loans will still exist. Again you'll just have to rationally think about whether course X, Y and Z will be beneficial to you or not. You'll also have to be committed during that time, no more binge drinking and not going to lectures.

Yes it's a great idea. If people were rational it might even work.

It'll force them to be rational.

[doodab]

I actually mentioned i would eliminate Corporate Tax too earlier (for other reasons) - it doesn't actually bring a lot in (10% of all revenue).

10% of all revenue is about £50-60 billion. How are you going to make up the shortfall?

But of course companies go places where income tax is low. As well as sales tax/VAT. Very few companies don't have employees and don't sell things. All taxes have to be considered.

Not if the infrastructure and workforce isn't there they don't. Otherwise Africa would be booming and northern Europe would be ****ed.

Well i mentioned that i would make sure road tax covers all the costs of covering roads, so if people started driving they would have the same problem. What it would eliminate is needless travel. There would be a trend towards proximity becoming more important, as well as things like home-working.

Road tax and fuel duty more than covers the costs of the roads already. You will still need to spend more on the roads though, which will cause a shortfall elsewhere.

Student loans will still exist. Again you'll just have to rationally think about whether course X, Y and Z will be beneficial to you or not. You'll also have to be committed during that time, no more binge drinking and not going to lectures.

It'll force them to be rational.

If human beings were capable of the level of rationality and foresight you are suggesting we wouldn't have the current mess to begin with.

[Robinho]

10% of all revenue is about £50-60 billion. How are you going to make up the shortfall?

I would up the dividend tax. As i say doesn't make sense to tax twice.

Not if the infrastructure and workforce isn't there they don't. Otherwise Africa would be booming and northern Europe would be ****ed.

I never said there would be no infrastructure or workforce, i said it would be funded differently.

Trains would be more expensive, but businesses would have more money so they would be happy to pay for that expense if they needed the service.

Likewise, universities would be more expensive, but people would have more money so they could justify paying for them if they deemed them to be worthwhile. Companies would have more money and may be happy to sponsor people.

Finally do many jobs actually require a degree? There are plenty of pencil pusher jobs that don't need them. In fact, i took virtually nothing out of my university too.

Road tax and fuel duty more than covers the costs of the roads already. You will still need to spend more on the roads though, which will cause a shortfall elsewhere.

Good, and if we needed to spend more, we'd charge higher road tax, or fuel duty.

[Bagpuss]

Well, the new IR35 is almost here. All the balls posted on here about the Tories scrapping it looks a bit silly now, they are about to make it much much worse. Be careful what you wish for as they say. I think some will be wishing we were back under New Labour in a couple of days. At least then it was easy to avoid.

[d000hg]

Well, the new IR35 is almost here. All the balls posted on here about the Tories scrapping it looks a bit silly now, they are about to make it much much worse. Be careful what you wish for as they say. I think some will be wishing we were back under New Labour in a couple of days. At least then it was easy to avoid.

Oh well, maybe you'll be able to find someone who will let you pay them to "protect you from IR35v2".

[Gordon Brown]

Well, the new IR35 is almost here. All the balls posted on here about the Tories scrapping it looks a bit silly now, they are about to make it much much worse. Be careful what you wish for as they say. I think some will be wishing we were back under New Labour in a couple of days. At least then it was easy to avoid.

I'm here if you need me. I miss you lovely contractors Sooooooooo much.