Do you want to discuss boring politics? (26 Viewers)

fatso said:

But the rich can move their assets abroad, out of the jurisdiction of the tax man
They do this quite legally, where as the other examples I gave are clearly fraudulent.

Click to expand...

What about those that claimed benefits legally but now aren't because of the changes? You change the legislation to make the behaviour illegal. Make it so that any business or individual making money in this country has to be set up in this country under these tax rules to trade. If they don't like it, call their bluff and let them leave. The demand is still there and there will be plenty of others willing to fill the gap in the market.

Isn't the argument always that the common man will be better off as this money will filter down (which it never actually does) so instead of letting a middlemen made up of the already rich people and businesses take an outrageous slice of that let's cut them out of it and give it to the common man to begin with. They have more disposable income now let the rich actually work to earn their share of that.

When you build you do it from the bottom up, not the top down.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:

What about those that claimed benefits legally but now aren't because of the changes? You change the legislation to make the behaviour illegal. Make it so that any business or individual making money in this country has to be set up in this country under these tax rules to trade. If they don't like it, call their bluff and let them leave. The demand is still there and there will be plenty of others willing to fill the gap in the market.

Isn't the argument always that the common man will be better off as this money will filter down (which it never actually does) so instead of letting a middlemen made up of the already rich people and businesses take an outrageous slice of that let's cut them out of it and give it to the common man to begin with. They have more disposable income now let the rich actually work to earn their share of that.

When you build you do it from the bottom up, not the top down.

Click to expand...

I've no idea what benefit laws have been changed that now make some claims illegal.
But if that's the case those benefits will certainly stop if there's any kind of individual benefits claim review.
Have those benefits been replaced with something else?

The current benefits bill is unsustainable, and it has to be addressed, the situation is only going to get massively worse when all the asylum seekers get their asylum granted and get put straight into the 1.5 million new homes that are under construction.
The local authority are responsible for housing these people, and that will be done at tax payers expense.
That is a financial melt down that will inevitably bankrupt the country.

Our future pension liabilities are also unsustainable.
The whole system needs to be addressed, which is what Starmer tried to start doing this week. Unfortunately he is too weak to take on his own backbenchers despite having a huge majority.

It would be almost impossible to geographicaly tie business people down to only trade in the UK if that's what you mean.
Too many businesses are run across many many boarders. And stocks and shares and commodities as well as investment funds are global.

Sky_Blue_Dreamer said:

Make it so that any business or individual making money in this country has to be set up in this country under these tax rules to trade. If they don't like it, call their bluff and let them leave.

Click to expand...

It's not that easy.

International conglomerates use transfer pricing and intellectual property licensing arrangements to ensure that significant chunks of their profits are booked in low tax jurisdiction. The classic example is the large US corporations that shift profits to Ireland, where they pay a low rate of tax. Whilst there is anti-avoidance legislation (see for example the Taxation (International and Other Provisions) Act 2010) it is complex and clever advisers help to mitigate its effects.

If you drive such companies out of the UK you end up losing the Corporation Tax that they do pay (even though this may be less than you would like it to be), employer's and employee's National Insurance and VAT on sales. You also lose jobs and the knock-on effects of employees spending money in our economy and paying VAT and creating other jobs.

You have to consider the wider picture.

fatso said:

I've no idea what benefit laws have been changed that now make some claims illegal.
But if that's the case those benefits will certainly stop if there's any kind of individual benefits claim review.
Have those benefits been replaced with something else?

The current benefits bill is unsustainable, and it has to be addressed, the situation is only going to get massively worse when all the asylum seekers get their asylum granted and get put straight into the 1.5 million new homes that are under construction.
The local authority are responsible for housing these people, and that will be done at tax payers expense.
That is a financial melt down that will inevitably bankrupt the country.

Our future pension liabilities are also unsustainable.
The whole system needs to be addressed, which is what Starmer tried to start doing this week. Unfortunately he is too weak to take on his own backbenchers despite having a huge majority.

It would be almost impossible to geographicaly tie business people down to only trade in the UK if that's what you mean.
Too many businesses are run across many many boarders. And stocks and shares and commodities as well as investment funds are global.

Click to expand...

The point with the benefits law is that rules have been changed so some claims that were legal before would be illegal now i.e. some people claiming PIP. So if you can change the law there you can change it elsewhere i.e. the rich.

I agree that we have massive spending priorities that are and will continue to be a burden but we've seen time and again that if you cut them you end up cutting off your nose to spite your face because you end up with even bigger costs and problems.

I don't mean for firms to only trade in the UK. I mean that any income they make in the UK has to be done through a UK registered entity and thus subject to UK tax laws.

This is where the other poster talking about transfer pricing etc comes in as I have got a bit ahead of myself. Tax should not be determined on profit - it's a bullshit metric that doesn't exist and just allows companies to avoid tax. So get them to pay just 1-2% on revenue (after a tax free allowance) and all that shenanigans disappears and they can also save themselves a fortune paying these financial brains to reduce their tax bills because they've got the simplified tax system they supposedly want. Still has potential loopholes but fewer than the current system.