Can't beat a bunch of expats discussing tax and benefits. LOL
It's partly because of tax and me being an honest Joe that I live in France, I'm still paying a tax bill that I owe HMRC that I couldn't afford to pay at the time because the money put aside for it was used when I couldn't work for 7 month due to bad health, but being the honest knob I am was, I submitted the tax return anyway and set up a payment plan. I then spent the following 6 month in and out of graft because of illness (which finally led to/caused my transplant in 2013). Now they've finally stopped adding interest, I hope it'll be paid off in 2015.
Just to clarify Algarve, I'm not defending the 5%, I'm just not making the distinction between the two like you. You go on like all benefit scroungers are poor people on the bread line. They (the scroungers) seem to feed em selves every week and get some decent clobber, I couldn't even afford to even feed myself towards the end. To those on benefit/disability that truly need it for one reason or another, absolutely no problem at all, to those that take the piss, just as bad as the 5%.
No, I get that there are piss takers out there Rob, and they should be dealt with. But it's a matter of priority - if we get back the billions those at the top are taking out of the system , we can then spend more on seeking out and hammering the piss takers at the bottom, it's a simple matter of logic.
By the way, here's what I wrote earlier in the thread, just to clarify my position even more: "...not by the scroungers ( who I agree should be sorted, but in proportion to their cost to the country ). "
HMRC are after over 1000 small/medium sized companies and individuals (of all sizes) for a total of £300million, whilst they just negotiated Vodafone's unpaid tax bill down from over £6billion to £1.5billion.
Tells you everything you need to know. HMRC are either unwilling or unable to go after the real tax dodgers whilst pursuing thousands of relatively petty cases for a far lower amount at a much greater cost to the tax payer.
Difficult business innit? When I was working i paid tax through PAYE, couldn't get away with a penny. If my circumstances changed and at the year end, i owed money to HMRC. They made sure they got it. They usually pointed out they had the right to claim it in one payment but would allow a tax-code change to facilitate collection. Meanwhile all these mystery bankers and millionaires are getting away with squillions. How the other half live eh! Of course the other side of the equation is; are we all squeaky clean? I've heard that people pay cash for work or services to avoid the VAT. Something i have NEVER done ....................... obviously. But it still qualifies as tax-dodging. Just different amounts, relative to what you or they have available.
Still entirely possible though Art, because if the rich can afford the expense of the lawyers to avoid it, then it must be worth their while to pay those lawyers; ergo, it must be worth HMRC 's while to pay to challenge it? Of course the government could change the law and then it wouldn't be a problem...
We are not all squeaky clean and that is why the dodge is so brilliant. A billionaire dodger can claim to be no different to a poor sod trying to make ends meet and paying for something cash in hand. Of course there is a difference but it is always good to muddy the waters. I think that it is ultimately more about morality than the law but morality is a dying concept.
Well, I don't know about you lot, but I don't want to pay more tax than I absolutely have to. Do you think the government will spend your money more carefully than you? I don't - I've worked for government departments (as a highly-paid consultant!) and the waste is incredible.
We are not all squeaky clean and that is why the dodge is so brilliant. A billionaire dodger can claim to be no different to a poor sod trying to make ends meet and paying for something cash in hand. Of course there is a difference but it is always good to muddy the waters. I think that it is ultimately more about morality than the law but morality is a dying concept.
Well, I don't know about you lot, but I don't want to pay more tax than I absolutely have to. Do you think the government will spend your money more carefully than you? I don't - I've worked for government departments (as a highly-paid consultant!) and the waste is incredible.
I do wonder how much alienation and disenfranchisement contribute to individual tax evasion or stretching the legal limits of tax avoidance.
Companies are run by directors who see their primary duty as profit maximisation for the shareholders hence the general wish to minimise company tax liabilities.
HMRC are after over 1000 small/medium sued companies and individuals (of all sizes) for a total of £300million, whilst they just negotiated Vodafone's unpaid tax bill down from over £6billion to £1.5billion.
Tells you everything you need to know. HMRC are either unwilling or unable to go after the real tax dodgers whilst Pershing thousands of relatively petty cases for a far lower amount at a much greater cost to the tax payer.
Goes beyond that as probably the top guys at Vodafone is funding the political parties... It's who you know that counts in the murky world of the super rich and their go betweens...
Don't blame people for trying to get away with what they can. Even though I'm not and never will be one, think it's outrageous that high earners have to hand over almost half their earnings just because they are successful. Ridiculous.
