View Single Post
Old 21-10-2023, 23:00   #1144
Sephiroth
Wisdom & truth
 
Sephiroth's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: RG41
Services: RG41: 1Gig VOLT Rutland: Gigaclear 400/400
Posts: 12,459
Sephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny star
Sephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny starSephiroth has a nice shiny star
Re: The Chronicles of Rishi

Quote:
Originally Posted by ianch99 View Post
Everybody, gather round and read Seph's previous post to understand the detail of how the global, pan-tax jurisdiction, corporate capitalist market works and the intricacies of arcane financial instruments. You're a funny man

I never mentioned '£100K bods' so not sure where you got that from. As to leaving and taking their jobs with them, your Brexit put paid to most of that.

Finally, for such a financial guru, you would think that when we are discussing effective tax rates, it is blindingly obvious we are discussing the tax rate applied to gross income/wealth gains.

---------- Post added at 21:06 ---------- Previous post was at 21:01 ----------



Again, I never mentioned people paying 45% tax rate. Classic deflection from addressing the point I made.

I also like the idea of people being wealthy e.g. I like myself. I am not saying that middle income earners are to be impacted. Please stop making up BS.

I'll ask the question again:

Quote:
Let's take this example: your wealth increases each year by £60k, principally through income, and you pay an overall effective tax rate of, say, 35%. Let's then say that my wealth increases by £100m each year but my overall effective tax rate is 10% or less. Do you think this is fair & equitable?
Quote:
I never mentioned '£100K bods' so not sure where you got that from. As to leaving and taking their jobs with them, your Brexit put paid to most of that.
You're splitting hairs here. What you have avoided explaining is what the heck you meant by this £60m/£100m 'example'.

Quote:
Again, I never mentioned people paying 45% tax rate. Classic deflection from addressing the point I made.
You don't have to have mentioned the 45% tax rate for me to introduce it into the conversation. You go on about the tax gap between the £60m bod and the £100m bod. The only inference to be drawn is that you wish the richer person to be subject to a higher tax rate, or a wealth tax, or something because you never defined the £60m/£100m wealth increase.

Quote:
... it is blindingly obvious we are discussing the tax rate applied to gross income/wealth gains.
You mentioned an effective tax rate (I now assume CGT) of 10% for the £100m bod. Where does that come from?


__________________
Seph.

My advice is at your risk.
Sephiroth is offline