Skip to content

Ahahahahaha: “Labour wants to lower income tax, says Rachel Reeves”


Ms Reeves said: “I have no desire to see the tax burden on working people increase. In fact, I would like the tax burden on working people to be lower – but that has to be built on the rock of economic and fiscal stability.”

That’s an even bigger promise. One she’s not going keep, but still. Given that all taxes end up falling on hte general population that will mean shirnking government as a percentage of GDP. Which Labour ain’t gonna do.

21 thoughts on “Ahahahahaha: “Labour wants to lower income tax, says Rachel Reeves””

  1. What she means is that they’ll spend like spud on a coke binge and tax the “wealthy” and the evil capitalists

  2. If Labour get rid of the 68.5% tax band on working people when annual incomes cross £100k until the personal allowance is eliminated, they will reduce taxes and increase tax collected.
    I have that on good authority from the top , Jim Diamond or someone.

    Could also let all UK residents do tax returns on the remittance basis. And knock any shortfall off the foreign aid budget.

    Legalise drugs – enforcement costs are a kind of tax on working people.

    Can be done

  3. “Which Labour ain’t gonna do.” Nor did the Coalition, nor the Conservatives. “Austerity” my left foot!

  4. Bongo

    They could also bring back the lash and the noose. Youthful criminals are flogged. Those who are really outrageous are hanged. Much cheaper than keeping ’em in prison.

  5. Bongo – Legalise drugs – enforcement costs are a kind of tax on working people.

    I’m fine with drugs being illegal, so I don’t pay taxes on them.

    With the current price of legal tobacco it might be cheaper to pad out a spliff with cocaine.

  6. I think the Overton Window has shifted decisively. UK government has been “mildly” Socialist for the last decade. The blue rosettes will lose the next election and then the red rosettes will slowly turn the ratchet on more Socialism.

    The march through the institutions has delivered. The bureaucrats are authoritarian and they have the power now, no matter who’s been voted for.

    We also have a generation (or two) that now look to government to solve everything (why else would a TV presenter’s indiscretions be a Ministerial matter?)

    Freedom lovers are done. Rail against the dying of the night if you must, but we’re done.

  7. @Geoffers

    I think it’s “Rage against the dying of the light”…

    Don’t worry. When the war breaks out we will look back at these tax rates wistfully.
    Won’t last long though, what with us barely having any military.

    And when the taxation has scuppered all economic activity, we can just live off the benefits system. Simples!

  8. The proportion of ‘working people’ who are net tax payers is reducing

    Soon those that are left will either leave the country or do as I am planning to do, retire and cease propping this Ponzi scheme up

  9. Employers’ NICs of 13.8% nets off to 6.5% when calculated as what the employee can’t have.
    Illustration: if you generate an additional 113.8 of income, you keep 38 of that.
    38/113.8 is 33.4%
    Ah, oops, a mistake, it’s 66.6% income taxation. So the employer NICs effect is 4.6% on top of 62%.

    Once you’ve lost the personal allowance and move into additional rate then you keep
    53/113.8 which is 46.6. So that’s 53.5% income taxation, or close enough, which is 6.5% above what is popularly thought to be the rate for PAYE earners at that level.
    That’s where I got the extra 6.5% and I applied to the 62%-ers incorrectly. The adjustment diminishes as rates rise. Doh

  10. Or to put it in numbers, if a company has £113.80 it would love to give to it’s employee in that tax band between £100k and £125,140 it must first pay £13.80 employer’s NIC.

    Then the employee will pay £60 tax + £2 NIC

    £60 + £2 + £13.80 = £75.80 or 66.6% of the £113.80 you started with.

    Or you can ask your employer to put £113.80 into your pension pot.

    £38 take home or £113.80 in your pension pot.

  11. Recently had some local politicians claiming that the latest carbon/green levy on fuel wasn’t a tax so it’s not technically breaking their promises not to raise taxes.
    Let’s not forget starmer is a lawyer so is going to make sure there’s plenty of wriggle room in the small print and plenty of technical loopholes

  12. The “Conservatives” have “wanted” to reduce taxes for 13 years.

    They’ve just given amnesty to this year’s boat invaders in order to get their illegal immigration bill through Parliament. Obviously the bill will fail eventually; this merely empties the hotels for the next wave.

  13. BniC

    I did notice that my latest rates bill (land tax) had a state government levy added. So pleased to see the state isn’t adding extra taxes to my bill after its huge increase in royalties on fossil fuels.

    As you’ve guessed, it needs the fossil fuel taxes to pay for its jihad to abolish fossil fuels.

  14. From Accountancy Daily: The analysis suggests the underground economy in the UK represented 11.5% of GDP in 2016 and is expected to fall only slightly in the coming years, to 10.8% by 2025.

    If the Civil Servants keep farming taxes (whatever the declarations of the political figureheads in power) then you could argue that engaging with the underground economy is a revolutionary act.

  15. @Steve – “I’m fine with drugs being illegal, so I don’t pay taxes on them.”

    You pay the price elsewhere – in the large wasted costs of policing and imprisoning people.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *