Then get ready to lose.
A lot.
Or you know, you tax the profits they make with their companies, close loopholes, up taxes on very high amounts, and give people proper welfare, education, healthcare and housing, so they can move upwards in society instead of being stuck.
Maybe it's just me but that's bordering on communism, is it not?
I'd be pissed if my earnings grew to a nice high amount but then I was told "lol nope, we're taking the rest of it".
The percentage of what you're taxed on any part of your income should never be more than 50%. You should never pay more in tax than you take home in my view.
I like the idea of a max income, but not some ridiculous cap like that. Something more along the lines of no higher than 200% more than the lowest paid employees. Still allows for ridiculous wealth while incentivising paying your employees more.
How would you go about doing something like that? How do you define an employee? Someone with direct salary, or also external companies you hire?I like the idea of a max income, but not some ridiculous cap like that. Something more along the lines of no higher than 200% more than the lowest paid employees. Still allows for ridiculous wealth while incentivising paying your employees more.
The country would lose a lot of tax revenue.What am I going to lose here? I'm not seeing your point. It's not a race, I'm not a runner.
I like the idea of a max income, but not some ridiculous cap like that. Something more along the lines of no higher than 200% more than the lowest paid employees. Still allows for ridiculous wealth while incentivising paying your employees more.
Does the UK have capital gains or does it tax investment as regular income?
Umm........ Maybe your UK Labour Party should boot this guy.
Umm........ Maybe your UK Labour Party should boot this guy.
It's fundamentally a question of where the money after the cap goes, amongst many many many many many many other sticking points.
Equally, take something like the NHS. At this point throwing a shit tonne of cash at it is not the answer in its current form.
They tried that already, Corbyn may be incompetent but he's clearly the best Labour have to offer at the moment given how forgettable all the challengers were
There is capital gains tax on both dividends and selling shares (taxed on the profit you make). The rate is dependent on your income tax rate, iirc.
There is both a yearly tax-free allowance on capital gains, and an ISA scheme where you can invest up to £15,000 annually free of any tax.
Umm........ Maybe your UK Labour Party should boot this guy.
He said: "Why would someone need to earn more than £50m a year?"
Dividends are taxed as income in UK to close a loophole. Capital gains tax is 28%, and it applies to things like share sales.
I don't see a problem with a cap, but not that low.
Re the NHS, just to point out we don't know if that's right or wrong. The NHS is drastically underfunded - we spend less on healthcare as a %of our GDP than almost every other western country. Even under Blair it only started approaching the lower levels of what France, Germany, Australia etc spend on health.
It's one of the big lies of uk politics - the notion that the NHS is this vast overspending monstrosity that needs funding beyond imagination.
Does the UK have capital gains or does it tax investment as regular income?
This is why I don't bother investing outside an ISA, I'm fairly financially minded but all the rules on taxation are a bit over my head. Not that I have more than the allowance to invest per year anyway..
It's fundamentally a question of where the money after the cap goes, amongst many many many many many many other sticking points.
Equally, take something like the NHS. At this point throwing a shit tonne of cash at it is not the answer in its current form.
That's my question. Where does the runoff money go?
The government? From there, where?
This just doesn't sound like a feasibly doable idea at all.
How did he end up with that specific figure?