New Council Tax proposals - Page 9 - Anything Goes - Other topics not covered elsewhere - Tartan Army Message Board Jump to content

New Council Tax proposals


Recommended Posts

I will fall intonthe bracket effected and tbh it doesn't really bother me,,, the only tax(not really tax) situation that has annoyed me was when the cut child benefits to earners over 50k,,, while a household that have two earners on a salary of 49k get the full child benefits,,, thats not fair,,, it should be done per house hold 

Edited by hampden_loon2878
Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 226
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

"#factcheck" with added spin.

"This means that Scots earning over £50,000 per year will pay a little more income tax."

I thought it was a tax freeze, not a tax increase? Anyway, Scots with an income over £43,000 will pay more than taxpayers in the rest of the UK - once someone reaches £45,000 they will be paying approximately £400 per year more. £1,000 per week is another arbitrarily chosen figure - could easily have chosen £865 per week, which is what someone on £45,000 earns. On top of this the taxpayer in Scotland will have to continue to pay 12% NI between £43,000 and £45,000 - a double whammy.

I don't view any of the "advantages" as 'advantages' - since the abolition of tuition fees the number of students from poorer backgrounds has actually declined as cuts have been made elsewhere, e.g. the maintenance grant, to pay for this (in part).

Oh, and if a "fully functional NHS" means waiting on a trolley in a corridor for 13 hours I'd hate to see it not fully functional.

Edited by Regenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Regenmann said:

I don't view any of the "advantages" as 'advantages' - since the abolition of tuition fees the number of students from poorer backgrounds has actually declined 

Pretty sure this was brought up at FMQ's the other week by Kezia Dugdale. Sturgeon said this was completely wrong and that Kezia was confusing "numbers" with "proportion". 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Regenmann said:

On top of this the taxpayer in Scotland will have to continue to pay 12% NI between £43,000 and £45,000 - a double whammy.

National Insurance isn't devolved, there's nothing the SG can do about it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Regenmann said:

"#factcheck" with added spin.

"This means that Scots earning over £50,000 per year will pay a little more income tax."

I thought it was a tax freeze, not a tax increase? Anyway, Scots with an income over £43,000 will pay more than taxpayers in the rest of the UK - once someone reaches £45,000 they will be paying approximately £400 per year more. £1,000 per week is another arbitrarily chosen figure - could easily have chosen £865 per week, which is what someone on £45,000 earns. On top of this the taxpayer in Scotland will have to continue to pay 12% NI between £43,000 and £45,000 - a double whammy.

I don't view any of the "advantages" as 'advantages' - since the abolition of tuition fees the number of students from poorer backgrounds has actually declined as cuts have been made elsewhere, e.g. the maintenance grant, to pay for this (in part).

Oh, and if a "fully functional NHS" means waiting on a trolley in a corridor for 13 hours I'd hate to see it not fully functional.

Aye, the "fully functional NHS" bit, is a bit over the top. There are plenty problems with NHS Scotland. But most health professionals will tell you that NHS Scotland is functioning far better than south of the border. Which is nothing short of a minor miracle considering that every time the Tories cut NHS budgets down south the SG loses a proportional amount in the block grant. The NHS in Scotland will continue to struggle more and more as the Tories continue to privatise their NHS.

If we want to have a fully functional NHS we will have to put more resources into it. The main problem is that the Tories would prefer not to have a NHS at all, never mind a functional one.

 

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whilst  i'm not overly bothered about the increases, i would have just preferred them to have been more transparent over them.

Just can't  help but feel this could lose the SNP quite a few seats come the next election as like it or loath it plenty of people voted for them who've no interest in Independence and did so as a protest against previous councils. I don't think it'll take much for them to sway back in the other direction and something like this could well do it for a lot of people. 

SNP have used this freeze as a political soundbite for years but in all honesty they'd have been better with a gradual increase every two years rather than an own goal (rightly and wrongly) that this will cause.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 03/02/2017 at 5:01 PM, Pool Q said:

First world problems right enough. I'm really not going to worry about paying £350 a year more in tax than someone on the same salary that lives in Manchester or Reading. There are far, far bigger issues to worry about out there, here and elsewhere in the world. I'll be at hospitality for the rugby tomorrow, the cost of which per head is probably as much, if not more, than the 'extra' tax in Scotland. Yet I guarantee that a fair few of those alongside me enjoying that hospitality will let everyone know that they are outraged at the injustice of them having to pay this additional '£350' as they order another bottle of wine that they don't have to pay for.  

And yet, they should be grateful that when they DO have that heart attack brought on by overindulgence, they'll be treated by the best Doctor available - not just the best one who could afford the university fees.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/02/2017 at 8:23 AM, Squirrelhumper said:

Whilst  i'm not overly bothered about the increases, i would have just preferred them to have been more transparent over them.

Just can't  help but feel this could lose the SNP quite a few seats come the next election as like it or loath it plenty of people voted for them who've no interest in Independence and did so as a protest against previous councils. I don't think it'll take much for them to sway back in the other direction and something like this could well do it for a lot of people. 

SNP have used this freeze as a political soundbite for years but in all honesty they'd have been better with a gradual increase every two years rather than an own goal (rightly and wrongly) that this will cause.

