Options

Labour will scrap non-dom status

179111213

Comments

  • Options
    valkayvalkay Posts: 15,742
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Part of the property crash in Spain was due to the German Government deciding to tax Germans on their earnings from letting their property in Spain, consequently many Germans sold their property.
  • Options
    LandisLandis Posts: 14,903
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    With regard to the 50p rate.....
    Let's all laugh at the Daily Mail and their hilarious apology for writing a steaming pile of garbage about millionaires leaving the UK. (The apology is at the end of this article)
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2239534/Britain-lost-7bn-thanks-Labours-50p-tax-rate.html

    How do you collect a 50p rate?
    1. Apply the rate for the full Parliament
    2. Don't verbally attack the 50p rate you have inherited 2 minutes after you take office. (This will only encourage the "Clever Accountants" who advertise on LBC and are already salivating at the prospect of you scrapping the rate after two years).
    3. Try to find the motivation to actually collect the tax (I accept this is not easy when you are Bankrolled by Hedge Funds)
  • Options
    JELLIES0JELLIES0 Posts: 6,709
    Forum Member
    Oh God. Not the old Daily Mail copyright "envy/jealousy" shtick.

    Can't you see this measure is one that is based on just good, old fashioned morality?

    It is irrelevant if this measure raises just £10m or £1bn. - it is what should happen ethically - and what should have happened decades ago.

    It has nothing to do with making the poor rich.

    Jealousy and spite more like. They are just playing to their core vote that's all.
  • Options
    LostFoolLostFool Posts: 90,688
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    valkay wrote: »
    Part of the property crash in Spain was due to the German Government deciding to tax Germans on their earnings from letting their property in Spain, consequently many Germans sold their property.

    Surely if someone is making money in a country through business or investments then the should be paying tax in that country not to the government where they have a passport from.
  • Options
    northantsgirlnorthantsgirl Posts: 4,663
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Boyard wrote: »
    The London Evening Standard running a ludicrous scare piece on this with the front page "LONDON BACKLASH OVER ED'S NON DOM ATTACK" Of course by "London" they mean millionaires in the city.

    It ends with this quote from an estate agent: "If non-dom status is abolished it will totally disable the luxury housing market in London" That's the best reason I've heard yet to go ahead with it! Such an out of touch rag.

    I assume that the Standard's Russian owners are non doms- hence the article. Wonder how their sister paper the Independent will report it?
  • Options
    northantsgirlnorthantsgirl Posts: 4,663
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Landis wrote: »
    With regard to the 50p rate.....
    Let's all laugh at the Daily Mail and their hilarious apology for writing a steaming pile of garbage about millionaires leaving the UK. (The apology is at the end of this article)
    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2239534/Britain-lost-7bn-thanks-Labours-50p-tax-rate.html

    How do you collect a 50p rate?
    1. Apply the rate for the full Parliament
    2. Don't verbally attack the 50p rate you have inherited 2 minutes after you take office. (This will only encourage the "Clever Accountants" who advertise on LBC and are already salivating at the prospect of you scrapping the rate after two years).
    3. Try to find the motivation to actually collect the tax (I accept this is not easy when you are Bankrolled by Hedge Funds)

    Must admit I am gobsmacked that the owner of the Daily Mail is a hereditary non-dom because of his family's French ancestry. Perhaps he would care to sod off there then.
  • Options
    JELLIES0JELLIES0 Posts: 6,709
    Forum Member
    Heck when the normally leftward leaning BBC comes up with a report like this, things are looking pretty bad for Labour

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h9JTMO0DZiM#t=62
  • Options
    TelevisionUserTelevisionUser Posts: 41,438
    Forum Member
    Oh God. Not the old Daily Mail copyright "envy/jealousy" shtick.

    Can't you see this measure is one that is based on just good, old fashioned morality?

    It is irrelevant if this measure raises just £10m or £1bn. - it is what should happen ethically - and what should have happened decades ago.

    It has nothing to do with making the poor rich.

    I would just call it plain fairness. These non-domiciled residents in the UK get to pay the same tax rates as British citizens and since these individuals are often incredibly wealthy, they can easily afford to comply with British tax rates.
  • Options
    StaunchyStaunchy Posts: 10,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Must admit I am gobsmacked that the owner of the Daily Mail is a hereditary non-dom because of his family's French ancestry. Perhaps he would care to sod off there then.

    That sort of thing gets labelled racist, when someone says it about people with less money.

    It's a funny old world with all these double standards isn't it?
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    David Tee wrote: »
    [1]There comes a tipping point where it doesn't work. Unfortunately that's not 50% or whatever stellar rate you 'd like to impose as a penalty rather a revenue measure.


    [2]
    I presume you have figures that say otherwise? If so, let's see them
    ...

    1. Which is?

    The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics reports that estimates of revenue-maximizing tax rates have varied widely, with a mid-range of around 70%.[2]

    (This about the Laffer Curve, as championed by that reactionary old devil Arthur Laffer.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve

    2. What exactly are you quoting from here?
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    I would just call it plain fairness. These non-domiciled residents in the UK get to pay the same tax rates as British citizens and since these individuals are often incredibly wealthy, they can easily afford to comply with British tax rates.

    Yep, that is what I call moral, ethical.
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yep, that is what I call moral, ethical.

