The real top 1% aren’t close to being wage slaves at all and likely not working. To be in the top 1% of incomes you’d be on about £180k- a very nice wage of course compared to the vast majority of people by definition but not the people truly in the most comfortable 1% if that’s a one-income household with kids in the South-East. If people at that level are flocking to leave (are they?) it’s because they can make far, far better money elsewhere. Not because their marginal tax rate is going up a couple of points.
Billionaire John Caudwell won't be leaving, he's backing Labour. I think the vast majority of the super-rich would be comfortable paying a little more tax. Patriotic Millionaires UK Those that do leave are no better than the fella that leaves the pub when it's his round.
It’s a very confusing and potentially misleading stat. I’m pretty sure that many more than 300,000 people have income of over £180k and pay income tax on it, and that most of them work in relatively senior roles in multinationals. If they are leaving the country in droves it’s because their companies are leaving or they can do their jobs from a more pleasant environment. But they are employees. The real mega rich don’t pay any income tax at all. That’s why we need a really brutal wealth tax regime. John Caudwell was very skilful at avoiding tax when he had a company. Now he has more money than he knows what to do with he’s developed a conscience about paying tax, apparently. My postal vote ballot paper has arrived. Let the bidding commence.
Because they're pissed off at having paid for every round until now, and then being told they have to pay for bigger rounds still..
The more reliable sources when I googled it were old but a bit lower so assume this is accurate enough. https://walletsavvy.co.uk/top-1-percent-income-uk/
Tell that to the average Joe paying his taxes and bills yet not having enough left to heat their homes. **** the rich.
What you mean is, they can **** off and take all their money that they've been using to pay massive amounts of tax to the UK treasury, with them. We don't need their money, we'll get it from...from...er...
Yes but we live in a world where a bloke can go on Question Time and insist his £80k salary is average so our perception of ‘rich’ when it comes to income is pretty skewed.
Saw this analogy before: “Suppose that once a week, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to £100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this... The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing. The fifth would pay £1. The sixth would pay £3. The seventh would pay £7. The eighth would pay £12. The ninth would pay £18. And the tenth man (the richest) would pay £59. So, that's what they decided to do. The ten men drank in the bar every week and seemed quite happy with the arrangement until, one day, the owner caused them a little problem. "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your weekly beer by £20." Drinks for the ten men would now cost just £80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. So the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free but what about the other six men? The paying customers? How could they divide the £20 windfall so that everyone would get his fair share? They realized that £20 divided by six is £3.33 but if they subtracted that from everybody's share then not only would the first four men still be drinking for free but the fifth and sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer. So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fairer to reduce each man's bill by a higher percentage. They decided to follow the principle of the tax system they had been using and he proceeded to work out the amounts he suggested that each should now pay. And so, the fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (a100% saving). The sixth man now paid £2 instead of £3 (a 33% saving). The seventh man now paid £5 instead of £7 (a 28% saving). The eighth man now paid £9 instead of £12 (a 25% saving). The ninth man now paid £14 instead of £18 (a 22% saving). And the tenth man now paid £49 instead of £59 (a 16% saving). Each of the last six was better off than before with the first four continuing to drink for free. But, once outside the bar, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got £1 out of the £20 saving," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man, "but he got £10!" "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a £1 too. It's unfair that he got ten times more benefit than me!" "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get £10 back, when I only got £2? The wealthy get all the breaks!" "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison, "we didn't get anything at all. This new tax system exploits the poor!" The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next week the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had their beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important - they didn't have enough money between all of them to pay for even half of the bill! And that, boys and girls, journalists and government ministers, is how our tax system works. The people who already pay the highest taxes will naturally get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy and they just might not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas, where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.”
That's part of the current Covid Inquiry. It won't help Starmer's government, if high tax payers leave. He knows he'll fail if they do, because there aren't other sources of income apart from ordinary people's incomes, pensions, houses etc.
