Visitors can check out the Forum FAQ by clicking this link. You have to register before you can post: click the REGISTER link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. View our Forum Privacy Policy.
Want to receive the latest contracting news and advice straight to your inbox? Sign up to the ContractorUK newsletter here. Every sign up will also be entered into a draw to WIN £100 Amazon vouchers!
You are not logged in or you do not have permission to access this page. This could be due to one of several reasons:
You are not logged in. If you are already registered, fill in the form below to log in, or follow the "Sign Up" link to register a new account.
You may not have sufficient privileges to access this page. Are you trying to edit someone else's post, access administrative features or some other privileged system?
If you are trying to post, the administrator may have disabled your account, or it may be awaiting activation.
"Rishi Sunak wins tug-of-war over national insurance hike
Boris Johnson and Rishi Sunak have jointly pledged to push ahead with a £12 billion hike in national insurance in a rebuke to MPs who have demanded that they scrap the tax rise to ease the cost-of-living crisis.
.
good. Don’t you hate it when the permies try and wriggle out of paying their fair share of tax?
if I had my way they would double NI and use the money to cut corporation tax and VAT.
As far as I'm aware, there is literally no distinction, at any important level, between income tax (for example) and NI once the monies are received (obviously, they are separate taxes, levied differently and require different accounting); but they are paid to the same accounts and they all go towards "general taxation". As noted above there is no hypothecation in general (for good reason) and, hence, at the moment priorities are funded, there is no useful distinction.
Even when the formal HSCL kicks in (in FY23/24, I think), the "hypothecation" advertised by the gov't is fake/erroneous because there will be no connection between the level of investment and the amount raised by the levy, which is literally what hypothecation means.
That's why I said "stated" reason rather than "actual" reason Put another way, why didn't they do the new levy straight away instead of hack it through as NI?
I think I read somewhere that it was through NI initially to get the money rolling, then move it to a separate levy so that it would be preserved as a discrete fund. Taxes aren't hypothecated, so leaving it as part of the general taxation would mean it could (and probably would) be spent elsewhere.
They can claim that they didn't put up NI by introducing a new tax. Make the tax system more complex, means you can increase the overall by muddying the waters.
That's why I said "stated" reason rather than "actual" reason Put another way, why didn't they do the new levy straight away instead of hack it through as NI?
Is there a stated reasoning behind it being NI then switching to a separate 'levy'? Back-end logistics maybe? Or is this a pointer towards major NI reforms down the line?
They can claim that they didn't put up NI by introducing a new tax. Make the tax system more complex, means you can increase the overall by muddying the waters.
Is there a stated reasoning behind it being NI then switching to a separate 'levy'? Back-end logistics maybe? Or is this a pointer towards major NI reforms down the line?
(BTW I believe the only requirement you have for being Mayor of London is having a better personality than your main opposition competitor as you don't have any real power.)
A better personality? I'd re-write that as a personality that makes people believe what you say. Doesn't have to be true.
Oh so you believe Boris "Garden Bridge I-stole-the-bike-name-from-Ken" Johnson?
(BTW I believe the only requirement you have for being Mayor of London is having a better personality than your main opposition competitor as you don't have any real power.)
Yeah because Khan has done so well on Crime & Transport...
Oh so you believe Boris "Garden Bridge I-stole-the-bike-name-from-Ken" Johnson?
(BTW I believe the only requirement you have for being Mayor of London is having a better personality than your main opposition competitor as you don't have any real power.)
Labours mandate could be localism e.g. local government, considering how popular some of their mayors are, which would mean small national government and smaller national taxation.
Yeah because Khan has done so well on Crime & Transport...
If you mean by that paying off the debt incurrered then this will NEVER happen.
I don't even believe this country will ever have a budget without any deficit - not with taxes like this, and certainly not with muppets in charge.
No, it will never happen, no matter how much "money" the UK has in the bank. That's basic macroeconomics: no major economy will ever be out of debt, if only because they trade with other economies. Have you seen how much China owes...?
Leave a comment: