Top 5 financial things to do before labour get in?
Discussion
MiniPro3 said:
So by labour being evasive on what its real agender is then one can assume anyone with spare capital is fair game, so any ideas where to invest to avoid labours theft, after all we paid tax on your savings, we pay income tax NI (Tax) even the air we breath is taxed (ULEZ) if the Gov, weren't so incompetent with our tax they wouldn't need to tax more. So where would someone send their hard earned wealth to avoid labours theft ?
Not sure how you've jumped to that conclusion?! I'm not sure any party is going to be any better in that regard, the conservatives certainly f
ked it up during Covid.....PoorCarCollector said:
MiniPro3 said:
So by labour being evasive on what its real agender is then one can assume anyone with spare capital is fair game, so any ideas where to invest to avoid labours theft, after all we paid tax on your savings, we pay income tax NI (Tax) even the air we breath is taxed (ULEZ) if the Gov, weren't so incompetent with our tax they wouldn't need to tax more. So where would someone send their hard earned wealth to avoid labours theft ?
Not sure how you've jumped to that conclusion?! I'm not sure any party is going to be any better in that regard, the conservatives certainly fked it up during Covid.....We (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy f
kers MiniPro3 said:
PoorCarCollector said:
MiniPro3 said:
So by labour being evasive on what its real agender is then one can assume anyone with spare capital is fair game, so any ideas where to invest to avoid labours theft, after all we paid tax on your savings, we pay income tax NI (Tax) even the air we breath is taxed (ULEZ) if the Gov, weren't so incompetent with our tax they wouldn't need to tax more. So where would someone send their hard earned wealth to avoid labours theft ?
Not sure how you've jumped to that conclusion?! I'm not sure any party is going to be any better in that regard, the conservatives certainly fked it up during Covid.....We (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy f
kers Have a skim of https://labour.org.uk/updates/stories/how-labour-w...
There are plenty of fish to fry in the sphere of “avoidance”, and indeed evasion…..they could do best by targeting the Tory chums who made millions from Covid through fake schemes…..
MiniPro3 said:
Read between the lines!
We (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy fkers
Last month it was unseasonably cold here. I remarked on this to Mrs B. “How cold is it out there?” she asked. “Pretty chilly” I replied. “I even saw a socialist with his hands in his own pockets!”We (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy f
kers MiniPro3 said:
Read between the lines!
We (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy fkers
At the moment you are just playing a guessing game / scaremongering, which is absolutely pointlessWe (lab) will go after tax avoidance, So ISA's etc. btw agreed they are all a bunch of chances but socialist will always go after the grafters and wealth creators to fund the lazy f
kers Let's wait and see what they say they'll do, unlikely they'll stick to it anyway, no party before them has!
MiniPro3 said:
So by labour being evasive on what its real agender is then one can assume anyone with spare capital is fair game, so any ideas where to invest to avoid labours theft, after all we paid tax on your savings, we pay income tax NI (Tax) even the air we breath is taxed (ULEZ) if the Gov, weren't so incompetent with our tax they wouldn't need to tax more. So where would someone send their hard earned wealth to avoid labours theft ?
Sounds like buying and holding physical gold/silver bullion and keeping it somewhere safe (so 'off the books') is going to be the way to go...But, you know, 'pet rock' and 'tin foil hat' etc. etc.
There are rumours on academic circles that some private research on 'one-off wealth tax' requested and heavily planned already.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
ooid said:
There are rumours on academic circles that some private research on 'one-off wealth tax' requested and heavily planned already.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
I have been very actively researching the overall topics since the start of the year . I have not seen or read anything like the above as yet . I think it would be a good way to ensure they had one term only and then lost to any party who guarantee to immediately reverse it .A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
cliffords said:
I have been very actively researching the overall topics since the start of the year . I have not seen or read anything like the above as yet . I think it would be a good way to ensure they had one term only and then lost to any party who guarantee to immediately reverse it .
Depends how long the term is... if we continue to be pushed into WW3, what if say 'elections will be suspended to ensure stability through this difficult time'?[/tin foil hat]
ooid said:
There are rumours on academic circles that some private research on 'one-off wealth tax' requested and heavily planned already.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
Why do they need a one off? A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
Load up on debt
ooid said:
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
Unlikely IMO. Without any indexation allowed CGT already acts as a wealth tax - it's a very significant tax on inflation. Also the questions around valuing every business, farm and other asset in the country would be an absolute minefield.One to watch out for IMO is a tax on lifetime gifts at, say, half the death rate. So at least 20%. Up until now IHT has been a "voluntary" tax, easily avoided by wealthy people who can just give stuff away.
ooid said:
There are rumours on academic circles that some private research on 'one-off wealth tax' requested and heavily planned already.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
It's not exactly a hidden conspiracy.A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
https://responsibletax.kpmg.com/article/global-res...
and the actual paper;
https://www.lse.ac.uk/International-Inequalities/A...
For what its worth, its an absolutely horrific idea, but it being discussed in the open.
In terms of implementation, it's almost certainly easier to amend rates and relief on existing taxes that try to spin something like this up from scratch. So expect the stories of significant hits to IHT and CGT to be closer to the truth.
Edited by bobthemonkey on Saturday 29th June 23:39
RSTurboPaul said:
cliffords said:
I have been very actively researching the overall topics since the start of the year . I have not seen or read anything like the above as yet . I think it would be a good way to ensure they had one term only and then lost to any party who guarantee to immediately reverse it .
Depends how long the term is... if we continue to be pushed into WW3, what if say 'elections will be suspended to ensure stability through this difficult time'?[/tin foil hat]
NRS said:
RSTurboPaul said:
cliffords said:
I have been very actively researching the overall topics since the start of the year . I have not seen or read anything like the above as yet . I think it would be a good way to ensure they had one term only and then lost to any party who guarantee to immediately reverse it .
Depends how long the term is... if we continue to be pushed into WW3, what if say 'elections will be suspended to ensure stability through this difficult time'?[/tin foil hat]
Russell Brand did an interesting piece including reference to how both Sunak and Starmer appear to be parroting the same 'corporate' position on the Ukraine war (Russia Man bad, 100% unprovoked madman, etc. etc.) whereas 'alternative' viewpoints/assessments seem to suggest that Farage (for example) has been accurately describing past actions and events that have taken place that have pushed Putin towards undesirable actions/outcomes.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XEmi0CWNp1s
There is a whole thread on the Ukraine situation so probably best not to get too sidetracked here! but the general thrust is that yes, Labour/Starmer appears to be pushing for WW3 in that they appear to be refusing to acknowledge anything prior to Putin's direct action as having an effect, and therefore that it seems they think going to war with Russia is an inevitable outcome if Putin refuses to do what the West says rather than, well, the West undertaking actual discussions to seek resolution that minimises conflict and takes into consideration the actions of the West as well as Russia.
The whole suspended elections thing is perhaps a stretch, admittedly, but the proper tin foil hatters out there
have wondered if 'something big' might happen that means global Digital ID and CBDC rollout to us peasants is 'needed', which could potentially involve the suspension of normal practices. (And I believe that in (so-called democracy?) Ukraine, elections have been suspended 'because war', despite every citizen of the country being forced onto the Diia digital ID app that could be used for voting if they wanted (AFAICS) so it's not without precedent.)Anyway, tin foil nutter etc. etc.
ooid said:
There are rumours on academic circles that some private research on 'one-off wealth tax' requested and heavily planned already.
A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
Ms Reeves ruled out a Wealth tax sometime ago but it will happen just not with that specific title. A one-off wealth tax payable on all individual wealth above £500,000 and charged at 1% a year for at least five years.
The figure is NAV (Gross asset value - debt) which also including property. When there are liquidity issues, pension lump sumps will be targeted, as they are not reachable until retirement.
The way they probably sell it, as it has been used before by Thatcher on banks in 80s.
The academic report from a while ago seemed to suggest that penalising anyone that lived in a house with a Pension would also be happy to have any payments deducted from a future lump sum Pension.
Not sure how it concluded how to deal with those individuals being asset rich cash poor though.
bobthemonkey said:
It's not exactly a hidden conspiracy.
https://responsibletax.kpmg.com/article/global-res...
and the actual paper;
https://www.lse.ac.uk/International-Inequalities/A...
For what its worth, its an absolutely horrific idea, but it being discussed in the open.
In terms of implementation, it's almost certainly easier to amend rates and relief on existing taxes that try to spin something like this up from scratch. So expect the stories of significant hits to IHT and CGT to be closer to the truth.
Agree far more likely and easier to amend existing rates on lots of things. https://responsibletax.kpmg.com/article/global-res...
and the actual paper;
https://www.lse.ac.uk/International-Inequalities/A...
For what its worth, its an absolutely horrific idea, but it being discussed in the open.
In terms of implementation, it's almost certainly easier to amend rates and relief on existing taxes that try to spin something like this up from scratch. So expect the stories of significant hits to IHT and CGT to be closer to the truth.
Edited by bobthemonkey on Saturday 29th June 23:39
Council tax ( might take a little while to arrange alternative cash raising explanation though ) , CGT allowances , IHT ( more in the way of Farming and other use of giving away loopholes rather than the actual rate , Pension higher rate tax relief contributions , amendment of the lump sum percentage being made available , maximum ISA allowance etc.
Should keep people happy for Labours first / second year before the screws get turned on anyone that dares to have a paid job that is able to save money and / or live in a house they have mortgaged to buy and dare to save into a Pension.
alscar said:
The academic report from a while ago seemed to suggest that penalising anyone that lived in a house with a Pension would also be happy to have any payments deducted from a future lump sum Pension.
Not sure how it concluded how to deal with those individuals being asset rich cash poor though.
They also forget to include the high possibility of immediate emigration in mostly high tax rates region, so the moment they will dare to touch anyones savings for future, would they even bothered to work in the same place again ? It is interesting because I would assume at least academics would not make the mistake of not using 'differential calculations' on these policies, but rather looking at quite simpleton static arithmetics to see how much they can actually raise?Not sure how it concluded how to deal with those individuals being asset rich cash poor though.
It is a bit like bunch of thugs planning to rob a bank, and estimate how much they can steal but not estimating the eventual consequences.
I guess that academic research title 'wealth tax' should have been 'Daylight Armed Robbery'
Gassing Station | Finance | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff