Rachel Reeves to raise taxes?

David49

growstuff

David49

It’s pretty clear we are going to get more taxation, there are many ways to do that. More than that we already have some benefits that are means tested, expect much more of that, WFA is just the start.
I want the tax I pay go to those that need it, not frittered away on handouts to those that don’t

So if you don't want benefits frittered away on those who don't need it, I assume you're in favour of the scrapping of WFA.

Absolutely, Yes

Ah! So Rachel Reeves has done something good in your view.

David49

A wealth tax has been mentioned, that has already been ruled out by Labour, I think it’s a bad idea, because a lot of wealth is held in property and business capital, it’s not readily available for paying tax. Many business only make 5% or less Return on Capital so a 2% wealth tax would be especially harmful. (assuming we want to encourage enterprise)
When the business closes, is sold or transferred then cash to pay tax is available

There have been far too many tax concessions given to those that don’t need them by the Tories to win votes, time to divert those where they are needed.

But many people with wealth do make more than 5% interest - and it's a far easier way to make money than going out to work every day (I'm not talking about SMEs).

A wealth tax has been mentioned, that has already been ruled out by Labour, I think it’s a bad idea, because a lot of wealth is held in property and business capital, it’s not readily available for paying tax. Many business only make 5% or less Return on Capital so a 2% wealth tax would be especially harmful. (assuming we want to encourage enterprise)
When the business closes, is sold or transferred then cash to pay tax is available

There have been far too many tax concessions given to those that don’t need them by the Tories to win votes, time to divert those where they are needed.

growstuff

David49

It’s pretty clear we are going to get more taxation, there are many ways to do that. More than that we already have some benefits that are means tested, expect much more of that, WFA is just the start.
I want the tax I pay go to those that need it, not frittered away on handouts to those that don’t

So if you don't want benefits frittered away on those who don't need it, I assume you're in favour of the scrapping of WFA.

Absolutely, Yes

Tough times call for tough measures, I’ve never known any government not impose its toughest budget of the term in year 1. I think she will work within the terms set out in the Manifesto - but not doing things that will cost a lot of money in year one isn’t an indicator that they won’t happen within the parliamentary term - and anybody who thinks that it would have been any easier for the population as a whole if there was a Tory government instead is burying their head. The country is in a financial mess, which has to be improved, all the experts are saying that. There are always winners and losers, and nobody wants to see anybody go cold or hungry - but sadly that has been happening for years already, and there isn’t a magic wand.

I can't see Rachel Reeves wanting to hurt the super wealthy. I think she is much more likely to reduce services. It is reported that she wants to keep the cap on benefits for families with more than two children, thus keeping small children poorer than they need be, she has already taken away the means to help older people keep themselves warm without worry and she wants to cut the amount spent on social security. Is this really what people wanted when they voted in a supposedly Labour Government?

Ronib and whst makes things worse is they are targeting pensioners , because they have fell for the narrative that all pensioners are rich !! Sadly pensioners are expendable as they have no clout , yet we are the ones eho worked so hard after the war and turned things around

MrsMatt

The same political party who said in April this year that they support pensioners, and no pensioner should have to sit indoors in their coat because they can't afford to put the heating on. Then decide to cut the Heating payment to Pensioners unless on Pension Credit.

Please don’t mention that or the video of Starmer challenging Sunak about the wrongness of removing the WFA from pensioners!

Message deleted by Gransnet. Here's a link to our Talk guidelines.

The same political party who said in April this year that they support pensioners, and no pensioner should have to sit indoors in their coat because they can't afford to put the heating on. Then decide to cut the Heating payment to Pensioners unless on Pension Credit.

MaizieD a bit later perhaps am busy mostly- I think it’s an important topic to discuss and investigate.
I do have an awareness of the very wealthy and my impression is of a highly mobile group who are not necessarily tied to any one area. Back to the dusting ….

Lady Mone ( Michelle to her friends) is a pretty wealthy woman with a former British based company and a seat in the Upper Chamber.
She lives in the Isle of Man, which gives her significant tax advantages.
I understand that there is a lawsuit pending to claim back £122 million from her business which she set up in the pandemic.
How can we say that her "entrepreneurial skills" have benefitted us? They seem to have benefitted her, for sure.

I read about the 0.01 % in The Observer yesterday, but I am sure there will be other sources.

I really don't think that just because someone has extreme wealth, they are necessarily limited in their interests, so that they would uproot their family and leave their social network in order to hang on to a bit of money that they don't need, rather than stay in a vibrant city where they have made a life for themselves.

ronib

A quick google search shows the opposite
Ilovecheese but how true the reports are is a guess.

How about some links to this research, ronib.

I'm sure I could find research that backs up Ilovecheese.

Apologies. Incomplete URL on that last link. Try this:

patrioticmillionaires.uk/latest-news/report-out-of-touch-when-it-comes-to-taxing-extreme-wealth-the-house-of-commons-flags-behind-even-the-richest-in-the-country

Some further reading.

From November 2023:

UK millionaires group projects ‘tax our wealth’ on to Treasury and Bank of England

www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/21/uk-millionaires-tax-wealth-treasury-jeremy-hunt-patriotic-millionaires-uk

The imposition of a 2% tax on those with more than £10m of assets could raise £22bn a year, or more than £420m a week, they claimed. “That could pay for the average salary cost of more than 600,000 nurses a year – more than three-quarters of the UK’s nursing workforce,” the group said.

*Whether you subscribe to the claim or not, there’s the alleged black hole in public finances filled right there.

A YouGov survey found that three-quarters of Britons support a wealth tax. Research by Patriotic Millionaires of those with investable assets of £1m found that 68% of the richest people in the country supported the introduction of wealth taxes.

yougov.co.uk/politics/articles/45044-three-quarters-britons-support-wealth-taxes-millio

patrioticmillionaires.uk/latest-news/report-out-of-touch-when-it-comes-to-taxing-extreme-wealth-the-house-of-commons-flags-behind-even-the-richest-in-the-c

A quick google search shows the opposite
Ilovecheese but how true the reports are is a guess.

Don't leave I meant.

But they don't. In other European countries that have introduced a wealth tax only 0.01% of the very wealthy relocated. I think people do the very wealthy a disservice by assuming they are all cultural philistines who would rather save a few quid that they don't need rather than enjoy the rich cultural and social opportunities that London offers.

keepingquiet same here but you can bet your bottom dollar that the wealth creators know exactly when to jump ship. That’s the difference between us and them?

keepingquiet

So much speculation about an event that hasn't yet taken place.
This government has a huge mandate and can pretty much do what it wants regardless.

All this speculaculation reminds me of people standing on a beach expecting a tsunami...

I will ride the tide whatever it brings, but only when it's actually here.

👏👏👏👏

So much speculation about an event that hasn't yet taken place.
This government has a huge mandate and can pretty much do what it wants regardless.

All this speculaculation reminds me of people standing on a beach expecting a tsunami...

I will ride the tide whatever it brings, but only when it's actually here.

David49

MaizieD

P.S Perhaps you'd like to give us some concrete examples of his suggestions that would affect 'ordinary' people on PAYE and who also pay indirect taxes, such as VAT.

Those working, “on PAYE” will pay more indirect taxes, fuel, alchohol, insurance and all the others they are not the main target
It’s those with “wealth”, property, investments, inheritance are an easy target for increase taxation, reading these pages there are a lot of “ordinary” gransnetters who are going to be paying more.

Concrete examples from the Taxing Wealth Report?

You're the one who thinks it will affect more than just the wealthy. So far you've just been talking in general terms unrelated to Murphy's proposals.

ronib

Growstuff having a late breakfast….

Of course!