PDA

View Full Version : 20:20 Tax Plan



portseven
30th September 2008, 13:31
Anyone see the adverts in the newspapers this weekend about something called the 20:20 tax plan?

Here is the basic gist

An open letter to George Osborne has been placed in the Mail on Sunday by Lord Anthony Jacobs and Richard Teather about their plans for tax - main points are:

10 million taken out of tax altogether

Personal tax free allowances risen immediately from £6035 to £7 500 taking 23.8 out of tax and increased to £15000 within 3 years taking 7.2 million out of tax

Employees National Insurance abolished but Employers NI increased from 12.8% to 20% over 6 years at rate of 1.2% a year (Europe average 25.4%)

Single rate of income tax at 20%

Pensions received tax free but no tax relief

VAT to be increased to 20% - Zero and reduced rates unchanged.

Tax credits increased by 1.7 billion to protect worse off

Corporation Tax reduced from 28% to 20%

Capital Gains Tax up to 20%

Inheritance Tax will be abolished but CGT of 20% substituted with primary home exempt

Apparently this requires no cuts in public spending or government borrowing

Results:
Person earning £10000 a year - immediate increase of £15 pw and in 3 years £28pw (22% increase)

£26,000 a year - increase of £39 a week and £71 in 3 years (21% increase)

42,000 - £56 a week and then £88pw (19% increase)

60 a year - £103 a week increasing to £136 a week in 3 years (equivalent to 20% gross wage increase)

Some interesting thoughts, my first is that it would make more sense to go full PAYE on this?

ace00
30th September 2008, 13:34
So it costs nothing yet delivers significantly reduced taxes. That's some magic trick.
Why raise tax threshold and tax credits?

ASB
30th September 2008, 13:37
So no cuts in public spending or rises in borrowing - therefor the treasury are collecting the exact same amount as before. Everyone on upto 60,000 pa is better off.

Thus the only place the money to be paying that can come from is those on over 60,000 a year. Curiously the impact on those doesn't appear to be mentioned.

Diver
30th September 2008, 13:42
So no cuts in public spending or rises in borrowing - therefor the treasury are collecting the exact same amount as before. Everyone on upto 60,000 pa is better off.

Thus the only place the money to be paying that can come from is those on over 60,000 a year. Curiously the impact on those doesn't appear to be mentioned.

They don't matter, as a small percentage of the voting public

lambrini_socialist
30th September 2008, 13:44
They don't matter, as a small percentage of the voting public

i know, how shocking that none of the main political parties are putting the needs of a small band of well-paid but rabid IT contractors at the very heart of their taxation policy! :eek

Gordon Brown
30th September 2008, 13:46
We are committed to keeping Britain a low taxation country, lowering tax for hard working families, investing for the future and giving everyone an opportunity to enjoy the success our government has provided over the last decade.

Although we are not ruling out tax rises to protect public finances.

HTH

Diver
30th September 2008, 13:46
i know, how shocking that none of the main political parties are putting the needs of a small band of well-paid but rabid IT contractors at the very heart of their taxation policy! :eek

Oh come on!
Contractors are all on minimum wage. Legal tax fiddling it's called :laugh

xoggoth
30th September 2008, 14:05
Abolish benefits and give poor free passes to scavenge for food on rubbish dumps.

Moscow Mule
30th September 2008, 14:14
So it costs nothing yet delivers significantly reduced taxes. That's some magic trick.
Why raise tax threshold and tax credits?

To a %age of the population. The remainder get shafted :wink:

FWIW, looks like a good plan, but I'd like to raise the tax free threshold to NMW/h * 40 * 52 and abolish tax credits.

I haven't got the info (or the inclination) to work out how much it would cost though.

HairyArsedBloke
30th September 2008, 14:17
Alan B'stard's proposal (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgAarQExtjE)should be updated for current values.

Anyone earning less than, say, £60,000 should pay no tax.

Anyone who does not pay tax does not get the vote.

No representation without taxation.

ace00
30th September 2008, 14:20
Alan B'stard's proposal (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WgAarQExtjE)should be updated for current values.

Anyone earning less than, say, £60,000 should pay no tax.

Anyone who does not pay tax does not get the vote.

No representation without taxation.

I would sell my vote for a lot less than that.