Election Year or Fear!

[SithHappens]

Restore candidate for Makerfield claims traffic issues are down to immigration

https://youtube.com/shorts/2pH1pqB4vsg?si=WXTZu_tZpZJd-O4E

[MadAmster]

Does he mean people trafficking?

Just joshing

[MadAmster]

I think I finally understand Reform UK Ltd's policies. They seem to boil down to:

The young get paid less
The old get paid less
The disabled get paid less
The sick and mentally ill are put back to work and paid less
The black and brown people get deported
The rich can do what they like

How right am I? Farage man of the people my *rse.

[Andy_Faber]

How right am I?

Time will tell.

Much as you (or I) dislike it, the rich will always get richer and every administration in history has failed to rein the rich in, mainly because administrations are full of 'the rich' So that's hardly a Reform-unique policy

Get this one, and using a sporting theme: A Venture Capitalist company bought a stake in a middle ranking F1 team a couple of years ago for ?270m. They are now selling it, with no improvement in form of the team, for ?700m. You just ain't gonna stop it...

[MadAmster]

Time will tell.

Much as you (or I) dislike it, the rich will always get richer and every administration in history has failed to rein the rich in, mainly because administrations are full of 'the rich' So that's hardly a Reform-unique policy

Get this one, and using a sporting theme: A Venture Capitalist company bought a stake in a middle ranking F1 team a couple of years ago for ?270m. They are now selling it, with no improvement in form of the team, for ?700m. You just ain't gonna stop it...

Not arguing with that. However, just maybe, some of that kind of profit should be taxed to ease the burden on the poor. As I've said in the past, and no doubt will say again, no issue with that sort of thing. Where I do have an issue is that there's likely to be some kind of deal with the tax jurisdiction under which the seller(s) fall and/or they are in some tax haven. All above board, but should it be? It's income, why shouldn't it be taxed as such or corporation tax paid on it or Capital gains...

The entire system is "rigged" in the favour of a small group. I think it's totally unfair. Why should a builder/plumber/sparky etc pay a higher % of his annual income than someone who plays the stock market or buys and sells F1 teams? Income is income. Treat it as such.

Without looking, I don't know which F1 team it is or where they are based or where the owners pay what little tax they can get away with. That info is irrelevant to my point that, say they are in Monaco, for instance, why should they pay a smaller % on whatever income they get from selling the team than a chambermaid in one of the hotels has to pay on her wage?

Basically, I'm not saying take all the rich folks' money, but I am saying they should pay the same % as everybody else. Whether that involves increasing the % the rich and companies pay, decreasing what the chambermaid pays or simply banning tax breaks for the rich and multinationals doesn't matter. Tax all income the same. That's fair.

Would I countenance some leeway? In the right circumstances, yes. 3 to 5 years incentive rates for startups, increasing to the standard rate over another 3 years wouldn't see me moan. Unless of course, they shut down after 5 years and reopened under a new name to get round the system.

The folk who go to work 5 days a week and get a wage/salary aren't being fairly treated IMO and they should be.

[ramAnag]

Time will tell.

Much as you (or I) dislike it, the rich will always get richer and every administration in history has failed to rein the rich in, mainly because administrations are full of 'the rich' So that's hardly a Reform-unique policy

Get this one, and using a sporting theme: A Venture Capitalist company bought a stake in a middle ranking F1 team a couple of years ago for ?270m. They are now selling it, with no improvement in form of the team, for ?700m. You just ain't gonna stop it...

