so first reaction, if Brown had not sold the Gold, we would be better off to the tune of £110 billion - oh well. We all make mistakes.
Answer to the 50p question from previous post.Should the chancellor cut the 50p tax rate, as recommended by our readers?Ayes to the right - 12Nos the the left - 3Cutting the tax is therefore proposed!
Leaking the Budget makes Ed's job easier sadly. At least one person has been delighted. Wait for all the rhetoric. How can grown men bear to listen to it? The 50p tax rate was such a spiteful move by Labour.
Top rate 50% to 45%. Labour spinning this as a tax cut for the rich, whilst the lower paid take the hit. Let us see whether the BBC swallow Labour's lie or acknowledge that the increase in personal allowance is actually a win for the lower paid.
Poor miliband - in mid flow they cut to the French murderer being apprehended.Miliband has also made two debating chamber points that will get him on the 10 O'clock & newsnight.But they are very easy to counter.1 - Hands up all the Tories who gain from the 45p tax cut.Well, if cameron has a half decent team he'll have a long list of wealthy labourites making a gain, by 6 O'clock.Not going to be very helpful to Ken Livingstone, Tony Blair, Peter Mandelson,John Prescott etc. And all those footballers and media types and actors and actresses and newspaper pundits. Put your hands in the air Polly Toynbee if you made a gain? Put your hands in the air, David miliband, if you just made a gain. ETC.and 2 - America has had 1.7% growth.Yes, Mr Miliband. But at a horrendous budget cost that we could never hope to copy. And if we did we'd lose the A rating altogether and join the B teams.
the highest tax rate remains 62p - paid by those who earn between 100k and 118k.
CityUnslicker: Your £110 billion is not the gold cost Osborne gave in his speech "400 or so tonnes of gold sold a decade ago sold for £2 billion which would now be worth ... over £13 billion" (@12:45:45).Did Osborne get it wrong in his budget speech?
rwendland - more likely I got a 0 wrong....:o(
CU - At least McBroon didn't take us into the Euro. He'd definitely have been adorning a lamp post by now.
CityUnslicker, a higher marginal tax+NI rate of 65.5% applies to a parent with 3 kids earning between 50k and 60k. Child Benefit recovery for higher paid is done thru tax code recovery, and 3 kid Child Benefit recovery is at 24.5% over the 10k band. So tax will by 40% + 1% NI + 24.5% = 65.5%.Of course more kids means higher marginal tax rate 50k to 60k. Should you be blessed with 8 kids (gulp), you have higher than 100% marginal tax rate!!
this 15% stamp duty for residential property bought by a "non-natural person" might present a few problems. lots of resdiential properties are bought and sold by companies and trusts for plenty of ordinary reasons that are not to do with avoiding SDLT. - eg for any property that is divided into units it is pretty common for the freeholder to be a company. Does that mean 15% duty to buy the freehold?- what if the property is bought by a my children's trust fund* ? 15% tax?- what if I buy, say, a nursing home. Normally I'd set up a company for that. 15%?*no, of course they don't
... thought I should add the maths for the higher than 100% marginal tax rate.Child benefit for 8 kids per year:(20.30 + (7 * 13.40)) * 52 = 5933.20At the 1% recovery in the tax code per £100 = 59.33% tax rate within the 50k-60k range.Add other tax + NI:40 + 1 + 59.33 = 100.33% marginal tax rateOf course any more kids makes the marginal tax rate even higher.There cannot be many chancellors who have created a marginal tax rate > 100%. Osborne could have the record for the highest ever!The Daily Mirror and/or Catholic Herald ought to have a competition to find the parent with the highest marginal tax rate in the country!At least a couple could I think avoid this tax rate by separating! What a result for a Tory chancellor.
I do this for a living, take it from me, this was Gordon Brown-esque minor tinkering at the margins just like it always was. There is absolutely nothing of any interest in this whatsoever, that's about the only thing worth saying, and even that was a waste of virtual ink.
Good maths by rwendland, that's cheered me up a bit. Nice to see somebody doing maths and logic and not all this "should" nonsense based on nothing but what you read in the Mail/Guardian/Independent/Telegraph/Sun** They're all the same tired old propaganda.
Post a comment