The problem is the higher the rate the higher the incentive not to pay it through avoidance or simply leaving the country. They can afford to after all. As pointed out before you then loose all that contribution.or encourages them to try to make more? Has anybody ever been deterred from making money by taxation? I doubt it - except at the bottom end where things like business rates can break a small company
It's an old and oft repeated argument, but in fact nobody has ever demonstrated that these people move about, except for the odd exception. We don't find immigrants from high tax regimes coming here in droves, nor vice versa.
It's been the basis of varied tax rates from day one. Nothing to do with the hard left. The hard right have to tax too and tax the wealthier higher, albeit reluctantly!
Nobody suggests that. It's a "reductio ad absurdam".
You are making the same mistake as JimJay..Because I commented on Saudi Arabia, and later on the UK, does not mean that I think that any other country ( Ireland* whose passport I thankfully hold* , or France , where I now live ) , is perfect, far from it.But neither Ireland, nor France ( despite what you might see about Marine's private party/ family business ) is is any danger of voting to leave the EU based in large part on racism.Not all leave voters in the UK brexit vote were racist, but all racists were leave voters.France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.
Need better law and more collection. More effort is made over benefit fraud which is tiny compared to tax dodgingThe problem is the higher the rate the higher the incentive not to pay it through avoidance
Seems to be a myth. They can't take land and property with them anyway. There is no evidence except for a few mega rich. They also own all the media and tell everybody, loudly and repeatedly, that high taxes are bad! Quelle surprise!!or simply leaving the country.
We have been here before. The problem is we are not talking about illegal avoidance. If you have the money your accountant can legally avoid a lot of tax for you, saving significantly more than they charge. There is a whole industry behind this. If taxation was as simple as you earn X you pay Y% it would be fine and you certainly wouldn’t need to put the rates up to anything like you suggest.Need better law and more collection. More effort is made over benefit fraud which is tiny compared to tax dodging
Seems to be a myth. They can't take land and property with them anyway. There is no evidence except for a few mega rich. They also own all the media and tell everybody, loudly and repeatedly, that high taxes are bad! Quelle surprise!!
Some is , some isn't, a lot is about bending the rules as far as possible.We have been here before. The problem is we are not talking about illegal avoidance.
We need a whole industry collecting it.If you have the money your accountant can legally avoid a lot of tax for you, saving significantly more than they charge. There is a whole industry behind this.
Not until proven, just like tax. Under payment is a bigger issue with benefits.If taxation was as simple as you earn X you pay Y% it would be fine and you certainly wouldn’t need to put the rates up to anything like you suggest.
You can’t compare this to benifit fraud which IS illegal.
Not if it's taxedProperty, land etc has nothing to do with it. They will keep that anyway.
Forms of tax avoidanceA heck of a lot of that is already owned by non dom investors.
Corporation tax is on business profits. Higher tax encourages businesses to reinvest tax free, rather than to take the profits and pay the taxTax is just a business cost, but unlike most (all?) other costs it increases if a business or individual is successful. It is fundamentally different to other business costs which are are normally reduced in delivering a profitable and successful enterprise.
Suggesting that increasing tax will stimulate effort and motivate investment is not just counter-intuitive, it is bizarre. If any other cost is increased, effort is directed towards its reduction or avoidance (there's an interesting and appropriate word).
The Laffer curve is good for a laugh. The optimum level to maximise tax revenues approaches 100%High tax rates encourage the identification of new and innovative ways to avoid it. The Laffer curve is but a theory - but the interesting proposition that there is an optimum level of taxation which maximises tax revenues.
Because the tax will be over and above various levels of lower or tax free income/profit. It doesn't all get taken away.The actual value will vary with different types of taxes, social cohesion etc etc. At the extremes a 0% tax rate generates no tax revenue. A 100% tax rate also generate no tax revenue - why work if it all gets taken away.
Not because of tax - it's because of better pay and conditions, as you seem to have noticed. Higher taxes might pay for better pay and conditions.Aside from avoidance, the option to simply move to a more welcoming regime is real. In the 1960s and 1970s this was a major loss of trained and skilled resource to the UK. Today, there are reports of trained, skilled and striking NHS staff looking overseas for better pay and conditions.
Land, buildings, "real" estate, can't.To assert that individuals are somehow "locked" into the UK is plain implausible. Wealth (property can be sold) can be transferred overseas.
Ask yourself what encouraged them to move. To save you time - the answer is Brexit and the destabilising curse of deregulation...
Companies have little problem in moving - since Brexit many have relocated including Panasonic, Sony, P&O, UBS etc.
Why is it only Jacob's stance that's a "soapbox"? Why aren't the right wing xenophobic viewpoints called thus?Perhaps we could start a new thread, "constructing things in wood for maximum longevity". We could discuss preferred species, and method of construction, to ensure getting the absolute maximum use out of an object.
I will put Jacob's soapbox forward as a very good initial case study.
I wouldn't entirely agree, but have to say I have been made to feel unwelcome on more occasions in France than in any other country I have visited. People often accuse the British of having some kind of superiority complex, some of the French appear to be far worse, in my experience anyway.France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.
I don't think it has anything to do with the view being expressed, rather the desire to ram it down everyone else's throat, and patronize anyone who disagrees. Unpleasant traits whatever your point of view.Why is it only Jacob's stance that's a "soapbox"? Why aren't the right wing xenophobic viewpoints called thus?
Just curious.
I initially read that as intolerant of racists, but now I'm guessing you mean racist and intolerant.France is IMO one of the most racist intolerant countries I’ve worked in. How very different people’s perceptions can be.
Well I'll have to agree to disagree with you. I think there's a lot of that sort of stuff on here, and Jacob, although dogged and uncompromising, is no more unpleasant than some others.I don't think it has anything to do with the view being expressed, rather the desire to ram it down everyone else's throat, and patronize anyone who disagrees. Unpleasant traits whatever your point of view.
Enter your email address to join: