Tax law can't cover every possibility

[Doggy Styles]

...as someone said in the BS66 thread.

Or can it?

What if the UK dumped all the schemes, convoluted legislation, politically correct legislation, and other s**t, and just demanded 25% of all income or profits? One rule for everybody and every corporation.

Would contractors be happy with that?

[Mich the Tester]

...as someone said in the BS66 thread.

Or can it?

What if the UK dumped all the schemes, convoluted legislation, politically correct legislation, and other s**t, and just demanded 25% of all income or profits? One rule for everybody and every corporation.

Would contractors be happy with that?

Yes. I’d move to the UK and the entire Dutch software industry would probably come too.

[Doggy Styles]

Yes. I’d move to the UK and the entire Dutch software industry would probably come too.

Oooh, you sound a bit eager. What about 35% then?

But even with only 25% I'll bet the tax take would be higher than it is today.

[PAH]

It'll never happen. It's all smoke and mirrors to make sure the rich stay rich off the earnings of the poor.

If you try to be clever and bend the rules like 'they' do, you end up getting stuffed with retrospective legislation!

It's all so blatantly corrupt it's beyond belief, but they know the sheeple are too busy engrossed with chav celebrities to even take notice. As long as the shops are open and they can get more credit they're content.

[Mich the Tester]

Oooh, you sound a bit eager. What about 35% then?

But even with only 25% I'll bet the tax take would be higher than it is today.

No, not 35%. Actually, Keynes suggested the a 25% tax take was about optimal for balancing revenues with the cost of recieving them.

[moorfield]

What if the UK dumped all the schemes, convoluted legislation, politically correct legislation, and other s**t, and just demanded 25% of all income or profits? One rule for everybody and every corporation.

Would contractors be happy with that?

You mean a flat rate tax ?

Every argument I've heard for it makes complete sense, but the politicians will never go for it. They like lots of levers to tinker with.

[DodgyAgent]

It'll never happen. It's all smoke and mirrors to make sure the rich stay rich off the earnings of the poor.

If you try to be clever and bend the rules like 'they' do, you end up getting stuffed with retrospective legislation!

It's all so blatantly corrupt it's beyond belief, but they know the sheeple are too busy engrossed with chav celebrities to even take notice. As long as the shops are open and they can get more credit they're content.

How can the rich stay rich by earning off the poor who earn eff all in the first place?

[Mich the Tester]

How can the rich stay rich by earning off the poor who earn eff all in the first place?

True. In all my business ventures the only people who’ve ever bought anything from me are rich people or rich companies. Poor people don’t buy stuff because they don’t have any money. Only if you make the massive capital investments of an Aldi or Lidl can you make serious money out of poor people, and even they have expanded their customer base into the middle classes so as to sell higher margin products.

[Churchill]

...as someone said in the BS66 thread.

Or can it?

What if the UK dumped all the schemes, convoluted legislation, politically correct legislation, and other s**t, and just demanded 25% of all income or profits? One rule for everybody and every corporation.

Would "Philip Green" be happy with that?

Fixed that for you!

Tax avoidance
Taveta Investments, the company used to acquire Arcadia in 2002, is in the name of Green's wife, a Monaco resident, avoiding millions of pounds in tax that would be payable if a UK resident owned the company.[18] When Green paid his family £1.2bn in 2005, it was paid for by a loan taken out by Arcadia, cutting Arcadia's corporation tax as interest charges on the loan were offset against profits.[19] In comparison, staff at Arcadia were told in 2005 that members of its final salary pension scheme must increase contributions by half and work five years longer to qualify for the same payout.[citation needed]

[PAH]

How can the rich stay rich by earning off the poor who earn eff all in the first place?

The poor in this case is anyone who isn't royalty, a lord, or a multi-millionaire.

The rest may think they're rich but that pile of bricks, piece of metal on wheels, and digits on a bank computer are one event away from being worthless.

It's who you know not what you have that defines the rich.