|
Fangz posted:This explains more about the current situation: This bit was extremely illuminating: quote:Under the English Limitations Act 1980, it was written off years ago and is it not cruelly ironic that although Scots suffered it first, they are still being pursued for it when the rest of the UK have been allowed to move on. Although I can't see any specific reference to tax in that Act so I'm not sure if the article is correct, if rUK has got rid of it, does that mean it's a devolved area? Prince John fucked around with this message at 17:13 on Oct 2, 2014 |
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
Poll Tax II: The Legend of Glasgow's Gold
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:10
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:Jesus, Glasgow really disliked the poll tax. £125m outstanding when no other council area has more than £30m?! Yep. The GCC practically endorsed non-payment at the time. which is why twoot posted:Although that last point from Glasgow is telling, they know how hosed they are if they try this. GCC going on to collect poll tax now would be the quickest method possible of transferring the council to the SNP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:18
|
|
|
Prince John posted:This bit was extremely illuminating: I think it relates to differences in laws about debt collection - I do believe it's a devolved power (under Law and Order?). Scottish law seems to be based on a 1973 act, while English law is based on a 1984 one. It does seem like, in place of inserting a special exemption about an individual unpopular tax, it would be more reasonable to reform scottish limitations on debt collection to match the more lenient terms of the rest of the UK. But then again, I guess this is the SNP we are talking about. Speaking of which. quote:Ian Brown, an SNP councillor in Highland, said: 'If people deliberately did not pay, and can afford to pay, then they should do. I would not be surprised if some councils are now potentially going after people who have suddenly popped up on their computer.' So lol. Fangz fucked around with this message at 17:21 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:19
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Tory Conference by Cassetteboy A friend of mine showed me this and I was struggling to breath. It's loving amazing.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:20
|
|
|
^^ That's hilarious. Surprisingly catchy.Fangz posted:It does seem like, in place of inserting a special exemption about an individual unpopular tax, it would be more reasonable to reform scottish limitations on debt collection to match the more lenient terms of the rest of the UK. But then again, I guess this is the SNP we are talking about. Agreed, that would seem like a reasonable solution.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
Spangly A posted:This is where I'll freely admit to obvious bias; when dealing with the homeless, a lot of the problems are about them being chased by debt collectors. The few times I've been able to get the bailiffs to leave their families alone have come as a massive relief to them. Wiping of years-old debt would absolutely be a huge positive for anyone in that situation. Since this is the scope of my interaction with people who I know are evading council tax/poll tax, I'm obviously not going to realistically be able to think of it in broader terms easily. What do you mean?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:What do you mean? You've not heard of the HMRC sweetheart deal where Vodafone were caught evading (IIRC) £4.6bn in taxes and were let off scot free so long as they paid (again IIRC) £1.2bn? If they'd been made to pay what they were due, the resulting benefit to the Exchequer would have replaced every council funding cut in the country.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:35
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Do you have any links about this or are you just repeating something somebody told you without engaging your brain? I'd link to the iplayer where you can see her having a fit at Salmond but it's not working for some reason. It's Labour councils pushing the drat thing anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:I'd link to the iplayer where you can see her having a fit at Salmond but it's not working for some reason. Why is nothing ever working when you're asked to provide proof? Genuine question. Jedit posted:You've not heard of the HMRC sweetheart deal where Vodafone were caught evading (IIRC) £4.6bn in taxes and were let off scot free so long as they paid (again IIRC) £1.2bn? If they'd been made to pay what they were due, the resulting benefit to the Exchequer would have replaced every council funding cut in the country. Isnt this pretty common? They normally will accept a percentage of a vast tax sum as going to court for months to get the lot is expensive and time consuming.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:43
|
|
|
Jedit posted:You've not heard of the HMRC sweetheart deal where Vodafone were caught evading (IIRC) £4.6bn in taxes and were let off scot free so long as they paid (again IIRC) £1.2bn? If they'd been made to pay what they were due, the resulting benefit to the Exchequer would have replaced every council funding cut in the country. I think Private Eye puts the figure evaded at £6 billion, but that's the highest estimate I've heard (they also allege it was sorted out when they took the head of the HMRC to lunch). Exact figures from HMRC aren't available and Vodaphone obviously don't want to talk about all the tax they refused to pay. In additional Private Eye news, HMRC just hired the former CEO of KPMG, the accountants responsible for much of UK tax 'management', who have replaced him with… the former head of HMRC! (I'll double check this when I get home, as always Private Eye is dead tree) The other problem with this sort of thing, ignoring the whole 'that's our money, that is' thing for a minute, is that it fundamentally damages the integrity of the whole system. People can quite rightly start wondering why they should pay tax when the biggest companies just… don't. Corruption doesn't just rob the state of money, it robs it of basic legitimacy. If corporations continue to get away with it so brazenly, expect it to trickle down to anyone who can afford an accountant.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:44
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:I'd link to the iplayer where you can see her having a fit at Salmond but it's not working for some reason. Scottish Gvmt Youtube channel is always far more reliable than iPlayer for parliament stuff. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LgewXxwQ-kQ
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:46
|
|
|
serious gaylord posted:Why is nothing ever working when you're asked to provide proof? Yes and no. HMRC will still be pragmatic, especially where the technical case isn't clear (and I think the Vodafone one had been argued back and forth for years with no clear victor). Their guidelines are tightening up and they are concentrating specialist teams together where they can, so I think they're much less likely to cut a deal than they used to be. Key decisions are run by a Governance Board as well, to try and provide some more consistency. I'm not familiar with the details of the case, but tend to take some of the "MY TAXES" brigade with a healthy dose of scepticism, as periodically they'll come out with some really dumb stuff, like criticising Rolls Royce for daring to reduce its tax bill by claiming government incentives for doing R&D, or describing companies that have their tax bill reduced by losses from previous years as being tax avoiders (when this is a completely automatic process under the law). Prince John fucked around with this message at 17:55 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
keep punching joe posted:Scottish Gvmt Youtube channel is always far more reliable than iPlayer for parliament stuff. I didn't even realise they had a youtube channel, brilliant!
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:54
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:I didn't even realise they had a youtube channel, brilliant! Can you pinpoint exactly where she states what you mentioned?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 17:57
|
|
|
Coohoolin posted:I didn't even realise they had a youtube channel, brilliant! As far as I can tell from that video, her response to Salmond's announcement was to: i) give him a dirty look for breaching parliamentary protocol (which the presiding officer also told him off for) ii) have a dig at him for "underfunding local government" iii) criticise the SNP's plan to cut the budget of NHS Scotland iv) make a bad-tempered joke about Salmond's golf handicap I don't think that any of those qualifies as "opposing this legislation" LemonDrizzle fucked around with this message at 18:07 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Their guidelines are tightening up and they are concentrating specialist teams together where they can, so I think they're much less likely to cut a deal than they used to be. Key decisions are run by a Governance Board as well, to try and provide some more consistency. Which makes it all the more annoying that pretty much all the countries pursuing austerity have cut the budget for their tax gathering bodies and Britain is no exception: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/mar/26/tax-clampdown-under-threat-revenue-customs-job-cuts quote:[March 24th 2014] The budget was also cut in 2013 and given it wasn't ringfenced I'd assume it was cut every prior year of the Coalition too.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:05
|
|
|
Jedit posted:You've not heard of the HMRC sweetheart deal where Vodafone were caught evading (IIRC) £4.6bn in taxes and were let off scot free so long as they paid (again IIRC) £1.2bn? If they'd been made to pay what they were due, the resulting benefit to the Exchequer would have replaced every council funding cut in the country. I didn't see this. Once something like that has been done and there's a precedent. Can't you just not pay tax, cite that and end up with a quartered bill? That would be good as heck. I'm sick of scroungers getting like half my wage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:I didn't see this. Once something like that has been done and there's a precedent. Can't you just not pay tax, cite that and end up with a quartered bill?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:08
|
|
|
Prince John posted:That it's lovely, but presumably legal under the laws at the time? I'm morally opposed to most of the things Russia does these days though. Considering the annexation of the Baltics was never legal to begin with, there's a big difference. The people who are being allegedly prosecuted escaped the military when independence was decelerated in Lithuania anyway.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:12
|
|
|
Bape Culture posted:I didn't see this. Once something like that has been done and there's a precedent. Can't you just not pay tax, cite that and end up with a quartered bill? You're an astonishingly limp troll.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
I've just seen Pride, which is a fantastic film which everyone should go and see. I know that it was said in the last thread, but it really deserves to be repeated since its very, very good.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:31
|
|
|
Prince John posted:Although I can't see any specific reference to tax in that Act so I'm not sure if the article is correct, if rUK has got rid of it, does that mean it's a devolved area? In a sense, in that Scots law is a thing. The Prescription and Limitation (Scotland) Act 1973 presumably has different limitations than the English Limitations Act 1980.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:54
|
|
|
mfcrocker posted:Why is it important that we take people on minimum wage out of tax, other than it makes a good soundbite? We'd be much better served increasing the minimum wage, which would a) have more of an impact on the working class and b) not affect services My personal feeling is that having a tax threshold below NMW allows for flashy politicising of the minimum wage. Although, yes, the minimum wage should be substantially increased too. Also, somebody did the sums on Cameron's pledge and it turns out that, if linked to inflation, the 20p and 40p thresholds would be £12,500 and £50,100 anyway. So he's basically pulled the same trick Miliband has.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 18:56
|
|
|
I live in what will most likely be a swing seat (shifted from Labour to Tory in 2010), so I should probably vote Labour, right? I hate what they've become, and am aware that there's not much difference between Labour and Tory (neoliberlism with a smile versus neoliberalism with a 'gently caress you'), but for the most vulnerable in society there's still a very real difference between life under a Labour government and life under a Tory government, right? Or even then am I still giving Labour too much credit?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 19:38
|
|
|
TinTower posted:My personal feeling is that having a tax threshold below NMW allows for flashy politicising of the minimum wage. Although, yes, the minimum wage should be substantially increased too. I must have missed Miliband's trick. Was it just linking tax bands to inflation, or was there something else as well?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 19:41
|
|
|
Jedit posted:I must have missed Miliband's trick. Was it just linking tax bands to inflation, or was there something else as well? Miliband's conference speech included a pledge to raise NMW to £8/hr by 2020, which is what it will be anyway if the Low Pay Commission keep it linked to inflation.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 19:55
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Miliband's conference speech included a pledge to raise NMW to £8/hr by 2020, which is what it will be anyway if the Low Pay Commission keep it linked to inflation. You're completely wrong about this because the pledge is to increase the minimum wage in relation to the median wage, not to just blindly hit £8 and call it a day. You're also blithely assuming that inflation over the next few years will be equal to that in the late 90s, which is completely inconsistent with everybody's expectations ("everybody" here being entities such as the bank of england and OBR).
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 20:01
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:You're completely wrong about this because the pledge is to increase the minimum wage in relation to the median wage, not to just blindly hit £8 and call it a day. You're also blithely assuming that inflation over the next few years will be equal to that in the late 90s, which is completely inconsistent with everybody's expectations ("everybody" here being entities such as the bank of england and OBR). Except £8 won't do a thing to increase the minimum wage at a faster pace than the median wage. Even the Fabians think it doesn't go far enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 20:33
|
|
|
Answers Me posted:I live in what will most likely be a swing seat (shifted from Labour to Tory in 2010), so I should probably vote Labour, right? I hate what they've become, and am aware that there's not much difference between Labour and Tory (neoliberlism with a smile versus neoliberalism with a 'gently caress you'), but for the most vulnerable in society there's still a very real difference between life under a Labour government and life under a Tory government, right? Or even then am I still giving Labour too much credit? If it's a swing between those two, that's all the choice you get unless there's a stupidly large local disaster because of FPTP. And yes, Labour is marginally better than the Tories. It's a small difference, but it's the difference between Labour fuelling the slow death of the public welfare systems and the Tories slitting the welfare system's throat and using the cash to fund tax cuts for themselves. Speaking of which, how on earth did the Tories get away with their tax cut plans? Doesn't that just fly in the face of the whole justification behind austerity? Or is the public just that misinformed on the amount spent on welfare? TinTower posted:Except £8 won't do a thing to increase the minimum wage at a faster pace than the median wage. Even the Fabians think it doesn't go far enough. Yeah it's an awfully low amount and it's close to the minimum they could do. If it keeps rising at that rate, it'll hit the current living wage something like... three years after the rises stop? It does beat inflation though, but not by much. Spooky Hyena fucked around with this message at 20:38 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 20:35
|
|
|
Answers Me posted:I live in what will most likely be a swing seat (shifted from Labour to Tory in 2010), so I should probably vote Labour, right? I hate what they've become, and am aware that there's not much difference between Labour and Tory (neoliberlism with a smile versus neoliberalism with a 'gently caress you'), but for the most vulnerable in society there's still a very real difference between life under a Labour government and life under a Tory government, right? Or even then am I still giving Labour too much credit? yes. vote labour. when the only possible outcomes are shite, there's no shame in opting for the lesser of two shites.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 20:40
|
|
|
