British public wrongly believe rich pay most in tax, new research shows

Study shows poorest 10% pay eight percentage points more income, prompting calls for more progressive system

The British public dramatically underestimate what the poorest pay in tax and wrongly believe the richest face the biggest tax burden, according to new research that calls for a more progressive system.

The poorest 10% of households pay eight percentage points more of their income in all taxes than the richest – 43% compared to 35%, according to a report from the Equality Trust.

The thinktank highlights what it sees as a gulf between perceptions of the tax system and reality. Its poll, conducted with Ipsos Mori found that nearly seven in ten people believe that households in the highest 10% income group pay more of their income in tax than those in the lowest 10%.

The survey of more than 1,000 people also found a strong majority – 96% – believe that the tax system should be more progressive than is currently the case.

Duncan Exley, director of the Equality Trust, said the findings underlined the need for the next government to overhaul the system.



"The public are misled about this country's tax system. They think households with the highest incomes pay more than those with the lowest, whereas the opposite is the case. Even more concerning is how little our current system matches people's preferences on tax. There is clearly strong support for a system that places far less burden on low-income households," he said ahead of the "Unfair and Unclear" report.

"We're calling on all parties seeking to form the government from 2015 to commit to the principle that any changes in tax policy are progressive."

Not a single respondent in the poll knew how much the richest and poorest paid in tax. On average the public underestimates what the poorest 10% pays in tax by 19 percentage points, believing they pay just 24% of their income in taxes, the Equality Trust said.

When asked about how to make the tax system fairer, on average, people said the poorest 10% should be taxed just 15% of their income, or 28% percentage points less than they currently are. They believe the richest 10% should be taxed 39%, or 4 percentage points more than now.

The report said the higher percentage paid by the poor at the moment was down to a number of taxes. "While income tax and national insurance are broadly progressive, the bottom 10% of households pay roughly 23% of their gross household income in indirect taxes on consumption and more than four times as much of their income in council tax as the top 10%," it said.

It urged the next government to radically reform council tax by re-evaluating properties and creating new bands with higher rates for high value properties. It also called for ministers to cut VAT when it has a budget surplus.

The recommendations follow calls from the European Commission earlier this month for the UK government to reform the "regressive" council tax system, as taxes are relatively higher on low-value homes than high-value ones.

http://www.theguardian.com/money/2014/jun/16/british-public-wrong-rich-poor-tax-research

Wait for the screams from Drinky et al.

What, no foaming at the mouth by Fred/Drinky?

None of that makes any sense, and it's far too vague.

Sassy it is a fact that the top 1 percent circa (200,000 people) pay as much as several million circs 6 million of ordinary taxpayers I haven't got the figures to hand.

Because you and your envious cohort think you can attack that 1 percent with punitive rates s you have in the past and Hollande in France is now you force that top 1 percent to get mobile thereby reducing the limited number of high rate taxpayers and producing a huge burden for those left.

Don't take my word for it history showed that the rich and famous in the sixties and seventies absented themselves from these shore for 6 months at a time to avoid Harold Wilsons ludicrous rates.

Fact your envious punitive taxation policies reduce income and make it really hard for the rest of us.

Fortunately not everyone is as dumb as you and can understand simple arithmetic and simple common sense.

Because you are so stpid I find it wasteful to foam at the mouth why would I shout at someone with learning difficulties.

That said the likes of Ed Balls should know better but he isn't interested in bringing in cash.

Fred wrote:Sassy it is a fact that the top 1 percent circa (200,000 people) pay as much as several million circs 6 million of ordinary taxpayers I haven't got the figures to hand.

Because you and your envious cohort think you can attack that 1 percent with punitive rates s you have in the past and Hollande in France is now you force that top 1 percent to get mobile thereby reducing the limited number of high rate taxpayers and producing a huge burden for those left.

Don't take my word for it history showed that the rich and famous in the sixties and seventies absented themselves from these shore for 6 months at a time to avoid Harold Wilsons ludicrous rates.

Fact your envious punitive taxation policies reduce income and make it really hard for the rest of us.

Fortunately not everyone is as dumb as you and can understand simple arithmetic and simple common sense.

Because you are so stpid I find it wasteful to foam at the mouth why would I shout at someone with learning difficulties.

That said the likes of Ed Balls should know better but he isn't interested in bringing in cash.

Your reliance on personal attacks undercuts your entire argument. I believe if you look back at the British economy during the '60s you'll find it was way better then than it is today.

This is all about percentage of income which is paid, not the actual amounts. Obviously, rich people pay more in terms of the amount, assuming that they pay income tax.

I suppose it's council tax and VAT which bumps up the percentage.

