Top 1% of earners pay 30% of all income tax

[Nagel]

Where did you get those figures from ? Just curious, I was looking earlier and could only find USA figures.

 

From the original Sunday Times article, the printed version. Like most people I don't have access to the online one because of the paywall.

 

---------- Post added 18-11-2013 at 23:29 ----------

 

It's also online in the Daily Mail's rehash of the story here -

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2508739/Britains-earners-paying-30-cent-income-tax.html

 

Britain's top earners are now paying almost 30 per cent of all income tax while their income equates to just 10 per cent of the national salary

Huge increase since 1979 revealed in research for the Sunday Times

 

Super-rich earners paid 11 per cent of tax 34 years ago - now they pay 29.8

 

Chancellor says 'broadest shoulders must take the biggest burden'

[SpikeMac]

30% of the tax yet only 10% of the income. By that measure they are paying three times what the average man is....

 

.

 

They need to have a word with the Chief execs of Boots, Amazon, Starbucks et al.

 

If those companies paid their share, the burden on individuals would be lower.

[whiteowl]

From the original Sunday Times article, the printed version. Like most people I don't have access to the online one because of the paywall.

 

---------- Post added 18-11-2013 at 23:29 ----------

 

It's also online in the Daily Mail's rehash of the story here -

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2508739/Britains-earners-paying-30-cent-income-tax.html

 

Britain's top earners are now paying almost 30 per cent of all income tax while their income equates to just 10 per cent of the national salary

Huge increase since 1979 revealed in research for the Sunday Times

 

Super-rich earners paid 11 per cent of tax 34 years ago - now they pay 29.8

 

Chancellor says 'broadest shoulders must take the biggest burden'

 

Thanks for the link, my eyes aren't quite that bad yet but very considerate of you to supersize it

[Mecky]

News for you - if they are using a tax avoidance scheme then they are paying exactly what they should. I know it's difficult for you because it involves long words but avoidance and evasion are two totally different things.

 

So why are such schemes dubbed TAX AVOIDANCE, surely if they are paying what they should they wouldn't have to avoid?

[Obelix]

So why are such schemes dubbed TAX AVOIDANCE, surely if they are paying what they should they wouldn't have to avoid?

 

You know the difference perfectly well Mecky, now run along and find a different drum to bang so we can pick holes in that as well for you.

[muddycoffee]

How is that income?

 

Wealth, yes. But income?

 

The times rich list is about wealth, not how much income tax is paid in each financial year.

[Nagel]

So why are such schemes dubbed TAX AVOIDANCE, surely if they are paying what they should they wouldn't have to avoid?

 

Tax avoidance is legal and the common sense thing to do. Who doesn't want to reduce their tax bill to the lowest level allowed? It's tax evasion that's illegal.

[RonJeremy]

So why are such schemes dubbed TAX AVOIDANCE, surely if they are paying what they should they wouldn't have to avoid?

 

All Businesses/taxpayers avoid tax. No one wants to pay more than they have to.

[dosxuk]

The times rich list is about wealth, not how much income tax is paid in each financial year.

 

Who said anything about the Times rich list? The story is about income, not wealth.

[taxman]

 

News for you - if they are using a tax avoidance scheme then they are paying exactly what they should. I know it's difficult for you because it involves long words but avoidance and evasion are two totally different things.

 

But are still targeted by the government as they contribute to the tax gap

 

"Tax evasion and tax avoidance by businesses and individuals contribute to the tax gap, along with error, failure to take reasonable care, non-payment, legal interpretation, the hidden economy and criminal attacks on the tax system."

 

I know it's difficult for you because it involves attacking avoidance, which you seem to be a fan of.

 

And before you start, and for the fiftieth time, an ISA is NOT avoidance!