Nick Clegg: "It simply would be incomprehensible" to struggling Britons to cut the 50p tax rate

Comments

[Commentator]

Er why? Can't this staggeringly conceited lightweight get it into his head that there would be less tax to pay by ordinary people if we weren't steadily offshoring high income jobs because, largely thanks to the Lib Dems, the UK is now an unattractive place to do business?

And how much of Clegg's bloated package of pay and perks suffers the 50% rate? For various reasons, I suspect little or none.

[Cleethorpes Rock]

This can easily be sorted out. You never give concessions, you only trade them, so the key for us is to trade the LibDems something for the abolition of the 50% tax rate, but that something has to be a policy that we would have supported anyway.

All we have to say is "Right then. Let's scrap the 50% rate, but how about we raise the income tax threshold to £12,000pa too? That way, you get your manifesto promise on income tax through and can say you've got a good deal for lower income workers."

This argument is largely staged. The Libs need to look like they're restraining the Tories from helping their rich friends and we want to take more lower income workers out of tax too, so there's no reason why there shouldn't be a mutually acceptable trade-off.

[Super Blue]

It is perfectly comprehensible to anyone who understands that higher rates frequently bring in less revenue - probably including this one.

[John Prendergast]

It is incomprehensible that we Tories are so scared of telling the Lib Fibs to buzz off that we let Glegg have the microphone , time and again. Huhne is still out of jail too and costing us wind mill squillions every time they go around or don't rotate,even.

[Daniel]

@ Cleethorpes
Not quite. The Lib Dems are insisting that the 50p rate must be replaced by a wealth tax, AS WELL as the £10k threshold being met first. Which is fair enough really - it would drive home the message that we're really in it together.

[robert]

The 50% income tax on high earners is one thing but tax avoidance is another.
That good socialist Neil Kinnock has a salary of £110,000 per annum but pays his tax in Switzerland where tax is four times less than in the UK.
The Conservatives need to legislate against tax avoiders in Britain like Kinnock and Blair if they really want more tax revenue to help with the deficit reduction.

[Steve-London]

I am sure my local council chief executive will be very pleased that some want to reduce his or her tax bill.
I am equally sure they will be very flattered that some think local council chief executives are a engine for growth going forward.

But sadly I do not share this view , specially since we have recently negotiated a deal with the Swiss banks to share UK tax domiciles oversea incomes with HMRC.

I would rather any spare cash be spent on incentives to attract further investment in the rebalancing the economy, specifically in the manufacturing sector. More tax incentives to be precise.

I am sure , in time , the immoral 50% personal income tax will be abolished , but I do not see it as priority number one this year.

[vgb]

I don't care what somebody earns in a year, being income taxed at 50% is just immoral and achieves nothing more than satisfying, to an extent, the envious members of our society.

[Matthew Reynolds]

Why not just cut public spending further to fund raising the basic personal tax allowance to say £13,000 p/a and cut top rates of income tax from 40%&50% to 35% on incomes exceeding £250,000 p/a ?The basic personal tax allowance would be £13,000 p/a for all taxpayers irrespective if age or income with claw-back rules for the over 65's & over 75's axed and the £100,000 p/a threshold for tax allowance claw-back all scrapped.That would simplify taxation and reduce the burden on everyone.By putting more cash in peoples pockets you grow the service industry who could re-employ all the sacked public sector workers who have the skills to prosper in the service industry.The rich would pay more as the incentive to dodge tax would decrease and the incentive for them to invest in productive job creation would rise meaning the tax revenue from profits on such investments would rise.That means more growth,more jobs and higher revenues with more tax paid by the wealthy.This plan would move jobs from the client state to the private sector thus decreasing the potential Labour vote and expanding the possible Tory vote.Taking cash away from the growth sapping public sector to the wealth creating private sector would spark an economic upswing.My tax allowance plan would benefit both the working poor as well as cutting the burden on the middle classes.They would be bigger % gainers than the rich thus making it 'fair'.You could be sacking overpaid under-employed civil servants,QUANGO employees and those doing council non-jobs.We could also work on reforming taxpayer funded pensions to make them more sustainable.

So Nick Clegg is right on raising the basic personal tax allowance - but following a more Gladstone style policy could be even more effective at securing his objectives.