I1L2T3 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 that's just called being self employed. Do you begrudge tradesmen paying corporation tax as well then? If you're that bothered start a company and go self employed yourself. No it's not being called self-employed. It is possible to have multiple contracts with an employer - some money paid to the individual, other money into companies. Reading between the lines I think you might be somewhat blinkered by your life as a (parasitical tax-avoiding) contractor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbirdone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Not a maths expert are you... 1% on 1000 I'd think. Wouldn't someone on £151k pay 50% of £1000 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I'd say a loophole is where you get round it by methods that were not planned when the rules came out, rather than an approved scheme. Fair point re: the share options Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Gobby Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 I would rather give a tax break to someone who earns and contributes rather than contribute to some lazy git that sits on their backside and thinks it's OK to do sod all for a living. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Ok, People earning in this range can often arrange their affairs so that they can take some of their earnings as pension, shares or property which means that their main income is less on paper. There was one such case in recent news where investment bankers were able to take some of their "compensation" as they call it, in vintage wine stock instead of salary. And there is, or was unil recently, a legal loophole which meant payment in wine did not attract income tax. Another thing which helps directors is dividend payments. I believe you are allowed to regard some proportion of income as dividend which allows you to avoid tax. Another one is trust funds. You can pay money into a trust fund instead of taking it as income. This is how the aristocracy manages to hide their wealth from the public. If you keep your property in a trust, then you can pass the trust on to your children to manage without attracting any change of ownership which means the land registry does not get involved and no inheritance tax is paid. You can do some or all of these things as well... Do you particularly want to pay extra tax on your pension contributions? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 There are loads of them: maximise use of HMRC-approved share option schemes and pay lower rate CGT on the proceeds wages paid offshore set yourself up as a contractor Domicile o verseas - might just be possible on 150k I think you might just be a bit jealous that you haven't bothered to optimise your own tax affairs... isn't it true that the top 10% of earners pay 50% of the tax revenue... But it's not enough, they should have to pay more? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 No it's not being called self-employed. It is possible to have multiple contracts with an employer - some money paid to the individual, other money into companies. Reading between the lines I think you might be somewhat blinkered by your life as a (parasitical tax-avoiding) contractor. If they run a company then they're self employed for part of there time, if not then IR 35 kicks in and they pay the extra tax anyway... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Bottom line is the vast majority of people are happy to pay a fair rate of tax as long as they generally know their tax is being effctively used and know that everybody else is contributing fairly as well. It's a contract we all have as members of this society. Our contract should not be to maximise our personal income at the expense of society. It's a simple point greed-driven people will not understand. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Have you ever paid a bit extra because the country needs it, our do you just party what you should? That's all anyone else does as long as they work within the rules the government creates. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
taxman Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 There was one such case in recent news where investment bankers were able to take some of their "compensation" as they call it, in vintage wine stock instead of salary. And there is, or was unil recently, a legal loophole which meant payment in wine did not attract income tax. I remember when I used to do compliance visits to Ltd companies. We would always ask the directors if they'd taken any remuneration in Persian carpets, fine wines or platinum sponge. It was a way to avoid National Insurance but the loophole has, I believe been closed now. But it just shows the lengths some people will go to to avoid paying their fair share. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.