There will be a lot of votes lost in Aberdeenshire with this rates increase as the folk who benifits stay silent whole those affected shout,, not good up here

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎06‎/‎02‎/‎2017 at 10:10 AM, aaid said:

National Insurance isn't devolved, there's nothing the SG can do about it.

Yes, I am aware of this (I've raised this on here before and stated that NI was set at UK level) - didn't stop the SG pressing ahead knowing full well that some people would be deducted more than half their earnings on a band of their income.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Regenmann said:

Yes, I am aware of this (I've raised this on here before and stated that NI was set at UK level) - didn't stop the SG pressing ahead knowing full well that some people would be deducted more than half their earnings on a band of their income.

how much of an effective tax rate would that be then ? 

https://listentotaxman.com/100000?married=y

For same of argument someone on GBP100K will have an effective tax rate of 30%  & Nat Insurance of 5%  - Nett GBP 65K

Someone on GBP 40K will have an effective tax rate of 15% & National Insurance of 10%- Nett GBP 30K

Someone on GBP 25K will have an effective tax rate 11% & National Insurance of 8% - Nett GBP 25K 

I think you are being a bit dramatic about the 40% rate (NOT more than half) of earnings above thresh-hold of GBP 43,000 

& even then the guy on GBP 100K is going to have spare cash and will pap this into a Pension ( which off top head is GBP 40K year ) so he wont pay the tax , will get full amount into pension.

My effective rate in UK was 9.5% because i increased my pension contributions.   

  

Edited by euan2020
Link to comment
Share on other sites

29 minutes ago, euan2020 said:

how much of an effective tax rate would that be then ? 

https://listentotaxman.com/100000?married=y

For same of argument someone on GBP100K will have an effective tax rate of 30%  & Nat Insurance of 5%  - Nett GBP 65K

Someone on GBP 40K will have an effective tax rate of 15% & National Insurance of 10%- Nett GBP 30K

Someone on GBP 25K will have an effective tax rate 11% & National Insurance of 8% - Nett GBP 25K 

I think you are being a bit dramatic about the 40% rate (NOT more than half) of earnings above thresh-hold of GBP 43,000 

& even then the guy on GBP 100K is going to have spare cash and will pap this into a Pension ( which off top head is GBP 40K year ) so he wont pay the tax , will get full amount into pension.

My effective rate in UK was 9.5% because i increased my pension contributions.   

  

Between £43,000 and £45,000 people in Scotland will be paying 40% income tax and 12% NI (which is what I was referring to). Completely unacceptable.

At present they are paying 40% and 2% (the lower NI rate, which is set at UK level) between £43,000 and £45,000.

Anyway, going forward I'm going pump company share plan gains into my pension - I don't really want to do this but the thought of 40% being squandered by the government is just too much to bear.

Edited by Regenmann
Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, Regenmann said:

Anyway, going forward I'm going pump company share plan gains into my pension - I don't really want to do this but the thought of 40% being squandered by the government is just too much to bear.

Aren't profits from company share schemes subject to Capital Gains Tax rather than PAYE?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

27 minutes ago, Regenmann said:

I've always paid PAYE on any gains. 

were they not share awards ?  which would be benefit in kind 

or possible discounted share contributions, where you  paid less than market rate ?

tax free limit is around GBP 9K on share gains in each tax year

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Regenmann said:

Between £43,000 and £45,000 people in Scotland will be paying 40% income tax and 12% NI (which is what I was referring to). Completely unacceptable.

At present they are paying 40% and 2% (the lower NI rate, which is set at UK level) between £43,000 and £45,000.

Anyway, going forward I'm going pump company share plan gains into my pension - I don't really want to do this but the thought of 40% being squandered by the government is just too much to bear.

sorry - didn't know about that - been outside UK tax regime last 6 years  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

We have two investment options - 'Traditional Plan' on which PAYE isn't payable on any gains (but CGT may be payable) and a 'Leverage Plan' (initial investment is multiplied by ten as an additional contribution is made by a financial institution - the financial institution takes 25% of any profit made in relation to the additional contribution) that is subject to Income Tax and NI on any gains.

The 'Traditional Plan' is the riskier of the two and the potential gains are greater under the 'Leverage Plan' (although this potential advantage is offset when you wander into the 40% bracket).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Regenmann said:

We have two investment options - 'Traditional Plan' on which PAYE isn't payable on any gains (but CGT may be payable) and a 'Leverage Plan' (initial investment is multiplied by ten as an additional contribution is made by a financial institution - the financial institution takes 25% of any profit made in relation to the additional contribution) that is subject to Income Tax and NI on any gains.

The 'Traditional Plan' is the riskier of the two and the potential gains are greater under the 'Leverage Plan' (although this potential advantage is offset when you wander into the 40% bracket).

Fair enough although these don't sound like traditional employee share save schemes but I'm no expert.

I hope for your sake these are all kosher and above board and don't fall into EBT territory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, aaid said:

Fair enough although these don't sound like traditional employee share save schemes but I'm no expert.

I hope for your sake these are all kosher and above board and don't fall into EBT territory.

This explains better - I'm not familiar with it 

but looks like Employer borrows money to issue the shares, and likely why treated as benefit in kind

meant to encourage staff to drive the business

http://www.investopedia.com/terms/l/lesop.asp

I think its similar to share awards or retention share awards that my employers issue, although we don't see the background of the financing - some of the guys get helluva share awards ;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...



×
×
  • Create New...