willman Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Fags and beer are not basics. I think he's being rather disingenuous with the comment that they are tbh. Anybody that requires beer or fags on a dialy basis needs some sort of help. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Of course they are. This is Yorkshire.Well, I can take that post just about as seriously as I can all of your others. I don't smoke, but I do enjoy hunting - should ammunition be a tax-free essential for me? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 In which case their economic awareness is sub-GCSE level You shouldn't believe everything you read regarding what other posters believe. Let them speak for themselves. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chem1st Posted October 31, 2011 Author Share Posted October 31, 2011 Well, I can take that post just about as seriously as I can all of your others. I don't smoke, but I do enjoy hunting - should ammunition be a tax-free essential for me? Of course not, that would be insane. You should be purchasing VAT free dog food for your whippet! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Conrod Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Of course not, that would be insane. You should be purchasing VAT free dog food for your whippet! Ah, but it's not insane to describe beer and fags as essentials? Ooookaaaaay Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 The BBC article is misleading anyway, all the argument about regressive/progressive is irrelevant, the study concludes that the poor are better off and spending more money on items which attract VAT than they used to, the % for the rich hasn't actually changed at all. I don't suppose even chem1st will see it as a bad thing that the poor have got richer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 VAT is a regressive tax but isn't it the big bad EU that force us to apply it at a minimum standard rate of 15%? Even at 20% the Uk is applying lower VAT than a lot of the other countries in the EU. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 If I buy something VATable at £12, £2 of my income has been spent on VAT - if my income is £200, that is 1% - if my income is £100 it is 2% - the lower my income the higher the proportion I am spending on tax - what is there not to understand?Short of setting up ever-grainier levels of VAT and defining ever more precisely what items attract what rate (retailers will lap the added overhead no doubt ), this square cannot be rounded anyway. I can't imagine every retailer asking for proof of income at the till would be a practical solution but, if they ever did, I can predict a roaring trade for payslip forgers and fake ID/credentials producers Interesting that no one has yet mentioned that (stereotype alert!), item for item, richer people tend to buy more expensive (branded) items which generate higher VAT receipts. E.g. Joe Prole buys a Logik 22" LCD TV and Jim Rich buys a Panasonic 50" Plasma TV. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclone Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 Short of setting up ever-grainier levels of VAT and defining ever more precisely what items attract what rate (retailers will lap the added overhead no doubt ), this square cannot be rounded anyway. I can't imagine every retailer asking for proof of income at the till would be a practical solution but, if they ever did, I can predict a roaring trade for payslip forgers and fake ID/credentials producers Interesting that no one has yet mentioned that (stereotype alert!) richer people tend to buy more expensive (branded) items which generate higher VAT receipts. E.g. Joe Prole buys a Logik 22" LCD TV and Jim Rich buys a Panasonic 50" Plasma TV. It could always be abolished and have the balancing amount applied to income tax rates... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulgarian Posted October 31, 2011 Share Posted October 31, 2011 I don't suppose even chem1st will see it as a bad thing that the poor have got richer? I don't know, he seems to revel in the poor being poor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.