If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   UK: I know, we'll tax the rich 50%. They'll just lie back and think of England. The rich: My oh my, but isn't tax exile lovely this time of year   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 281
    More: Obvious, Lib Dems, parliamentary debate, Ed Miliband, cull, tax rates, Britain, income taxes  
•       •       •

10786 clicks; posted to Main » on 28 Nov 2012 at 8:18 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



281 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-28 09:02:59 AM
If people making over a million pounds could just hide their money somewhere to avoid the 50% tax rate, why wouldn't they just do it to avoid ANY tax rate?

Keep farking that chicken, conservatives.
 
2012-11-28 09:03:14 AM

GoodyearPimp: Answer: Raise the top tax rate in all countries. Let "the rich" move to Somalia if they are really moving to escape taxes.


Did you know that Somalia is also a country? Also, they have taxes. If inconsistently applied/collected.
 
2012-11-28 09:04:31 AM
For a millionaire, this is a simple financial decision: what's the best tax rate for my residency dollars?

This is one of the many reasons that "tax the rich" is theft by wishful thinkers who will destroy their country with it.
 
2012-11-28 09:04:32 AM
It's pretty simple: if you've got the means to take off BUT think you're getting a decent value for what you pay in taxes, you're more likely to stay put.

There's high taxes in places like Norway but the Norwegian government isn't jammed with cronies, crooks, nitwits and farktards.
 
2012-11-28 09:05:30 AM

digistil: If I'm understanding this correctly, the rich should pay less in taxes because when a recession is in full force, it even impacts them.


Problem is those evil rich people are mixed up with investors and business owners. Also the presumption of people in favor of the tax hikes that those rich folks will just absorb the cost and, you know, not pass them down the line to their customers.

If the goal is to balance out the inequality of wealth, taxing Peter to pay Paul (whom Peter will also charge more to pay his taxes) is unlikely to have the desired effect.
 
2012-11-28 09:06:25 AM

bluefoxicy: Lee Jackson Beauregard: 1) God forbid Wallyworld should pay a decent wage, we gotta have that cheap Chinese crap.

So, back when you couldn't get $8/hr at Best Buy, fast food was paying $6.50/hr, K-mart you could get $7.50... Wal-Mart was paying cashiers and backroom stock boys $11/hr and benefits. Wal-Mart always had the best retail wages, but everyone complains they don't pay a decent wage. WTF?


That's all different varieties of poverty-level wages. Just because Wal-Mart's are the best of the worst doesn't mean they're good.

(Wal-Mart? Benefits? Good luck with that.)
 
2012-11-28 09:07:08 AM
How is it possible there are rich people in the UK? I was told it's a socialist hell hole.
 
2012-11-28 09:07:16 AM

GoodyearPimp: Answer: Raise the top tax rate in all countries. Let "the rich" move to Somalia if they are really moving to escape taxes.


This.
 
2012-11-28 09:08:10 AM

Gulper Eel: It's pretty simple: if you've got the means to take off BUT think you're getting a decent value for what you pay in taxes, you're more likely to stay put.

There's high taxes in places like Norway but the Norwegian government isn't jammed with cronies, crooks, nitwits and farktards.


Winner, winner chicken dinner.
 
2012-11-28 09:11:26 AM

david_gaithersburg: Here in Maryland our Dear Leader O'Malley passed a special millionaires tax in the hopes of raising an additional $1 bil. of revenue. He forgot to build a wall around the state and as a result he ended up losing $1 bil of revenue with a stroke of his pen. He has since redefined "millionaire" to mean $500k. Eventually in MD you will only need to earn $100k per family to be evil rich in his eyes.

/btw
//This farking babbling economic idiot
///Is who so called progressives plan to have as our next president.


California is about to learn this very hard lesson the usual way: increase taxes on the wealthiest members of society, and if they have other options (such as living where taxes are less) then they can afford to leave and enjoy that option, leaving the poor behind. California is about to learn that increasing estimated "revenue" while driving away the people who earn that revenue will in fact result in missing their projections by quite a lot. Also, the ones who actually choose to stay will find other ways around the problem:

"After the election, my wife and I are going partial Galt. We're in California, so our state income tax went up in addition to what's sure to come out of Washington.

My wife quit her job last week. I increased my participation in a tax deferment plan offered by my employer to bring my taxable income as close to $250K as possible. We'll be cutting back a little, but the government is going to getting a whole lot less.

My wife's entire salary barely covered our tax bill - she was 100% slave to the government, while I was a 10% slave. Now she is 100% free, and I'll be a ~35% slave As a couple, 17.5% of our time is slaving on the government plantation from an astounding 55% previously.

