Reply to: Election winning slogan

[malvolio]

If the only reason they live here is because they can avoid paying tax, then maybe they should go. This "we can't survive without them" argument seems like Stockholm Syndrome to me.
If you want to reside in the UK, pay UK tax. If you don't want to pay local taxes, live somewhere else and just visit the UK for a holiday.

I think you need to research where a lot of our wealth comes from. And how much of it is home-grown...

[vetran]

Your link is to taxpayers earning £1m+
Not people living in the UK with a global income of £1m+

How naive of you to equate the two.

Well obviously non doms don't count but everyone else does

https://www.gov.uk/tax-foreign-income

[vetran]

Many of us are wealthy enough to move country. Most of us don't.
Tax should be set at a reasonable level and people should pay it. Lower taxes encourage businesses regardless if the owner is resident or not.

Indeed so it seems the balance is right. The top 5% contribute nearly half the tax take. Plenty of tax free Islands out there or golden visas,

https://www.taxjournal.com/articles/...ives-on-in-tax

The latest data from HMRC suggests that the top 1% of earners contribute 28% of all income taxes to the nation’s coffers, while the top 5% contribute almost half (48%).

And while a super-tax might sound like an appealing idea in principle to address perceived unfairness in the system, do we really want to get back to the days of Harold Wilson when the top income tax rate was 83%, and combined with a 15% surcharge on unearned income, the marginal rate reached a staggering 98%?

France gave up on their supertax

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jonhart...h=5fec2eee5df2

[WTFH]

how naive

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ket-in-the-uk/

there are 19,000 people earning £1m+ a year, assuming they are paying around 50% tax is £9billion. If half rearrange their affairs that is a tax hole. if they then rearrange their employees how much is lost?

Tax them enough that it stings, if it hurts they have the means to move.

Your link is to taxpayers earning £1m+
Not people living in the UK with a global income of £1m+

How naive of you to equate the two.

[d000hg]

how naive

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ket-in-the-uk/

there are 19,000 people earning £1m+ a year, assuming they are paying around 50% tax is £9billion. If half rearrange their affairs that is a tax hole. if they then rearrange their employees how much is lost?

Tax them enough that it stings, if it hurts they have the means to move.

Many of us are wealthy enough to move country. Most of us don't.
Tax should be set at a reasonable level and people should pay it. Lower taxes encourage businesses regardless if the owner is resident or not.

[vetran]

If the only reason they live here is because they can avoid paying tax, then maybe they should go. This "we can't survive without them" argument seems like Stockholm Syndrome to me.
If you want to reside in the UK, pay UK tax. If you don't want to pay local taxes, live somewhere else and just visit the UK for a holiday.

how naive

https://www.statista.com/statistics/...ket-in-the-uk/

there are 19,000 people earning £1m+ a year, assuming they are paying around 50% tax is £9billion. If half rearrange their affairs that is a tax hole. if they then rearrange their employees how much is lost?

Tax them enough that it stings, if it hurts they have the means to move.

[d000hg]

It's not illegal, it's avoidance. However if you remove the tax advantage they will simply take their residency and taxes back home or to somewhere more friendly, like the Caymans or Malta. It's very doubtful the seriously rich will start paying taxes they don't have to pay.

If the only reason they live here is because they can avoid paying tax, then maybe they should go. This "we can't survive without them" argument seems like Stockholm Syndrome to me.
If you want to reside in the UK, pay UK tax. If you don't want to pay local taxes, live somewhere else and just visit the UK for a holiday.

[malvolio]

If they are not paying tax here and they move elsewhere, then why do the far right keep whining that if these non-tax payers leave it will destroy the country. This is the same country they don't want to pay taxes in like genuine hard working people do.
Live in the country where you pay tax on your earnings.

...unless these people are hell-bent on destroying the UK, because they hate the UK, while flag-shagging for their supporters.

They are not paying taxes here, but the businesses and investments they are making in the UK certainly are. Remove the non-dom option and start charging them local taxation and they will probably take everything away. Except they do pay some personal taxes to retain their non-dom status at present, albeit indirectly.

But yes, everyone is out to screw the UK. Probably why we're the fifth biggest economy in the world.

[WTFH]

It's not illegal, it's avoidance. However if you remove the tax advantage they will simply take their residency and taxes back home or to somewhere more friendly, like the Caymans or Malta. It's very doubtful the seriously rich will start paying taxes they don't have to pay.

If they are not paying tax here and they move elsewhere, then why do the far right keep whining that if these non-tax payers leave it will destroy the country. This is the same country they don't want to pay taxes in like genuine hard working people do.
Live in the country where you pay tax on your earnings.

...unless these people are hell-bent on destroying the UK, because they hate the UK, while flag-shagging for their supporters.

[Zigenare]

It's not illegal, it's avoidance. However if you remove the tax advantage they will simply take their residency and taxes back home or to somewhere more friendly, like the Caymans or Malta. It's very doubtful the seriously rich will start paying taxes they don't have to pay.

It was WTFH's use of the word "evade" rather than "avoid" that I was picking up on.

[vetran]

It's not illegal, it's avoidance. However if you remove the tax advantage they will simply take their residency and taxes back home or to somewhere more friendly, like the Caymans or Malta. It's very doubtful the seriously rich will start paying taxes they don't have to pay.

every multi national I know of manipulates transfer pricing. Luckily these poor companies can get workers subsidised by Gordon B'ruin's in work benefits as many of them make few profits or even a loss.

https://taxjustice.net/faq/what-is-transfer-pricing/

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-b...89E0EX20121015

https://news.bloombergtax.com/transf...state-aid-case

[malvolio]

Are you suggesting that what the super-rich are doing is illegal?

It's not illegal, it's avoidance. However if you remove the tax advantage they will simply take their residency and taxes back home or to somewhere more friendly, like the Caymans or Malta. It's very doubtful the seriously rich will start paying taxes they don't have to pay.

[Zigenare]

We are told by non-dom owners of newspapers, etc, that it's a tiny amount compared to something else that can be used as a distraction.
It's about £8-10 Billion a year from "non-dom" status of individuals.

https://web.archive.org/web/20131021...ame&issue=1351

If Hector went after the offshore schemes used to reduce/evade tax in the UK, that would generate a lot more, but would deeply upset the right wing and super-rich who rely on "tax the poor" as a means to their end.

Are you suggesting that what the super-rich are doing is illegal?

[d000hg]

Perhaps someone should focus on the £30/50/65bn "hole" they are trying to fill given it doesn't exist but merely is a gap between projected spend estimates and interest rates and projected growth figures.

So it doesn't exist except by a quite detailed definition you are able to give?

[AtW]

Not sure what the markets would make of that. I imagine they would be wanting a big wodge of the £55bn now.

Markets get tax increases now, Labour would reverse tax cuts in 18 months anyway