£10bn lost in tax credit fraud

[the flying graysons]

I'm all for anyone blatantly ripping the system off to be weeded out, regardless of where they are on the scale.

The tricky bit is how much cash and effort do you put into it for the return you'll get from it, and how many innocent people will suffer as a result?

An eternal dilemma, I suppose.

The IRR is likley to have been better persuing vodaphone like.

 

[Teed]

Someone working 35hrs min wage would earn £217 a week. On that theyd pay £12 tax & £9 NI

37 hrs would work out £102. 23p pr month- £61 tax - £41 . 23p NI still a fair amount to lose from a paltry sum anyway.

 

[John Steed]

Council Tax, VAT, petrol duty, tobacco duty, alcohol duty, etc etc

That's not what he meant though.
Living on MW they are unlikely to have a car or smoke or drink. At least not in excess.

 

[Teed]

That's not what he meant though.
Living on MW they are unlikely to have a car or smoke or drink. At least not in excess.

How do they get to and from work?

 

[consettsafc]

That's not what he meant though.
Living on MW they are unlikely to have a car or smoke or drink. At least not in excess.

Like how you ignore the rises of indirect taxation ove the last 25 years or so, chuck in prescription prices as well.

 

[Le Chuck]

How do they get to and from work?

if they're on min wage, chances are it'll be somwhere local within walking distance. Or there's the bus (yes the fuel duty will get passed off indirectly through the cost of the fair)

 

[John Steed]

How do they get to and from work?

You're just being daft now.
Your attempt to steam in and put down what I said backfired. Do some research next time.

 

[Big Sharp Teeth]

Like what about all those companies just making ends meet when the MW was first introduced. What happened to them? Did the MW result in mass unemployment?

Are you saying there wouldn't be a negative impact?

 

[John Steed]

Like how you ignore the rises of indirect taxation ove the last 25 years or so, chuck in prescription prices as well.

We were talking about income tax.

Are you saying there wouldn't be a negative impact?

Was there when the MW was introduced?

 

[consettsafc]

We were talking about income tax.

But what Teed said was factually correct where he said the word Taxes.

 

[John Steed]

Are you saying there wouldn't be a negative impact?

Should the taxpayer subsidise corporations like the big supermarkets?

But what Teed said was factually correct where he said the word Taxes.

He meant income tax which is what he replied to in my post.

 

[Big Sharp Teeth]

Was there when the MW was introduced?

Yes, reduced hiring, reduced hours and higher prices.

Are you saying there wouldn't be a negative impact?

 

[Teed]

You're just being daft now.
Your attempt to steam in and put down what I said backfired. Do some research next time.

No it didn't, I forgot to take off personal allowance, your claim that the lower paid, paid no tax or very little was totally wrong, they pay more tax pound for pound than most anyone else.

 

[the flying graysons]

No it didn't, I forgot to take off personal allowance, your claim that the lower paid, paid no tax or very little was totally wrong, they pay more tax pound for pound than most anyone else.

Horeshite pound for pound they pay the lowest that is how progressive taxation works. I assume you mean as a proportion they pay a higher percentage.

 

[consettsafc]

Horeshite pound for pound they pay the lowest that is how progressive taxation works. I assume you mean as a proportion they pay a higher percentage.

That is true where direct taxation is involved, it's the rises in indirect taxation that hits the lower wage earners the hardest.

 

[Teed]

Horeshite pound for pound they pay the lowest that is how progressive taxation works. I assume you mean as a proportion they pay a higher percentage.

I'm talking about the money the spend on essentials, every f***ing step of the way they're taxed, it would be interesting to find out just how much goes back in tax.

 

[John Steed]

No it didn't, I forgot to take off personal allowance, your claim that the lower paid, paid no tax or very little was totally wrong, they pay more tax pound for pound than most anyone else.

What's with the aggressive and sarcastic replies?
I wasn't totally wrong I was totally right, somebody has already done the maths on this thread.
I know the low paid lose out on the likes of high VAT but that has nothing to do with how much income tax they pay. I thought you'd be in favour of higher pay for the lower paid. You were attacking me though and not what I said.

 

[Teed]

What's with the aggressive and sarcastic replies?
I wasn't totally wrong I was totally right, somebody has already done the maths on this thread.
I know the low paid lose out on the likes of high VAT but that has nothing to do with how much income tax they pay. I thought you'd be in favour of higher pay for the lower paid. You were attacking me though and not what I said.

I'm not attacking anybody, just pointing out that the lower paid pay more in tax's, whether that's IT or stealth in comparison to their wage packet, than most others, yes I am in favour of a higher pay, but it won't happen, because company's are riddled with greed.

 

[John Steed]

Yes, reduced hiring, reduced hours and higher prices.

Are you saying there wouldn't be a negative impact?

Are you saying we should subsidise a money making machine like Tesco?

I'm not attacking anybody, just pointing out that the lower paid pay more in tax's, whether that's IT or stealth in comparison to their wage packet, than most others, yes I am in favour of a higher pay, but it won't happen, because company's are riddled with greed.

I know it won't happen. Read big sharp teeth's replies, thats what will be spouted if there is any attempt to make the MW semi decent.

 

[Big Sharp Teeth]

Are you saying we should subsidise a money making machine like Tesco?

I'm asking about the organisations who are finding things tough.

Answer the question.