Don't blame people for trying to get away with what they can. Even though I'm not and never will be one, think it's outrageous that high earners have to hand over almost half their earnings just because they are successful. Ridiculous.
I have to on a not particularly large salary, why shouldn't they? That is how taxes work.
I see the ultra impressive Ed Balls wants everyone to get a receipt for all payments they make. Says he does - well of course, he needs them to put in his expenses claims doesn't he? Utter moron that one.
Well, I don't know about you lot, but I don't want to pay more tax than I absolutely have to. Do you think the government will spend your money more carefully than you? I don't - I've worked for government departments (as a highly-paid consultant!) and the waste is incredible.
Lend me a fiver
That was a long time ago, sadly! It all went on drugs, booze and loose women, the rest I squandered.
Well, I don't know about you lot, but I don't want to pay more tax than I absolutely have to. Do you think the government will spend your money more carefully than you? I don't - I've worked for government departments (as a highly-paid consultant!) and the waste is incredible.
Lend me a fiver
That was a long time ago, sadly! It all went on drugs, booze and loose women, the rest I squandered.
Don't blame people for trying to get away with what they can. Even though I'm not and never will be one, think it's outrageous that high earners have to hand over almost half their earnings just because they are successful. Ridiculous.
So what you are advocating is a one tier tax system where everyone pays the same, no matter what their circumstances AFKA?
I see the ultra impressive Ed Balls wants everyone to get a receipt for all payments they make. Says he does - well of course, he needs them to put in his expenses claims doesn't he? Utter moron that one.
Not quite what he said was it? From what I can see from reports he was asked a question relating to cash in hand payments assisting tax evasion (untaxed work = circa £150b per annum btw) and stated that households could/should consider requesting a receipt to make sure everything goes through the books. He admitted that he hasn't done it on every occasion in the past but does now since he knows that he is under scrutiny...and presumably needs to put an expenses claim in!
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
Nothing at all, any canny gardener will have two books with receipt stubs. One for the customers and one for the HMRC (tax and or VAT) inspectors. But Ed's too thick to understand such niceties. (I expect he thinks a receipt is the same as an invoice.)
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period. In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more. When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income: Gross Receipt Method Hours Worked Method Good Faith Agreement"
Companies are run by directors who see their primary duty as profit maximisation for the shareholders hence the general wish to minimise company tax liabilities.
Our pensions are invested in the shares of companies like Vodafone and HSBC. More tax paid means smaller dividends and a fall in the share price...
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
Nothing at all, any canny gardener will have two books with receipt stubs. One for the customers and one for the HMRC (tax and or VAT) inspectors. But Ed's too thick to understand such niceties. (I expect he thinks a receipt is the same as an invoice.)
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period. In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more. When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income: Gross Receipt Method Hours Worked Method Good Faith Agreement"
Reading this and knowing the monumental car crash that is the tax regime in Portugal, the UK really has it sussed at the basic level for the vast majority of people with the PAYE system. It's only when we get up to the really rich ( am not talking about your everyday bloke made good earning a million a year here ) that it all goes to pot. Again, because the will to something about it isn't there among the ruling elite...
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
Nothing at all, any canny gardener will have two books with receipt stubs. One for the customers and one for the HMRC (tax and or VAT) inspectors. But Ed's too thick to understand such niceties. (I expect he thinks a receipt is the same as an invoice.)
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period. In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more. When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income: Gross Receipt Method Hours Worked Method Good Faith Agreement"
Reading this and knowing the monumental car crash that is the tax regime in Portugal, the UK really has it sussed at the basic level for the vast majority of people with the PAYE system. It's only when we get up to the really rich ( am not talking about your everyday bloke made good earning a million a year here ) that it all goes to pot. Again, because the will to something about it isn't there among the ruling elite...
Sorry, just flagged you by accident and can't unflag
Im an everyday bloke and I don't earn millions, but I don't think people that do earn millions should pay a higher percent tax than me.
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
Nothing at all, any canny gardener will have two books with receipt stubs. One for the customers and one for the HMRC (tax and or VAT) inspectors. But Ed's too thick to understand such niceties. (I expect he thinks a receipt is the same as an invoice.)
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period. In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more. When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income: Gross Receipt Method Hours Worked Method Good Faith Agreement"
Reading this and knowing the monumental car crash that is the tax regime in Portugal, the UK really has it sussed at the basic level for the vast majority of people with the PAYE system. It's only when we get up to the really rich ( am not talking about your everyday bloke made good earning a million a year here ) that it all goes to pot. Again, because the will to something about it isn't there among the ruling elite...
