The characteristics and incomes of the top 1% (In the UK)

[Payyourwaymate]

Title of the thread is of the report linked in. I think this is PAYE though, have not read through it fully. Only read the executive summary.

External Link/Members Only

[timsussex]

nothing is certain except death and the rich avoiding taxes

[Pillowtalk]

Thank goodness for high earners when over 50% of the population pay no income tax at all. We need many more high earners - and we should appreciate the contribution they make.

[Payyourwaymate]

I'll attach the conclusion of the report. This is over 15 years.

"The top 1% of income tax payers are geographically very concentrated. Half of them live in just 10% of the parliamentary constituencies (65 out of 650), many of which are in London and the South East. Given that those in the top 1% are also disproportionately likely to be in middle age, and to be male, people in the top 1% may not feel especially high income relative to their peers. A man aged 45–54 in London with an income of £162,000 would be in the top 1% nationally, but would not even be in the top 5% for their age, gender and region, and would need a staggering extra £550,000 per year to be in the top 1% for their age, gender and region. Understanding more about the top 1% is important in debates about inequality, but it is also important from a fiscal point of view. The top 1% of income tax payers pay 27% of all income tax, as well as a significant share of other taxes. The regional dimension is arguably particularly important here – tax revenues, and hence the funding of our public services and welfare system, are very sensitive to a relatively small group of people based
in London.

On the theme of tax, our analysis highlights that a substantial fraction of the top 1% earn their income in the form of partnership income and dividends, which accrue to the owners of unincorporated and incorporated businesses, respectively. Both forms of income are taxed at lower rates than salary – the result of a policy choice to tax business owners at lower rates than employees. Our estimates here suggest that almost one-in-three people in the top 1% are business owners, meaning that this policy choice provides substantial
tax breaks to some of the highest-income people in society.

It is tempting to think of the ‘top 1%’ as a stable, never-changing group – as popular debate often seems to do, at least implicitly – and it is certainly the case that a large majority of people will never be in the top 1% of income tax payers. But people do move in and out of the group frequently. Only half of the top 1% of income tax payers in one year will be in the top 1% five years later. And the flipside is that many more people will have very high incomes at some point in their lives than in any single year. Looking at a generation that has just gone through its peak-income years (i.e. those born in 1963, who were 53 in 2016), on average, around 10,000 (1.1%) were in the top 1% in any single year between 2000–01 and 2015–16, but three times as many (31,000, or 3.4%) had been in the top 1% at some point since 2000–01. For men in this birth cohort, the figure rises to 5.5%. Of course over their whole lifetimes – as opposed to the 15-year period we observe here – the figures will be higher still."

[Payyourwaymate]

The Key findings which are in the executive summary were:

To be in the top 1% of income tax payers in the UK (i.e. to be among the 310,000 individuals with the highest income), a taxable income of at least £160,000 is required. £236,000 is required to be in the top 0.5% and nearly £650,000 to be in the top 0.1%. 43% of adults pay no income tax and to be in the top 1% of all adults (or the top 540,000 people), a pre-tax income of at least £120,000 is required.

The top 1% of income tax payers are disproportionately male, middle-aged and London-based. A man aged 45–54 in London could be in the top 1% nationally while still needing a further £550,000 to be in the top 1% for his gender, age and region. These patterns become more pronounced at even higher income levels. Almost half of the top 0.1% of income tax payers are based in London, over 40% are aged 45–54 and only 11% are women.

The top 1% of income tax payers have become more geographically concentrated since the turn of the century. The 65 (out of 650) parliamentary constituencies with the highest density of people in the top 1% now contain half of all of the top 1%. This is up from 78 constituencies in 2000–01. Partnership and dividend income account for over a quarter of the total income of the top 1%, and over a third of the total income of the top 0.1%, a much higher share than for those with lower incomes. Partnership and dividend income are taxed at lower rates than normal salaries – a policy choice to tax the incomes of business owners at lower rates than employees, which therefore benefits a significant share of the top 1%.

The top 1% of income tax payers are not a stable group – a quarter of those in the top 1% in one year will not be there the next. After five years, only half will still be in the top 1%.

As a result, someone has a much higher chance of being in the top 1% at some point in their lives than they do in any given year. 3.4% of all people (and 5.5% of men) born in 1963 were in the top 1% of income tax payers at some point between 2000–01 and 2015–16.

[Payyourwaymate]

I put in these excerpts as the full report is 23 pages, to save anyone who was interested time from reading the whole report. Obviously things must have changed since they used 15 years mainly and the most recent stats in the report was 2019 but it is still quite illuminating. I wonder how this puts things into perspective for people who believe high earners are everywhere and think it's easy to become one, those who think WGs earn 1% incomes, and a niche group of young social media women that believe they can find a 1% man in terms of income like popping into Mcds. This in only in the UK. Globally the difference must be insane since there are large sub-sets of populations who live on merger wages in economically challenged countries.

For some reason the report missed out the Tech industry. I don't know why.

[Payyourwaymate]

Global Wage Report 2020-21

External Link/Members Only

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

The UK's Income Inequality Crisis Explained

[fudi_maar]

Thank goodness for high earners when over 50% of the population pay no income tax at all. We need many more high earners - and we should appreciate the contribution they make.

