Equality..

There’s significant help for the poorest (no issue with that), but noting of note for those on okay salaries who have worked hard to get there.
=====
Loaded statement. The poorest are also hard workers. It's like your statement assumes they aren't. It's not just those on OK salaries that work hard and people on OK salaries need less help than the poor. You are advocating for help for people on OK salaries on the basis that they have worked hard, so by default others have not worked hard?

Income tax is all over the place partly because of the approach to and priority in policy, which is the big corporations and the rich. We give them everything and leave large deficits in our budgets which we force the people to cover. We lose well over 100b in possible taxes to these corporations annually, probably more.

Take that away and tax off shored money and relieve the people. The people should always come first. Now they're leaving us down here to argue with each other and take away help from the poor because there is no money, while still spending our taxes to help commit genocide in foreign lands.

They can fack off with that bullsheet. There is more than enough money if we use it well and always put the people first.

I must be missing something here.

The Government told women about the rise in pension age years back but the BBC is littered with women claiming they knew nothing about it with some saying they spent thousands on having to re-train because they were suddenly out of work.

If women think they're due compo for having to work until they're 66 to get State Pension then surely (in the name of equality) so are men.

“Loaded statement. The poorest are also hard workers. It's like your statement assumes they aren't. It's not just those on OK salaries that work hard and people on OK salaries need less help than the poor. You are advocating for help for people on OK salaries on the basis that they have worked hard, so by default others have not worked hard?”

Just to be clear, this isn’t what meant. In the current system, rewards for progression are becoming slimmer and slimmer.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
There’s significant help for the poorest (no issue with that), but noting of note for those on okay salaries who have worked hard to get there.
=====
Loaded statement. The poorest are also hard workers. It's like your statement assumes they aren't. It's not just those on OK salaries that work hard and people on OK salaries need less help than the poor. You are advocating for help for people on OK salaries on the basis that they have worked hard, so by default others have not worked hard?

Income tax is all over the place partly because of the approach to and priority in policy, which is the big corporations and the rich. We give them everything and leave large deficits in our budgets which we force the people to cover. We lose well over 100b in possible taxes to these corporations annually, probably more.

Take that away and tax off shored money and relieve the people. The people should always come first. Now they're leaving us down here to argue with each other and take away help from the poor because there is no money, while still spending our taxes to help commit genocide in foreign lands.

They can fack off with that bullsheet. There is more than enough money if we use it well and always put the people first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Corporation tax currently raises about 8% of tax revenue.

I accept that large corps are able to offshore money and avoid tax and benefit from some breaks but I think the impact of this on the tax receipts overall, "big black hole" this leaves in the national finances is exaggerated. Corp tax only contributes 8% of tax revenue and even if this were increased by 25% it would add only 2% to overall tax revenues.

As for personal tax, I am not sure what significant tax breaks the rich benefit from which causes such significant black holes that skew tax revenues. What examples are there. Most I am aware of offer marginal savings from an otherwise fairly high tax burden

Corp tax only contributes 8% of tax revenue and even if this were increased by 25% it would add only 2% to overall tax revenues.
=======
Eh?

comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
There’s significant help for the poorest (no issue with that), but noting of note for those on okay salaries who have worked hard to get there.
=====
Loaded statement. The poorest are also hard workers. It's like your statement assumes they aren't. It's not just those on OK salaries that work hard and people on OK salaries need less help than the poor. You are advocating for help for people on OK salaries on the basis that they have worked hard, so by default others have not worked hard?

Income tax is all over the place partly because of the approach to and priority in policy, which is the big corporations and the rich. We give them everything and leave large deficits in our budgets which we force the people to cover. We lose well over 100b in possible taxes to these corporations annually, probably more.

Take that away and tax off shored money and relieve the people. The people should always come first. Now they're leaving us down here to argue with each other and take away help from the poor because there is no money, while still spending our taxes to help commit genocide in foreign lands.

They can fack off with that bullsheet. There is more than enough money if we use it well and always put the people first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Corporation tax currently raises about 8% of tax revenue.

I accept that large corps are able to offshore money and avoid tax and benefit from some breaks but I think the impact of this on the tax receipts overall, "big black hole" this leaves in the national finances is exaggerated. Corp tax only contributes 8% of tax revenue and even if this were increased by 25% it would add only 2% to overall tax revenues.

