It'd be refreshing (and probably chaos-inducing) for an exasperated left/centrist government to produce and publish a shit-list of 'threatening to leave Britain if taxes increase etc etc' companies/non-doms/entrepreneurs who wear Union Jack waistcoats. A real test for bogus patriots like Farage to see which way they'd publicly express their sympathies.
Taxes are obligatory for peons. and small businesses. For rich and the multinationals, they are basically optional. This is entirely legal.
Somewhat as an aside, one Jeffery Epstein supposedly made his money by offering tax strategies, although he was not an accountant and did have a tax background, nor was he an attorney, which meant his work for any supposed clients would not be subject to attorney client privilege.
Sorry but your whole premise is wrong and misinformed, and seemingly based on anecdotes about wealthy tax dodgers. You should have done some basic research and provided some data before spouting such certainties. Here is an overview from ChatGPT:
"In the United Kingdom, the top 5% of earners contribute a substantial portion of the total income tax revenue. As of the 2023–24 tax year, individuals with incomes exceeding approximately £160,000 fall into the top 1% of earners, and this group alone pays about a third of all income tax.
The share of income tax paid by the highest earners has been increasing over time. For instance, in the 2023–24 tax year, the top 1% of taxpayers (those with incomes exceeding £214,000) received 13% of taxpayers’ pre-tax income and provided 29% of all income tax revenue.
This trend reflects the UK's progressive tax system, where higher earners are taxed at higher rates, resulting in a significant portion of income tax revenue being sourced from the top earners."
I am not a fan of attacking wealthy people as if they are bad people. This is because the top 10% pay 60% of the UK tax take. They pay the majority of the bills, no question. I also think humans have a deeply embedded security behaviour of protecting their wealth, so moralising it is pointless. Are we seriously saying that we don't all like to reduce our own tax bills?
Looking at non dom remittances, capital gains and inheritance taxes, to me they seem pretty sensible.
The issue is how people may be using loopholes. For instance, non doms run the clock down to 14 years living in the UK when the limit is 15 years - then move away for a couple of years. When they return to the UK the clock starts again from 0. That shouldn't happen.
Non doms bring in 9 Billion in taxes, quite a lot of money. I personally don't see why someone who is not permanently based in the UK should pay takes on profits made in India for example if they have a business and house there where they were born and raised. India should have that tax. They pay taxes on their business here and all together it amounts to 9 billion.
Wealth inequality has not increased due to lack of taxation, more because of asset value increases due to global market changes.
Overall I would agree with shaming those who use and maipulate tax loopholes-but I personally focus on that rather than saying blanket 'rich people don't give us enough money'. I don't see glaring unfairness in the current system. The unethical dodging - yes lets squash that as much as possible.
Be honest, it gave you a thrill having Michael Portillo compare you to Thatcher....haha...I love that you included that little golden nugget. In that case she can't have been all bad...
"Wealth inequality has not increased due to lack of taxation, more because of asset value increases due to global market changes." - so what do we do then to balance the books on the asset rich class and the waging poor? should not being born to an asset rich family condemn you to never finding financial security? Does the asset class not benefit from the labourr has plummeted of people whose purchasing powe? Is that fair ? Is that productive? Is that sustainable?
Nobody is attacking the rich as if they are bad people. I have plenty of very rich friends and some are extremely angry at their fellow rich people who will use and abuse loopholes.
On non-doms I will accept a tapering, but the current situation is setting a bad example. I don't think people should pay tax on things multiple times, hence why agreements with other countries are good, but it should be considered shameful to have a registered company in a tax haven when you are clearly a person living and benefiting from British society.
And yes, I am sorry but rich people don't give enough money. Just because they pay the majority of taxes that does not mean it is enough. This is simply a statement of fact, the country needs investment in infrastructure that has been neglected for too long and our growth and producitivity has suffered for it.
About Portillo saying I reminded him of Thatcher, for sure I welcome the comparison, not for her politics which I do not share, but for her demeanor and principles. The first time I heard of the term 'iron lady' when I was a child in Greece I had no idea what she was about, but I remember very clearly thinking 'this is what I am too'. I couldn't have been older than 9 or 10.
If we put aside the loopholes (non dom loopholes might increase the take from 9bill to 12billion.) what tax would you apply to the rich to pay for the infrastructure?
I'm not sure Thatcher was blogging about boys in quite the same way in her 20s, but perhaps you are a softer alloy with lower carbon content.
Nonsense. It is righteous and just to dodge taxes. It will only go on asylum seekers, welfare scroungers and the loathsome public sector socialists. Choke off the water supply and let the weeds choke too.
