| The budget 06:44 - Nov 4 with 4500 views | chicoazul |
Looks like all the TWTDers who have been lecturing us about how we need to pay more tax it’s our duty the country is in ruins etc are going to get their wish.
I expect the next three years to be absolute halcyon days with the grown ups in charge and income tax & NI seeing the clever people in the treasury raking it in! How exciting! |  |
| |  |
| The budget on 06:56 - Nov 4 with 2498 views | noggin |
Don't worry, those who are against increased taxes will just leave the country. |  |
| |
| The budget on 07:00 - Nov 4 with 2479 views | Benters |
Just like two tiers ‘smash the gangs’ it’s all balls. |  |
| |
| The budget on 07:05 - Nov 4 with 2447 views | chicoazul |
| The budget on 06:56 - Nov 4 by noggin |
Don't worry, those who are against increased taxes will just leave the country. |
Like you did. | |
| |
| The budget on 07:07 - Nov 4 with 2432 views | Benters |
| The budget on 07:05 - Nov 4 by chicoazul |
Like you did. |
I thought that 😂👍 | |
| |
| The budget on 07:07 - Nov 4 with 2431 views | noggin |
| The budget on 07:05 - Nov 4 by chicoazul |
Like you did. |
Yes but I pay more tax now. | |
| |
| The budget on 07:33 - Nov 4 with 2262 views | MattinLondon |
| The budget on 07:07 - Nov 4 by noggin |
Yes but I pay more tax now. |
And probably now experience much better public services. |  | | |
| The budget on 07:38 - Nov 4 with 2242 views | TractorWood |
| The budget on 07:33 - Nov 4 by MattinLondon |
And probably now experience much better public services. |
Public services are badly run. No amount of tax will fix them.
Equally our chancellor doesn't seem to understand the laffer curve. That was her NI shortcoming.
Take the expected plan to introduce ERs NI on LLPs. They will all just incorporate and then gain the power to retain profits. She always neglects to think about the obvious ramifications of her relentless pot hunting. |  |
| |
| The budget on 07:39 - Nov 4 with 2237 views | GlasgowBlue |
| The budget on 07:33 - Nov 4 by MattinLondon |
And probably now experience much better public services. |
With the UK's overall tax burden at its highest level since 1948, I don’t think the levels of tax that is the reason our public services are so poor. |  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| The budget on 07:51 - Nov 4 with 2181 views | football |
I'm pretty sure that when I pay more tax, which is annoying me, I am confident our public services to which it should pay for will not get substantially better. those who earn the most (many because they work darn hard and spent years honing their trade - but not all I get and that does not mean lower paid do not work hard) always seem the easy pickings ahead of making difficult decisions. |  | | |
| The budget on 07:51 - Nov 4 with 2178 views | DJR |
| The budget on 07:39 - Nov 4 by GlasgowBlue |
With the UK's overall tax burden at its highest level since 1948, I don’t think the levels of tax that is the reason our public services are so poor. |
It was austerity wot done it, according to a Nobel prize-winning economist.
https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2024/jun/28/how-the-unforced
Austerity itself was an excuse to shrink the state and we have been suffering the consequences ever since.
EDIT: here is an extract.
To sum up: a decade ago, the main critique of austerity was macroeconomic – it was holding back recovery from the severe recession that followed the global financial crisis. And it did. But that was not the end of the story. Austerity also gradually undermined public services, including healthcare.
What will a Labour government do to reverse this damage? There are two reasons to worry it will fall short.
First, the era of Conservative austerity coincided with an era of low interest rates and substantial excess capacity, exactly the conditions under which Britain should have been investing in its future. The current environment is much less favourable.
Second, Labour’s stated plans lack any ambition to reverse austerity. In the US, the Biden administration came in with bold plans and managed to accomplish a significant fraction of them despite having only a razor-thin congressional majority. I am not hearing anything comparable from Labour, even though Keir Starmer seems on course to have political capital beyond the wildest dreams of US progressives.
I hope to be proved wrong. But right now it looks as though the shadow of austerity policies adopted in error 14 years ago will continue to darken Britain’s prospects for many years to come.
[Post edited 4 Nov 8:02]
|  | | |
| The budget on 08:32 - Nov 4 with 2011 views | OldFart71 |
I think the lesson for Reeves is if you are in a hole don't keep digging. You can't tax yourself to wealth. There are too many people getting money for nothing in Britain. Whilst I am a pensioner and obviously get the State Pension which to by disdain is called a benefit I at least paid N.I. for over fifty years. Many who are on benefits haven't paid a cent into the system and whilst I have absolutely no problem with people genuinely unable to work it's the one's that can and don't that are a huge problem,
What really worries me is Reeves stated after last years budget that she had put things right and wouldn't need to come back asking for more. But she will. She also needs so called Headroom for increased spending as last years headroom disappeared pretty quickly. So will that mean that next year she will be back again ? | | | |
| The budget on 08:39 - Nov 4 with 1971 views | BloomBlue |
How will the public react, after all in their manifesto they promised no tax increases on working people.
