Jump to content
Manx Forums, Live Chat, Blogs & Classifieds for the Isle of Man
Sign in to follow this  
Mr Newbie

Half of us now concerned about losing our livelihoods

Recommended Posts

3 minutes ago, doc.fixit said:

I don't have an argument with you because I don't know the facts but you have already shown two examples of saving tax albeit one is deferred, interesting that the amount is close to my annual income.

I'm just trying to show you that there are not mass ways to avoid tax.

If you earn 500k a year you will pay a ball park 100k.  Sure, you could reduce that 1500 quid for your mortgage and 5k for your pension but that is 6500 of 100k.

96k is a LOT of tax.   Of course they have 400k (less NI) .  Then I suppose they go out and spend that on VAT items .  Perhaps a higher end car etc.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

I'm just trying to show you that there are not mass ways to avoid tax.

If you earn 500k a year you will pay a ball park 100k.  Sure, you could reduce that 1500 quid for your mortgage and 5k for your pension but that is 6500 of 100k.

96k is a LOT of tax.   Of course they have 400k (less NI) .  Then I suppose they go out and spend that on VAT items .  Perhaps a higher end car etc.

96k is a fair amount of tax, but it's hardly burdensome if you're left with 400k.

HNW individuals tend to spend less money in the place they live too, don't they? They're certainly not propping up local shops and services as much as the average person.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think the rate of taxation in the higher bracket should increase, I wouldn't mind an additional 2%, say, and I think that would be quite reasonable. Perhaps maybe even an additional third, higher bracket? I think the personal allowances and lower bracket should stay how it is, there's not much more belt tightening people with a lower earning capacity can do without it impacting their quality of life. I'm not interested in hearing "get a better job", as it's quite simply not an option for everyone.

I also think an independent audit of each Government department should be carried out too, to establish the amount of 'slack' there truly is, tighten up efficiency and reduce the wage bill if possible. A tax increase would be easier to swallow if I could be reassured that it was being put to good use, rather than just maintaining jobs for the boys. 

  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

DB..........OK. I'm not disputing that a bigger lump is paid by higher earners. I'm suggesting that there are more opportunities to alleviate that heavy burden.

I refer you back to the conundrum I mentioned and the fact that there is no easy answer, therefore we are discussing a dead end. My views haven't changed and I have nothing else to say except thanks for a civilized discussion.

Edited by doc.fixit
  • Like 1
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, HeliX said:

96k is a fair amount of tax, but it's hardly burdensome if you're left with 400k.

HNW individuals tend to spend less money in the place they live too, don't they? They're certainly not propping up local shops and services as much as the average person.

That is a terrible generalisation. 

I suspect people that live here earning very good money probably spend more, proportionately, than most to be fair.

They are probably less inclined to live their lives through Amazon.

A lot of the high net worths employ people too?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

That is a terrible generalisation. 

I suspect people that live here earning very good money probably spend more, proportionately, than most to be fair.

They are probably less inclined to live their lives through Amazon.

A lot of the high net worths employ people too?

I would be quite surprised if people on circa 500k are spending more in local shops than the number of average pay persons who's salaries combined would make up 500k.

 

Some HNW individuals do employ people, yes. But do they pay those people appropriately? Probably not, or they likely wouldn't be HNW individuals in the first place.

  • Like 2
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
24 minutes ago, Feelslike said:

I think the rate of taxation in the higher bracket should increase, I wouldn't mind an additional 2%, say, and I think that would be quite reasonable. Perhaps maybe even an additional third, higher bracket? I think the personal allowances and lower bracket should stay how it is, there's not much more belt tightening people with a lower earning capacity can do without it impacting their quality of life. I'm not interested in hearing "get a better job", as it's quite simply not an option for everyone.

I also think an independent audit of each Government department should be carried out too, to establish the amount of 'slack' there truly is, tighten up efficiency and reduce the wage bill if possible. A tax increase would be easier to swallow if I could be reassured that it was being put to good use, rather than just maintaining jobs for the boys. 

If you look at the Pink Book it makes scary reading.

Sadly, tax rises of 2% on 20% earners makes very very little difference.    I think you would need 3 or 4% across both the 10% and 20% bands to see any meaningful numbers.

They could bring in a 3rd tier of tax.  But at what level and percentage would be the discussion.   

Phillip Dearden would probably be good to know about the impact of rises once extrapolating the data from the Pink Book.

