Maximum Wage ?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
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 :lol:
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

tbtc

Veteran Member
Joined
16 Dec 2008
Messages
16,240
Location
Yorkshire, Yorkshire, Yorkshire
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

Established Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
21 Dec 2007
Messages
7,397
Location
Newcastle (unless I'm out)
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

Established Member
Joined
12 Mar 2011
Messages
4,410
Location
Nottingham
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.
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
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 ?
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
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

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
Rather then a max wage why not just a flat tax?

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

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2005
Messages
3,389
Location
Birmingham, UK
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.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
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.
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
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 ---
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.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

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 ---
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.:p
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
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

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
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 :lol:
 

MidnightFlyer

Veteran Member
Joined
16 May 2010
Messages
12,846
I generally support a flat tax as in chief I think it would stop the rich getting around the current system, and stop the poorer being shafted, plus it would save the man hours the current system I suspect wastes.
 

David

Established Member
Joined
9 Jul 2005
Messages
5,103
Location
Scunthorpe
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.

You'll be surprised!

While there may only be a maximum of 500 players registered to play in in the Premier League, remember, those under the age of 21 do not have to be registered. While most of the under 21s will not be on £10,000 a week or more, there will be some. Conversly, most of the registered players (21 and above) will be on more than £10,000, and in quite a lot of cases, significantley more....

In the Championship, you'll be surprised at how many players earn £15,000 a week or more. For example, Middlesborough. Do you think they would have been able to attract all their Scottish players from the SPL without being able to pay them a fair amount each week?

Even the "squad" players in the Championship can be earning £10,000 a week or more ....
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
I generally support a flat tax as in chief I think it would stop the rich getting around the current system, and stop the poorer being shafted, plus it would save the man hours the current system I suspect wastes.

I suppose in reality the rich and poor cannot be squeezed for that much in absolute terms, most money comes from the average joe public as this is the greatest source of potential revenue for any government.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
You'll be surprised!

While there may only be a maximum of 500 players registered to play in in the Premier League, remember, those under the age of 21 do not have to be registered. While most of the under 21s will not be on £10,000 a week or more, there will be some. Conversly, most of the registered players (21 and above) will be on more than £10,000, and in quite a lot of cases, significantley more....

In the Championship, you'll be surprised at how many players earn £15,000 a week or more. For example, Middlesborough. Do you think they would have been able to attract all their Scottish players from the SPL without being able to pay them a fair amount each week?

Even the "squad" players in the Championship can be earning £10,000 a week or more ....

Why after in many cases constant failure is there no pressure for wages to be capped and attendance prices for spectators to be reduced. No one ever seems to object to the huge amount players are paid - is it because they are not in general "posh boys":p
 

Xenophon PCDGS

Veteran Member
Joined
17 Apr 2011
Messages
26,640
Location
A semi-rural part of north-west England
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.

Just think that I was watching professional football being played in the 1960/1961 season when I was 15 years old and when footballers had to accept a maximum wage of £20 per week. Jimmy Hill was one of those who fought for the ending of that maximum wage.
 

telstarbox

Established Member
Joined
23 Jul 2010
Messages
4,988
Location
Wennington Crossovers
I'm not too worried about how much those at the top earn, as long as they pay their share of tax - it's unjust that top earners can pay a lower proportion of their income as tax than low earners. A maximum wage would be hard to enforce - no country has one at present. It could be done in the public sector though.

The gap between those at the top and those at the bottom is a bigger issue. To take a well-publicised example - Philip Clarke, CEO of Tesco, earned £6.9m last year. A full-time Tesco cashier or shelf stacker earns not more than £15k. Does Clarke really work 460 times harder than the Tesco shop staff?

As for footballers, the only people to blame for the high salaries are the mugs like me who fork out for tickets, programmes, replica shirts, Sky Sports etc. I think most put up with it because they want to see their team do well!
 
Last edited:

All Line Rover

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2011
Messages
5,026
I suppose in reality the rich and poor cannot be squeezed for that much in absolute terms, most money comes from the average joe public as this is the greatest source of potential revenue for any government.

The top 1% of earners pay almost a third of overall income tax. The bottom 50% of earners pay around 10% of overall income tax.

For this reason I would not be in support of a "maximum wage." It's not feasible, but even if it was it would only suppress work, innovation and GDP, rather than raise average earnings and living standards.

This country needs rich people as they pay a very large proportion of overall taxes, even though some use aggressive tax avoidance (which, for the record, I have nothing against, unlike the hypocritical David Cameron).
 

SS4

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2011
Messages
8,485
Location
Birmingham
I'd love to see fair distribution of wealth but it'll never happen. I think it's appalling that the top 1% should be in such a financial position that, even with various offshore interests, can still contribute almost a third. That said I wouldn't want to see a maximum cap - it would either be so high as to be meaningless or too low to entice people to work harder.

I'd like to see an increase in capital gains tax though and most of all a "truth" act - applied to the media in which anything stated or could be implied by a reasonable person has to be backed up by fact and must be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
 

Zoe

Established Member
Joined
22 Aug 2008
Messages
5,905
most of all a "truth" act - applied to the media in which anything stated or could be implied by a reasonable person has to be backed up by fact and must be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth.
The danger with that is you coud end up with them having to take everything the governemnt said as truth. I know that would be the intention but it could end up getting misused for this.
 

Butts

Established Member
Joined
16 Jan 2011
Messages
9,276
I'm not too worried about how much those at the top earn, as long as they pay their share of tax - it's unjust that top earners can pay a lower proportion of their income as tax than low earners. A maximum wage would be hard to enforce - no country has one at present. It could be done in the public sector though.

The gap between those at the top and those at the bottom is a bigger issue. To take a well-publicised example - Philip Clarke, CEO of Tesco, earned £6.9m last year. A full-time Tesco cashier or shelf stacker earns not more than £15k. Does Clarke really work 460 times harder than the Tesco shop staff?

As for footballers, the only people to blame for the high salaries are the mugs like me who fork out for tickets, programmes, replica shirts, Sky Sports etc. I think most put up with it because they want to see their team do well!

Phillip Clarke is in charge of a company that makes £3 Billion plus per year and employs thousands of people.

Mario Balotelli earns more than Clarke for playing football, his wage differential with a cleaner at Man City is probably bigger than Clarkes and City lose money :p

Why not use him as an example of the Top/Bottom divide ? even more extreme than Clarkes and arguably more tenuous.
 

WelshBluebird

Established Member
Joined
14 Jan 2010
Messages
3,405
I think a maxiumum wage is a stupid idea really.
For all the reasons already said.

However, I do think certain things need to be controlled. Bonuses for bankers who were partly responsible for the 2008 crisis is a start. Bonuses are supposed to be rewards for doing well, not for failing! This is especially the case in the banks that are partly taxpayer owned.
I also support closing of tax loopholes so people like Jimmy Carr cannot get away with paying just 1% tax.

I generally support a flat tax as in chief I think it would stop the rich getting around the current system, and stop the poorer being shafted, plus it would save the man hours the current system I suspect wastes.

The problem with flat tax is that unless you have a pretty large tax free allowance, then it hits the poor more. If you earn £15k, then 20% of that is £3k. If you earn £60k, then 20% of that is £9k. While the 20% of the higher wage is obvious more in actual money, the 20% of the lower wage is "more important" to the person. Basically a person on the lower wage would value the £3k more than the person on the higher wage would value the £9k.
 

LE Greys

Established Member
Joined
6 Mar 2010
Messages
5,389
Location
Hitchin
The problem with flat tax is that unless you have a pretty large tax free allowance, then it hits the poor more. If you earn £15k, then 20% of that is £3k. If you earn £60k, then 20% of that is £9k. While the 20% of the higher wage is obvious more in actual money, the 20% of the lower wage is "more important" to the person. Basically a person on the lower wage would value the £3k more than the person on the higher wage would value the £9k.

There's a way around that.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_income_tax
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top