Happ Hazzard Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Flat tax is the solution IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Flat tax is the solution IMO. Yep,the only problem is what rate to choose.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Obelix Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Nobody would volunteer to pay additional tax - that is not how it works. Most people do however believe in paying their fair share of tax. It's quite simple to understand. I believe we should have a highly progressive personal taxation system with very restricted opportunities for people at higher income levels to narrow their tax base. Basically, a simple and fair system that has low adminsitration costs and low compliance costs. The problem is you could reset the tax system now and introduce something like what I describe and within one parliament it would be tweaked around with (e.g. to encourage certain types of economic activity) and within a few parliaments it would be festooned with politically-driven and economically-driven tweaks and additions, many of which would have unintented consequences (e.g. the effect of being a loophole). IMO we have a broken taxation framework that favours people with higher earnings and allows them to avoid proportionately more of their tax. In the current economic climate that isn't good. Your argument is predicated on the assumption that it's correct that people who earn more should pay much more. That isn't necessarily so, and when people start being charged an excessivly large amount of money simply for being successful then they will start to minimise their liability. The reason that the example I gave re Lamont and the lowering to 40% was successful was twofold. Firstly it was cheaper to have the money taxed in the UK, rather than have it taxed overseas (I think the prime location for it at that point overseas left you liable for 44% tax on the top end) and secondly, the people earning the top rate were happy to pay 30% tax, as that was considered a fair amount, but 60% wasn't ergo that rate was assiduously avoided. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Flat tax is the solution IMO. why is it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbirdone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Flat tax is the solution IMO. Why is that ? Lets say we bring in a flat rate of 25% for everyone regardless of earnings. The same people paying big bucks to accountants to legally avoid paying 50%, would still pay the same accountants to avoid paying 25%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 why is it? Everyone pays the same %age..easier/cheaper to administer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Why is that ? Lets say we bring in a flat rate of 25% for everyone regardless of earnings. The same people paying big bucks to accountants to legally avoid paying 50%, would still pay the same accountants to avoid paying 25%. Don't you think the changed cost/benefit ratio may stop some people from trying to avoid paying it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andyofborg Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Everyone pays the same %age..easier/cheaper to administer? not sure if it would be that much easier or cheaper to administer and doesn't it hammer the poor at the expense of the rich? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 not sure if it would be that much easier or cheaper to administer and doesn't it hammer the poor at the expense of the rich? If there was only one tax rate why wouldn't it be easier/cheaper....whether ot not it hammers anyone depends on the rate set....those that earn more will pay more.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
speedbirdone Posted August 14, 2011 Share Posted August 14, 2011 Don't you think the changed cost/benefit ratio may stop some people from trying to avoid paying it? It might do for one or two people, but these earning huge amounts of money, if they are going to the trouble of paying accountants to avoid 50% they will as ive said just do the same to avoid paying whatever the flat rate happened to be. It only really starts to work when the cost of trying to avoid paying tax is more than the amount you would have saved, which i can't see been the case for them earning big bucks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.