[Butts]

If there is a minumum wage should there also be a maximum wage ?

How much would members suggest this be set at ?

Can anyone come up with a reason why my ceiling of One Million Pounds Per Year would be insufficient to maintain a reasonable lifestyle

[tbtc]

It would never work - people would easily find ways round it (like setting up a business and then pouring money in that business to cover "expenses").

One of the problems with the 50% tax band is that the rich find loopholes (taking a lower salary but being paid in shares etc)

[DaveNewcastle]

What?
You're proposing to criminalise a hard-earned income (even if its at a few thousand a day) but not criminalising un-earned income (property revenue, dividends, and speculative investments)?

A writer, composer, film-maker who earns little more than royalties from one of their works, would have their life's income outlawed because it exceeded the threshold in their one year of success.

When does the proceeds of selling a home become income?

Isn't it better to tax income while we can, than to encourage more off-shore operations which we cannot tax?

Criminalising income amounts to criminalising wealth, and that always results in the diversion of wealth into legal alternatives. There's plenty examples in French Law, where Promissory Notes, the vaults of the Knights Templar and regulation of inheritances have been used to control wealth. Not with a resounding success in my opinion.

[Yew]

Although an interesting concept, I think there would be too many concessions that could be used as loopholes. An remember that paying high wages ensures we have some of the best bankers/engineers/doctors in the world. If we limit wages they may move away.

[Lampshade]

It'd never happen, people would just have a lower "income" and have the remainder paid to a "charity of their choice".

[Clip]

Rather then a max wage why not just a flat tax?

[Butts]

In my view it should not be beyond the ability of HMRC to track down and close all the loopholes if there was the political will to do it.

In principle and in times of austerity could anyone claim that a million pounds per year is insufficient for their needs ?

It would be interesting to see the biggest groups of employees affected - one of the biggest in my view would be premiership footballers. I would say there must be at least 500 of them who earn this much.

Are there more Bankers earning a Million Pounds a year than footballers ?

[MattE2010]

Originally Posted by Butts

It would be interesting to see the biggest groups of employees affected - one of the biggest in my view would be premiership footballers. I would say there must be at least 500 of them who earn this much.

Closer to 100 I'd say, if that. You forget there's only about 475 players registered in the Premier League!

£1,000,000 levels up at just over £19,000 per week, not many earn that outside the top 6, I'd say the average after that is closer to £8,000-£10,000 a week. I doubt any of that bracket have additional income either - those with sponsorship deals tend to be on £100,000+ already.

I wouldn't touch them though - if you limit their income they'll just move off to the developing, massive money leagues in Russia, China and the USA, then England will be even worse off than before!

[LE Greys]

Originally Posted by Clip

Rather then a max wage why not just a flat tax?

Originally Posted by Butts

In my view it should not be beyond the ability of HMRC to track down and close all the loopholes if there was the political will to do it.

In principle and in times of austerity could anyone claim that a million pounds per year is insufficient for their needs ?

It would be interesting to see the biggest groups of employees affected - one of the biggest in my view would be premiership footballers. I would say there must be at least 500 of them who earn this much.

Are there more Bankers earning a Million Pounds a year than footballers ?

Tax people on gross income with no deductions, and abolish the tax credit system (which should save a considerable ammount by making it a lot easier to calculate). However, I prefer negative income tax to a straightforward flat tax, since the cost of living is disproportionate to those on low incomes. People are allowed up to X tax-free, then taxed (say 30%) on that. There would be a good deal of debate as to what X is, but in practice it would be the equivalent of the minimum wage for a full working year, since that could be reinforced by state top-ups. The idea is, add up your enitre yearly income, subtract X, multiply by 0.3 and write the cheque. If subtracting X gives you a negative number, that's what the government owes you (without the division stage). Practically all other personal taxes would be abolished, saving a lot more from the system. Both monetary capital gains and monetary inheritence would count as income (meaning you could inherit a house tax-free). To replace child tax credit and pension tax credit, just put up child benefit and the state pension.

The only way to evade that is to hide your income, and there would have to be some way to prevent that (no idea how). Expenses money is another question, no idea what to do about that either.

Still, it can't be worse than now.

[Ascot]

If my wages got capped, why should I work harder?

EDIT: Another super tax hike will just wind people up and encourage offshore accounting. Failing that it's off to Jersey.

[LE Greys]

As for a maximum wage, to be honest, I don't really know. I don't think there's any real point in earning silly money (what would you do with it?) but you do have to be prepared to fight for people who get paid a lot. I never want to do a job just for the sake of the money, that's the road to misery and stress. However, I may well not have any choice. Still, there's more to life than £££! It can't buy you happiness.

[MattE2010]

Originally Posted by Ascot

If my wages got capped, why should I work harder?

Indeed, it's human nature I think to work harder to gain more. A wage limit in effect destroys this, not a good thing in my opinion.

[Butts]

Originally Posted by MattE2010

Closer to 100 I'd say, if that. You forget there's only about 475 players registered in the Premier League!

£1,000,000 levels up at just over £19,000 per week, not many earn that outside the top 6, I'd say the average after that is closer to £8,000-£10,000 a week. I doubt any of that bracket have additional income either - those with sponsorship deals tend to be on £100,000+ already.

I wouldn't touch them though - if you limit their income they'll just move off to the developing, massive money leagues in Russia, China and the USA, then England will be even worse off than before!

Do you really think there are only 100 who earn £20,000 per week - I thought the figure would be more than that with a few in the Championship as well.

Perhaps in these days of transparency each club should have to publish the amount paid to each player, particularly when a lot of them are losing money hand over fist.

With regard to them moving abroad I think that is unlikely apart from an elite few.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Originally Posted by Ascot

If my wages got capped, why should I work harder?

EDIT: Another super tax hike will just wind people up and encourage offshore accounting. Failing that it's off to Jersey.

In times of austerity when some people in the UK are living in relative poverty is it morally right for some to earn so much while others struggle to provide a pair of shoes for a child.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Originally Posted by MattE2010

Indeed, it's human nature I think to work harder to gain more. A wage limit in effect destroys this, not a good thing in my opinion.

Is this part of the problem in The Public Sector where there is no link between the amount of work done and pay - other than perhaps promotion.

[MattE2010]

Originally Posted by Butts

Do you really think there are only 100 who earn £20,000 per week - I thought the figure would be more than that with a few in the Championship as well.

Perhaps in these days of transparency each club should have to publish the amount paid to each player, particularly when a lot of them are losing money hand over fist.

With regard to them moving abroad I think that is unlikely apart from an elite few.

There'll be a couple in the Championship on considerable amounts of money, I wouldn't have thought any would be on anything above £15,000 though.

'An elite few' - I would have though any who currently earn over £30,000 would move on; a lot of new leagues could offer them what they want, ergo they leave, ergo the quality goes down in England, ergo interest lessens among fans and TV, ergo there's less income to the club, ergo there's less income for the club to spend on players, ergo quality never improved - imagine the EPL with no Man City, United, Chelsea, Arsenal or Spurs, it'd be average. It's supply and demand - elite footballers are skilled, and people will pay to see them. Lose them and you find no-one cares any more.

[Butts]

Should the tax system be used to redistribute money from those who have more than enough to those who have little for a fairer society ?

That was the original premise of my post