Middle Income Earner taxes
Discussion
https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/...
With the "wealthy" finding ever more creative ways to avoid increases in taxes this government is planning to bring in, it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases. So "tax the rich" really means "tax the people we can easily get hold off by the balls".
Twas ever thus I guess.
With the "wealthy" finding ever more creative ways to avoid increases in taxes this government is planning to bring in, it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases. So "tax the rich" really means "tax the people we can easily get hold off by the balls".
Twas ever thus I guess.
s1962a said:
https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/...
With the "wealthy" finding ever more creative ways to avoid increases in taxes this government is planning to bring in, it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases. So "tax the rich" really means "tax the people we can easily get hold off by the balls".
Twas ever thus I guess.
It's the Laffer Curve in action; raise (or threaten to raise) taxes on various groups and they will accept it up to a point but beyond that take steps to mitigate it. QNUPS etc. as referenced in that article are just one example...take 'loopholes' like that away and it will just precipitate even greater reaction i.e. the wealthiest will just leave and take all their money with them.With the "wealthy" finding ever more creative ways to avoid increases in taxes this government is planning to bring in, it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases. So "tax the rich" really means "tax the people we can easily get hold off by the balls".
Twas ever thus I guess.
Unfortunately, that brings the next tier into Labour's sights, the middle earners, as you say. Even then though, as the tax burden on them increases, one would expect them to take steps in response where they can too.
In the same week that the royal family are going to get a bumper 45m increase in their stipend from the taxpayer and William refusing to divulge what tax he will pay. So much for slimming down the monarchy.
The rich threaten a lot of things, but they dont leave if push comes to shove.
The rich threaten a lot of things, but they dont leave if push comes to shove.
To be fair, who ever had won that election would be in the same boat.s1962a said:
it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases.
Nope.A "middle earner", i.e.median pay for someone in full-time work in the UK is around £35k gross, so they will not be troubled by this - www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinw...
Those earning high salaries really do have a distorted view of what the average person does actually earn.
zedx19 said:
What band is low, middle and high earner?
www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinw..."Low pay is defined as the value that is two-thirds of median hourly earnings and high pay is defined as the value that is 1.5 times median hourly earnings."
That would mean those receiving less than around £23.5k are low earners and anyone getting more than £52.5k (broadly those paying higher rate tax) is a high earner.
SpidersWeb said:
s1962a said:
it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases.
Nope.A "middle earner", i.e.median pay for someone in full-time work in the UK is around £35k gross, so they will not be troubled by this - www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinw...
Those earning high salaries really do have a distorted view of what the average person does actually earn.
Does someone earning £35k really consider themselves a middle earner in the UK? Especially in the SE?
s1962a said:
SpidersWeb said:
s1962a said:
it's the middle earners, mostly on PAYE who will end up taking the brunt of these increases.
Nope.A "middle earner", i.e.median pay for someone in full-time work in the UK is around £35k gross, so they will not be troubled by this - www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinw...
Those earning high salaries really do have a distorted view of what the average person does actually earn.
And perhaps those middle class people, the well educated and professional groups, should remember that they have always been paid well above amount that the average full time worker gets.
s1962a said:
Does someone earning £35k really consider themselves a middle earner in the UK? Especially in the SE?
What they consider themselves to be is rather irrelevant - the fact is that they would be a middle earner - and with half the full time working population earning less than them.s1962a said:
zedx19 said:
What band is low, middle and high earner?
I'd put middle earners as anything from £50k up till about £100k (especially in and around London) - higher earners above that.SpidersWeb said:
What they consider themselves to be is rather irrelevant - the fact is that they would be a middle earner - and with half the full time working population earning less than them.
He said especially in the South-East and that isn't a middle earner in the SE.In terms of what is a middle class income that also varies by region. Outside London and its commuter belt it could be as low as £50k. In the more expensive areas it needs to be far more than that.
One of the problems the country has is that income tax thresholds have not adjusted to reflect the new realities and so more and more people face very high marginal rates and are discouraged from bettering themselves.
FWIW I earn £35k and live and work in London. I’m more than aware that’s “about the national average” full time earnings - while also very clear about the lifestyle it buys me.
I suspect people’s interpretations of “middle earnings” are affected by their individual circumstances and what they perceive to be “remarkable” and “unremarkable” earnings. I’m a bit of an outlier amongst my long term social circle with many peers earning 10 or 20 times my modest wage. Possibly much more. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if many within that group consider themselves unremarkable earners. Despite the statistical facts of the matter.
Slightly off topic but my work exposes me to both the earnings and the wealth of the general public across a fairly broad spectrum and even decades into this kind of work I’m surprised by just how many people have “s
t tonnes” (technical term) and just how few in the state sector (appear to) have any understanding just how valuable their pensions are/will be.
On the matter in hand few who understand the state of the public finances since the GFC can possibly be surprised that something’s got to/will be done. I suspect that something will come as a bit of a shock to many and probably to private sector PAYE earners in the £50k+ group more than most.
I suspect people’s interpretations of “middle earnings” are affected by their individual circumstances and what they perceive to be “remarkable” and “unremarkable” earnings. I’m a bit of an outlier amongst my long term social circle with many peers earning 10 or 20 times my modest wage. Possibly much more. It wouldn’t surprise me in the slightest if many within that group consider themselves unremarkable earners. Despite the statistical facts of the matter.
Slightly off topic but my work exposes me to both the earnings and the wealth of the general public across a fairly broad spectrum and even decades into this kind of work I’m surprised by just how many people have “s
t tonnes” (technical term) and just how few in the state sector (appear to) have any understanding just how valuable their pensions are/will be.On the matter in hand few who understand the state of the public finances since the GFC can possibly be surprised that something’s got to/will be done. I suspect that something will come as a bit of a shock to many and probably to private sector PAYE earners in the £50k+ group more than most.
JagLover said:
He said especially in the South-East and that isn't a middle earner in the SE.
In terms of what is a middle class income that also varies by region. Outside London and its commuter belt it could be as low as £50k. In the more expensive areas it needs to be far more than that.
What's "middle class"? To my mind it's people who have a cook and a nanny etc living in. You aren't doing that on £50K.In terms of what is a middle class income that also varies by region. Outside London and its commuter belt it could be as low as £50k. In the more expensive areas it needs to be far more than that.
scenario8 said:
On the matter in hand few who understand the state of the public finances since the GFC can possibly be surprised that something’s got to/will be done. I suspect that something will come as a bit of a shock to many and probably to private sector PAYE earners in the £50k+ group more than most.
I was thinking we might be saved by MPs whose salaries will put them right in the firing line for the brunt of any likely new measures - but they'll probably claim any shortfall on expenses, and special measures will protect their pensions.JagLover said:
SpidersWeb said:
What they consider themselves to be is rather irrelevant - the fact is that they would be a middle earner - and with half the full time working population earning less than them.
He said especially in the South-East and that isn't a middle earner in the SE.https://commonslibrary.parliament.uk/research-brie...
JagLover said:
In terms of what is a middle class income that also varies by region
Middle class has always meant earning a high income as a well educated professional, not a median income.JagLover said:
One of the problems the country has is that income tax thresholds have not adjusted to reflect the new realities and so more and more people face very high marginal rates and are discouraged from bettering themselves.
Those on median incomes would need to increase their earnings significantly to even be close to paying the higher rate of tax.Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff