Funds Insider - Opening the door to funds

Welcome to the Citywire Funds Insider Forums, where members share investment ideas and discuss everything to do with their money.

You'll need to log in or set up an account to start new discussions or reply to existing ones. See you inside!

Notification

Icon
Error
Increased taxation for the older generation?
+ Reply to discussion
Options
Easyrider
Posted: 09 December 2020 17:43:40(UTC)
#335

Joined: 09/11/2020(UTC)
Posts: 1,951
Tug Boat;140722 wrote:
I see you dodged the SIPP question.

However that’s not my point. The issue is the complexity, there are so many exceptions it’s unworkable like the current tax system.


Apologies, an oversight, not deliberate. Trust law can be changed if it is considered necessary, and there is the political will to do so.
The Government enacted Trust law so it can change it.
As WW2 demonstrates, Governments can have almost unlimited power to do what they consider necessary in a serious National emergency.
IMO we face a serious economic National emergency.
Back to top Quote
NoMoreKickingCans
Posted: 09 December 2020 18:27:57(UTC)
#339

Joined: 26/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 4,470

Thanks: 4548 times
Was thanked: 8771 time(s) in 3091 post(s)
Quote:
IMO we face a serious economic National emergency.


Now an entirely self generated one by an incompetent leader and failing SAGE.

Release the ridiculous lockdowns, just wash your hands and keep a bit of distance. Stop the furlough payments. Stop spending 75% of the entire NHS budget on utterly futile mass testing. Cancel the excess vaccines and try to get the money back.

Stop panicking, stop testing, reverse the fear propaganda, sack Vallance & Whitty, Normalise.
Back to top Quote
2 users thanked NoMoreKickingCans for this post.
Keith Cobby on 09/12/2020(UTC), W.B on 11/12/2020(UTC)
ANDREW FOSTER
Posted: 09 December 2020 18:38:25(UTC)
#337

Joined: 23/07/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8,126

Thanks: 11371 times
Was thanked: 18239 time(s) in 5983 post(s)
NoMoreKickingCans;140737 wrote:


We need a 2% or 3% internet tax on all non UK domiciled companies selling on the internet. And some way of hitting the super rich where it hurts. But since the super rich run everything that doesn’t happen.


How can you even collect that? let me give you an example...

I bought a phone last year. I bought it via an American Web site. Paid with Paypal. The Fulfillment was from a Chinese distributor. They sent to the phone to me. Via Switzerland to bypass EU Tariffs. So it entered the EU via an FTA and in the end got delivered to my house.

Where did the transaction actually occur? Which company should be paying the taxes?

It would be trivial to set up a UK Domiciled company to accept the order, but it would make very little "profit", all the profit would be elsewhere in the supply chain. But hey, I met your condition.

That's how easy it is to bypass any rules you can come up with.
Back to top Quote
3 users thanked ANDREW FOSTER for this post.
For What It's Worth on 09/12/2020(UTC), Tim D on 09/12/2020(UTC), W.B on 11/12/2020(UTC)
Tim D
Posted: 09 December 2020 23:50:26(UTC)
#338

Joined: 07/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 8,883

Thanks: 33209 times
Was thanked: 24362 time(s) in 7229 post(s)
NoMoreKickingCans;140737 wrote:
We need a 2% or 3% internet tax on all non UK domiciled companies selling on the internet.


Uh, I thought they'd already done that.

And Google and Apple and Amazon promptly passed the increased costs straight onto their customers and platform users:
https://www.theguardian....-uk-digital-service-tax .
https://www.telegraph.co...-bear-cost-uk-tech-tax/
https://tamebay.com/2020...rvices-tax-uk-smes.html

So Google and Apple and Amazon lose nothing and UK businesses end up bearing the cost of it all.

A tax-raising result, but probably not the intended one.

Unless those UK businesses defected to using.... uh, what?
Back to top Quote
 |  Edit by user
1 user thanked Tim D for this post.
Easyrider on 10/12/2020(UTC)
Tim D
Posted: 10 December 2020 00:42:20(UTC)
#304

Joined: 07/06/2017(UTC)
Posts: 8,883

Thanks: 33209 times
Was thanked: 24362 time(s) in 7229 post(s)
Tim D;140513 wrote:
Self-proclaimed UK Wealth Tax Commission unveiling their final report tomorrow (Wednesday 9th December).

Online event (Zoom, I think) at 16:00-17:30 can be registered for (until sometime Weds. morning) at
https://www.lse.ac.uk/Ev...020/12/202012091000/tax
(and click "How can I attend?")


Watched it live. Think it's available at https://fb.watch/2h9eTI0P4b/ . 90 mins.

More interesting than expected (I have yet to properly chew over the report itself). Starts slow but gets better; the 3rd section from Emma Chamberlain particularly good. They make a good case for, if such a thing was bought in, this is how it should be done. Particularly the "one off" and "no exemptions" aspect.... primary residence, pensions (even ones already paying out)... nothing out of scope.

However a recurring theme was "...but it'd be better to just reform the existing taxation regime...".

Bits which particularly stuck with me:

- The alternatives (to raise the same amount of money) to that headline "5% of everything over £500K" are (from memory) 9p on basic rate or 6p on all income tax bands or 6p on VAT.

- In the Q&A they show a map of the regional hit (from the baseline proposal): over 20% raised from the South East, 3% from the North East, 8% from Scotland, 5% from Wales.

However, I was also rather left with the impression "this'll never happen" and "the politicians would fudge this... and completely mess it up" (IMHO I suspect they'd be forced into carve-outs for the sacred cows of primary residences and pensions, despite this report making a strong case for "horizontal equity" across all assets).

But really, I just can't see the current govt going down this route.
Back to top Quote
 |  Edit by user
1 user thanked Tim D for this post.
Easyrider on 10/12/2020(UTC)
NoMoreKickingCans
Posted: 10 December 2020 00:55:05(UTC)
#341

Joined: 26/02/2012(UTC)
Posts: 4,470

Thanks: 4548 times
Was thanked: 8771 time(s) in 3091 post(s)
Quote:
So Google and Apple and Amazon lose nothing and UK businesses end up bearing the cost of it all.

A tax-raising result, but probably not the intended one.

No I don’t agree. The whole point is that when you tax some things and not others you tilt the playing field. It doesn’t matter who is paying the tax the playing field is now tilted. So if someone buying a book from amazon has to pay 3% more then it helps the high street book seller. And if Amazon insists the publisher pays the 3% then it incentivises the publisher to look for other distribution routes - like the high street bookseller. If Amazon want to charge their advertising clients 3% more - well it makes other advertising routes a bit more attractive.

And what is the alternative - just allow every market in the UK to be run by US and Chinese companies that pay no UK tax - disasterous.
Back to top Quote
4 users thanked NoMoreKickingCans for this post.
Tim D on 10/12/2020(UTC), Guest on 10/12/2020(UTC), Easyrider on 10/12/2020(UTC), W.B on 11/12/2020(UTC)
SimonHughes
Posted: 10 December 2020 06:23:07(UTC)
#342

Joined: 07/08/2018(UTC)
Posts: 1,267

Thanks: 1253 times
Was thanked: 2840 time(s) in 904 post(s)
An article against a wealth tax "Wealth taxes are not the answer to our financial woes" in the Spectator can be seen Here
Back to top Quote
2 users thanked SimonHughes for this post.
Easyrider on 10/12/2020(UTC), Tim D on 10/12/2020(UTC)
Easyrider
Posted: 10 December 2020 09:50:15(UTC)
#343

Joined: 09/11/2020(UTC)
Posts: 1,951
I also can't see a Conservative Government introducing a specific new tax called a wealth tax although I can envisage a Labour or a Lib-Lab alliance doing so.
There are bunches of low-lying fruit which could be more readily picked: restricting tax relief on pension contributions to the standard rate; introducing a ceiling on the value of ISA holdings; increasing inheritance tax (which is a quasi- wealth tax); increasing Council tax on expensive properties (which is a quasi-wealth tax); increasing transactions taxes on expensive goods and services such as expensive cars, expensive houses, stocks and yachts (which is a proxy wealth tax); and of course increasing income tax (say 80% on incomes over £0.5k.
The latter won't raise much money but would go down well politically.
IMO some form of wealth tax is inevitable given the huge disparity of wealth in this country which has been accentuated by quantitative easing, and the possible limited scope to increase revenue by raising income tax, which could be subject to diminishing marginal returns.
With regard to the older generation, as they are the major consumers of health services provided by the NHS, there must be the possibility that they may be required to pay NICs after retirement, which would effectively raise their standard tax rate.
Back to top Quote
1 user thanked Easyrider for this post.
Tim D on 10/12/2020(UTC)
anglo29
Posted: 13 December 2020 11:00:50(UTC)
#340

Joined: 04/12/2015(UTC)
Posts: 779
NoMoreKickingCans;140745 wrote:
[quote]IMO we face a serious economic National emergency.[/qu

Stop panicking, stop testing, reverse the fear propaganda, sack Vallance & Whitty, Normalise.



Could we not also sack virtually the entire sycophantic Cabinet, who seem incapable/unwilling to answer direct questions when challenged for fear of upsetting Boris?
Back to top Quote
ANDREW FOSTER
Posted: 13 December 2020 11:07:00(UTC)
#346

Joined: 23/07/2019(UTC)
Posts: 8,126

Thanks: 11371 times
Was thanked: 18239 time(s) in 5983 post(s)

There will be two big "costless" taxes coming soon.

We won't be sending a proportion of VAT to Brussels any more.

Nor will we be sending them any import duty either...

Both are instant bonuses to the treasury.
Back to top Quote
85 Pages«Previous page3233343536Next page»
+ Reply to discussion

Markets

Other markets