Gransnet forums

News & politics

Taxing the wealthy, point of discussion.

(297 Posts)
Whitewavemark2 Sat 12-Oct-24 09:33:06

This is the view of the guardian - I thought it worth a discussion.

Taxing the rich: essential for economic fairness and growth
Powerful vested interests are trying to stop the wealthy from paying their fair share.

Denis Healey is often misquoted as saying he wanted to “squeeze the rich until the pips squeak” in the 1970s. He never actually used that phrase. What Labour’s finance spokesman did predict, however, was that his proposed top tax rate would spark “howls of anguish from the 80,000 people” wealthy enough to pay. With Labour in power again, it seems plus ça change, plus c’est la même chose. On Thursday this newspaper reported that Rachel Reeves, Healey’s successor in the Treasury, was looking at taxing the rich more by increasing capital gains tax. That would be a very good idea. Yet “howls of anguish” fill the airwaves and can be found on newspaper front pages. Ms Reeves should ignore them.
For decades the rich have projected ideas that support their interests, notably by reframing political language to valorise “wealth creators”. Post the financial crisis, this has been a harder sell. But plutocrats won’t easily give up their muscle, privileges and wealth. In Britain, the grossly unfair distribution of power fuels the effort to protect 3,000 individuals in private equity from Labour’s plan to make them pay their fair share in tax. It’s absurd to think that successful capitalists require an annual state subsidy of £188,000 just to perform their roles. However, this is probably only the beginning of Labour’s efforts. On paper, Britain’s tax system seems relatively progressive, with a headline rate of 47% for those earning over £3m. In reality, nearly a quarter of this ultra-wealthy group pays less than 12% in taxes.
The true scale of income inequality in the UK has been obscured by the methods the wealthy use to generate income. Current measurements exclude the capital gains from selling or shutting down businesses – one of the primary ways the rich earn money and benefit from lower tax rates. A 2020 study found that the top 1%’s share of total income had stayed steady at 14% since 1997. However, when capital gains were included, that figure rose to 17%, with the bulk of the increase concentrated among the ultra-wealthy.
Ms Reeves should act to make Britain more productive. This week, the Institute for Fiscal Studies highlighted how the current tax system discourages investment, undermines productivity, and ultimately makes the country poorer. To reform capital gains tax the chancellor should look at the work of researchers from the Centre for Analysis of Taxation (CenTax). Their latest paper provides a blueprint for necessary reforms. It proposes aligning capital gains tax rates with income tax rates, introducing allowances to incentivise productive investment, taxing the increase in an asset’s value when it is inherited, and implementing an exit tax (common in major economies) to prevent individuals from dodging British taxes on gains made while residing in the UK. In total the package would raise £14bn.
Capital gains tax has morphed into a driver of inequality. The top 5,000 taxpayers account for over half of the taxable gains, receiving an average of nearly £7m each. In fact, the benefits per capita are four times higher in London compared with poorer UK regions. Creating a low-poverty, low-inequality society requires, as the Beveridge report declared in 1942, much more than “patching”. But powerful vested interests are pushing to make opposition to taxing the rich a key element of UK economic policy. Ms Reeves must remain committed to building a fairer and more productive economy, and taxing the rich is essential to achieving that goal.

Doodledog Mon 14-Oct-24 18:37:41

Allira

LizzieDrip

Allira I’m sorry but I don’t get your Animal Farm referenceconfused

Obviously I’m very familiar with Orwell’s novella but I don’t see how the themes in the narrative relate to Labour removing tax breaks for private schools.

Obviously you’re making connections that I’m not seeing - perhaps you could enlighten me. Genuinely interested!

It's allegorical, a treatise on social justice and the dangers of totalitariamism

I am well aware of that, but am with Lizzie on not following the connection. What totalitarianism?

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 18:35:39

No, there hasn't.
I've never said that.

LizzieDrip said this:
^IMO abolishing the tax relief for private schools is one of the best things this government has done so far. It’s a move in the right direction … towards social justice for our children.