Incidentally the taxation in your graphs relates to all taxes including such things as VAT and excise duties on alcohol etc.

If you focus on Income taxes the amount paid by the top earners is extremely important and substantial. With the former figures given there are many more people in the lower groups then it isn't surprising that when we consider taxes as you spend rather than as you earn the figures change.


Moreover figures as you spend involve those spending benefits which of course have been paid for by those that earn.


If I could be bothered I would produce a graph or two as I have in the past but I now know the likes of Spassy isn't interested in facts just her prejudices against anyone who she perceives has two bob more than her.

So those other taxes aren't taxes then. Oh right, that's ok then, glad you pointed it out lol

Ben_Reilly wrote:

Fred wrote:Sassy it is a fact that the top 1 percent circa (200,000 people) pay as much as several million circs 6 million of ordinary taxpayers I haven't got the figures to hand.

Because you and your envious cohort think you can attack that 1 percent with punitive rates s you have in the past and Hollande in France is now you force that top 1 percent to get mobile thereby reducing the limited number of high rate taxpayers and producing a huge burden for those left.

Don't take my word for it history showed that the rich and famous in the sixties and seventies absented themselves from these shore for 6 months at a time to avoid Harold Wilsons ludicrous rates.

Fact your envious punitive taxation policies reduce income and make it really hard for the rest of us.

Fortunately not everyone is as dumb as you and can understand simple arithmetic and simple common sense.

Because you are so stpid I find it wasteful to foam at the mouth why would I shout at someone with learning difficulties.

That said the likes of Ed Balls should know better but he isn't interested in bringing in cash.

Your reliance on personal attacks undercuts your entire argument. I believe if you look back at the British economy during the '60s you'll find it was way better then than it is today.

It was way way worse and a cursory glance would show you that. By the 70s we were the laughing stock of Europe as we were inundated with strikes ridiculously high taxes and eventually the then Labour govt had to go to the IMF for a bail out as they ran out of other peoples money.

By 1979 the unions bought the then Labour govt lead byCallaghan down because they didn't like the austerity. I know I lived through this period.

Thatcher came to power and a few years later she had taken the top rates of income tax down from 98% to 40 % and yet revenues went up exponentially as the rich needn't leave the country to avoid taxes anymore. The Laffa curve is real one can argue about where the effects kick in but the effects of profligate spending and pernicious taxes are real. In the UK we have net inward investment as our business taxes are a real magnet Millibabble cannot wait to undo that and his supporters like Sassy cheers him on. Forgive me f I find that mind set contemptible.

Churchill and his many statements about Socialism have never rang so true.

AS to my references to Sassy I have absolutely no respect for the person her ambitions are simply to ensure the removal of any dissenting voices.

You know what Drinky, I don't give a damn. Years ago, when you were a mod on ADO I used to have quite a bit of respect for you, even though I disagreed with you. Since then I have come realise you must have been putting on an act then and the real Drinky emerged, a man I totally despise.

On ADO Sassy I never had respect for you I thought you a brain dead Spassy then, addicted to leaving her grandchildren debts and fuck all else to make her own life easier.

I am certain Drinky thought the same probably more so.

The OP is hilarious.

Nothing more to be said.

You are a disgusting little man Drinky, misogynist and despicable. You hid it well for a short while, you obviously couldn't keep it up. Strikes me there are probably a lot of things you can't keep up, hence your attitude.

BigAndy9 wrote:The OP is hilarious.

Nothing more to be said.

You think it hilarious that rich people pay a lower percentage of their income into society than poor people do. It doesn't surprise me, cap doffers like to be shat upon.

Drinky, it's the Conservatives that are making the debt worse:

As the chart below shows, debt has increased massively in recent years, doubling to more than £1tn in the past five years, largely due to the financial crisis and resulting recession.

An easy way to compare debt levels across different countries is to express debt as a percentage of total economic output, or GDP, which is why you'll hear commentators regularly talk about the debt -to-GDP ratio. Obviously this has risen sharply since 2007.

And, according to the Office for Budget Responsibility, the UK's stock of debt will keep on rising for a number of years. So if anyone tries to tell you that UK debt is falling, they are wrong.



http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-25944653

Your op is bollocks.


Twisted in fact.


Then you show a graph of national debt, which Tories inherited the problems labour left, and labour have not just opposed every cut to sort it out, but even want more borrowing and spending!!!!



YOu couldn't make it up!!!!!


Madness!!!

Labour left bad mmm grrrrrr!!!!