Sorry, just flagged you by accident and can't unflag
Im an everyday bloke and I don't earn millions, but I don't think people that do earn millions should pay a higher percent tax than me.
Do you think the reverse is true though i.e. should people who earn half as much as you pay the same rate of tax you do?
So I have a piece of paper, a receipt, that proves I have paid the gardener, in case he forgets. What has that got to do with ensuring the gardener declares it for tax?
Nothing at all, any canny gardener will have two books with receipt stubs. One for the customers and one for the HMRC (tax and or VAT) inspectors. But Ed's too thick to understand such niceties. (I expect he thinks a receipt is the same as an invoice.)
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period. In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more. When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income: Gross Receipt Method Hours Worked Method Good Faith Agreement"
Reading this and knowing the monumental car crash that is the tax regime in Portugal, the UK really has it sussed at the basic level for the vast majority of people with the PAYE system. It's only when we get up to the really rich ( am not talking about your everyday bloke made good earning a million a year here ) that it all goes to pot. Again, because the will to something about it isn't there among the ruling elite...
Sorry, just flagged you by accident and can't unflag
Im an everyday bloke and I don't earn millions, but I don't think people that do earn millions should pay a higher percent tax than me.
Do you think the reverse is true though i.e. should people who earn half as much as you pay the same rate of tax you do?
That is basically the same question I am asking of AFKA earlier in the thread BA.
If that were the case, then would the poorest be paying more tax to offset the richest paying less? Or am I getting that all wrong?
I'm all for simplifying the tax regime to a point where there is a tax-free band followed by a flat rate for all PAYE income above that band, with perhaps an additional levy on income above a certain level. The tinkering at the edges of whether the top rate should be 40% or 45% or 50% or 90% is getting us nowhere and seems to only descend into class war. We find ourselves in the absurd position where it is now seen as the norm to be both in receipt of benefits and having to pay income tax and should instead work towards a system where people earning below a certain income are not taxed and receive benefits relative to their circumstances and everyone above that income threshold should not be receiving welfare at all. At the very least it would cut down on an enormous amount of admin work keeping track of all these working claimants.
Comments
By the way, here's what I wrote earlier in the thread, just to clarify my position even more: "...not by the scroungers ( who I agree should be sorted, but in proportion to their cost to the country ). "
Tells you everything you need to know. HMRC are either unwilling or unable to go after the real tax dodgers whilst pursuing thousands of relatively petty cases for a far lower amount at a much greater cost to the tax payer.
When I was working i paid tax through PAYE, couldn't get away with a penny. If my circumstances changed and at the year end, i owed money to HMRC. They made sure they got it. They usually pointed out they had the right to claim it in one payment but would allow a tax-code change to facilitate collection.
Meanwhile all these mystery bankers and millionaires are getting away with squillions. How the other half live eh!
Of course the other side of the equation is; are we all squeaky clean? I've heard that people pay cash for work or services to avoid the VAT.
Something i have NEVER done ....................... obviously. But it still qualifies as tax-dodging. Just different amounts, relative to what you or they have available.
I do wonder how much alienation and disenfranchisement contribute to individual tax evasion or stretching the legal limits of tax avoidance.
Companies are run by directors who see their primary duty as profit maximisation for the shareholders hence the general wish to minimise company tax liabilities.
;-)
Miliband thinks Tory donors are the problem.
Balls thinks its gardeners taking cash in hand.
Both clearly do not live on this planet.
BTW, I don't know if it's true, but an American told me that waiters, etc in the States get charged tax by the IRS based upon a restaurant's turnover divided by the number of waiters multiplied by a percentage for the notional tips they would have received. So ,if staff get tetchy with you in restaurants in the States because you haven't tipped, it's not only because you haven't tipped them it's because they'll be paying tax on money they haven't received!
Edited to add, yes it's true, I've checked the IRS web site:- "As an employer, you must ensure that the total tip income reported to you during any pay period is, at a minimum, equal to 8% of your total receipts for that period.
In calculating 8% of total receipts, you do not include nonallocable (sic) receipts. Nonallocable receipts are defined as receipts for carry out sales and receipts with a service charge added of 10% or more.
When the total reported to you is less than 8%, you must allocate the difference between the actual tip income reported and 8% of gross receipts. There are three methods for allocating tip income:
Gross Receipt Method
Hours Worked Method
Good Faith Agreement"
Im an everyday bloke and I don't earn millions, but I don't think people that do earn millions should pay a higher percent tax than me.
If that were the case, then would the poorest be paying more tax to offset the richest paying less? Or am I getting that all wrong?