My wife is deliriously happy, our children are delighted to have mom home, the dog gets more walks, and I find not spending money rapturously satisfying. "
 
2012-11-28 09:12:24 AM

Lord Summerisle: Been working and paying a large chunk of my salary in tax and NI since I was 17, chum. Which is more than most of these rich coonts can say, most of whom owe their wealth to being born into the privileged classes and who use the loopholes and tax havens provided for them to avoid paying their share.


Someone sounds jealous.

Who gives a rats arse if the wealth was inherited? It still belongs to them, not the gov't. I work for my paycheck, but i don't begrudge those who don't have to. It's their money, they can do what they want with it.
 
2012-11-28 09:13:42 AM

david_gaithersburg: evil rich


You had a point. Then you had to go and stupid it up. Why did you do that?
 
2012-11-28 09:13:46 AM

Dadoody: Taxes need to be reasonable all around.

There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.

In the United States, our tax monies go into fruitless military expenditures, high pensions and lavish lifestyles of many people on the government's dole, while our roads, dams, and infrastructure are falling into disrepair.


i.qkme.me
 
2012-11-28 09:15:18 AM

sodomizer: For a millionaire, this is a simple financial decision: what's the best tax rate for my residency dollars?

This is one of the many reasons that "tax the rich" is theft by wishful thinkers who will destroy their country with it.


I don't see the difference between "don't tax the rich" and "ZOMG the rich leave cuz taxes", except in the latter scenario they aren't around to fark everything up for the rest of us. Either way, they aren't paying taxes.
 
2012-11-28 09:15:37 AM
This reminds me a bit of the Flight of the Earls in Ireland 400 years ago.
 
2012-11-28 09:16:06 AM

drb9: Isn't the other possibility that 2/3rds of the UK's millionaires made significantly less money this year than last? It's a crappy economy.


No. A few maybe. 2/3 rds? No.
 
2012-11-28 09:16:42 AM

onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone. Get rid of all the corporate tax loopholes for sending jobs overseas etc.


No. Regressive, punishes the poor.
 
2012-11-28 09:17:32 AM
They are starting to run out other peoples money
 
2012-11-28 09:17:57 AM

MarkEC: It says the numbers at the worst point in the recession were higher than today. Yes they are climbing, but not even back to that level yet.


Funny how the same thing can be read two different ways. What you say was certainly implied, but that assumes the workforce of those making above six figures rises and falls in parallel with the strength of the economy. Generally speaking, those people are the last people to feel the impact of the recession.
 
2012-11-28 09:18:41 AM

JosephFinn: That's all different varieties of poverty-level wages. Just because Wal-Mart's are the best of the worst doesn't mean they're good.


Oh, so you're American then.

/minimum work for maximum gain
//It's not fair that the rich are doing it and you're just wishing you could flip burgers for $80k/year
 
2012-11-28 09:20:29 AM

thespindrifter: My wife's entire salary barely covered our tax bill - she was 100% slave to the government, while I was a 10% slave. Now she is 100% free, and I'll be a ~35% slave As a couple, 17.5% of our time is slaving on the government plantation from an astounding 55% previously.

My wife is deliriously happy, our children are delighted to have mom home, the dog gets more walks, and I find not spending money rapturously satisfying.


He's probably the same sort of person that derides pot-smoking neo-hippies for taking low paying jobs that offer them flexibility and free time in return for having to live a frugal lifestyle...
 
2012-11-28 09:20:39 AM
My country's top tax rate is 45 cents in every dollar over $180,000 plus the 1.5% healthcare levy on total income. No one is running away from here.

The Torygraph is living up to its name.
 
2012-11-28 09:24:04 AM

thespindrifter: david_gaithersburg: Here in Maryland our Dear Leader O'Malley passed a special millionaires tax in the hopes of raising an additional $1 bil. of revenue. He forgot to build a wall around the state and as a result he ended up losing $1 bil of revenue with a stroke of his pen. He has since redefined "millionaire" to mean $500k. Eventually in MD you will only need to earn $100k per family to be evil rich in his eyes.

/btw
//This farking babbling economic idiot
///Is who so called progressives plan to have as our next president.

California is about to learn this very hard lesson the usual way: increase taxes on the wealthiest members of society, and if they have other options (such as living where taxes are less) then they can afford to leave and enjoy that option, leaving the poor behind. California is about to learn that increasing estimated "revenue" while driving away the people who earn that revenue will in fact result in missing their projections by quite a lot. Also, the ones who actually choose to stay will find other ways around the problem:

"After the election, my wife and I are going partial Galt. We're in California, so our state income tax went up in addition to what's sure to come out of Washington.

My wife quit her job last week. I increased my participation in a tax deferment plan offered by my employer to bring my taxable income as close to $250K as possible. We'll be cutting back a little, but the government is going to getting a whole lot less.

My wife's entire salary barely covered our tax bill - she was 100% slave to the government, while I was a 10% slave. Now she is 100% free, and I'll be a ~35% slave As a couple, 17.5% of our time is slaving on the government plantation from an astounding 55% previously.

My wife is deliriously happy, our children are delighted to have mom home, the dog gets more walks, and I find not spending money rapturously satisfying. "


This sounds lke a win-win type of story? They still can live lavishly on $250,000/year, wife can stay home with kids and the dog, her old job can be filled by someone who actually NEEDS a job to support their family (and who will pay taxes on the money they earn so the government will still get theirs whether it comes from this woman or not). What is bad about this?
 
2012-11-28 09:26:46 AM

Joe Blowme: They are starting to run out other peoples money


I mentioned that statement a week or two ago and the Fark Dependents® went nugging futs about what an idiot Thatcher was to make such a statement. Ain't that a kick in the head?
 
2012-11-28 09:27:43 AM

my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: What is bad about this?


Nothing, except his need to proclaim to the world about how he's going Galt turning what most people would consider reasonable decisions into a childish act of defiance.
 
2012-11-28 09:29:12 AM

onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone. Get rid of all the corporate tax loopholes for sending jobs overseas etc.


pro tip. Sim City is a pretty fun simulation but not everything in it is 1:1 usable in the real world.

flat taxes are not fair. They have a much larger impact on the working poor and middle class families then they do on the rich.
 
2012-11-28 09:29:56 AM

naturalbornposer: GoodyearPimp: Answer: Raise the top tax rate in all countries. Let "the rich" move to Somalia if they are really moving to escape taxes.

This.


Jelly, this is how it works
 
2012-11-28 09:30:05 AM

Zeb Hesselgresser: onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone. Get rid of all the corporate tax loopholes for sending jobs overseas etc.

No. Regressive, punishes the poor.


Negative Income Tax. It combines a flat tax with a fixed annual subsidy/rebate to fix the regressive problems with the flat tax.

Basically, you tax everyone 30% and cut every household a check for $10,000 a year (or equivalent monthly payments).

It's demonstrably equitable, as it applies the same way to everyone. Thanks to the significant subsidy, you can eliminate traditional welfare (cutting every household an additional $100/person/month worth of discount coupons for food and essentials, which could be redeemed by retailers with the government, would serve to fill any gaps), and the very poor have no disincentive to find work, since additional income doesn't make you ineligible for the subsidy. Nor do high-income earners have any disincentive to make more, since they're never kicked into a higher tax bracket.

It's effectively a guaranteed minimum income system, but it doesn't disrupt markets the way raising the minimum wage does, since wages are effectively unlinked from basic survival. It also has a stabilizing effect during economic downturns, since the working class doesn't have to worry about whether it can meet a basic standard of living after taking a paycut, and so consumer confidence should remain higher, and the economy should recover faster.
 
2012-11-28 09:30:07 AM

Z-clipped: Except that that's not fair for everyone, because there's a difference between taxing someone's grocery/rent/electricity money and taxing disposable income


How can have everyone pay the same rate not be fair? That's like saying we should have different speed limits based on income.

Right now as it stands the rich pay far lower than 20% tax because they can take their income source at a different tax rate. If memory serves Romney's tax rate for his returns that made the news was something like 14%. Most corporations pay far less than 20% of their income as well. You'll note that my tax figure is a far greater tax rate than Herman Caine's 9/9/9 plan.

Simplifying the tax code would save the economy Billions of dollars a year in accounting costs alone.
 
2012-11-28 09:31:06 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: Joe Blowme: They are starting to run out other peoples money

I mentioned that statement a week or two ago and the Fark Dependents® went nugging futs about what an idiot Thatcher was to make such a statement. Ain't that a kick in the head?


That is no surprise to me. When i pull it out farkers usually scream Troll because facts make them uncomfortable.
 
2012-11-28 09:31:26 AM

sodomizer: For a millionaire, this is a simple financial decision: what's the best tax rate for my residency dollars?

This is one of the many reasons that "tax the rich" is theft by wishful thinkers who will destroy their country with it.


B....bu....but Obama!!!!
 