Edited by The Dog's Dangly Bits

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Thanks Helix, got me thinking , say 10 familes say of four folk, earning £50kpa. just talking of necessary items now, minimum of 10 cars and possible hp. on them. 40 lots of food, clothes etc. 40 lots of entertainment and media,plus maybe 10 to 15 lots of tax, NI etc. ie, almost every outgoing x40. for every 500k.

1 family of say four folk= x4 outgoings for every £500k.

Never thought of that! Plus of course the big earner won't have to waste cash on hp unless there is a tax advantage.

ok I know it's simplistic and not full of graphs and percentages but food for thought rightly or wrongly.

 

Edited by doc.fixit
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

If you look at the Pink Book it makes scary reading.

Sadly, tax rises of 2% on 20% earners makes very very little difference.    I think you would need 3 or 4% across both the 10% and 20% bands to see any meaningful numbers.

They could bring in a 3rd tier of tax.  But at what level and percentage would be the discussion.   

Phillip Dearden would probably be good to know about the impact of rises once extrapolating the data from the Pink Book.

Up until about 2 years ago there were industries and business still recovering from the effects of the 2008 crash. I don't think we're near the realms of meaningful change - I'd have thought it'll be slow and steady, and increases will come over time. We'll see the same with any reductions in Government, they will wait until people leave and not fill those roles, they're not instantly doing to chop £20m off the cost of employing everyone in Government.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I recall from a conversation some years back that income tax rises would not make any significant dent in our situation, and could actually make it worse. Other than increasing VAT markedly, we have will have no choice but to reign in CS spending, but not at the expense of front line services.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, doc.fixit said:

Thanks Helix, got me thinking , say 10 familes say of four folk, earning £50kpa. just talking of necessary items now, minimum of 10 cars and possible hp. on them. 40 lots of food, clothes etc. 40 lots of entertainment and media,plus maybe 10 to 15 lots of tax, NI etc. ie, every outgoing x40. for every 500k.

1 family of say four folk= x4 outgoings for every £500k.

Never thought of that! Plus of course the big earner won't have to waste cash on hp unless there is a tax advantage.

ok I know it's simplistic and not full of graphs and percentages but food for thought rightly or wrongly.

 

I can only take credit for remembering enough of it to make a little bit of sense. I definitely stole it from someone smarter than me.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
20 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

If you look at the Pink Book it makes scary reading.

Sadly, tax rises of 2% on 20% earners makes very very little difference.    I think you would need 3 or 4% across both the 10% and 20% bands to see any meaningful numbers.

They could bring in a 3rd tier of tax.  But at what level and percentage would be the discussion.   

Phillip Dearden would probably be good to know about the impact of rises once extrapolating the data from the Pink Book.

DDG...No comment about the wasteful, non investigated  spending of Government and the incredible list of financial disaster projects and waving through of monumental mistakes that lost money? There would not be the need for talk of additional tax if the basic moral and maybe legal bad errors were and had been attended to.

Edited by doc.fixit
  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, doc.fixit said:

No comment about the wasteful, non investigated  spending of Government and the incredible list of financial disaster projects and waving through of monumental mistakes that lost money? There would not be the need for talk of additional tax if the basic moral and maybe legal bad errors were and had been attended to.

I agree.

But there is only so much to be saved I suppose.  The government still need to spend 230m plus delivering health care etc.  There is still infrastructure to be invested in.

There isn't a magic solution but the Pink Book estimates for 2020/21 versus where we will be at now are petrifying.  Alf Cannan must have genuine sleepless nights.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, doc.fixit said:

DDG...No comment about the wasteful, non investigated  spending of Government and the incredible list of financial disaster projects and waving through of monumental mistakes that lost money? There would not be the need for talk of additional tax if the basic moral and maybe legal bad errors were and had been attended to.

Government payroll is nudging £390M this year. They are probably looking at at least an £80M drop in income looking at average quarterly VAT figures for the last few years assuming this rolls through until August as that’s nearly 2 quarters of dropped VAT rated activity including a non TT. You’d expect to see cost savings rolling through ASAP in any normal business faced by such a significant drop in income. It must be concerning for those at the helm.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, The Dog's Dangly Bits said:

They are probably less inclined to live their lives through Amazon.

Amazon spending benefits the island. Masses of local people are employed in distribution and it adds to the numbers from which the VAT we get back is calculated.

Thanks to Amazon people likely spend more. Especially at the moment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...