Fred wrote:
Sassy it is a fact that the top 1 percent circa (200,000 people) pay as much as several million circs 6 million of ordinary taxpayers I haven't got the figures to hand. <<< Of course he doesn't have his non-existent "facts" to hand, if they don't exist !

Because you and your envious cohort think you can attack that 1 percent with punitive ratess you have in the past and Hollande in France is now you force that top 1 percent to get mobile thereby reducing the limited number of high rate taxpayers and producing a huge burden for those left. <<< IS this "Fred's" weak attempt at justifying 'tax avoidance' by that top 1% ?

Don't take my word for it history showed that the rich and famous in the sixties and seventies absented themselves from these shore for 6 months at a time to avoid Harold Wilsons ludicrous rates. <<< More unproven Tory mythology from the Looney Toon Right...

Fact your envious punitive taxation policies reduce income and make it really hard for the rest of us.

Fortunately not everyone is as dumb as you and can understand simple arithmetic and simple common sense.

Because you are so stpid I find it wasteful to foam at the mouth why would I shout at someone with learning difficulties.

That said the likes of Ed Balls should know better but he isn't interested in bringing in cash.

  

YOU'RE an idiot, Fred !!!

NOT one point of fact in your aggressive rants above, that in any way actually contradicts the gist of this thread..

ALL that you are managing to do is attempting to perpetuate old Tory propaganda myths, easily dismissed by consulting government statistics that ARE a matter of public record.

Poor showing there, Fred.
"F" for fail - back to the drawing board !
And better luck next time..   

BigAndy9 wrote:
The OP is hilarious.

Nothing more to be said.

  

What is even more hilarious, B'Andy...

Is your ludicrous total lack of any economic or political know-how in your armoury..

Ben_Reilly wrote:
Labour left bad mmm grrrrrr!!!!

  

That 'Tommy Monk' is certainly one seriously and insanely bad nutter, isn't he !?!   As is Drinky (long absent, but how can we ever really totally 'forget' him, what with his dozens of alternative identities..).

THOUGH I put Tommy on my 'Foes' list a couple of months ago, it is still easy enough to witness the discordant effects he has on other members, and these threads in general !    ::hndbg::

Lone Wolf wrote:

BigAndy9 wrote:
The OP is hilarious.

Nothing more to be said.

  

What is even more hilarious, B'Andy...

Is your ludicrous total lack of any economic or political know-how in your armoury..

Hi Donk another example of kettle and pot. You and Spassy make a great pair when it comes to innumeracy.

Labour left the economy in A proper shit storm with rising borrowing and debt.



Tory have tried to reduce spending and cut borrowing.



Labour have opposed every single cut proposed while chanting their mantra of the cuts being 'too far and too fast'......



They actually wanted more borrowing and more spending!!!




But now Sassy is complaining that after all these severe cuts that were too far and too fast, the borrowing is still too high!!!!



And not just that, but trying to say that the mess is all Tories fault!!!!



Unbelievable!!!!



Only in The mind of a deluded leftie does this madness make any sense.....

Tommy Monk wrote:Labour left the economy in A proper shit storm with rising borrowing and debt.



Tory have tried to reduce spending and cut borrowing.



Labour have opposed every single cut proposed while chanting their mantra of the cuts being 'too far and too fast'......



They actually wanted more borrowing and more spending!!!




But now Sassy is complaining that after all these severe cuts that were too far and too fast, the borrowing is still too high!!!!



And not just that, but trying to say that the mess is all Tories fault!!!!



Unbelievable!!!!



Only in The mind of a deluded leftie does this madness make any sense.....

So tell me, Tommy -- who is the total fucking moronic idiot (besides you) who would call in the sum total of Britain's debt, regardless of the consequences?

I really want you to try something new, and actually think on this one. In other words, don't rely on the position dictated to you by the Daily Mail. On this special occasion, I want you to tell me what Tommy's answer would be to my question!

Because seriously, unless you think the UK is about to go the way of the dinosaur, you would never ever ever decide today is the day to call in all debts and plunge the world into recession/depression.

Search your feelings, young padawan!  ::D::

What are you talking about...???


I am criticising the lefties for complaining at the small cuts in spending that have been made, while wanting more borrowing and spending, but now complaining that borrowing is still too high, implying that there should have been more cutting.


As usual the lefties are trying to have it both ways.....



And I think it is you who are struggling to understand our govt debt/borrowing and what it is made up of.

Also, I don't read the daily mail.....

Drinky can barely read the Beano, Ben. As for writing down his thoughts on the topic, he has yet to progress beyond his colouring crayons. And all of his colours are blue - and he threw the red ones in the bin!

How true, and he's so stupid that he thinks National Dept rising by nearly £500 Bil since 2010 means it's going down!