As for personal tax, I am not sure what significant tax breaks the rich benefit from which causes such significant black holes that skew tax revenues. What examples are there. Most I am aware of offer marginal savings from an otherwise fairly high tax burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My premise is from long-term observation. I see examples regularly in the news and it's been a topic in UK media for a long time, and I'm sure some examples could be found via a simple Google search.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Devonshirespur (U6316)
posted 1 hour, 29 minutes ago
comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 2 hours, 43 minutes ago
There’s significant help for the poorest (no issue with that), but noting of note for those on okay salaries who have worked hard to get there.
=====
Loaded statement. The poorest are also hard workers. It's like your statement assumes they aren't. It's not just those on OK salaries that work hard and people on OK salaries need less help than the poor. You are advocating for help for people on OK salaries on the basis that they have worked hard, so by default others have not worked hard?

Income tax is all over the place partly because of the approach to and priority in policy, which is the big corporations and the rich. We give them everything and leave large deficits in our budgets which we force the people to cover. We lose well over 100b in possible taxes to these corporations annually, probably more.

Take that away and tax off shored money and relieve the people. The people should always come first. Now they're leaving us down here to argue with each other and take away help from the poor because there is no money, while still spending our taxes to help commit genocide in foreign lands.

They can fack off with that bullsheet. There is more than enough money if we use it well and always put the people first.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Corporation tax currently raises about 8% of tax revenue.

I accept that large corps are able to offshore money and avoid tax and benefit from some breaks but I think the impact of this on the tax receipts overall, "big black hole" this leaves in the national finances is exaggerated. Corp tax only contributes 8% of tax revenue and even if this were increased by 25% it would add only 2% to overall tax revenues.

As for personal tax, I am not sure what significant tax breaks the rich benefit from which causes such significant black holes that skew tax revenues. What examples are there. Most I am aware of offer marginal savings from an otherwise fairly high tax burden
----------------------------------------------------------------------
My premise is from long-term observation. I see examples regularly in the news and it's been a topic in UK media for a long time, and I'm sure some examples could be found via a simple Google search.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yes but you are making big statements like "We give them [the rich] everything and leave large deficits in our budgets"

And that just isnt supported by facts.

If you take this article for example:

https://www.resolutionfoundation.org/press-releases/five-terrible-tax-breaks-are-costing-taxpayers-4-billion-a-year/


It identifies tax relief that the wealthiest 70,000 get comes at a cost of 4bn. SO yes, that is money that would ideally be taken as tax rather than as a relief, but £4bn in a total tax landscape of £1000bn is nothing like the "large deficit" that skews the burden onto others.

While i do not disagree with the principle of what you are saying, i think you are guilty of churning out your own 'propaganda' in how you have responded.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 19 minutes ago
Corp tax only contributes 8% of tax revenue and even if this were increased by 25% it would add only 2% to overall tax revenues.
=======
Eh?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

of total tax revenues of about £1000bn, Corporation tax contributes £80bn or 8%.

If you increased corporation tax or were stricter with it and increased that contribution from £80bn to £100bn (a 25% increase). it would only increase total tax revenues by 2% (to £1020bn). Small fry in the big picture

A bit of a waste of time because corporation tax includes tax from all incorporated entities, not just big corporations.

Big difference between the incorporated corner store with 2-20 employees and a behemoth like Shell Petroleum.

comment by Mamba the Chief Disinformation Officer on JA60... (U1282)
posted 1 hour, 37 minutes ago
A bit of a waste of time because corporation tax includes tax from all incorporated entities, not just big corporations.

Big difference between the incorporated corner store with 2-20 employees and a behemoth like Shell Petroleum.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah but if you are going to make the claim that these are the areas where big shortfalls are created then the figures needs considering otherwise its an unsubstantiated cliam.

Also, its not UK tax policy per se that allows Shell, for example, to pay little or no tax in the UK, and this is an issue faced all over the world where multinationals will pay their tax in the most efficient way. Last figures showed Shell paid about £6bn in Norway and £15m in UK tax. Not denying that their strategy leaves a hole in UK tax income, along with many others (amazon paid £0 in '22, despite posting >£200m UK profits) but this isnt a Tory tax concession to the benefit of the rich, it's just big business being big business and its a global issue . In fact it is other countries and governments that entice these businesses with lower tax rates (like Ireland do), although work has begun to address this behaviour by multi national companies.