Dan, my editor at work, has posted a rather interesting story on our blog about why wealthy individuals come to the UK. The story origionated from Forbes.com and the line that stands out for me is "a relatively lenient tax regime, which allows the super-rich to legally sidestep some taxation"I wonder if the Labour supporters who read this blog feel happy with that line? I wouldn't feel too happy about that statement being true of a Conservative government, let alone a Labour one!
I like low taxes, fair and low is a good mantra as far as I am concerned. A tax regime which encourages companies to locate in the UK is good, a tax regime which allows low paid employees to keep more of thei money is good, a tax regime which doen't penalise saving, thrift and generousity is good.
An opt-out for the the "super rich" doesn't sound too good to me at all.
3 comments:
Quite right too.
But it's obvious why Mittal gave the £2m - he's cut a deal, which is what this Government thinks is right. And the only reason Al Fayed hasn't had his citizenship is he won't pay the price.
Well said James.
Would you support a 50% tax rate for earnings over £500k? Are there other ways that we can make sure the super-rich pay their fair share?
It seems that the Lib Dems used to have the fairest policy, but I would be interested to know if you have a better alternative.
It seems really wrong that the rich pay a lower proportion of their wealth in tax than the poorest members of society, and I am glad that you are willing to address this issue.
Jimmy,
I don't think that there is any need to bring punitive taxation for the rich.
I would like to see the balance of taxation shifted too but I would do it by reducing the taxation on the poor rather than increasing taxation on the rich.
Post a Comment