What is a fair salary as we head into the future?

Your precious EU is fully on board
Nothing "precious" about the EU and I am fully aware that EU membership is not a solution to this particular dilemma. The point was more that the "Leave consensus" seems to be falling apart and now they are blaming "Remainers" for the fact that Brexit is a "mess".

and "FUKK RIGHT OFF THIS IS YOUR FAULT" is extended to any fool who voted leave dreaming of "sunlit uplands", "Lexit" and/or a fully funded NHS...
 
Nothing "precious" about the EU and I am fully aware that EU membership is not a solution to this particular dilemma. The point was more that the "Leave consensus" seems to be falling apart and now they are blaming "Remainers" for the fact that Brexit is a "mess".

and "FUKK RIGHT OFF THIS IS YOUR FAULT" is extended to any fool who voted leave dreaming of "sunlit uplands", "Lexit" and/or a fully funded NHS...

It was completely irrelevant to the point of the topic as well so I assumed you thought the EU provided a better tax environment than the UK does.

Also, it is not all anyone's fault. We live in a democracy and voting is acknowledging that the vote is valid. Accepting the result and conceding defeat when beaten is a requirement for a functioning decision making process. Brexit wasn't wanted by MPs and so was never given a chance. It might not be the best idea but by fighting against your own side it prevents us as a whole getting the best we can from the opposition. A united front is always stronger but remainers couldn't accept that they lost. They aren't wholly to blame but they share the blame. As do you by validating the referendum by voting in it and not convincing enough people that leaving was the wrong decision.

Soundbites like "sunlit uplands" show that you never listened to any of the reasons for brexit and after 3+years you still haven't done any research to understand it. You've just listened to the soundbites and the memes decided everyone else must be wrong.
 
It was off topic granted.
It might not be the best idea but by fighting against your own side it prevents us as a whole getting the best we can from the opposition. A united front is always stronger but remainers couldn't accept that they lost. They aren't wholly to blame but they share the blame.
As soon as Theresa May laid down the "red lines" that were immutable to the Tory party there was no way that any Remainer would have anything to do with such a deal. So no, it is not the fault of Remainers in any shape or form. "You lost get over it" we were told. There was no attempt at establishing a consensus. I like many "Remainers" would have accepted a compromise along the lines of SM+CU+FoM but the "red lines" threw that away.

Trying to share the blame now that the "mess" is becoming achingly obvious is cowardice.

Soundbites like "sunlit uplands" show that you never listened to any of the reasons for brexit and after 3+years you still haven't done any research to understand it.
I'm quoting the soundbites of "Leave", I have asked and tried to rationalise people voting for Brexit and there is no coherent or common reasoning that I can identify. To an extent I understand the frustration with the situation that people find themselves in after years of Tory imposed austerity but what I cannot find is any reason to blame the EU for it yet this was the Farage line. Turkey is joining the EU, remember that one? The EU army, that one? £350million for the NHS? Easiest ever deal the day after we vote leave, a classic?

Never mind me not understanding you seem to be suffering from Stockholm Syndrome you refuse to see the mess that your vote and your beliefs have caused, now you are blaming the people trying to steer away from the cliff edge for your view of the approaching sea.
 
Capitalism is an amoral system with only one objective - profit.

It is like the Alien as described by the robot crew member. It destroys everything in its path but he 'admires its purity'.

As long as it exists there can be no redistribution comrades! * searches for red flag emoji*
 
I’m afraid 99.9% of those at the top don’t give a feck about those lower down or at the bottom. They live in the best areas so unlikely to be affected by crime an if they get sick they can skip the NHS queue an get private health care straight away. Things are only going to get worse for the majority of us and increasing poverty and the social problems that come with it will increase. An equal and fair society is, in reality, a pipe dream - especially with a Tory government running things


🐔
 
It's predominantly on social media and those who want want want but won't work work work for it.
The thing is Randy, work, work. work. very often does not provide a wage that a person can live off without government intervention. And even then a person needs to jump through so many hoops to get help, degrading and humiliating themselves in the process and stripping themselves of any pride and dignity they had .............................
 
