Here we go! | Page 1606 | Vital Football

Here we go!

Do they really?

And when I say that, I mean, do they actually?

Can't see any more recent articles, but this is from 2015

Non-doms in numbers: how 115,000 non-doms pay as much tax as 10 million low-income workers​


At the same time, the amount of money raised by HMRC from non-doms has increased - from £5.9 billion in 2008-09 to £8.2 billion in 2012-13.

 
Do they really?

And when I say that, I mean, do they actually?

Newer figures from Bloomberg

The changes are intended to raise £2.7 billion ($3.4 billion) in tax per year by 2028-29, in addition to the £8.5 billion that non-doms currently pay in various UK taxes each year.

 
Can't see any more recent articles, but this is from 2015

Non-doms in numbers: how 115,000 non-doms pay as much tax as 10 million low-income workers​


At the same time, the amount of money raised by HMRC from non-doms has increased - from £5.9 billion in 2008-09 to £8.2 billion in 2012-13.


that's the thing about economics, you can look at things from different points.

how much is 'lost' through elevated housing costs and the knock on effects?
 
Newer figures from Bloomberg

The changes are intended to raise £2.7 billion ($3.4 billion) in tax per year by 2028-29, in addition to the £8.5 billion that non-doms currently pay in various UK taxes each year.

Fair play to you for doing your research.

Let's hope the conservative party did the same before abolishing the status
 
Does the 2.7bn estimate of additional income include expected losses from the minority that might actually leave our shores?
Presumably it does so we will be net winners.
 
Further than what Toms?

The abolition of non-dom status that the Tories have already stolen from Labour policy?

Did you laugh when you were typing that bit about them taking "their tax take with them"?

I laughed when I read it. Good work Toms
The distinction , I believe, is that this applies to new non doms rather than existing/ there is a time period applied . I will review this further

I have said that the policy is the wrong one.

It’s a massive massive mistake
 
Does the 2.7bn estimate of additional income include expected losses from the minority that might actually leave our shores?
Presumably it does so we will be net winners.

I doubt it very much. All the parties are as bad, but I would be pretty sure that Labour will have made the figure as large as possible. Do any of these people EVER publish their workings, along with the assumptions they have made ?

Similarly with their plans on education. Ideologically they are correct, except it won't affect the rich at all. They will easily afford the increases, or send their kids abroad to be educated. It will only affect the middle and working classes. Will Labour publish how many children will need to leave Private Education and move into State Education before it costs the taxpayers money, and the same with the one off taxes on energy companies. The worst of it is the Tories have jumped on many of these ideas too.
 
I doubt it very much. All the parties are as bad, but I would be pretty sure that Labour will have made the figure as large as possible. Do any of these people EVER publish their workings, along with the assumptions they have made ?

Similarly with their plans on education. Ideologically they are correct, except it won't affect the rich at all. They will easily afford the increases, or send their kids abroad to be educated. It will only affect the middle and working classes. Will Labour publish how many children will need to leave Private Education and move into State Education before it costs the taxpayers money, and the same with the one off taxes on energy companies. The worst of it is the Tories have jumped on many of these ideas too.
I agree with almost all you have said except for the ideologically correct part. It’s not imo. It’s merely class warfare . When many middle class parents leave the private sector the net effect will be minimal. What will happen is that English parents will flood the state system , most likely grammar schools. They will become a burden to the state rather than a benefit.

There should be no vat on education or health choices .
 
I doubt it very much. All the parties are as bad, but I would be pretty sure that Labour will have made the figure as large as possible. Do any of these people EVER publish their workings, along with the assumptions they have made ?

Similarly with their plans on education. Ideologically they are correct, except it won't affect the rich at all. They will easily afford the increases, or send their kids abroad to be educated. It will only affect the middle and working classes. Will Labour publish how many children will need to leave Private Education and move into State Education before it costs the taxpayers money, and the same with the one off taxes on energy companies. The worst of it is the Tories have jumped on many of these ideas too.
They do submit these figures usually to the OBR.

How are labour supposed to accurately calculate how many children are going to leave private education as a result?

That would require reading the future.

You would need to know:

a) What proportion of private schools would pass the whole increase on rather than absorb some of it to avoid losing customers

b) guess how many would not be able to afford these unknown figures

c) know how many would put their children in state schools rather than sourcing cheaper private

What we do know is that private school fees have increased exponentially under this Tory Government; I quoted the figure from Paul Johnson a few weeks ago on here. I can't remember but it was a significant increase- more than 20%.

The last time that state schools had a big influx from private was 2008. The state sector coped just fine because it was being properly funded
 
I agree with almost all you have said except for the ideologically correct part. It’s not imo. It’s merely class warfare . When many middle class parents leave the private sector the net effect will be minimal. What will happen is that English parents will flood the state system , most likely grammar schools. They will become a burden to the state rather than a benefit.

There should be no vat on education or health choices .
Maybe the conservatives should have thought about protecting the middle class then and raising the 40p thresholds?

After all, that is what is choking middle class taxpayers. Brought in by one of the many recent chancellors and confirmed by all since.

The taper between 100k-130k is insane and was brought in by Osborne. As is the child benefit charge, brought in by Osborne. And removing mortgage relief on landlords, brought in by Osborne.

Had the 40p thresholds risen to more more like 70k as it should have by now, and the 100k tax trap been sorted, then middle class parents would easily be able to afford VAT on private schools and Labour wouldn't mess with it as they don't like messing with income tax
 
Maybe the conservatives should have thought about protecting the middle class then and raising the 40p thresholds?

After all, that is what is choking middle class taxpayers. Brought in by one of the many recent chancellors and confirmed by all since.

The taper between 100k-130k is insane and was brought in by Osborne. As is the child benefit charge, brought in by Osborne.

Had the 40p thresholds risen to more more like 70k as it should have by now, and the 100k tax trap been sorted, then middle class parents would easily be able to afford VAT on private schools and Labour wouldn't mess with it as they don't like messing with income tax
The thresholds are required to pay down debt caused by wars and Covid. If you raise the thresholds you reduce the tax take for public services and debt payment. There are no easy solutions .

I agree with the 100k-120 k thing. There are many things that have been done which don’t represent true conservatism in the last few years but I can only vote for a party who isn’t totally going to screw my family.
 
Really not sure how much of the middle class can afford private schooling for their kids in the first place. Is it really affecting much of the middle class? Maybe it's because I live fairly near London so most of my incomes goes on the mortgage, but despite being pretty definitively middle class, and being close to the top of my profession, the prospect of paying for private education isn't even in the conversation.
 
The thresholds are required to pay down debt caused by wars and Covid. If you raise the thresholds you reduce the tax take for public services and debt payment. There are no easy solutions .

I agree with the 100k-120 k thing. There are many things that have been done which don’t represent true conservatism in the last few years but I can only vote for a party who isn’t totally going to screw my family.
And brexit
 
The thresholds are required to pay down debt caused by wars and Covid. If you raise the thresholds you reduce the tax take for public services and debt payment. There are no easy solutions .

I agree with the 100k-120 k thing. There are many things that have been done which don’t represent true conservatism in the last few years but I can only vote for a party who isn’t totally going to screw my family.
VAT on private schools and abolishing Non dom status are required to pay down debt caused by wars and COVID.
 
They do submit these figures usually to the OBR.

How are labour supposed to accurately calculate how many children are going to leave private education as a result?

That would require reading the future.

You would need to know:

a) What proportion of private schools would pass the whole increase on rather than absorb some of it to avoid losing customers

b) guess how many would not be able to afford these unknown figures

c) know how many would put their children in state schools rather than sourcing cheaper private

What we do know is that private school fees have increased exponentially under this Tory Government; I quoted the figure from Paul Johnson a few weeks ago on here. I can't remember but it was a significant increase- more than 20%.

The last time that state schools had a big influx from private was 2008. The state sector coped just fine because it was being properly funded

The point is not whether or not the state sector will cope, the point is whether or not the plans will raise £2.7 billion, otherwise the various plans Labour have that will be financed from that money will have to be financed by other tax or borrowing.

It may require reading the future, but that is exactly what politicians have to do. It's a vital part of any policy to have a good estimate of exactly what will happen. Get it wrong and it causes major problems.