• We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue without changing your settings, we'll assume that you are happy to receive all cookies from this website. Read more here

Politics Today

fred binneys head

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Apr 1, 2004
Messages
21,915
Location
Loving the boy Stanno
(8) Putting Dole Up To £1K A Week | Kevin Bridges: A Whole Different Story - YouTube

This is a great set from Kevin Bridges, an alternative to trickle-down economics :ROFLMAO:
 

MJP_Exeter

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
9,233
Location
Honiton
The idea that lots of folk dabble in the dark arts of offshore tax avoidance/evasion is yet more nonsense. It is a very small minority and HMRC does catch some of them. The penalties for those caught are severe.

Of course it serves the interests of dozy politicians to argue there is money galore to be collected to pay for their ambitious spending plans thus avoiding telling us the Great Unwashed that we will have to foot the bill.

The dozy members of the public lap this crap up of course.
HM Revenue & Customs publishes annual estimates of the tax gap, the difference between tax that is collected and that which is ‘theoretically due’. In September 2021 HMRC published revised estimates, which put the tax gap at £35 billion for 2019/20, representing 5.3% of total tax liabilities. It is estimated that in 2019/20 the financial loss from tax avoidance was £1.5 billion, while the cost of tax evasion was £5.5 billion.

Theoretical liability is the tax that would be collected if all individuals and companies complied with both the letter and the spirit of the law. The tax gap estimated top down is the difference between theoretical liability and total tax collected.

I would argue that a tax gap of 5.3% is worth fighting for. This is evidence from 2019/20.

Also trickle down economics

Using inflation-adjusted wealth data from archive copies of the Rich List, it said the combined wealth of Britain's billionaires had risen from £53.9bn in 1990 to more than £653bn in 2022. “This represents an increase in billionaire wealth of over 1,000% over the past 32 years,”



1675775919567.png

1675775987810.png


1675776005862.png
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
14,700
HM Revenue & Customs publishes annual estimates of the tax gap, the difference between tax that is collected and that which is ‘theoretically due’. In September 2021 HMRC published revised estimates, which put the tax gap at £35 billion for 2019/20, representing 5.3% of total tax liabilities. It is estimated that in 2019/20 the financial loss from tax avoidance was £1.5 billion, while the cost of tax evasion was £5.5 billion.

Theoretical liability is the tax that would be collected if all individuals and companies complied with both the letter and the spirit of the law. The tax gap estimated top down is the difference between theoretical liability and total tax collected.

I would argue that a tax gap of 5.3% is worth fighting for. This is evidence from 2019/20.

Also trickle down economics

Using inflation-adjusted wealth data from archive copies of the Rich List, it said the combined wealth of Britain's billionaires had risen from £53.9bn in 1990 to more than £653bn in 2022. “This represents an increase in billionaire wealth of over 1,000% over the past 32 years,”



View attachment 10945

View attachment 10946


View attachment 10947
Not sure what you're trying to illustrate there. Let's break it down simply:

1) Do you believe in trickle down economics?
2) If not, do you believe we should the highest earners 80% (or more)?
3) If your answer to 2) is no, then why?
4) If your answer to 2) is yes, don't you think said highest earners will move elsewhere or start to consider doing stuff offshore.
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
32,673
Location
Busy knitting muesli
Not sure what you're trying to illustrate there. Let's break it down simply:

1) Do you believe in trickle down economics?
2) If not, do you believe we should the highest earners 80% (or more)?
3) If your answer to 2) is no, then why?
4) If your answer to 2) is yes, don't you think said highest earners will move elsewhere or start to consider doing stuff offshore.
1) NO
2) We should "what" the highest earners? - give them all 80% guaranteed minimum bonus from the public purse?
3) If my interpolation of question 2) is correct then, again, NO
4) Most already do. A major influx of money to the "London Laundrette" in recent years has been from dodgy foreign oligarchs from repressive regimes trying to salt their own ill-gottens away.
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
14,700
1) NO
2) We should "what" the highest earners? - give them all 80% guaranteed minimum bonus from the public purse?
3) If my interpolation of question 2) is correct then, again, NO
4) Most already do. A major influx of money to the "London Laundrette" in recent years has been from dodgy foreign oligarchs from repressive regimes trying to salt their own ill-gottens away.
tax the highest earners 80%
 

Mr Jinx

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Nov 28, 2006
Messages
14,700
4) Most already do.
How do you know this? Where is the study and breakdown? Oligarchs do not make up the lion's share of high earners. It's nothing more than a lazy assumption.
 

Grecian2K

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 9, 2004
Messages
32,673
Location
Busy knitting muesli
Now come on Jigzy...you're just having a Laff(-er) there, surely?
 

Spanks

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Jul 9, 2019
Messages
1,472
tax the highest earners 80%
Lazy assumption back at you, Mr J.
 

angelic upstart

Very well known Exeweb poster
Joined
Jul 8, 2004
Messages
27,444
How do you know this? Where is the study and breakdown? Oligarchs do not make up the lion's share of high earners. It's nothing more than a lazy assumption.
The lions share of high earners also can't leave it he country for their job cos they're PAYE. Close down non dom status and problem solved.
 

MJP_Exeter

Well-known Exeweb poster
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
9,233
Location
Honiton
Not sure what you're trying to illustrate there. Let's break it down simply:

1) Do you believe in trickle down economics?
2) If not, do you believe we should the highest earners 80% (or more)?
3) If your answer to 2) is no, then why?
4) If your answer to 2) is yes, don't you think said highest earners will move elsewhere or start to consider doing stuff offshore.
The tax gap is tax which is due, whether in sprit or actual law. I believe that tax gap should be zero. This is not a call for increased taxes but a call for Avoidance and Evasion to be prevent and stopped. This tax gap equates to over 5% of the tax take and around £35b. This would pay back what Truss lost and be able to be used towards things like public services etc.

The point is, if your Trickle down economics work, how come only the richest have seen wealth increases? Considerable ones at that. How come disposable income across almost all other wealth areas has decreased? Poverty is as high as its ever been, Public services are underfunded and crumbling, Food banks soaring, Wages stagnant at best. Where is the trickle down of investment and job creation from the rich at the moment.

On your questions

1/ No. It is proven ********.
2/ Where have i asked for high earners to be taxed at 80%? Literally not idea where this has come from. We need to ensure they pay what they are due and also a fair proportion based on the wealth they hold.
3/ It doesn't work and is proven to not work. In reality wealth trickles up. If you give poor people more money, they spend it within our economy, creating jobs etc. and a nice eco system of movement of money. If you give rich people money, as proven and stated by the current prime minister when discussing the corporation tax reduction, they simple hold on to it and investment doesn't increase etc.
4/ aS ABOVE.
 
Top