Increasing borrowing to reduce borrowing.

[Cyclone]

Interesting idea, just based on the price though, or done by category and an army of bureaucrats?

[I1L2T3]

I wouldn't have thought it’s as common as tax avoidance, and it’s easy to make it progressive by having higher VAT on luxury items and zero VAT on essential items.

 

EG. The more expensive the car the higher the VAT.

 

EU law means we have to charge a standard rate of VAT at least 15% but there is latitude and some items can be VAT free or have a reduced rate of VAT. Each EU country decides on the goods and services that will attract a lower rate.

 

So we kind of do what you suggest already to a very limited extent.

[MrSmith]

Interesting idea, just based on the price though, or done by category and an army of bureaucrats?

 

I would do it just on price for all none essential items, poor people tend not to buy expensive items so zero vat on cheap stuff, and the more expensive an item becomes the more VAT one pays, so someone buying a £100k car pays 40% VAT instead of 10% VAT on a £10K car. It can work for almost any item, cheapest TV Zero vat, expensive TV highest VAT. The better off you are the more likely you are to buy more expensive stuff.

 

I have no idea if it would be more or less expensive to administer that having personal tax, and VAT as well as many people just not paying tax. I would say that avoiding VAT would be more difficult than avoiding tax.

[dutch]

Great dreams but not realistic. The rich need to get richer the poor need to keep working for just enough to keep them alive and to fill the rich pockets.

That is how things really work. Dream on in your sleepy life but it will not change and no government related with the upper class shall take money from rich upper class to give to lower class to make them rich as well.

 

Bob marley gave away all his money to people and children at his front door, he did not need all that money and gave all these people a decent amount not just a little bit.

 

A politician will give a little bit to stop the moaning when the poor get restless. Just enough to stop the moaning but never ever will they give out of love and generousity.

Then they pretend they are good by giving and use it as a means to look good and win votes. Well they only did it to calm things down, their real intend is selfish, to keep things in control.

 

You talk about little changes and very hopefull wishes that maybe things could change.

I put a 1 million bet on the fact that politics as it is in todays system will never ever make things better no matter wich party is there or money is or is not borrowed.

No matter how you dress it up to make it look nice and attractive, the real purpose is to keep the rich rich and the poor just happy enough so they don't explode with frustration.

Has always been like that and will stay that way untill you decide to live your own live.

[Jim Graham]

Great dreams but not realistic. The rich need to get richer the poor need to keep working for just enough to keep them alive and to fill the rich pockets.

That is how things really work. Dream on in your sleepy life but it will not change and no government related with the upper class shall take money from rich upper class to give to lower class to make them rich as well.

 

Bob marley gave away all his money to people and children at his front door, he did not need all that money and gave all these people a decent amount not just a little bit.

 

A politician will give a little bit to stop the moaning when the poor get restless. Just enough to stop the moaning but never ever will they give out of love and generousity.

Then they pretend they are good by giving and use it as a means to look good and win votes. Well they only did it to calm things down, their real intend is selfish, to keep things in control.

 

You talk about little changes and very hopefull wishes that maybe things could change.

I put a 1 million bet on the fact that politics as it is in todays system will never ever make things better no matter wich party is there or money is or is not borrowed.

No matter how you dress it up to make it look nice and attractive, the real purpose is to keep the rich rich and the poor just happy enough so they don't explode with frustration.

Has always been like that and will stay that way untill you decide to live your own live.

 

I am getting a bit tired of this poor getting poorer rhetoric. It has been going since the time of Marx. If it were true poor people would be getting less now that they were in the 1800s. There are places in the world where the poor are truly destitute. Not in this country.

[Cyclone]

I would do it just on price for all none essential items, poor people tend not to buy expensive items so zero vat on cheap stuff, and the more expensive an item becomes the more VAT one pays, so someone buying a £100k car pays 40% VAT instead of 10% VAT on a £10K car. It can work for almost any item, cheapest TV Zero vat, expensive TV highest VAT. The better off you are the more likely you are to buy more expensive stuff.

 

I have no idea if it would be more or less expensive to administer that having personal tax, and VAT as well as many people just not paying tax. I would say that avoiding VAT would be more difficult than avoiding tax.

 

What you describe just got more complicated.

 

If it were a single sliding scale, low VAT for a low price going up to 40% for 100k ticket items then it would be simple.

But if it's different for every item then how is it calculated.

What's the cheapest TV available, what's the most expensive, if every possible category of purchase needs it's own sliding scale then it would be impossible to manage.

[Jim Graham]

I would do it just on price for all none essential items, poor people tend not to buy expensive items so zero vat on cheap stuff, and the more expensive an item becomes the more VAT one pays, so someone buying a £100k car pays 40% VAT instead of 10% VAT on a £10K car. It can work for almost any item, cheapest TV Zero vat, expensive TV highest VAT. The better off you are the more likely you are to buy more expensive stuff.

 

I have no idea if it would be more or less expensive to administer that having personal tax, and VAT as well as many people just not paying tax. I would say that avoiding VAT would be more difficult than avoiding tax.

 

 

Given that HMRC is not fit to administer its own tax regime as it is any attempt to complicate it may be self defeating. I was always disappointed in Brown for not getting to grips with the problem of the low paid paying huge amounts of tax relative to their income while the rich pay a much smaller percentage. He even scrapped the 10% tax rate. The Lib Dems are on the right track by raising the tax threshold but not by nearly enough.

 

Personally, I would put a massive tax hike on Champagne because that will hit the rich and the Socialists

[JFKvsNixon]

The easiest way to clamp down is to stop personal tax and just have higher VAT, even criminal pay VAT.

 

This is the way we're going, if you look at historical income tax rates you'll see that we are shifting the burden of our tax collection away from income.

[Jim Graham]

This is the way we're going, if you look at historical income tax rates you'll see that we are shifting the burden of our tax collection away from income.

 

 

That is what is hurting the poor more than anything else. It means the poor, the old, the young and the disabled pay proportionally more of their income in tax than the rich.

[JFKvsNixon]

That is what is hurting the poor more than anything else. It means the poor, the old, the young and the disabled pay proportionally more of their income in tax than the rich.

 

I'd speculate that the plan is for it to hurt the rich as it is very difficult to avoid paying VAT.