    You just want to clobber the rich with very high rates of tax. I am sure that many people will have alternative description for your dogmatic hatred of the rich.
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    MartinP wrote: »
    You just want to clobber the rich with very high rates of tax. I am sure that many people will have alternative description for your dogmatic hatred of the rich.

    ...... and I'm sure many will have an alternative description for your dogmatic love of their selfsame wealth.
  • Options
    ecco66ecco66 Posts: 16,117
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    MartinP wrote: »
    You just want to clobber the rich with very high rates of tax. I am sure that many people will have alternative description for your dogmatic hatred of the rich.
    Oh indeed. Pathological class discrimination.
  • Options
    ecco66ecco66 Posts: 16,117
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ...... and I'm sure many will have an alternative description for your dogmatic love of their selfsame wealth.
    .....which generate taxes, which generate revenue for the exchequer.
  • Options
    GreatGodPanGreatGodPan Posts: 53,186
    Forum Member
    ecco66 wrote: »
    .....which generate taxes, which generate revenue for the exchequer.

    What? Martin's love of wealth generates revenue for the exchequer?
  • Options
    ecco66ecco66 Posts: 16,117
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    What? Martin's love of wealth generates revenue for the exchequer?
    If you wish to be so purile, yes. You were a civil servant, retiring early on a state funded, final salary scheme. You did not generate any revenue, you spent it.

    Martin works in the private sector. It generates revenue for the exchequer. Revenue your successors spend, and which under Labour they think they can just spend with abandon.
  • Options
    David TeeDavid Tee Posts: 22,833
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    1. Which is?

    The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics reports that estimates of revenue-maximizing tax rates have varied widely, with a mid-range of around 70%.[2]

    (This about the Laffer Curve, as championed by that reactionary old devil Arthur Laffer.)

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Laffer_curve

    2. What exactly are you quoting from here?

    I'm not the least bit interested in your selective use of theory. Theory is all you and your irrational ideology have going for you. I'm interested in facts. Do you have any figures that refute what I've listed?
  • Options
    northantsgirlnorthantsgirl Posts: 4,663
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Staunchy wrote: »
    That sort of thing gets labelled racist, when someone says it about people with less money.

    It's a funny old world with all these double standards isn't it?

    Clutching at straws or what? I may be appalled that the owner of the flag waving nationalist anti- immigrant Daily Mail is actually a non-dom and thus totally two faced but it's great to say sod off to France then- the same France his paper is always having a go at. The irony is truly delicious.
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ...... and I'm sure many will have an alternative description for your dogmatic love of their selfsame wealth.

    But I don't, so please stop making things up.

    This is poor stuff, Pan.

    Surely you can do better than this.
  • Options
    StaunchyStaunchy Posts: 10,904
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Clutching at straws or what? I may be appalled that the owner of the flag waving nationalist anti- immigrant Daily Mail is actually a non-dom and thus totally two faced but it's great to say sod off to France then- the same France his paper is always having a go at. The irony is truly delicious.

    You're the one clutching.

    Telling the descendant of immigrants to sod off back to where they came from, how very liberal of you.
  • Options
    MartinPMartinP Posts: 31,358
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I would just call it plain fairness. These non-domiciled residents in the UK get to pay the same tax rates as British citizens and since these individuals are often incredibly wealthy, they can easily afford to comply with British tax rates.

    Do you want people who are overseas nationals who work in the UK to pay tax in their UK income in the UK or in the country they have nationality?

    Presumably you said they should be taxed in the UK on their UK income.

    Now reverse the situation... why should these individuals pay UK taxes on income earned outside the UK?
  • Options
    paulschapmanpaulschapman Posts: 35,536
    Forum Member
    Boyard wrote: »
    http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2015/apr/07/ed-miliband-non-dom-tax-status-labour

    Fantastic policy! About time too. No doubt we'll get all the usual nonsense scaremongering about how "the rich will leave the country!" from the usual suspects, but we hear that about Labour before every election and they always seem to stick around!

    Except they wont - the proposal is not to abolish the status but to restrict it to those who live here for a maximum of 2-3 years. Much more than that and as Balls himself admitted - it will cost money rather than raise it.
  • Options
    MariesamMariesam Posts: 3,797
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ecco66 wrote: »
    If you wish to be so purile, yes. You were a civil servant, retiring early on a state funded, final salary scheme. You did not generate any revenue, you spent it.

    Martin works in the private sector. It generates revenue for the exchequer. Revenue your successors spend, and which under Labour they think they can just spend with abandon.

    I think some of those on the left still don't get it ......it needs people paying into the system to beable to support people who work in the public sector, those on benefits etc......I think they must believe there is a big money tree that how we fund these sectors comes from.....They have to realise its from people paying their taxes that fund the country and the outgoings we have.....If Labour bring in enough policies that put people off staying here everyone (not least those of a left leaning angle) are in for a major shock and will be the first to moan about not enough money left (oh that was a Labour quote - they left us with no money to pay for these things) to fund the NHS, services and benefits......
  • Options
    MajlisMajlis Posts: 31,362
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    What? Martin's love of wealth generates revenue for the exchequer?

    well if he (and people like him) hadnt generated any revenue you wouldnt have retired with such a generous pension.
Sign In or Register to comment.