Social justice for all children? How is that achieved by adding VAT to private school fees? Only the very wealthy will not feel the difference.
The implication is that all children should be equal which would mean all should be state-educated, ie removal of choice.

Casdon Mon 14-Oct-24 18:29:23

Allira

LizzieDrip

…but for those who are struggling to pay school fees…

If people can’t afford school fees they don’t have to pay them. All children in this country have a right to state school education.

That's because we are lucky to have social justice in the UK.

However, we also have choice in this country and removal of people's right to choose would be against the social justice we enjoy in this country.

The right to choose isn’t being eroded though, if people want to send their children to private schools, and plan adequately to cover the costs and known variables plus a contingency, as all sensible planners do, they can still do so? I don’t think there has ever been any suggestion from the government that that won’t continue to be the case?

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 18:28:18

No-one, but no-one, is planning to remove the right to choose.

I don't think they are, although some might be in favour, it seems.

Fleurpepper Mon 14-Oct-24 18:24:47

No-one, but no-one, is planning to remove the right to choose.

Make all schools great for all children, properly funded, small classes, decent staff, buildings and facilities - and the vast majority of people who now choose to go private, will just stop. Same as for health.

MaggsMcG Mon 14-Oct-24 18:23:42

She won't do that because 95% of politicians from all parties are some of those people. No one craps on their own people do they? Same as they won't give up their Fuel Allowance which eoukd in some way make a gesture of faith.

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 18:22:57

LizzieDrip

Allira I’m sorry but I don’t get your Animal Farm referenceconfused

Obviously I’m very familiar with Orwell’s novella but I don’t see how the themes in the narrative relate to Labour removing tax breaks for private schools.

Obviously you’re making connections that I’m not seeing - perhaps you could enlighten me. Genuinely interested!

It's allegorical, a treatise on social justice and the dangers of totalitariamism

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 18:19:42

LizzieDrip

^…but for those who are struggling to pay school fees…^

If people can’t afford school fees they don’t have to pay them. All children in this country have a right to state school education.

That's because we are lucky to have social justice in the UK.

However, we also have choice in this country and removal of people's right to choose would be against the social justice we enjoy in this country.

LizzieDrip Mon 14-Oct-24 18:10:30

Allira I’m sorry but I don’t get your Animal Farm referenceconfused

Obviously I’m very familiar with Orwell’s novella but I don’t see how the themes in the narrative relate to Labour removing tax breaks for private schools.

Obviously you’re making connections that I’m not seeing - perhaps you could enlighten me. Genuinely interested!

Mamardoit Mon 14-Oct-24 17:57:29

Grantanow

I noticed Mullins didn't say how much profit he had made out of his business after paying tax.

If he paid the correct tax and employed many more taxpayers what's it got to do with anyone else.

I would think he made a great deal of money but he had the ability and worked hard and I dare say took risks.

Fleurpepper Mon 14-Oct-24 17:52:02

Again, Lablur can't really tax the SUPER rich as they will 'escape'

can't tax the poor, well because ...

so, in the dire situation they have been thrown into, not of their own making, and with so much to do, NHS, education, social services, and all the rest

so WHO do they tax?

ronib Mon 14-Oct-24 17:47:42

MaizieD I think the Bank of England?

LizzieDrip Mon 14-Oct-24 17:47:34

…but for those who are struggling to pay school fees…

If people can’t afford school fees they don’t have to pay them. All children in this country have a right to state school education.

valdali Mon 14-Oct-24 17:35:16

Way back on this thread, there was a poster who bewailed that if their "super-rich" acquaintances had to pay more tax, they wouldn't be able to keep their charitable Foundation afloat. Well no, the money will not go to charity but it -will- go to paying nurses salaries in A&E, paying the benefits people who aren't able to work (cancer sufferers? Suicide survivors in the first few months? Many others who've gone through hell?) rely on to feed themselves & with a bit of luck , keep a roof above their head.And it's all means -tested & the people who need it most get it. Whereas with charities, great work though they do, you can't get away from an element of "who you know" & "who's better at finding what's out there & asking for help". Their money will do at least as much good as tax ££s as it would in a charity. But they won't be able to feel like "Lord & Lady Bountiful" because they have no choice but to give the money.

