Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
it had been 17.5 for years hadn;;t it
I think babies clothing is still exempt from vat.
it's my favourite.
Went up to 20% at the start of 2011.
I find it helps if I process that information, say to myself 'How about that...' or write it down.
It's not *strictly* necessary to start a thread about it...
Last time i did what he told me, I <abandon reply>
or, make a snide comment. these are the only two options available to you.
scrap all other taxes
or something idk we got a left-wing economist in the house?
VAT is a regressive tax.
thank you for dismissing my theory without resorting to abuse
onto the next idea...
so you tax wealth rather than just income, and remove the exemptions for taxes that exist on second homes and empty properties too. I'd also revalue all properties for council tax too.
It would have the effect of devaluing property and land as something on which to speculate, and would see people investing or developing land and property rather than leaving it idle.
Personally, I'd scrap VAT entirely.
I wonder to what extent our societal problems can be put at the door of property development, gentrification, overpricing...
...why haven't Council Tax bandings been updated and are still banded at 1991 values?
There's people living in parts of Hackney for instance whose gaffs are worth over 1 million now but would definitely have been in the lowest 2 bands in 1991. What's been the rationale for not actually looking into this and re-aligning it? Seems pretty strange to me, unless I'm missing something...
from those who made a killing in the property market would be too great.
There were talks of re-vauluing back in about 2007, but the press went mental, splashing headlines like *third of homes to see council tax hike* all over their front pages and it was quietly dropped.
What their reports didn't say, was that under the calculations, a third of properties would likely be moved up a band, a third would stay the same, and a third would actually move down a band.
Thanks for the summary!
...I guess the overall net impact on the exchequer would be close to zero (unless they introduced more bands of course at the top end) so I guess it's one of those things that isn't really worth bothering about for most governments.
It would just have been to seek to rebalance the banding to better reflect the changes in the property market over the past twenty years.
can... worms. No-one wants to open it. Homes can be regraded - it's supposed to be based on the value that the property in it's current state would have had in 1991 - but obviously no-one's going to bring the land registry or council's attention to it if they think their property would go up a category.
Lower incomes mean a greater proportion of it goes to VAT compared to wealthy people. for some reason. that i don't know.
rich people invest offshore.
poor people can't afford accountants to advise on how best to avoid paying tax.
something like that.
the thing about VAT is that it can't be avoided if the sale is in the UK's jurisdiction - so tighten up laws about what transactions can and can't be done here? or will that DRIVE OUT BUSINESSMEN who are the BEDROCK OF OUR ECONOMY
anything that extrudes conniving cheats would surely be good
So no, she doesn't.
but that doesn't make sense. SOmebosy is smoking in my office, Now that I;m a non smoker, I have a very keen nose for these things.....
got an appt at the smoking cessation clinic next week. get me on those facking Champix, man.
don't want to be a prick ex-smoker though. there is nothing worse.
i knew there was no way SEPP BLATTER was a real name. fuckin hell
Remember that year when it was 15%. That was nice.
2009, was it?
Because I'm not a disingenuous attention seeker.
The Conservatives, the traditional anti-tax party introduced VAT in the first place. They also were the ones to raise it from 15% to 17.5%. They were also the ones to raise it from 17.5% to 20%.
It's a regressive tax and as such hits the poor harder. So you know, that's probably why.
that you've only just noticed, over a year after it changed?
it just came up
what else doesn't have vat apart from baby clothes?
but it's made up for by the use of 'fucking' to start the sentence. really adds character and desperation to the whole tone of the thread.