Do You Have A Favourite Type Of Bean?
ChatterBank1 min ago
Why Are The Recent Tax Cuts Described As "Unfunded" In The Media?
Surely the money that is not taken in tax will largely be spent on things that have VAT, duty etc on them and therefore end up in the treasury anyway.
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by Kardashev. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
because they are ! ( unfunded) haw haw haw
as the great leddy might say - we reach into our purse ( = the treasury) and we want this toy
and if you dont have the lu-lu ( = moolah, money)
then you have to borrow it from mummy or Papa ( Financiers, CHinese or both).
and mummu or papa may say - do you really need
Spenging your way out of a recession is I agree mainstream Keynes
as the great leddy might say - we reach into our purse ( = the treasury) and we want this toy
and if you dont have the lu-lu ( = moolah, money)
then you have to borrow it from mummy or Papa ( Financiers, CHinese or both).
and mummu or papa may say - do you really need
Spenging your way out of a recession is I agree mainstream Keynes
ToraToraTora
//It suits the 5C agenda, VAT alone is 20% so that's the same as income tax, then there is the huge "Duty" on all sorts of things like petrol, beer etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the tax take actually went up. Labour and the left wing media love to conveniently ignore indirect tax.//
…….whilst conveniently ignoring the recent ‘fiscal event’ that has proved utterly catastrophic for the economy and mortgages, not to mention irreparable damage to the PM, her Chancellor and their Party.
Yet some are moaning about ‘spin’? PMSL
//It suits the 5C agenda, VAT alone is 20% so that's the same as income tax, then there is the huge "Duty" on all sorts of things like petrol, beer etc. I wouldn't be surprised if the tax take actually went up. Labour and the left wing media love to conveniently ignore indirect tax.//
…….whilst conveniently ignoring the recent ‘fiscal event’ that has proved utterly catastrophic for the economy and mortgages, not to mention irreparable damage to the PM, her Chancellor and their Party.
Yet some are moaning about ‘spin’? PMSL
Let's take beer, for a 4% pint for example, that's 19.08p for each % of alcohol so 76.32p. We add VAT to that so 91.584. Now we add VAT to the base cost of a pint say £2.50 so that gives us £3 + the 91.58 so £3.91. So out of £3.91 we are paying 50p + 92p = £1.42, so out of £3.91 we are paying £1.42 tax that's 36%, a lot more than income tax. That's why direct tax is a very poor way to collect revenue.
I am no economic expert, but I feel ithas to be wishful thinking to hope that unfair indirect taxation on spending will increase sufficiently to cover the loss of fairer direct taxation on income; especially when times are hard and all, particularly the poorer section of the community, is looking really hard at what spending is necessary and what can be avoided. By the reckoning that all is going to be covered one is led to the conclusion that one can remove the fairer direct taxation altogether, with complete impunity; which can't be right.
TTT, the problem is many on here are economically illiterate and just rant based on what they have been told by Sky or TwitFace etc.
They also conveniently miss that all currencies are down against the Dollar that is massively over valued and wont do the USA much good long term as their exports will suffer.
They also conveniently miss that all currencies are down against the Dollar that is massively over valued and wont do the USA much good long term as their exports will suffer.
//If the savings were spent only on food, there would be no VAT going to the Treasury.//
But they wont be will they. For the poorest in society maybe but we still have plenty of booze, gas and petrol being bought which is where many wold perhaps spend a bit extra they have. And that is way more than 20% and would cover the few spending on food.
But they wont be will they. For the poorest in society maybe but we still have plenty of booze, gas and petrol being bought which is where many wold perhaps spend a bit extra they have. And that is way more than 20% and would cover the few spending on food.
The FT is a bit lefty, but I thought you all might read it so:
https:/
https:/
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.