Reply to: Labour to raise dividend tax from 7.5% to 20%

[WordIsBond]

I actually wouldn't mind if all personal income was treated equally under a simpler system though as was pointed out, the low dividend tax rate is to avoid double taxation. This is quite a complicated issue to explain to the man in the street though why you're not "only paying 7.5% tax".

It'd based on turnover as a rough metric for how big your company is, not how profitable. I would imagine the businesses in your position who might have the MD better off by reducing turnover are a tiny edge case. You're a contractor opportunistically subbing some mates not an entrepreneur trying to grow their company - and I don't mean that as an insult, kudos to you for doing so. If you were the latter you'd be thinking how to grow beyond 300k and hire more people, not how to just keep under 300k. I imagine 26% CT on a turnover of 500k you'd be better off than 21% CT on 299k?

There are always weird corner cases affected weirdly by changes.

Actually, I've been building slowly and have employees, and I'm not subbing mates, I've built a team and am subcontracting out pieces. In other words, the consultancy model. But I'm not that far over £300K, could get under it, and I certainly would be better off under those stupid plans if I got under it. The jump from £325K to £400K, which is probably where I'd have to get to be better off, is not necessarily something I could do quickly.

These kinds of hard thresholds are nuts. You have the same thing with the 50 employee threshold, breach that and it causes lots of headaches, enough that people have to think long and hard about hiring past 45 employees. It's an artificial barrier to growth that will cause some to simply decide not to grow.

[WordIsBond]

now that would be fair and sensible.

Thus, Corbyn-led Labour would never do it. We'll see if they get anyone who is more fair and sensible, or just someone a little less obvious in their lunacy. I'd bet on the latter -- the lunatics have taken over.

[AtW]

Corp tax paid should have been treated as dividend tax credit - pound for pound, now that would be fair and sensible.

[d000hg]

If the IR35 reforms bite then you are looking at full PAYE on all income with Employers NI thrown in on top as well, so really not much difference.

I actually wouldn't mind if all personal income was treated equally under a simpler system though as was pointed out, the low dividend tax rate is to avoid double taxation. This is quite a complicated issue to explain to the man in the street though why you're not "only paying 7.5% tax".

I'll breach that figure this year, because I was foolish enough to hire a couple more people whose time I could bill out. If this were to come in I might just let them go, and tell them I'll be glad to recommend them to clients but I can't afford to keep them on as employees.

Yet another Labour stupidity -- if they based it on a profit threshold rather than a turnover threshold then it wouldn't be a disincentive to employ people. These people aren't even competent in implementing envy politics.

It'd based on turnover as a rough metric for how big your company is, not how profitable. I would imagine the businesses in your position who might have the MD better off by reducing turnover are a tiny edge case. You're a contractor opportunistically subbing some mates not an entrepreneur trying to grow their company - and I don't mean that as an insult, kudos to you for doing so. If you were the latter you'd be thinking how to grow beyond 300k and hire more people, not how to just keep under 300k. I imagine 26% CT on a turnover of 500k you'd be better off than 21% CT on 299k?

There are always weird corner cases affected weirdly by changes.

[JohntheBike]

The Liberals might be a decent option if they weren't going to put Corbyn-McDonnell in power to stop Brexit. And everyone knows they are now really a one-issue party and that's what they'll do.

So it's going to be PM Corbyn or PM Johnson. If given a choice between Chavez/Stalin and Trump, the former is devastating enough that I'll take Trump. No doubt he's damaged America but not like what Chavez did to Venezuela. The Tories don't deserve my vote, not even close, but the alternative is so much worse.

Not that they'll win in my constituency anyway.

nor mine

[WordIsBond]

So, no sane person can support the Tories/TBP Ltd, and no sane person can support the Labour leadership.

Can any of you suggest who the sane should vote for?

The Liberals might be a decent option if they weren't going to put Corbyn-McDonnell in power to stop Brexit. And everyone knows they are now really a one-issue party and that's what they'll do.

So it's going to be PM Corbyn or PM Johnson. If given a choice between Chavez/Stalin and Trump, the former is devastating enough that I'll take Trump. No doubt he's damaged America but not like what Chavez did to Venezuela. The Tories don't deserve my vote, not even close, but the alternative is so much worse.

Not that they'll win in my constituency anyway.

[WTFH]

It's bad when "spoiled ballot paper" is looking like the best option.

Are the Monster Raving Loony Party still around?

Lord Buckethead is still around.

He was campaigning in Uxbridge and wanted a debate with BoJo under the title Buckethead v Mophead

[captcavey]

Revoking A50 was the draw for me

What is so appalling about revoking article 50? I hear people complaining about it being undemocratic, but the Lib Dems can only do the revoking if they win the votes, which seems to me to be the very essence of democracy. Looking at the European election results, half the voters want it.

Agreed. I actually voted leave back when TTIP was a promising threat. The main reason I voted leave was I didn't want to be so cosy with US. We're over three years down the line and looking like we're getting firmly in bed with Trump. Voting for Labour or Conservative is the same out (regarding Brexit) - more discussion and votes on leaving terms. IF a new referendum is held then what happens? More discussions, more negotiations, more wasted time, effort, and money. There's nothing has been shown to me in the last three years that would suggest any government will be able to make Brexit a reality. When people say "democracy is dead if we don't honour the vote" I say "that ship has sailed" they had their chance to honour the vote and that chance has gone. I'd now rather be in the EU and be led by a party that has a definite decision. Revoke A50. Simplicity.

[JohntheBike]

It's bad when "spoiled ballot paper" is looking like the best option.

Are the Monster Raving Loony Party still around?

yes

The Official Monster Raving Loony Party | Vote For Insanity

[Paralytic]

So, no sane person can support the Tories/TBP Ltd, and no sane person can support the Labour leadership.

Can any of you suggest who the sane should vote for?

It's bad when "spoiled ballot paper" is looking like the best option.

Are the Monster Raving Loony Party still around?

[JohntheBike]

So, no sane person can support the Tories/TBP Ltd, and no sane person can support the Labour leadership.

Can any of you suggest who the sane should vote for?

none of the above!

[WTFH]

So, no sane person can support the Tories/TBP Ltd, and no sane person can support the Labour leadership.

Can any of you suggest who the sane should vote for?

[JohntheBike]

McDonnell said in 2013 he is a Marxist. His stated policies in the Labour manifesto indicate that he would push forward Marxist principles much more than this country has ever seen if elected.

Johnson wrote an opinion article in 1995. His stated policies in the Tory manifesto don't indicate that he would push forward the ideas he espoused 24 years ago, in fact, quite the opposite. And even then, his idea back then was not privatisation or selling the NHS to Americans. His idea was to charge a nominal fee so people would value what they are getting, and be slower to use the services if they aren't actually ill. The Tories won't have the courage to implement that idea, they'd throw him out if he even tried, but he doesn't have the courage either. Won't happen. In a sane world it would happen, but this world is not sane.

You can argue about whether McDonnell and Corbyn are socialists or Marxists but I can tell you what they are -- economically, they are either illiterate or malevolent. Ethically, they are bankrupt, intending to steal 10% of every successful company (and more of certain other companies), which will decimate the pensions of everyone who has done what we're constantly told is the right thing to do, save into a pension. The government is practically forcing people to save into pensions with AE and now they are going to impound 10% of it?

They are appeasers -- in foreign policy, of Russia and of Islamic terrorists. In criminal justice, of domestic terrorists and other violent criminals. Morally, of the antisemiticism in their own party (whether or not they are personally antisemitic I don't know or care).

In terms of liberty, they are authoritarian and doctrinaire, intending to put control of the Internet (the only place there is really broad opportunity for the free exchange of ideas) into the hands of the government, and determined to exterminate any schools that aren't completely controlled by the government so that they can brainwash all the children in their doctrines.

If that's socialism, may it die forever. In my view, it's way beyond democratic socialism but if it makes you feel better about yourself when you vote for them to call it that, be my guest.

agreed, it's a real shame that so many are not aware of these issues. Clearly new and younger voters won't see the threat to pensions as that is a long way off to them They only see ideological issues, and this is where Komrade Korbyn is clever. It's this that he's trying to exploit.

Real Socialism, i.e. looking after others who are less fortunate than you, through no fault of their own, can only work if those who are giving are able to. This lot will kill the goose that lays the golden egg.

[WordIsBond]

McDonnell said in 2013 he is a Marxist. His stated policies in the Labour manifesto indicate that he would push forward Marxist principles much more than this country has ever seen if elected.

Johnson wrote an opinion article in 1995. His stated policies in the Tory manifesto don't indicate that he would push forward the ideas he espoused 24 years ago, in fact, quite the opposite. And even then, his idea back then was not privatisation or selling the NHS to Americans. His idea was to charge a nominal fee so people would value what they are getting, and be slower to use the services if they aren't actually ill. The Tories won't have the courage to implement that idea, they'd throw him out if he even tried, but he doesn't have the courage either. Won't happen. In a sane world it would happen, but this world is not sane.

You can argue about whether McDonnell and Corbyn are socialists or Marxists but I can tell you what they are -- economically, they are either illiterate or malevolent. Ethically, they are bankrupt, intending to steal 10% of every successful company (and more of certain other companies), which will decimate the pensions of everyone who has done what we're constantly told is the right thing to do, save into a pension. The government is practically forcing people to save into pensions with AE and now they are going to impound 10% of it?

They are appeasers -- in foreign policy, of Russia and of Islamic terrorists. In criminal justice, of domestic terrorists and other violent criminals. Morally, of the antisemiticism in their own party (whether or not they are personally antisemitic I don't know or care).

In terms of liberty, they are authoritarian and doctrinaire, intending to put control of the Internet (the only place there is really broad opportunity for the free exchange of ideas) into the hands of the government, and determined to exterminate any schools that aren't completely controlled by the government so that they can brainwash all the children in their doctrines.

If that's socialism, may it die forever. In my view, it's way beyond democratic socialism but if it makes you feel better about yourself when you vote for them to call it that, be my guest.

[meridian]

Mcdonnell is saying and doing all he can to gain power. First he has a "fully costed" manifesto and then when the polls didn't improve pledged another £58 billion to buy the votes of the so called "WASPI" women. Of course he could have pledged this money for in work benefits but these people predominantly vote Labour. Or another £1.5 billion a year to subsidise rich commuters (who I guess also probably don't vote Labour ordinarily).

Believe Mcdonnell if you will, but I reckon that puts you top of the gullibility league. I suppose he no longer supports IRA terrorism. Or regrets saying that the thug who threw a fire extinguisher from the top of a tall building onto police below was "the best of our movement".

I'm perhaps an odd person now but I judge people on what they do rather than what they say. People like Mcdonnell or Corbyn have a record of deeds (e.g. Corbyn inviting the head of the IRA to the Houses of Parliament after they had just tried to murder the PM).

Back to Mcdonnell. He was too left wing even for "red" Ken Livingstone who sacked Mcdonnell for dishonestly trying to hoodwink him into setting an illegal budget.

As for Johnson, perhaps he did say that but never in a million years would a Conservative government introduce charges to see a Doctor or use NHS services. It would be electoral suicide.

Believing McDonnell puts people at the top of the gullibility league, but you can trust Johnson....

If that’s what you think, then nothing anyone says will make any difference to you, you’re already in Narnia.

By the way, you’re lying. You don’t “judge people on what they do rather than what they say”. You judge certain people (Labour) on what they say on very specific things that suit your narrative, and you ignore what other certain people (Tory) actually do because it doesn’t suit your narrative. That’s fine, we’re all human and we have our foibles, but if you can’t be honest with yourself then there’s no point carrying on.