The thing is Randy, work, work. work. very often does not provide a wage that a person can live off without government intervention. And even then a person needs to jump through so many hoops to get help, degrading and humiliating themselves in the process and stripping themselves of any pride and dignity they had .............................
I get that I do, been there and done it myself.

But the likes of Bezos who get unjustified hate because they are billionaires from work and not trust funds setup by daddy annoys me.
 
OK, Bezos was merely a well known figure and as you say he did start from a pretty humble beginning.

Let's talk about a much better example, Hugh Grosvenor, 7th Duke of Westminster. Hugh Richard Louis Grosvenor is the third child and only son of Gerald Grosvenor, 6th Duke of Westminster, on the death of his father he inherited an estate worth £9 billion (his sisters also received large trust funds estimated to be in the region of £1 billion - jointly or each depending on who you believe) this wealth is held in a trust, of which Grosvenor is a beneficial owner but not the legal owner—an arrangement that received considerable press attention, owing to the inheritance tax exemption it confers.

Anyone think this is "fair"?

Estates like this need to be broken up. That is not to say reduce poor Hugh and his sisters to penury, attractive though that might sound, but reduce the inherited wealth by about half perhaps? Had he had to pay Inheritance Tax he SHOULD have paid £3.5 billion. This is the sort of thievery that the Tories excuse by making an example of middle income families when Labour talk about tax increases.
 
You completely ignored the part where I said the idea of trickle down is fine but the current version of it doesn't work because the methods of the trickle are dammed at the top of the hill by an inadequate taxation system. You have never experienced life in a trickle-down economy, it's never been given a go., just something that looks like it.



This is a global problem and one that needs a consensus to fix because the issue is globalised companies moving profits to low tax countries. A sales tax will just see businesses passing on the tax to the customer via price increases. The proper way to do it is to tax transfers between subsidiary companies. The current setup allows for the business in Luxembourg with no tax to pay generating all of the profit by allowing its subsidiaries in the UK to use its intellectual property by paying for the rights. That is seen as a cost to the business in the UK wiping out all profits and leaving no tax to pay. If you tax that transfer then the issue goes away because there is no benefit to making the transfer.



As for this. Your precious EU is fully on board with tax dodging and trickle-down and allows, and even encourages, global businesses to use these methods. It could be the bigger man and set a minimum tax level or blacklist companies that pay no tax but it knows all of the companies would just leave to somewhere outside the EU that will allow it.
The political class wont chase tax dodgers and avoiders: its part of the system they perpetuate and protect.
Its much more in step to blame "benefit cheats" and "scroungers" - because most people know someone in poverty and never comes into contact with the Billionaire cheaters.
Austerity is Miss Smith`s fault at no. 27. She claims 2.30 GBPs for each child - and shes got three - and they`ve all got different dads...........
We`ve all heard that ballox.
 
There's no chance of this cesspit of a country looking to reform its laws on tax avoidance for both corporations and individuals.

There's little point in pointing the finger at the EU, we've voted to come out, and the main reason for that being pushed by the nation's wealthy was to make their avoidance/evasion even easier.
 
I get that I do, been there and done it myself.

But the likes of Bezos who get unjustified hate because they are billionaires from work and not trust funds setup by daddy annoys me.

I agree with the sentiment, and Bezos has done amazingly well to get where he has and I don't begrudge him that. However, he was helped on his way by a $250k investment/loan from his parents so it's not quite the rags to riches story it may first appear.

Again I don't disagree with the sentiment, but best to have the whole story out there
 
'We live in a democracy'.

How can we live in a democracy' when the financial transactions within the economy are secret. We're voting blindly until we are able to see how the nation's wealth (and with it power) is divided.

I've read comments by yourself, boromike, with regards to IR35 and I can't fault your sentiments in many ways, but why should those from the working class be restricted the practices used by the nation's wealthy.?

There shouldn't be a need for tax fiddling accountancy practices but let's level the playing field first and fix the loopholes purposely engineered by the wealthy.
 
'We live in a democracy'.

How can we live in a democracy' when the financial transactions within the economy are secret. We're voting blindly until we are able to see how the nation's wealth (and with it power) is divided.

I've read comments by yourself, boromike, with regards to IR35 and I can't fault your sentiments in many ways, but why should those from the working class be restricted the practices used by the nation's wealthy.?

