If you could start from scratch, what philosophical principles would you want to underpin our taxation system?

Who was it who suggested that the system should be based on an assumption of being blind to your own situation? i.e. what would be fair if you were born into a rich/poor/middle family, if you were able-bodied or disabled in some way, if you were an only child/one of two/had a mass of siblings, if you had two caring parents/a single parent/uncaring or irresponsible parents/were adopted, etc. etc. I think that might be a good starting point.

Sounds like Marxism to me, as anno said.

I have been trying to find out how much of tax is paid by business and how much by individuals, but I cant find the answer.

Meanwhile I came across this
www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/personalfinance/tax/11233686/How-top-3000-earners-pay-more-tax-than-bottom-9-million.html

That doesnt seem fair to me.
I presume that the statisitic is right though?

What would seem fair to you, soon?

Absent I think you are thinking of the veil of ignorance, or the original position, the philosophy of John Rawlls.
The idea is that to form an ethical idea, you start from a position of no personal advantage.
en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Veil_of_ignorance

soontobe

The Equality Trust reported from 2011/12 figures that:

Income
"the poorest fifth of society have only 8% of the total income, whereas the top fifth have just less than half (41%)."

and:

Wealth
"The richest 10% of households hold 44% of all wealth. The poorest 50% own just 9.5%."

and

"Compared to other developed countries, the UK has a very unequal distribution of income. Out of the 30 OECD countries in the LIS data set, the UK is the fourth most unequal .."

How fair is that?

Probably got worse since then, Eloethan.

www.jrf.org.uk/general-election-hub

13 million in poverty. That's why the top earners have to pay more tax. Unless you want to see dead bodies on the streets.

My link talks about those paying tax, not those that dont.

9,000,000 v 3,000

So 1 of those individuals is paying the same tax as 3,000 ordinary tax payers.

Anno That was my new comprehensive school's motto.

"from each according to his/her ability; to each according to his/her needs."

What would all these excutives do if we all earned lot's of money and nobody want to clean the office toilets or collect the rubbish from the streets, or clean the sewers of Fatbergs.
Those poorly paid at the bottom of the job pile are those who keep the country functioning. They are the ones who deserve better pay, and less taxation not the very rich who can afford to pay.

The following comment relate to those that earn their wealth, not those that inherit it.

We need people that have minds capable of earning high salaries, they are the one that drive our businesses and create wealth for the rest of us. They already pay very high percentages of tax related to their income.
Provided the wealthy spend or invest their wealth (very few hoard it) that filters down to all of us. ie. the reason a Rolls Royce is expensive is because it take far more work to build than the average car - more work for the working man to do.
If we over tax the wealthy, those brains will leave the country, not a good plan.
The very poor are a different issue, we need determine how they have reached that situation in an economy that should give everyone a reasonable income.

If an ordinary tax payer pays £2000 in tax

£2000 x 3,000 = £6 million.

If I was paying 6 million in tax each year, I am beginning to see their perspective. A lot. If I was paying the same tax as 3,000 people, I think I would be shouting a lot about quite a lot of things too.

I would probably think I should have a louder voice about things.
Well, well.

Those who are talented most times already have easy options to leave.
Raising taxes just makes the option even easier.

They are not appreciated anyway.

Go doctors, go dentists, go talent, go small business owners.

Freedom from Want.

STB, I am a little confused with the meaning of your post. However, I don't rate Doctors. dentists etc as our very high earners. Our high earners tend to be entrepreneurs, bankers, leaders of financial institutions and captains of business. Often theses people skill are spread across a range of businesses.
As you rightly say they are already in a position to easily move their base to any country, so we have to attract them to stay.
Having said all that, IMO, wealth is now a global thing, the wealthy earn their money from the global economy rather than any one country. What we need , is to persuade companies to invest in Britain to provide employment.

The problem is pompa that the sort of wealth distribution we have creates unrest and social division. We cannot just approach this in purely money terms. The theory that there is a trickle down effect from wealth-creators to those less well off just doesn't wash with those at the bottom of the pile, and who can blame them?

There has to be some visible fairness.

That is the fault of the system, not the wealthy. what you describe is socialism, which as we seen in communist countries also does not work as they have some of the poorest and most corrupt.

Pompa suggests that 'brains' will leave the country if we tax them too much and then redefines 'brains' to mean commercially acute entrepreneurs and the people who manipulate money. One reason people leave this country is because they see more opportunity elsewhere, which may include higher income. The entrepreneurs and inventors of the Industrial Revolution were proud to invest in the place where they lived, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Birmingham - and London. Globalisation means that many rich people only have a sentimental attachment to their place of birth and that includes avoiding paying tax if they can. Look at all the celebrity Scottish Nationalists who made public statements in favour of independence. Where do they live and where do they spend their money?

I am not advocating pure socialism, which does as you rightly say not work to the benefit of the poorer members of society.

But those in the UK who are poor/disabled or otherwise disadvantaged find it hard to swallow the sort of Tory policies that favour the rich - they want to see a bit of fairness. That is all - they have no expectations of being rich. I am not blaming the wealthy for being wealthy, but recognise that policies that keep them obscenely wealthy stick in the throats of the poorer members of society.

Pompa suggests that 'brains' will leave the country if we tax them too much and then redefines 'brains' to mean commercially acute entrepreneurs and the people who manipulate money

They do have brains! We may not like or approve of what some of them do, but they do have brains!
Surely you know that?

* The entrepreneurs and inventors of the Industrial Revolution were proud to invest in the place where they lived, Manchester, Leeds, Sheffield, Newcastle, Birmingham - and London*

Therein lies a very big problem.
Being patriotic about England is a very big no no.
It is acceptable to be patriotic about Scotland or Wales, but never England unless it is sport related.

Firstly soontobe dont believe anything you read in the Telegraph about unfair taxation, and talent leaving the country; the paper is owned by famed tax dodging owners so they are not really going to report in a balanced manner. To my mind, the taxation system has been tinkered with and adjusted so much over the 200 years or so of its existence that it is no longer efficient, which is presumably the philosophy behind your initial question grannytwice? There have been some slight improvements in the working of the system, the RTI (Real Time Information) system now ensures that HMRC has up to date figures for PAYE earnings and thus working people in tax credits no longer have the worry of having to repay inadvertent overpayments at the end of the tax year. But, on a whole scheme basis, I think there has to be more transparency, more shaming of people like Phillip Green of Arcadia group who have their company incomes paid outside of the UK and thus dodge millions and millions of pounds in corporation taxes. The amount of tax unpaid/underpaid by corporations would go an awful long way to balancing the books, apart from the moral question. So, my plan if I was in charge of the taxation system would be public availability of figures showing what these corporations pay. Glad to see France are taking a stand by the way, they have just jailed a member of the Ninna Ricci perfume empire for tax dodging, details of which came out as part of the HMRC leaks. Sorry for the ramble, but I get very very angry about taxation and the unfairness of it all.

Fairness, honesty and a social conscience would go a long way to bringing in the tax revenues needed to pay off national debt and provide all the services the population needs.
PAYE for everyone!

Many people seem to have no social conscience nowadays; in the days of the wellknown entrepeneurs they were philanthropic and the wealthy industrialists built whole villages so that their workers could live in decent accommodation. Nowadays the very wealthy avoid paying their fair share of tax and buy ego boosting football clubs, huge yachts and spend millions on parties, offsprings' weddings etc.

And another philosopy should simply be 'simplification'.

The tax system in this country is over-complicated.

It is well known about talent leaving the country.

I have no idea if you are right about the Telegraph and unfair taxation.