Sorry… you are ascribing the feeling of shame to rich tax dodgers? I think there are at least 20,000(000) videos on youtube which will explain why shame is not even in their panoply of emotions (a very small panopy-a micropanoply).There was this picture of the wef conference panel with a lot of rich people discussing how (not why) AI was going to be so much better at everything than humans (…with all their silly, messy ‘emotions’). The emotion pool is veeeery shallow-you are digging Stella but there is nothing there!
In a well run country, the government will partner with businesses and collect its income as dividends! Let’s all make our money by being pro business. What is good for business, is good for people
I wish you would subscribe to The Familographer, my Substack, as well as become my FB friend. I've plugged your writings multiple times as something different, fresh and interesting. I hope it will get more paid subscribers for you than I've got myself, though I doubt you can love yours more than I do mine. I'd pay for yours if I had money. You'll make a fine American one-day (again), if the country survives MusketRump. I'm grateful to Leah at Juvenescence for the intro.
Hi Jack, thank you for reading, I really do appreciate you being here. I am afraid I can't subscribe to any more substacks because my email is so clogged up that I can hardly find the emails I need to be responding to. Best of luck with your writing, don't give up building the Familographer, I will check it out when I get the chance x
You can not seriously expect the political classes to over-tax or punish the rich or super-rich, simply because it is the intention of the political classes, once in power, to create their own riches by lending their names and influence to the very people you expect them to financially punish!?
Would you expect Angela Rayner to go back to working at Asda as a checkout girl, once her political career is over, or would you expect her to cozy up to any, or every, rich person who will pay her for her political connections and advice?
And let us not ignore the fact that Tony Blair made a Million pounds in his first week after he left his Prime Minister position, by touring the world giving after dinner speeches to the very people you are complaining about!
Capitalism and Champagne Socialism is alive and well and has no intention of destroying the very lucrative system it depends on.
Mieh I don't agree with that, we all need jobs and I do not think consulting businesses is evil, unless you have a conflict of interest and you hide it, if anything it can also be useful experience to learn how the world works. I don't think Rachel Reeves is not raising taxes because she wants a better job after leaving the treasury, I genuinely believe for her this is her calling and she wants at the end of her life to look back and say 'I did this well'. Her ideology and political temperament are leading her to make policies the way she does. I am glad she got around to scrapping non-dom, even if diluted for practical reasons.
Sure those who work hard should be rewarded, but are you really trying to convince me that a banker earning bonuses is working so hard and contributing so much to our society to deserve millions?
The top 10% of the population own approximately 57% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% hold less than 5%. The real value of inheritances transferred annually in the UK has doubled roughly every 20 years since 1979, now exceeding £100 billion each year.
There’s no logical argument for more money when we’re wasting what we have. We need a surplus in our balance of payments and no-one in the public sector provides that. Entrepreneurs, unfortunately for the left are rare but essential. We can’t all be paid for by the state. The Opposition often uses the argument of the ‘brain drain’ but seriously, if you don’t realise how up the creek we are this time then you’ll never realise how easy it is for anyone, let alone the ‘rich’, to say ‘forget this’ I’m leaving and taking my skills and investment elsewhere. Dark times ahead.
If you put the numbers together, on infrastructure alone, we need a lot more, we needed a lot more a decade ago. We would be far richer by now if in 2012 the coalition had bit the bullet and built nuclear plants but... they said it would take till 2022 to see the beenfits !!
I absolutely love the ideas herein. As part of the 99.999% not the ultrarich, we absolutely should shame the ultrarich for their blatant tax evasion and what is effectively stomping on society by doing so.
That said, I'm not sure they care. I think the only way to convince them to care may be to revive the guillotine.
It'd be refreshing (and probably chaos-inducing) for an exasperated left/centrist government to produce and publish a shit-list of 'threatening to leave Britain if taxes increase etc etc' companies/non-doms/entrepreneurs who wear Union Jack waistcoats. A real test for bogus patriots like Farage to see which way they'd publicly express their sympathies.
people should be ashamed to send an invoice from companies registered in the Cayman Islands
Compelling Stella. Since they don't pay taxes, the non-doms should have their bluff called. They have a weak hand.
Taxes are obligatory for peons. and small businesses. For rich and the multinationals, they are basically optional. This is entirely legal.
