So, who votes for a government that improves the lives of Bankers, and ensures the excessive profits of energy companies, but needs all the "levelling up" money to pay for the holes in Brexit?

You obviously know little about the financial services sector from personal experience, Cossy. I speak from personal experience. Try calculating the amount of tax and NI which will be paid on bonuses, for a start. As I have already said, if the bankers don’t get paid their bonuses the money is just going to stay in the coffers of the banks. What good will that do anyone (except perhaps the likes of me who hold bank shares)?

I’m sure you would consider that my earnings were immoral too. But there was a time in my life when I had to choose between feeding my son and feeding myself. Don’t assume that everyone who is or has been a ‘fat cat’ knows nothing of what it’s like to struggle.

Germanshepherdsmum

There seems to be a perception that bankers don’t pay tax on their bonuses. They do, and they are subject to the PAYE system as they are employees, not self-employed.

I have already said, WWM, that regulations affecting the financial sector have been considerably tightened up since the crash.

I the paying tax the whole point. You know they will find ways to pay as little as possible - who wouldn't if the government allows. However, at the same time that same government is holding down lower wages/salaries. I would guess that would rub salt into the wounds for most.

I is

The only way that removing the cap benefits those outside the sector is by growing the economy by enabling the sector to be more competitive and increasing tax revenue if bonuses are taken in cash - you can’t dodge PAYE. Given the way bank shares have performed during the last few years, share options aren’t particularly attractive.

Germanshepherdsmum

All the usual suspects, GG. Those who don’t have it always blame those who do.

My goodness that is a massive assumption. I am sure that some undoubtedly have quite a lot of it, but choose not to broadcast the fact.

Interesting to read that you have worked closely with money laundering GSM

The claim that those who criticise the wealth gap in the U.K. are jealous and always blame the rich are echoing the Tories who have always used it as an excuse to avoid introducing greater equity via the tax system.

It is a poor argument and one that simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Societies who have greater equality, as the U.K. did post-war WW11 are proven to be less divisive, more cohesive and successful.

It would be good to hear why the only way that seems to be under consideration to "grow the economy" is through paying people more in financial services. I wonder why this would be. It seems a very limited and short-term action and certainly will not help with levelling-up. That money has basically been spent already filling Brexit holes.

Whitewavemark2

The claim that those who criticise the wealth gap in the U.K. are jealous and always blame the rich are echoing the Tories who have always used it as an excuse to avoid introducing greater equity via the tax system.

It is a poor argument and one that simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Societies who have greater equality, as the U.K. did post-war WW11 are proven to be less divisive, more cohesive and successful.

... and grow Whitewave the growth and the changes in society after the war were amazing.

Germanshepherdsmum

Clearly not only are you patronising you make huge inaccurate assumptions, clearly not at your level but I worked in the City in both banking and insurance, as does my step-daughter, so actually I do speak from personal experience. I received performance bonuses when the bank made profits of 10% of my annual salary and was very pleased to receive them. However I also lost two of my jobs in the early nineties, along with many others, due to irresponsible boards of directors. I have no issue with wealth, nor hard workers being well rewarded, however it’s all about what’s reasonable and clearly you and I have very different moral compasses and ethos. For me, a cap of twice one’s annual salary for bonuses is more than reasonable and I’m well aware of tax and NI as I was a higher rate tax payer, however it’s how our taxes that are distributed that is part of the issue. I state again this uplift of the bonus cap will benefit no one other the top 5% income earners. Kindly stop with your patronising tone and incorrect assumptions

Whitewavemark2

Interesting to read that you have worked closely with money laundering GSM

Solicitors do. Very closely. And have done so for a long time.

Whitewavemark2

Germanshepherdsmum

All the usual suspects, GG. Those who don’t have it always blame those who do.

My goodness that is a massive assumption. I am sure that some undoubtedly have quite a lot of it, but choose not to broadcast the fact.

it really is an assumption. I don't know when it became such a weird thing to care about other people worse off than you or care about those that a vulnerable

DaisyAnne

It would be good to hear why the only way that seems to be under consideration to "grow the economy" is through paying people more in financial services. I wonder why this would be. It seems a very limited and short-term action and certainly will not help with levelling-up. That money has basically been spent already filling Brexit holes.

We have yet to hear what else will be put forward. Little or nothing has been said or done since the Queen died, for obvious reasons. The Chancellor is due to make a statement after the funeral. Then we will have something else to argue about.

Whitewavemark2

The claim that those who criticise the wealth gap in the U.K. are jealous and always blame the rich are echoing the Tories who have always used it as an excuse to avoid introducing greater equity via the tax system.

It is a poor argument and one that simply doesn’t stand up to scrutiny.

Societies who have greater equality, as the U.K. did post-war WW11 are proven to be less divisive, more cohesive and successful.

Exactly! What patronising assumptions! It is because I know so many people in the top echelons of FS, that I know about the loopholes re tax.

I do not mind people earning large sums of money, as long as they pay their dues.

Germanshepherdsmum

Whitewavemark2

Interesting to read that you have worked closely with money laundering GSM

Solicitors do. Very closely. And have done so for a long time.

Oh I see. I didn’t realise that you were an anti-money laundering solicitor, I thought your expertise lay elsewhere?

I sometime worked on cases relating to vast quantities of money laundering, for the revenue. I found it fascinating and very challenging getting the evidence together.

Cossy

Germanshepherdsmum

Clearly not only are you patronising you make huge inaccurate assumptions, clearly not at your level but I worked in the City in both banking and insurance, as does my step-daughter, so actually I do speak from personal experience. I received performance bonuses when the bank made profits of 10% of my annual salary and was very pleased to receive them. However I also lost two of my jobs in the early nineties, along with many others, due to irresponsible boards of directors. I have no issue with wealth, nor hard workers being well rewarded, however it’s all about what’s reasonable and clearly you and I have very different moral compasses and ethos. For me, a cap of twice one’s annual salary for bonuses is more than reasonable and I’m well aware of tax and NI as I was a higher rate tax payer, however it’s how our taxes that are distributed that is part of the issue. I state again this uplift of the bonus cap will benefit no one other the top 5% income earners. Kindly stop with your patronising tone and incorrect assumptions

At the risk of being patronising again, a 10% bonus indicates that you were not working at a senior level. As do your posts. People in quite junior positions in the financial sector pay higher rate tax.

Your assumption as regards my moral compass is insulting, as doubtless you will find my reply.

I have yet to hear from you or anyone else how the lifting of the cap on bonuses will penalise anybody.

I have yet to hear from you or anyone else how the lifting of the cap on bonuses will penalise anybody.

Then you clearly do not understand the risks.

Whitewavemark2

Germanshepherdsmum

Whitewavemark2

Interesting to read that you have worked closely with money laundering GSM

Solicitors do. Very closely. And have done so for a long time.

Oh I see. I didn’t realise that you were an anti-money laundering solicitor, I thought your expertise lay elsewhere?

I sometime worked on cases relating to vast quantities of money laundering, for the revenue. I found it fascinating and very challenging getting the evidence together.

My specialism was commercial real estate. Big deals. I'm surprised, given your background, that you don't realise that all solicitors who may receive money from clients have to verify its source - even at the risk of losing the client. Every law firm has to have a money laundering officer amongst its partners, who risks imprisonment if money laundering is found to have taken place on their watch. I have even been obliged to ask an Oxbridge college to verify the source of its money destined for investment in a major redevelopment scheme - that should show you how seriously the profession takes that risk. Naturally, being intelligent people, they understood why questions were asked. I also had a potential client who did not; maybe they featured in your work WWM.

Whitewavemark2

*I have yet to hear from you or anyone else how the lifting of the cap on bonuses will penalise anybody.*

Then you clearly do not understand the risks.

What risks exactly, given the immense tightening up of regulations including the separation of investment and retail banking?

GSM

To be completely honest my dear, I’m not insulted because I care very little for your negative opinions of me. Please don waste your very valuable time responding to such a “junior” person as I, I’m clearly not worthy of the effort. Enjoy the rest of your long weekend, I know I will

I never did get an answer to the question I asked a day or two ago. Which was, where do the commercial companies which receive loans/services from investment banks get the money from with which to pay the interest and fees n these loans and services?

Would our banking expert like to tell me?

Germanshepherdsmum

Whitewavemark2

Germanshepherdsmum

Whitewavemark2

Interesting to read that you have worked closely with money laundering GSM

Solicitors do. Very closely. And have done so for a long time.

Oh I see. I didn’t realise that you were an anti-money laundering solicitor, I thought your expertise lay elsewhere?

I sometime worked on cases relating to vast quantities of money laundering, for the revenue. I found it fascinating and very challenging getting the evidence together.

My specialism was commercial real estate. Big deals. I'm surprised, given your background, that you don't realise that all solicitors who may receive money from clients have to verify its source - even at the risk of losing the client. Every law firm has to have a money laundering officer amongst its partners, who risks imprisonment if money laundering is found to have taken place on their watch. I have even been obliged to ask an Oxbridge college to verify the source of its money destined for investment in a major redevelopment scheme - that should show you how seriously the profession takes that risk. Naturally, being intelligent people, they understood why questions were asked. I also had a potential client who did not; maybe they featured in your work WWM.

??? another assumption about what a poster does or does not know! I knew you were a solicitor, but simply not what your specialism was. For goodness sake get a grip??.

Yes of course you have to verify source, and are legally obliged to advise the revenue if you suspect laundering, but that is where your involvement ended. Revenue then take up the baton, and that is where the work begins.

But by no means are all these cases reported either by solicitors or banks, either because of conflict of interest, ignorance or laziness.

The amount of property bought this way together with other assets, like art work etc is evidence of this.

@DaisyAnne
Brain washed sheep, who think they are higher up the pay scale than they actually are.
I honestly cannot get my head around that people living in awful poverty, vote to make themselves worse off.

I'm a skilled craftsperson/artist. I wish some money was brought my way. I'm exploited by people

It’s known as the working class Tory vote. A conundrum for all sociologists.