2012-11-28 09:32:28 AM

Dadoody: Taxes need to be reasonable all around.

There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.

In the United States, our tax monies go into fruitless military expenditures, high pensions and lavish lifestyles of many people on the government's dole, while our roads, dams, and infrastructure are falling into disrepair.


Keep on pushing the myth that people on foodstamps and ssi are living the good life. Feel sorry for the rich MOAR.
 
2012-11-28 09:33:09 AM

tom baker's scarf: onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone. Get rid of all the corporate tax loopholes for sending jobs overseas etc.

pro tip. Sim City is a pretty fun simulation but not everything in it is 1:1 usable in the real world.

flat taxes are not fair. They have a much larger impact on the working poor and middle class families then they do on the rich.


They bought their tickets Shayna, I say let em crash.
 
2012-11-28 09:33:56 AM

Dancin_In_Anson: Joe Blowme: They are starting to run out other peoples money

I mentioned that statement a week or two ago and the Fark Dependents® went nugging futs about what an idiot Thatcher was to make such a statement. Ain't that a kick in the head?


It's remarkable that, 30 years later, there are still rich people around... you know, with all that socialism going on.
 
2012-11-28 09:34:20 AM

Cythraul: This is why we should just raise an army of the people, arrest them, and take what they have. Maybe even find a final solution for these pests later on.


It's amusing, in a sad sort of way, that you think that governments can solve their debt problems that way. Or, that you think that governments can solve their debt problems, period.
 
2012-11-28 09:34:24 AM

Mija: Dadoody: Taxes need to be reasonable all around.

There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.

In the United States, our tax monies go into fruitless military expenditures, high pensions and lavish lifestyles of many people on the government's dole, while our roads, dams, and infrastructure are falling into disrepair.

Keep on pushing the myth that people on foodstamps and ssi are living the good life. Feel sorry for the rich MOAR.


Are you reading something no one else can see? I see no mention of why is making your butt hurt in his statement
 
2012-11-28 09:35:27 AM

onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone. Get rid of all the corporate tax loopholes for sending jobs overseas etc.


Immediately dive over the fiscal cliff, you say?
 
2012-11-28 09:39:07 AM

Dadoody: There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.


Greece is currently doing that. It's not working.
 
2012-11-28 09:40:49 AM
This article is stupid. The article initially makes the claim that of the 16,000 Britons who previously filed tax returns showing that they have an income of over 1 Million GBP, 2/3rds have left for tax exile.

This claim is fallacious. Later on in the article, it admits that thus far, 10,000 Britons have filed a tax return showing incomes of greater than 1 GBP (so it's not 2/3rds - more like 1/3rd). Furthermore, has anyone bothered to point out that the deadline for filing one's taxes has not passed in the UK yet? All paper tax filings are due on October 31st, but electronic online filings are due on January 31. There's literally another 2 months (and several days) before the final deadline for all taxes to be filed.
 
2012-11-28 09:40:56 AM

JosephFinn: bluefoxicy: Lee Jackson Beauregard: 1) God forbid Wallyworld should pay a decent wage, we gotta have that cheap Chinese crap.

So, back when you couldn't get $8/hr at Best Buy, fast food was paying $6.50/hr, K-mart you could get $7.50... Wal-Mart was paying cashiers and backroom stock boys $11/hr and benefits. Wal-Mart always had the best retail wages, but everyone complains they don't pay a decent wage. WTF?

That's all different varieties of poverty-level wages. Just because Wal-Mart's are the best of the worst doesn't mean they're good.

(Wal-Mart? Benefits? Good luck with that.)


By benefits, he of course means Welfare benefits.

/The Waltons cry "Why should we have to pay for the "lazies" on welfare?"
//Answer: Because most of them work for you, you dolts!
 
2012-11-28 09:41:15 AM

Arkanaut: Dadoody: There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.

Stop it. The difference between taxation and theft is that you don't get to elect representatives to the Thieves Guild to tell them how much to steal from you, much less contribute to their elections and try to influence their outcomes. You also don't get to tell those representatives what to do with that money.

Come to think of it, the Thieves Guild should really be more transparent.


So, if they raised the income tax on everybody to 99.99% and eliminated all deductions, that wouldn't be theft? Because we have elections?

/"It's not the people who vote that count; it's the people who count the votes."
 
2012-11-28 09:42:07 AM

RexTalionis: This article is stupid. The article initially makes the claim that of the 16,000 Britons who previously filed tax returns showing that they have an income of over 1 Million GBP, 2/3rds have left for tax exile.

