Dirty Tax avoiding b*stards

[Strokes]

It's £41,865 and only applies to any money earned over that amount.

You ought to be in favour of a tougher stance on tax avoiders. If the rich paid their share then you would either get a tax cut or better services.

Good I probably won't hit 40k+ for a good decade.

what firmer stance on tax avoiders are you talking about? They haven't done anything wrong and there are only a few solutions really. One force the Swiss and other tax havens inline with ourselves, 2 become a tax haven ourselves, 3 leave the EU and apply a tax to all companies operating in UK but not based here. I quite like option 3.

[Nalis]

One of the main roles in my job is to manage the corporate administration and registration of tax efficient structures (I've sold my soul, I know...).

The biggest gripe is that, due to the admin costs involved, the tax benefits are less than the costs of set up for someone on a average amount of capital. However, for the mega rich the costs are small in the grand scale of things. Bottom line - making the rich richer.

A lot of what is said about tackling tax avoidance by the UK govt. is just lip service.

There is no way the UK will take significant steps to combat tax avoidance as if we tighten our regimes it makes us less competitive compared to other countries. The only way we would is if other countries towed the line also.

[Rob1742]

I have a few points on this:

1. If you do well, build a business and lucky enough to be in the highest earning tax bracket. After you have paid your corporation tax and NI and Personal Tax, or Dividend tax,,however you do it, you come out with well under HALF of your profit after overheads.

To employ people, all the hassle of running a business etc and coming out with under half of what you have made, drives people to find ways of paying less tax.

2. The government has created the situation where you do well, you have to pay more as a percentage than anyone else, which is wrong in my opinion, so they have created this current sutuation. We all should pay the same percentage after the first £10,000 and then maybe everyone would feel it fair.

3. Pots and kettles spring to mind. I recall someone doing some work for me and he was moaning about Starbucks. Quite a shock to him when I said "well you insist on cash in hand" so you are worse than them as at least what they are doing is legal.

4. People at the rock face are fleecing the government every single day, builders, decorators, gardeners, handy men, etc etc, cash in hand. Our country is littered with them. So what percentage of their income will they actually pay in tax?? Probably way less than 10 when I look at some of the individuals that I have known. Yet people that do well and do it correctly end up paying around 55 percent of there profits in one tax or another. No wonder they look at legally trying to reduce that.

Make everyone pay equal tax as a percentage then there will be more money in the economy and more businesses and individuals will flourish. Also if we all paid the same percentage, maybe everybody will feel that we should all do the ethical thing and either stop cash in hand and stop the avoidance schemes

[Vicki Vixen]

The article is not about personal tax and it's not about UK tax. It's about multinational companies who are advised by big accounting firms to set up a complex global network of companies (many of which have no employees and are just a corporate shell to hold or divert profits) in order to minimise tax. This might be Amazon selling to EU customers from Luxembourg, or Google signing advertising contracts for EU customers from Ireland. There are many other examples.

The only organisations that have any ability to change these practices are the international accounting boards (IASB and FASB) who could rule that sales must be recognised in the country where the customer is based as opposed to the country where the seller is based. They won't do this unless they are lobbied by governments, which unfortunately will not happen as there are too many vested interests.

[Sir Fynwy]

I have a few points on this:

1. If you do well, build a business and lucky enough to be in the highest earning tax bracket. After you have paid your corporation tax and NI and Personal Tax, or Dividend tax,,however you do it, you come out with well under HALF of your profit after overheads.

To employ people, all the hassle of running a business etc and coming out with under half of what you have made, drives people to find ways of paying less tax.

2. The government has created the situation where you do well, you have to pay more as a percentage than anyone else, which is wrong in my opinion, so they have created this current sutuation. We all should pay the same percentage after the first £10,000 and then maybe everyone would feel it fair.

3. Pots and kettles spring to mind. I recall someone doing some work for me and he was moaning about Starbucks. Quite a shock to him when I said "well you insist on cash in hand" so you are worse than them as at least what they are doing is legal.

4. People at the rock face are fleecing the government every single day, builders, decorators, gardeners, handy men, etc etc, cash in hand. Our country is littered with them. So what percentage of their income will they actually pay in tax?? Probably way less than 10 when I look at some of the individuals that I have known. Yet people that do well and do it correctly end up paying around 55 percent of there profits in one tax or another. No wonder they look at legally trying to reduce that.

Make everyone pay equal tax as a percentage then there will be more money in the economy and more businesses and individuals will flourish. Also if we all paid the same percentage, maybe everybody will feel that we should all do the ethical thing and either stop cash in hand and stop the avoidance schemes

A flat tax is dumb in my opinion, let those that can afford to pay more pay more, I'm on top rate tax but understand that for society to function we need to support those less fortunate.

[Buce]

A flat tax is dumb in my opinion, let those that can afford to pay more pay more, I'm on top rate tax but understand that for society to function we need to support those less fortunate.

Hear, hear. Well said.

[Carl the Llama]

A flat tax is dumb in my opinion, let those that can afford to pay more pay more, I'm on top rate tax but understand that for society to function we need to support those less fortunate.

Right, I firmly believe that at a certain level of income the whole "you live within your means" argument becomes a bit of a parody - when someone on 18k a year is just about able to live their life in a cheap flat, pay their taxes, and maybe have a couple hundred to put aside at the end of the month, then it's a bit galling to see someone in a higher tax bracket - who can still pay their full tax load and come away with sizeable savings each month - complaining that they should pay less tax.

But before we even start fixing the tax rates we should probably fix income levels to reflect actual value and work put in.  I know a guy who is absolutely useless at his job with a capital U and has shown no signs of improvement over the past year, but because his Grandad owns the company he keeps getting bumped upwards (at Grandad's own foolish expense because the company in question is a small one with plenty of room to grow if they had someone who knew what they were doing in that role - and indeed at my own expense because I work for the fvckers).  Tell me someone like that deserves to pay the same level of tax as a nurse while earning over twice as much and driving around in a flashy car.

[Rincewind]

A flat tax is dumb in my opinion, let those that can afford to pay more pay more, I'm on top rate tax but understand that for society to function we need to support those less fortunate.

As one of the less fortunate I heartily agree.      

[MooseBreath]

A flat tax is dumb in my opinion, let those that can afford to pay more pay more, I'm on top rate tax but understand that for society to function we need to support those less fortunate.

If it's a flat percentage then those that earn more would still pay more. That said I do agree with progressive taxation as long as the levels are set sensibly. Someone on £45k trying to support a family is hardly wealthy.

I'd support a three band system. 20% up to £30k. 30% up to £100k and 40% thereafter. Absolutely no idea how this would work in terms of revenue, but it would seem to represent modern incomes a bit better than the current bands.

[lavrentis]

I would say people earning £30k-£50k are hit hardest with taxes and I would reduce tax for these.