Boris was going to increase NI by 1p to help fund the NHS and was attacked for that.
I think Rachel is heading towards the backbenchers in a few years on the opposite side of the house, watching PM Nigel |  | | |
| The budget on 08:47 - Nov 4 with 1914 views | Herbivore |
| The budget on 08:32 - Nov 4 by OldFart71 |
I think the lesson for Reeves is if you are in a hole don't keep digging. You can't tax yourself to wealth. There are too many people getting money for nothing in Britain. Whilst I am a pensioner and obviously get the State Pension which to by disdain is called a benefit I at least paid N.I. for over fifty years. Many who are on benefits haven't paid a cent into the system and whilst I have absolutely no problem with people genuinely unable to work it's the one's that can and don't that are a huge problem,
What really worries me is Reeves stated after last years budget that she had put things right and wouldn't need to come back asking for more. But she will. She also needs so called Headroom for increased spending as last years headroom disappeared pretty quickly. So will that mean that next year she will be back again ? |
A lot of people on universal credit are in work, they are just paid a pitifully low wage. A lot of other people on benefits have disabilities that mean they can't work. The number of people who could work, who live in an area that has jobs that they are capable of doing, but who don't work is very small and would make no real difference to the overall public finances. |  |
| |
| The budget on 08:48 - Nov 4 with 1905 views | Herbivore |
| The budget on 07:38 - Nov 4 by TractorWood |
Public services are badly run. No amount of tax will fix them.
Equally our chancellor doesn't seem to understand the laffer curve. That was her NI shortcoming.
Take the expected plan to introduce ERs NI on LLPs. They will all just incorporate and then gain the power to retain profits. She always neglects to think about the obvious ramifications of her relentless pot hunting. |
And yet when public services are handed over to the private sector they invariably become much worse. | |
| |
| The budget on 08:51 - Nov 4 with 1891 views | iamatractorboy |
Just going to throw this out there: remember that Income Tax is not the only way that people pay tax in this country. Council Tax is an absurd way to collect tax and hits the less well off disproportionately highly. VAT surely also does this. So does the TV licence (I am pro BBC and don't think it should shift to a commercial model, but the licence setup is mad). | | | |
| The budget on 08:54 - Nov 4 with 1862 views | JakeITFC |
The talk of lowering the higher rate threshold to £45,000 is the real head scratcher for me - minimum wage is around £24,000 nowadays and so there really isn’t much jump from literally every full time job to having to pay 40% taxes.
As an aside, the extra employer NI stuff, the increased difficulty to sponsor people on visas and the fact that someone can earn not much less by stacking shelves has absolutely smashed the graduate hiring process. Another example of a generation of people being told to do the right thing (study hard, rack up a load of debt) and then being let down when the time comes for them to be rewarded for it. |  | | |
| The budget on 08:56 - Nov 4 with 1850 views | eireblue |
| The budget on 07:38 - Nov 4 by TractorWood |
Public services are badly run. No amount of tax will fix them.
Equally our chancellor doesn't seem to understand the laffer curve. That was her NI shortcoming.
Take the expected plan to introduce ERs NI on LLPs. They will all just incorporate and then gain the power to retain profits. She always neglects to think about the obvious ramifications of her relentless pot hunting. |
Some people that talk about the laffer curve don’t understand it.
There isn’t a single curve, there isn’t a single point that is optimal on a particular laffer curve.
All you can know is if you are moving towards or away from an optimal point in the curve.
The curve, and optimal point will change over time.
Sometimes raising taxes does raise income for the government, is also what the laffer curve predicts. |  | | |
| The budget on 08:58 - Nov 4 with 1833 views | Herbivore |
| The budget on 08:54 - Nov 4 by JakeITFC |
The talk of lowering the higher rate threshold to £45,000 is the real head scratcher for me - minimum wage is around £24,000 nowadays and so there really isn’t much jump from literally every full time job to having to pay 40% taxes.