This claim is fallacious. Later on in the article, it admits that thus far, 10,000 Britons have filed a tax return showing incomes of greater than 1 million GBP (so it's not 2/3rds - more like 1/3rd). Furthermore, has anyone bothered to point out that the deadline for filing one's taxes has not passed in the UK yet? All paper tax filings are due on October 31st, but electronic online filings are due on January 31. There's literally another 2 months (and several days) before the final deadline for all taxes to be filed.


FTFM

Oh, and let's not forget that for most of 2012, the UK has been mired in a double-dip recession. Could that possibly have an impact on the number of individuals claiming incomes of over 1 million GBP?
 
2012-11-28 09:42:53 AM

theknuckler_33: If people making over a million pounds could just hide their money somewhere to avoid the 50% tax rate, why wouldn't they just do it to avoid ANY tax rate?

Keep farking that chicken, conservatives.


1. Accounting tricks do carry a certain cost of their own. They don't work for free.
2. People are lazy and opportunities have costs. As it turns out, below a certain tax rate, people tend to stop bothering going to the trouble of dodging taxes.
 
2012-11-28 09:45:54 AM

Z-clipped: onyxruby: Flat tax 20 regardless of income source. No penalty for success, fair for everyone.

Except that that's not fair for everyone, because there's a difference between taxing someone's grocery/rent/electricity money and taxing disposable income. Progressive taxation is the only system that can take into account externalities and the increased benefit the wealthy receive from the social contract.

Screw your Flat/"Fair" Tax nonsense.


Screw the poor. Screw the middle class. Screw "social justice." Screw "diversity." Screw "multiculturalism." Screw "every person's and every country's way of thinking, doing, believing, worshiping, sexing, and existing is equal and valid."
 
2012-11-28 09:46:20 AM

onyxruby: How can have everyone pay the same rate not be fair? That's like saying we should have different speed limits based on income.


The minimum cost of living is not zero. A true flat percentage tax fails to acknowledge this.
 
2012-11-28 09:46:44 AM

DrPainMD: Arkanaut: Dadoody: There is no real reason ANYONE should be forced to pay a 50% tax on anything. That's not taxation - that's outright theft of income. What governments need to do, but will not, is live within their budgets and means.

Stop it. The difference between taxation and theft is that you don't get to elect representatives to the Thieves Guild to tell them how much to steal from you, much less contribute to their elections and try to influence their outcomes. You also don't get to tell those representatives what to do with that money.

Come to think of it, the Thieves Guild should really be more transparent.

So, if they raised the income tax on everybody to 99.99% and eliminated all deductions, that wouldn't be theft? Because we have elections?

/"It's not the people who vote that count; it's the people who count the votes."


No, the difference between taxation and theft is that, in theory, you get something of value for your taxes (schools, roads, police, your neighbors not having to rob your house so they can put food on the table). Theft is just theft, your money is gone and you'll never see it again.
 
2012-11-28 09:50:19 AM
Those that can - will vote with their feet, not surprising.

And it's not like they were paying not taxes to begin with. They were paying a hefty share. With the increase the logical step is a cost / benefit analysis. Can I live as comfortably and safely elsewhere and pay less taxes, if so, then off you go
 
2012-11-28 09:50:25 AM

dwrash: Gulper Eel: It's pretty simple: if you've got the means to take off BUT think you're getting a decent value for what you pay in taxes, you're more likely to stay put.

There's high taxes in places like Norway but the Norwegian government isn't jammed with cronies, crooks, nitwits and farktards.

Winner, winner chicken dinner.


Also, Norway doesn't have a lot of fried chicken lovers. So, its got that going for it...
 
2012-11-28 09:51:45 AM
Since the announcement the 50p top rate will be reduced to 45p from next April, the number of people declaring annual incomes of more than £1 million has risen to 10,000.

However, the number of million-pound earners is still far below the level recorded even at the height of the recession and financial crisis.


that is just damning. suck it, warren buffett.
 
2012-11-28 09:52:25 AM

my_cats_breath_smells_like_cat_food: This sounds lke a win-win type of story? They still can live lavishly on $250,000/year, wife can stay home with kids and the dog, her old job can be filled by someone who actually NEEDS a job to support their family (and who will pay taxes on the money they earn so the government will still get theirs whether it comes from this woman or not). What is bad about this?


Win-win? How so? With his wife's lack of income and him reducing/deferring his, they will have less to spend (costing the economy jobs) and will pay less in taxes (reducing the jobs that the government can create). Any way you look at it, the effect on GDP and jobs will be negative.
 
Displayed 50 of 281 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report