MaizieD Mon 14-Oct-24 17:26:56

ronib

MaizieD well the State doesn’t seem to have included me in its largesse. I hadn’t noticed money flowing down from the heavens around here. DH is working very hard today….

Where do you think all the UK's money comes from?

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 17:09:41

All children in this country are entitled to free education up to the age of 18 - or 19 if they have to repeat a year.

Social justice?
That has nothing to do with it, a red herring.

The fact that some parents prefer to pay for private education for their children is not depriving the majority of a free education. The net amount raised by VAT on school fees is a tiny drop in the ocean of the country's economy.
It will mean nothing to the super-rich but for those who are struggling to pay school fees at the moment for whatever reason it could make a huge difference.

Unless Labour targets the inequalities in the tax system and closes loopholes then they will continue tinkering around the edges of what they claim is a black hole in the country's finances.
Which is all a complete nonsense anyway.

Notagranyet24 Mon 14-Oct-24 16:47:08

So 4,500 millionaires have left the country, well aren't they the lucky ones to have houses overseas. I'm sure many of us would love to be able to do the same.
As to them being employers, one hopes Mr Al Fayed is not typical but some of these people who employ are nasty b*ggers who expect lot for their money.

yrhengastan62 Mon 14-Oct-24 16:45:07

Entirely agree, I'm aware of wealthy people who have they didn't pay tax some years. In brief, the "tax break" was setting up a company that now employs 30 people presumably supporting their families.

Fleurpepper Mon 14-Oct-24 16:44:39

FriedGreenTomatoes2

“Among our Socialist opponents,” Sir Winston Churchill wrote, “there is great confusion. Some of them regard private enterprise as a predatory tiger to be shot. Others look on it as a cow they can milk. Only a handful see it for what it really is—the strong and willing horse that pulls the whole cart along.”

Unfortunately that does not work- the very rich, with all the loopholes they can afford to find, do NOT pull the whole cart along.

And yes, it is very unfair that we, and our very successful enterprisers and innovators, are the one to pay, and do all the pulling.

Doodledog Mon 14-Oct-24 16:28:13

ronib

Well let’s hope that this government starts taxing anyone using private healthcare so that NHS operations can catch up. How many millions on the list? The principle is the same- if principle and government can be applied?

That would be great. I can't see it happening in this budget, but maybe next time?

Allira Mon 14-Oct-24 16:11:17

LizzieDrip

IMO abolishing the tax relief for private schools is one of the best things this government has done so far. It’s a move in the right direction … towards social justice for our children.

It was made clear during the election campaign that they would do this, so people voted them in knowing it would happen. No surprises🤷‍♀️

🤔

Animal Farm.

LizzieDrip Mon 14-Oct-24 16:07:50

Well let’s hope that this government starts taxing anyone using private healthcare so that NHS operations can catch up

I agree Ronib.

Wyllow3 Mon 14-Oct-24 15:56:34

Available facts on drops in enrolment in both the private and state sector, roughly equal, due to falling numbers overall

"The Independent Schools Council (ISC) said a survey of 1,185 member schools in the UK found their rolls fell by 1.7% when the school year started last month, compared with 2023".

However in the state sector:

"However, figures for England show that state school enrolments have also been falling, mainly because of the UK’s declining birthrate over the past decade.

The DfE said there was a 2.3% fall in the number of applications for primary school places this September, and a 1.7% fall in secondary school applications.

ronib Mon 14-Oct-24 15:55:35

Well let’s hope that this government starts taxing anyone using private healthcare so that NHS operations can catch up. How many millions on the list? The principle is the same- if principle and government can be applied?

LizzieDrip Mon 14-Oct-24 15:47:07

IMO abolishing the tax relief for private schools is one of the best things this government has done so far. It’s a move in the right direction … towards social justice for our children.

It was made clear during the election campaign that they would do this, so people voted them in knowing it would happen. No surprises🤷‍♀️