Somewhat as an aside, one Jeffery Epstein supposedly made his money by offering tax strategies, although he was not an accountant and did have a tax background, nor was he an attorney, which meant his work for any supposed clients would not be subject to attorney client privilege.
yeap
Sorry but your whole premise is wrong and misinformed, and seemingly based on anecdotes about wealthy tax dodgers. You should have done some basic research and provided some data before spouting such certainties. Here is an overview from ChatGPT:
"In the United Kingdom, the top 5% of earners contribute a substantial portion of the total income tax revenue. As of the 2023–24 tax year, individuals with incomes exceeding approximately £160,000 fall into the top 1% of earners, and this group alone pays about a third of all income tax.
IFS.ORG.UK
The share of income tax paid by the highest earners has been increasing over time. For instance, in the 2023–24 tax year, the top 1% of taxpayers (those with incomes exceeding £214,000) received 13% of taxpayers’ pre-tax income and provided 29% of all income tax revenue.
IFS.ORG.UK
This trend reflects the UK's progressive tax system, where higher earners are taxed at higher rates, resulting in a significant portion of income tax revenue being sourced from the top earners."
You are literally talking about people who are living in the UK and paying taxes in the UK, I am talking about tax dodging and loopholes.
Do you have some data to support your commentary?
I am not a fan of attacking wealthy people as if they are bad people. This is because the top 10% pay 60% of the UK tax take. They pay the majority of the bills, no question. I also think humans have a deeply embedded security behaviour of protecting their wealth, so moralising it is pointless. Are we seriously saying that we don't all like to reduce our own tax bills?
Looking at non dom remittances, capital gains and inheritance taxes, to me they seem pretty sensible.
The issue is how people may be using loopholes. For instance, non doms run the clock down to 14 years living in the UK when the limit is 15 years - then move away for a couple of years. When they return to the UK the clock starts again from 0. That shouldn't happen.
Non doms bring in 9 Billion in taxes, quite a lot of money. I personally don't see why someone who is not permanently based in the UK should pay takes on profits made in India for example if they have a business and house there where they were born and raised. India should have that tax. They pay taxes on their business here and all together it amounts to 9 billion.
Wealth inequality has not increased due to lack of taxation, more because of asset value increases due to global market changes.
Overall I would agree with shaming those who use and maipulate tax loopholes-but I personally focus on that rather than saying blanket 'rich people don't give us enough money'. I don't see glaring unfairness in the current system. The unethical dodging - yes lets squash that as much as possible.
Be honest, it gave you a thrill having Michael Portillo compare you to Thatcher....haha...I love that you included that little golden nugget. In that case she can't have been all bad...
"Wealth inequality has not increased due to lack of taxation, more because of asset value increases due to global market changes." - so what do we do then to balance the books on the asset rich class and the waging poor? should not being born to an asset rich family condemn you to never finding financial security? Does the asset class not benefit from the labourr has plummeted of people whose purchasing powe? Is that fair ? Is that productive? Is that sustainable?
Nobody is attacking the rich as if they are bad people. I have plenty of very rich friends and some are extremely angry at their fellow rich people who will use and abuse loopholes.
On non-doms I will accept a tapering, but the current situation is setting a bad example. I don't think people should pay tax on things multiple times, hence why agreements with other countries are good, but it should be considered shameful to have a registered company in a tax haven when you are clearly a person living and benefiting from British society.
And yes, I am sorry but rich people don't give enough money. Just because they pay the majority of taxes that does not mean it is enough. This is simply a statement of fact, the country needs investment in infrastructure that has been neglected for too long and our growth and producitivity has suffered for it.
About Portillo saying I reminded him of Thatcher, for sure I welcome the comparison, not for her politics which I do not share, but for her demeanor and principles. The first time I heard of the term 'iron lady' when I was a child in Greece I had no idea what she was about, but I remember very clearly thinking 'this is what I am too'. I couldn't have been older than 9 or 10.
If we put aside the loopholes (non dom loopholes might increase the take from 9bill to 12billion.) what tax would you apply to the rich to pay for the infrastructure?
I'm not sure Thatcher was blogging about boys in quite the same way in her 20s, but perhaps you are a softer alloy with lower carbon content.
I'd forgo shaming the rich to learn what they do so I can replicate it for myself. lmfao
suit yourself
Nonsense. It is righteous and just to dodge taxes. It will only go on asylum seekers, welfare scroungers and the loathsome public sector socialists. Choke off the water supply and let the weeds choke too.