But you’re missing the point, AF. Neither MA, nor I (or Swale or Sith) have ever claimed to be against profit.
As an example, I bought my last house in 1983 for 27k…did it up, extended it, bought some adjacent land and sold it in 2016 for 330k. Likewise I bought my current house in 2016 for 325k…fixed it, did it up, sorted the garden and it’s now worth, allegedly, at least twice what I paid for it. Anything wrong with that? Not that I can think of, but I’m just an ordinary bloke and there will be many more in that position.
What I think MA, and certainly I, object to is the chronically unfair and uneven distribution of wealth. The fact that so much is owned by so few, as is sadly encapsulated by, to venture back into your ‘sporting theme’, a system where the best pro footballers can earn three times as much in a week as doctors and headteachers do in a year.
That is, imo, wrong as is the fact that those taxed via PAYE - a fair and transparent system which I have no personal problem with - seem to be paying a much bigger % of their earnings than those who’s earnings are less transparent, less traceable (crypto currency anyone?) and often seem only to be revealed to the extent that their undoubtedly clever, but often equally slippery, accountants allow.

[Andy_Faber]

But you?re missing the point, AF. Neither MA, nor I (or Swale or Sith) have ever claimed to be against profit.
As an example, I bought my last house in 1983 for 27k?did it up, extended it, bought some adjacent land and sold it in 2016 for 330k. Likewise I bought my current house in 2016 for 325k?fixed it, did it up, sorted the garden and it?s now worth, allegedly, at least twice what I paid for it. Anything wrong with that? Not that I can think of, but I?m just an ordinary bloke and there will be many more in that position.
What I think MA, and certainly I, object to is the chronically unfair and uneven distribution of wealth. The fact that so much is owned by so few, as is sadly encapsulated by, to venture back into your ?sporting theme?, a system where the best pro footballers can earn three times as much in a week as doctors and headteachers do in a year.
That is, imo, wrong as is the fact that those taxed via PAYE - a fair and transparent system which I have no personal problem with - seem to be paying a much bigger % of their earnings than those who?s earnings are less transparent, less traceable (crypto currency anyone?) and often seem only to be revealed to the extent that their undoubtedly clever, but often equally slippery, accountants allow.

Give us an example of such a person and someone here may be able to do a deep dive. I'm currently limiting my internet useage so It'd take me ages but depends who you select!

[ramAnag]

Give us an example of such a person and someone here may be able to do a deep dive. I'm currently limiting my internet useage so It'd take me ages but depends who you select!

Suffice it to say…I’m not going to provide names on here, but I have two (former) acquaintances, both self employed, who used to boast about how little tax they pay and how ‘helpful’ their accountants had been, while as far as crypto currency is concerned…isn’t one of its greatest attractions the lack of traceability?

Anyway, my point was, those with a more ‘left leaning’ stance on here aren’t necessarily opposed to profit…they are simply in favour of a fairer and more equitable society. You don’t need a ‘deep dive’ to comment on that.

[Andy_Faber]

Suffice it to say…I’m not going to provide names on here, but I have two (former) acquaintances, both self employed, who used to boast about how little tax they pay and how ‘helpful’ their accountants had been, while as far as crypto currency is concerned…isn’t one of its greatest attractions the lack of traceability?

Anyway, my point was, those with a more ‘left leaning’ stance on here aren’t necessarily opposed to profit…they are simply in favour of a fairer and more equitable society. You don’t need a ‘deep dive’ to comment on that.

You’re being too vague (in both paragraphs), and we’ve been through the ‘accountants’ issue before, accountancy is a profession and if a suitably skilled accountant is engaged to minimize a persons tax obligation it would be unprofessional not to do so (within the law). And please don’t assume wanting a fairer society is the preserve only of the ‘left’, that’s a typical lefty viewpoint

Let’s try again, roughly how much do/did your two acquaintances make/what were they worth and what industry were they in?

Surely having a conversation like this is better than giggling about the latest perceived Tory/ Reform / Restore faux paux

[ramAnag]

You?’re being too vague (in both paragraphs), and we?’ve been through the ?‘accountants?’ issue before, accountancy is a profession and if a suitably skilled accountant is engaged to minimize a persons tax obligation it would be unprofessional not to do so (within the law). And please don?’t assume wanting a fairer society is the preserve only of the ?‘left?’, that?’s a typical lefty viewpoint

Let?’s try again, roughly how much do/did your two acquaintances make/what were they worth and what industry were they in?

Surely having a conversation like this is better than giggling about the latest perceived Tory/ Reform / Restore faux paux

I’m not sure what your final sentence means. When have I been giggling about Tory/Reform/Restore and what ‘faux paux’? Tbh I don’t find anything about the far Right to be a subject for giggling.

As regards the rest. One was a builder. The other was a mechanic. No idea what they earned, just know that they boasted about paying (much) less tax than they should have.

I do think that we’ve had a similar conversation in the dim and distant. If I recall correctly the much missed Mistaram - who was himself self employed - came down heavily in my support saying that the self employed take advantage of every loophole going.

Of course accountancy is a profession. So is being a doctor, teacher, nurse, solicitor etc. doesn’t stop there being bad/bent one’s though, does it?

[Andy_Faber]

I’m not sure what your final sentence means. When have I been giggling about Tory/Reform/Restore and what ‘faux paux’? Tbh I don’t find anything about the far Right to be a subject for giggling.

As regards the rest. One was a builder. The other was a mechanic. No idea what they earned, just know that they boasted about paying (much) less tax than they should have.

I do think that we’ve had a similar conversation in the dim and distant. If I recall correctly the much missed Mistaram - who was himself self employed - came down heavily in my support saying that the self employed take advantage of every loophole going.

Of course accountancy is a profession. So is being a doctor, teacher, nurse, solicitor etc. doesn’t stop there being bad/bent one’s though, does it?

Sorry we are talking at crosspurposes unless you are on two issues atonce - my original reply to MA was about the 'filthy rich' not some fellahs who've made a few extra bob

[ramAnag]

Sorry we are talking at crosspurposes unless you are on two issues atonce - my original reply to MA was about the 'filthy rich' not some fellahs who've made a few extra bob

Thought you’d been replying to me since post 6577 at 1.14. Must be mistaken.

[swaledale]

I think I finally understand Reform UK Ltd's policies. They seem to boil down to:

The young get paid less
The old get paid less
The disabled get paid less
The sick and mentally ill are put back to work and paid less
The black and brown people get deported
The rich can do what they like

How right am I? Farage man of the people my *rse.

Of course he isn't! I mean is a Thai based crypto billionaire intrested in the "avergae Joe or Jill" and their lives? Is a guy who earns an estimated £1 million a year from side hustles either "in touch" or cocnerned with the lives of the ordinary man or women on the street? No of course not, he is just using them to put him in power in order to faciliatete the economics that the very rich want.

So why do the very people who would suffer or at the very least gain very little under Farage vote for him?

[Andy_Faber]

Thought you’d been replying to me since post 6577 at 1.14. Must be mistaken.

Whatever

There are a dozen blowhards like your acquaintances in any given pub, there's one that sits behind me at the match, claiming all sorts of financial *******s that is clearly bragadaccio. But lets assume their conversations had a basis in truth. Were they talking about NOT paying all the tax that they should (illegal) or paying ONLY paying what's due (legal)?

Not paying would be achieved by doing work 'for cash' and leaving it off 'the books' or claiming non-business expenses as business expenses. The former is the easiest, in fact we've had that discussion on here before, with a lot of erring and umming about whether we here assembled had ever asked for a price 'for cash'. Overstating business expenses is a bit more sophisticate but its still basically lying

However, HMRC rules are there for a reason, and a good, trained, expert accountant would work the HMRC rules as hard as possible to minimize 'tax exposure', including advising on if/how a business is incorporated. I don't see any problem with that, the rules must be there for a purpose and and have been set by administrations of more than one colour.

Maybe your acquaintances were just braggards and their accountant was an absolutely solid citizen staying the right side of the rules, who knows?

[Geoff Parkstone]

The politics of ignorance combined with the politics of envy....