anywebsite Posted June 26, 2012 Share Posted June 26, 2012 I'm not so sure we shouldn't be encouraging more long term investment and less short term speculation. Shouldn't we be weaning ourselves off the gambling economy and doing much more for the tangible real economy that drives exports and creates more jobs in a more balanced economy and a more equal society? It's not just European markets that have concerns over trends in the stock market: "By late 2011 regulators in the United States and overseas were cracking down on computerized high-speed trading, worried that as it spreads around the globe it is making market swings worse." http://topics.nytimes.com/topics/reference/timestopics/subjects/h/high_frequency_algorithmic_trading/index.html What is the value to society when traders are buying and selling shares in milliseconds? It seems to me that the activities of the stock market have very little to do with investment in companies any more and I don't see that as a good thing. No. Extremely short term high frequency trading is a big thing now. More trade & higher frequency trading should help to stabilise markets. It creates liquidity in the markets & should help them to set better prices. They're doing arbitrage trading between different markets, taking advantage of different prices on companies & other things that are traded globally, it helps to make sure the prices stay stable between markets, which is a tricky & very useful thing to do. Banks really do contribute a lot of tax & account for a lot of our GDP in the UK at the moment. We don't want them all to move abroad & pay tax somewhere else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron wasn't setting up the UK to be the tax haven of Europe. He's already offered the UK to French high rate taxpayers who are going to be paying 70% under Hollande. He wants them to transfer funds here at 40% If Europe does go for fiscal union, all he has to do is undercut the European top tax rate, wait for the money to roll in and skim off the surface. I can't think of any other reason why he should be going so easy on top rate tax payers here in the UK. He says one thing and does another,,, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tinfoilhat Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron wasn't setting up the UK to be the tax haven of Europe. He's already offered the UK to French high rate taxpayers who are going to be paying 70% under Hollande. He wants them to transfer funds here at 40% If Europe does go for fiscal union, all he has to do is undercut the European top tax rate, wait for the money to roll in and skim off the surface. I can't think of any other reason why he should be going so easy on top rate tax payers here in the UK. He says one thing and does another,,, Now as long as we close all the loopholes I've absolutely no problem with the French or anyone else paying 40%. But close the loopholes first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skinz Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron wasn't setting up the UK to be the tax haven of Europe. He's already offered the UK to French high rate taxpayers who are going to be paying 70% under Hollande. He wants them to transfer funds here at 40% If Europe does go for fiscal union, all he has to do is undercut the European top tax rate, wait for the money to roll in and skim off the surface. I can't think of any other reason why he should be going so easy on top rate tax payers here in the UK. He says one thing and does another,,, What if another country undercut the 40% to 35%? Either way the French economy will lose out. Personally If you earn money from this country, its taxable amount should not be up for ( cross border) negotiation, and should stay in this country..high tax rate or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
I1L2T3 Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 It can't be a truly accurate figure, you should probably take it as a minimum of 19% aren't paying their income taxes. There are people evading tax that haven't been caught yet, nobody knows how many. Jimmy Carr hasn't done anything illegal, as far as I'm aware. He's paid the minimum amount of tax that the government has asked him to pay, that's all. The fact that these schemes are allowed to exist is the real scandal, not the people taking advantage of them. The figure was from HMRC. And it doesn't say that 19% aren't paying their taxes. The 19% are paying less than 40% Jimmy Carr has not paid what the government asked him to. He paid what he thought he could legally get away with. There's a difference. With people who are self-employed there is a lot more latitude in terms of tax planning. He used it to the max. His scheme will most likely be made illegal anyway in due course like the Rushmore scheme he was planning to use in 2009. Legal or not, the HMRC see the activities of people like Jimmy Carr as a big problem. Check out the HMRC website - it makes it very clear. http://www.hmrc.gov.uk/avoidance/vision-strategy.htm Her Majesty's Revenue & Customs (HMRC) and HM Treasury (HMT) have a shared objective of minimising the tax gap (that is, the difference between the tax collected and the tax we think ought to be collected). We want to provide our customers with a level playing field while maintaining the UK's international competitiveness. Our strategy for delivering this objective is through encouraging everyone to pay tax at the right time and vigorously tackling those who deliberately avoid their responsibilities. In the UK the tax loss from avoidance is estimated to run into several billion pounds across both direct and indirect taxes. This directly affects the delivery of public services and long-term economic growth. Avoidance distorts markets, is economically unproductive and breaks the link between economic productivity and reward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magilla Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 ..... Oh, I see the posts from your other aliases have gone... Guess you'll have to make a few more so you can continue to congratulate and agree with yourself Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anna B Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 What if another country undercut the 40% to 35%? Either way the French economy will lose out. Personally If you earn money from this country, its taxable amount should not be up for ( cross border) negotiation, and should stay in this country..high tax rate or not. If there's fiscal union, all Europe will pay the same tax rate, and no individual country will be able to undercut it. Britain can because it's not in the Euro. I agree. It's a dodgy way of doing business, and considering Cameron has taken the moral high ground on the morality of tax avoidance, he's being hypocritical to say the least. That's why I said he says one thing and does another. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 This lot will shift the goal posts regularly in favour of the rich. They do not want anyone other than the rich to receive a university education. Tory boys never have done. Which party introduced tuition fees... ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
truman Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 I was married with 3 kids and a mortgage, when I did my degree, the first in my family to do so. That was hard enough. If I'd been putting the family in hock to the tune of £36,000 (4 year course) plus interest, with no guarentee of a job, then I wouldn't have gone. £36,000 is an enormous debt just the same as any other. Whose to say that some future government won't change the rules again, and insist the debt is repaid when you're earning £15,000, or £10,000 or..... see my point? You said it would deter people from poorer backgrounds..I still don't understand why....after graduating they'll have the same loan to pay back as anyone else who took one out..what's wrong with people investing in their own future....? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
L00b Posted June 27, 2012 Share Posted June 27, 2012 Actually I wouldn't be surprised if Cameron wasn't setting up the UK to be the tax haven of Europe. <...> If Europe does go for fiscal union, all he has to do is undercut the European top tax rate, wait for the money to roll in and skim off the surface. That is exactly what Ireland did in the early 90s. 15 years of 'Celtic Tiger' followed. To compound your take on Cameron's goals, he's even copied the same tax incentives based on commercial exploitation of IP (...at long last. Coming into effect 01 April 2013). The way I see it, a carbon copy, for a "British Tiger" reboot. Personally, I am praying for tighter European fiscal integration and European (€zone) tax-on-transactions. That'll put an end to the crisis in the UK in very short order, as we'll then be coping most of the EU-borne investments from outra-EU. Plants (jobs), R&D (IP), finance (still more £££), the works. Brussels will howl...like they've howled at Ahern for the last 15 years and kept getting the rods. Let them eat cake ...and that's me saying all that, being more of a Europhile than many on here Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.