There shouldn't be a need for tax fiddling accountancy practices but let's level the playing field first and fix the loopholes purposely engineered by the wealthy.


You're not going to get any arguments out of me on that. I agree fully. The tax situation is the problem because people aren't paying their fair share (I include billionaires, contractors and cash in hand businesses in that). Our hairdresser comes round our house to cut our hair and charges half what they do in the salon/barber and yet she's just upgraded her BMW X6 to a Porsche Panamera. It doesn't affect me that she's not paying tax but there are millions of people doing that and it adds up, though still not to what the billionaires are doing. The problem is though that it isn't fair. I am a lowly PAYE, like the majority of the country, and we don't have the option of tax dodging. All those others not playing fair might individually not be benefitting massively but they are unfairly giving themselves an advantage over all the others that do play by the rules.

We know the Tories aren't going to do anything about it. The people that fund them don't want it but Labour need to sell it better, and commit to it when they get a chance. They had 13 years under Blair and Brown and did nothing to combat tax dodging. If Labour don't take the chance then where do we turn to? Setting tax levels is a tricky business. Fora start, people only see what they are putting in and can't contextualise how much it affects everyone else so politically it is difficult to mess with taxes. The government need to decide whether they want to maximise tax take or take it more fairly. At the moment they are happy with the amount and don't care about the fairness in who is paying it. It seems like having both is impossible because the more they increase it the more beneficial it is for the wealthy to pay someone to avoid it for them. Global businesses means we lose the small amount of tax we do get if we enforce it properly because they change their HQ to Luxembourg or Ireland etc.

The alternative, levelling the playing field by allowing people at all levels to tax dodge will only benefit the wealthy again because it means there'd be nothing in the system to fund the essential services that the less wealthy need.

I know what the problems are and what I want the tax system to achieve but I don't know what the solution is.

Anyone think this is "fair"?

No. The principal of it seems legitimate, father dies and leaves business to son, it is the amount of money involved which makes it a problem and the fact that it isn't legitimately a business as it is a property portfolio and the value is in the assets and not the business. Inheritance is the single biggest cause of inequality in the world and the biggest obstacle to social mobility. People that inherit capital tend to be rich and stay rich.
 
I know what the problems are and what I want the tax system to achieve but I don't know what the solution is.
Sadly, when someone comes along who is prepared to address this inequality the smears start. And I'm afraid that people fall for it every time. You see the lies parroted on here. When a wealthy man wants to make the system fairer he is a "hypocrite" when a poor man wishes to level the playing field it is "the politics of envy".

I know what will never solve it.

Voting Conservative. (The clue is in the name)
 
needs to be huge tax reform, the majority should be along the lines of PAYE....

LTD companies - with hubby & wife setup should be much more towards PAYE & no 'dividend' bollox
cash in hand people are free loading on everyone else's taxes - not contributing to anything & that needs to stop..

however the biggest dodgers are the multinationals - for me, something along the lines of pay tax at point of delivery, not in some admin room in Dublin or Lux - though they need to be paying more in the UK.

& as its a football board: any player in the UK league, needs to be paying full PAYE in this country - no exception - & all clubs must be registered here & liable for full UK corporate taxes.

Way too much offshoring going on to the detriment of the majority..
 
Economies and types of employment are going to change dramatically in the coming decades. One of the things that the last few months has shown is that many high salary jobs aren't really that important after all. If these jobs didn't exist, no one would really notice. It's been people in less valued jobs that have kept the country running. But surely things will have to change? Many people see those on benefits as a burdon on the nation's finances. But they extract a measly sum from the economy say compared to someone earning £100k per year plus. If the UK's wealth was spread about more evenly you'd have pretty much the whole population living a better life. Most of the problems in society would soon be eliminated. But are those who earn more willing to take less. Or will their greed be an everlasting fixture resulting in a much inferior society to what otherwise could be achieved.

No, they won't.

The people paid the most will be those highest skilled, or those that can or are willing to do a job that no other can, or there is a lot less competition for. This makes them the most important to private sector employers/ company owners, as this makes them the most money/ or keeps them afloat. The guy at the top on 200k might be one of a kind, and irreplaceable, the 10 guys on 20k are crucial, but easily replaced. That one guy on 200k is paying more in tax than 40 guys on 20k.

You need the option to earn more to give the best something to aim for, if there's nothing to aim for then the best don't try, and everyone ends up worse off.

Just because someone is on good money does not make them a tax dodger, just because someone is paid $hit doesn't mean they pay all their tax.

Even as a Labour voter I realise we need those that are on high pay, people just don't like to admit it. If there were no private companies and the government or local councils ran everything then the uk would be broke within a year.
 
No, they won't.

The people paid the most will be those highest skilled, or those that can or are willing to do a job that no other can, or there is a lot less competition for. This makes them the most important to private sector employers/ company owners, as this makes them the most money/ or keeps them afloat. The guy at the top on 200k might be one of a kind, and irreplaceable, the 10 guys on 20k are crucial, but easily replaced. That one guy on 200k is paying more in tax than 40 guys on 20k.

You need the option to earn more to give the best something to aim for, if there's nothing to aim for then the best don't try, and everyone ends up worse off.

Just because someone is on good money does not make them a tax dodger, just because someone is paid $hit doesn't mean they pay all their tax.

Even as a Labour voter I realise we need those that are on high pay, people just don't like to admit it. If there were no private companies and the government or local councils ran everything then the uk would be broke within a year.

High pay doesn't have to equal tax dodging but we know it does, and that definitely includes contractors who seem to think that accepting reduced benefits (which is a falsehood) means they are entitled to not pay tax (especially NI & employers NI) by taking it as dividends. It helps the big businesses and it helps the contractors but it doesn't help the public purse and so shouldn't be allowed. Contractors always forget that they can get annual leave, pension, sick pay etc. but they are supposed to pay themselves it. The arrangement means it isn't their "client" that isn't paying it but their own Ltd.

If contractors are such essential specialists then they should have no problem earning the same amount after tax as they do now by charging a higher rate to cover the higher tax payments.

Tbh, Employers NI is a ridiculous tax that should be scrapped anyway. It's daft to have such a barrier to employment when the money can be collected another way anyway. Keep the money in businesses and employees pockets instead and let them spend it in the economy.
 
You're not going to get any arguments out of me on that. I agree fully. The tax situation is the problem because people aren't paying their fair share (I include billionaires, contractors and cash in hand businesses in that). Our hairdresser comes round our house to cut our hair and charges half what they do in the salon/barber and yet she's just upgraded her BMW X6 to a Porsche Panamera. .

Has she specifically told you that she is doing it as a tax dodge? Majority of hair dressers pay huge fees to have a space in a salon, which is why the majority of them cut hair outside of the salon as well as even charging half price she is probably making more from the appointment than she would be in the Salon. I believe it's rare for them to be salaried / paid hourly, and they are generally self employed. Without knowing what else they do, it seems a large assumption to make. My girlfriends hairdresser for example, makes £5k month on OnlyFans as a gay model. Obviously not applicable to everyone, but plenty of people have a side hustle, and their partners can also have a significant income, but even without that its far from rare for hairdressers to cut hair outside of the salon for cheaper without it being a tax dodge.
 
Has she specifically told you that she is doing it as a tax dodge? Majority of hair dressers pay huge fees to have a space in a salon, which is why the majority of them cut hair outside of the salon as well as even charging half price she is probably making more from the appointment than she would be in the Salon. I believe it's rare for them to be salaried / paid hourly, and they are generally self employed. Without knowing what else they do, it seems a large assumption to make. My girlfriends hairdresser for example, makes £5k month on OnlyFans as a gay model. Obviously not applicable to everyone, but plenty of people have a side hustle, and their partners can also have a significant income, but even without that its far from rare for hairdressers to cut hair outside of the salon for cheaper without it being a tax dodge.

No. I've never discussed it, I've just done the maths. She gets £25 out of the Mrs and is at ours for an hour plus there's travelling time so about £20ph which is decent money but not £70k+ car money. Plus this is Liverpool where people are not averse to breaking the rules. Her husband is a roofer so maybe he's on much better money than I think. You are right though, I don't have any idea how much she takes home or pays in tax and it could be all legit.
 
Back
Top