As an aside, the extra employer NI stuff, the increased difficulty to sponsor people on visas and the fact that someone can earn not much less by stacking shelves has absolutely smashed the graduate hiring process. Another example of a generation of people being told to do the right thing (study hard, rack up a load of debt) and then being let down when the time comes for them to be rewarded for it. |
That would be mad. The median salary in the UK is about £31.5k and the mean is nearly £37k. Having a higher rate for income tax for people earning not much more than the mean average salary feels off. They should be targeting genuinely high earners, this feels like a regressive rather than progressive approach to taxation. | |
| |
| The budget on 09:00 - Nov 4 with 1813 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The budget on 08:32 - Nov 4 by OldFart71 |
I think the lesson for Reeves is if you are in a hole don't keep digging. You can't tax yourself to wealth. There are too many people getting money for nothing in Britain. Whilst I am a pensioner and obviously get the State Pension which to by disdain is called a benefit I at least paid N.I. for over fifty years. Many who are on benefits haven't paid a cent into the system and whilst I have absolutely no problem with people genuinely unable to work it's the one's that can and don't that are a huge problem,
What really worries me is Reeves stated after last years budget that she had put things right and wouldn't need to come back asking for more. But she will. She also needs so called Headroom for increased spending as last years headroom disappeared pretty quickly. So will that mean that next year she will be back again ? |
It’s reasonable to raise the issue of benefit fraud. It’s substantial. Overpayment on benefits in 24/25 was about £9.5BN. Another area where there are major problems impacting government income include the tax gap. The tax gap is estimated to be £46.8BN per year in 23/24, the largest component being unpaid corporation tax of about £7BN (all figures from here, with links to official sources - https://theferret.scot/claim-costs-asylum-benefit-fraud-tax-mostly-false/).
Cutting benefit fraud/overpayments and closing the tax gap by 50% each would almost fill this supposed £30BN black hole in the public finances. Interestingly/frustratingly, there seems insufficient appetite to cut fraud - HMRC criminal investigations for tax avoidance have reduced from 749 in 2018-19 to 344 in 2023-24 (presumably at least partly due to cost savings in HMRC?).
Of course, stimulating growth would help too; it can’t all be about cutting waste/fraud. But that in part involves talking about the B word and there aren’t enough adults in Westminster to do that yet. |  |
| |
| The budget on 09:00 - Nov 4 with 1813 views | DJR |
| The budget on 08:54 - Nov 4 by JakeITFC |
The talk of lowering the higher rate threshold to £45,000 is the real head scratcher for me - minimum wage is around £24,000 nowadays and so there really isn’t much jump from literally every full time job to having to pay 40% taxes.
As an aside, the extra employer NI stuff, the increased difficulty to sponsor people on visas and the fact that someone can earn not much less by stacking shelves has absolutely smashed the graduate hiring process. Another example of a generation of people being told to do the right thing (study hard, rack up a load of debt) and then being let down when the time comes for them to be rewarded for it. |
That ain't going to happen, especially given the fact that merely freezing allowances is not at all popular, but may well be one of the things they opt for. | | | |
| The budget on 09:01 - Nov 4 with 1807 views | RadioOrwell |
| The budget on 07:38 - Nov 4 by TractorWood |
Public services are badly run. No amount of tax will fix them.
Equally our chancellor doesn't seem to understand the laffer curve. That was her NI shortcoming.
Take the expected plan to introduce ERs NI on LLPs. They will all just incorporate and then gain the power to retain profits. She always neglects to think about the obvious ramifications of her relentless pot hunting. |
You might not understand the Laffer curve.
Precis: Most modern economies are on the left of the curve - Ie increase in tax will increase revenue. |  | | |
| The budget on 09:15 - Nov 4 with 1730 views | FromReuserWithLove |
| The budget on 07:00 - Nov 4 by Benters |
Just like two tiers ‘smash the gangs’ it’s all balls. |
rabid little reformer language. |  | | |
| The budget on 09:16 - Nov 4 with 1734 views | BanksterDebtSlave |
| The budget on 07:39 - Nov 4 by GlasgowBlue |
With the UK's overall tax burden at its highest level since 1948, I don’t think the levels of tax that is the reason our public services are so poor. |
It must be the private companies stealing it for inflated management wages and their share holders then! But pension funds or something.
Tell Sid. [Post edited 4 Nov 9:16]
|  |
| |
| The budget on 09:34 - Nov 4 with 1630 views | Swansea_Blue |
| The budget on 08:58 - Nov 4 by Herbivore |
That would be mad. The median salary in the UK is about £31.5k and the mean is nearly £37k. Having a higher rate for income tax for people earning not much more than the mean average salary feels off. They should be targeting genuinely high earners, this feels like a regressive rather than progressive approach to taxation. |
One the one hand median earners do pay less tax compared to some European countries, so there is an argue for raising taxes (our tax burden is below EU average despite being high for us). On the other, we’ve been hammered by wage stagnation and high living costs compared to such comparator countries. It’s grim for the average worker in the UK right now, so this would be the last thing they need unless there are significant pay rises to increase real terms take home pay (cue arguments about inflation), | |
| |
| The budget on 09:34 - Nov 4 with 1628 views | TractorWood |
| The budget on 09:01 - Nov 4 by RadioOrwell |
You might not understand the Laffer curve.
Precis: Most modern economies are on the left of the curve - Ie increase in tax will increase revenue. |
Did lowering the LEL and increasing NI and CGT raise tax receipts or did it prompt the stalling of the economy and spook business confidence?
Equally by most of the rhetoric on here, if it had there would have been a noticeable increase in the quality of public services because:
HiGHer TAXes = BETtER SErviCes [Post edited 4 Nov 9:36]
| |
| |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