IceAgeComing posted:I've just seen Pride, which is a fantastic film which everyone should go and see. I know that it was said in the last thread, but it really deserves to be repeated since its very, very good. I saw this the other day, and watching that means that I have no issues whatsoever with agreeing that poll tax debts should get tae gently caress. Admittedly, I probably would have very few issues anyway, but if you want to raise a kneejerk reaction to a Thatcherite policy, just point me in the direction of media depictions of the miners' strike. (It is a really good film  )
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 20:43
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Except £8 won't do a thing to increase the minimum wage at a faster pace than the median wage. You're wrong. The proposal is to increase the minimum wage from 54% of the median to 58%. That will necessarily increase it more rapidly than the median wage. It just so happens that based on the expected rate of inflation over the next few years, this will take the NMW to £8/hr. If wage inflation is stronger than expected, it will lead to a correspondingly higher minimum wage.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:06
|
|
|
Following on from the former head of HMRC having a cozy relationship with big business, another hint the civil service may not be as impartial as it claims: http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/oct/02/john-manzoni-whitehall-chief-executive-government-big-business-love-in-claim quote:The government has been accused of a “cosy love-in with big business” after it appointed a former executive of oil giant BP to a new role running the civil service.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:24
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:You're wrong. The proposal is to increase the minimum wage from 54% of the median to 58%. That will necessarily increase it more rapidly than the median wage. It just so happens that based on the expected rate of inflation over the next few years, this will take the NMW to £8/hr. If wage inflation is stronger than expected, it will lead to a correspondingly higher minimum wage. Actually, you're wrong: quote:The £8 an hour announcement is essentially a re-announcement of a previous policy: to link the National Minimum Wage to median earnings. If wages rise at the levels forecasted by the Office for Budget Responsibility, an £8 minimum wage in 2020 would be 54% of the level of median wages, the exact same proportion as the current minimum wage is to the current level of median pay. Crucially, this steady rise would do little to bring people out of ‘low pay’ as the low pay threshold is usually defined as two thirds of median pay – a markedly higher figure than Labour’s proposed minimum wage. Miliband didn't say anything about median wages anyway; he said he would raise NMW to £8/hr. The 58% figure seems to be calculated from the proposed NMW rate, not the other way around.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:27
|
|
|
TinTower posted:Actually, you're wrong: No u, srsly. Here is the actual policy as written up on the actual website of the actual Labour party and articulated by the disembodied head of Chuka Umunna: http://www.labour.org.uk/blog/entry/an-8-minimum-wage quote:The wage rise is based on a proposed target to increase the NMW from 54% to 58% of median earnings by 2020 following consultation with business. Forecasts show that this target will take the NMW from £6.50 in October this year to £8.00 by 2020 – a rise of £1.50 an hour for Britain’s lowest paid workers, worth £60 a week or £3,000 a year for a full time worker on the minimum wage. Miliband didn't say "we will raise the minimum wage from 54% of the median income to 58%" because if you say things like that the immediate reaction will be "OK, but what does that mean for me?" You have to present things in ways that are immediately understandable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 21:41
|
|
|
LemonDrizzle posted:No u, srsly. Here is the actual policy as written up on the actual website of the actual Labour party and articulated by the disembodied head of Chuka Umunna: Maths isn't Labour's strong suit. While they've been trying to position themselves as having everything costed, by their own policy positions, they've used the banker's levy and the mansion tax several times over. £8/hr is 58% of the current median wage, not 58% of the median wage in 2020. For them to hit 58% of the predicted median wage in 2020, NMW would need to be £8.50. Easy to put the word "fifty" in a speech.
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 22:25
|
|
|
Question Time is apparently going to be good tonight, the argy bargy has already kicked off in the warm up session, according to the producer on twitter. e: Grant Shapps (the man of many names) has already dropped a bollock, and refused to deny they are planning to fund the income tax cuts from raising VAT. Absolute bastards. Trickjaw fucked around with this message at 22:54 on Oct 2, 2014 |
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 22:35
|
|
|
Trickjaw posted:Question Time is apparently going to be good tonight, the argy bargy has already kicked off in the warm up session, according to the producer on twitter. Just tuned in and Susie Boniface is irritating me already. Managing to try and conflate the NHS having a budget shortfull with the coalition having cut the NHS budget. Edit: I keep wanting to say Grant Schnapps. Didn't he basically say they'd set out how they'll fund it in the Autumn Statement?
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 22, 2024 02:31 |
|
|
Prince John posted:Edit: I keep wanting to say Grant Schnapps. Didn't he basically say they'd set out how they'll fund it in the Autumn Statement? He more flubbered about with the lines we have been hearing all week, but when Stella Creasey held to feet to the fire he wouldn't deny it, which generally is a 'Whoops! You got me!'
|
|
#
?
Oct 2, 2014 23:02
|
|