Sorry… you are ascribing the feeling of shame to rich tax dodgers? I think there are at least 20,000(000) videos on youtube which will explain why shame is not even in their panoply of emotions (a very small panopy-a micropanoply).There was this picture of the wef conference panel with a lot of rich people discussing how (not why) AI was going to be so much better at everything than humans (…with all their silly, messy ‘emotions’). The emotion pool is veeeery shallow-you are digging Stella but there is nothing there!
In a well run country, the government will partner with businesses and collect its income as dividends! Let’s all make our money by being pro business. What is good for business, is good for people
Such a socialist view!
I don’t think we should attack the rich. If you want them to pay the their taxes fairly, make it low taxes, like in SG
I wish you would subscribe to The Familographer, my Substack, as well as become my FB friend. I've plugged your writings multiple times as something different, fresh and interesting. I hope it will get more paid subscribers for you than I've got myself, though I doubt you can love yours more than I do mine. I'd pay for yours if I had money. You'll make a fine American one-day (again), if the country survives MusketRump. I'm grateful to Leah at Juvenescence for the intro.
Hi Jack, thank you for reading, I really do appreciate you being here. I am afraid I can't subscribe to any more substacks because my email is so clogged up that I can hardly find the emails I need to be responding to. Best of luck with your writing, don't give up building the Familographer, I will check it out when I get the chance x
You can not seriously expect the political classes to over-tax or punish the rich or super-rich, simply because it is the intention of the political classes, once in power, to create their own riches by lending their names and influence to the very people you expect them to financially punish!?
Would you expect Angela Rayner to go back to working at Asda as a checkout girl, once her political career is over, or would you expect her to cozy up to any, or every, rich person who will pay her for her political connections and advice?
And let us not ignore the fact that Tony Blair made a Million pounds in his first week after he left his Prime Minister position, by touring the world giving after dinner speeches to the very people you are complaining about!
Capitalism and Champagne Socialism is alive and well and has no intention of destroying the very lucrative system it depends on.
Mieh I don't agree with that, we all need jobs and I do not think consulting businesses is evil, unless you have a conflict of interest and you hide it, if anything it can also be useful experience to learn how the world works. I don't think Rachel Reeves is not raising taxes because she wants a better job after leaving the treasury, I genuinely believe for her this is her calling and she wants at the end of her life to look back and say 'I did this well'. Her ideology and political temperament are leading her to make policies the way she does. I am glad she got around to scrapping non-dom, even if diluted for practical reasons.
Hmmm... I suppose we will have to wait and see, time will reveal the truth eventually!
It's interesting Frank Field used the word gained instead of earned.
Lots of "wealthy" people work damned hard for their money and pay their taxes without complaining.
There are "cheats" at every level of society.
Maybe we should have a national register of tax evaders and benefit cheats.
Sure those who work hard should be rewarded, but are you really trying to convince me that a banker earning bonuses is working so hard and contributing so much to our society to deserve millions?
The top 10% of the population own approximately 57% of the nation's wealth, while the bottom 50% hold less than 5%. The real value of inheritances transferred annually in the UK has doubled roughly every 20 years since 1979, now exceeding £100 billion each year.
"Our family finances are going to be shaped more in the years ahead by who our parents are, and less by how hard we work, posing huge challenges to how fair Britain is and feels." https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2024/oct/05/tiktok-is-full-of-advice-on-how-to-retire-early-the-truth-is-you-just-need-rich-parents?utm_source=chatgpt.com
Fully repect your opinions Stella.
But I draw the line at a polemic from Torsten Bell, the genius behind the Ed Stone
There’s no logical argument for more money when we’re wasting what we have. We need a surplus in our balance of payments and no-one in the public sector provides that. Entrepreneurs, unfortunately for the left are rare but essential. We can’t all be paid for by the state. The Opposition often uses the argument of the ‘brain drain’ but seriously, if you don’t realise how up the creek we are this time then you’ll never realise how easy it is for anyone, let alone the ‘rich’, to say ‘forget this’ I’m leaving and taking my skills and investment elsewhere. Dark times ahead.
Considering that the rich set both tax policy and spending priorities....
If you put the numbers together, on infrastructure alone, we need a lot more, we needed a lot more a decade ago. We would be far richer by now if in 2012 the coalition had bit the bullet and built nuclear plants but... they said it would take till 2022 to see the beenfits !!
I absolutely love the ideas herein. As part of the 99.999% not the ultrarich, we absolutely should shame the ultrarich for their blatant tax evasion and what is effectively stomping on society by doing so.
That said, I'm not sure they care. I think the only way to convince them to care may be to revive the guillotine.
hahaha let's hope it doesn't come to that, I can't stomach violence