+1.

It's customary to hate the rich and successful, but most of that is due to jealousy. The rich aren't necessarily the 'bad guys'.

[Payyourwaymate]

+1.

It's customary to hate the rich and successful, but most of that is due to jealousy. The rich aren't necessarily the 'bad guys'.

When you say rich, how rich? There has been various sources and documentaries over the years which show the richest in the world tax evade and avoid via various means with big 4 accountancies, banks and lawyers happy to help, depriving many countires of tax funds to put towards infrastructure and development. Do you mean individuals in the 1% that their form of their employment pays them mainly through PAYE and not funnelling money via tax efficient means so they still contribute? or groups and individuals big enough to have shell corporations registered in tax havens to avoid tax whilst still being mainly based and extracting profits out of their operating countries without paying tax?

Read Nicholas Shaxsons Treasure Island book or you can look at some panorama docs, there's plenty of sources around if you want to be disproved that the rich are not the "bad guys".

[lamboman]

When you say rich, how rich? There has been various sources and documentaries over the years which show the richest in the world tax evade and avoid via various means with big 4 accountancies, banks and lawyers happy to help, depriving many countires of tax funds to put towards infrastructure and development. Do you mean individuals in the 1% that their form of their employment pays them mainly through PAYE and not funnelling money via tax efficient means so they still contribute? or groups and individuals big enough to have shell corporations registered in tax havens to avoid tax whilst still being mainly based and extracting profits out of their operating countries without paying tax?

Read Nicholas Shaxsons Treasure Island book or you can look at some panorama docs, there's plenty of sources around if you want to be disproved that the rich are not the "bad guys".

Panorama  that's not biased in any way.
Simple fact is the rich contribute far more to any economy than the poor.
Hammering the wealthy with taxes has never worked anywhere.

[fudi_maar]

When you say rich, how rich? There has been various sources and documentaries over the years which show the richest in the world tax evade and avoid via various means with big 4 accountancies, banks and lawyers happy to help, depriving many countires of tax funds to put towards infrastructure and development. Do you mean individuals in the 1% that their form of their employment pays them mainly through PAYE and not funnelling money via tax efficient means so they still contribute? or groups and individuals big enough to have shell corporations registered in tax havens to avoid tax whilst still being mainly based and extracting profits out of their operating countries without paying tax?

Read Nicholas Shaxsons Treasure Island book or you can look at some panorama docs, there's plenty of sources around if you want to be disproved that the rich are not the "bad guys".

There's 'rich' and there's 'super-rich'. I believe you are referring to the super-rich when you talk about offshore companies, tax havens etc. A person can be seen as rich if they earn £200K/year and have a net worth of say £5million. But they are no-where near the league of the £500million net worth individuals.

Sure, some super-rich people (maybe even many) may be 'bad guys' by not paying what they are morally due to pay, but the 1% aren't quite big enough to get access to the top lawyers etc.

To be fair though, it's not just the rich that try to avoid paying taxes......any cash based industry (builders, old-style taxi drivers, plumbers, WG's etc etc) is open to abuse. In fact, you don't even have to earn money to screw the system - benefit fraud itself costs billions every year.

I'm not saying two-wrongs make a right, but tax avoidance is not the preserve of the rich and successful.

 

[Payyourwaymate]

Panorama  that's not biased in any way.
Simple fact is the rich contribute far more to any economy than the poor.
Hammering the wealthy with taxes has never worked anywhere.

I was not disputing that the rich do not contribute at all. I was disputing that he stated the rich are not the bad guys, like say they are all hard working successful and an upright group. I said there are multiple sources apart from just panorama aswell that can disprove his statement.

Regarding your second point, that's only because where there have been tax implementations trying to tax wealth or high income, it has led to capital flight from said countries to countries with more lax tax regulations or none what so ever in the past.

[Payyourwaymate]

Average household income, UK: financial year 2020

Main points

"In financial year ending (FYE) 2020 (April 2019 to March 2020), the period leading up to the coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic, median household income in the UK was £29,900, based on estimates from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) Household Finances Survey.

Between FYE 2011 and FYE 2020, median household income increased by 7%, an average of 0.8% per year, after accounting for inflation.

Growth in income of the poorest fifth of people did not keep pace with inflation, which led to the median income of the poorest fifth falling by an average of 3.8% per year between FYE 2017 and FYE 2020.

Median income of the richest fifth continued to grow steadily between FYE 2017 and FYE 2020, meaning that some measures of income inequality have increased over this period.

Median income for people living in retired households fell by an average of 1.1% between FYE 2018 and FYE 2020; this compares with 1.8% growth per year for those living in non-retired households."

Quite the difference when you compare to the top 1%.

Source is from:

External Link/Members Only

[Payyourwaymate]

There's 'rich' and there's 'super-rich'. I believe you are referring to the super-rich when you talk about offshore companies, tax havens etc. A person can be seen as rich if they earn £200K/year and have a net worth of say £5million. But they are no-where near the league of the £500million net worth individuals.

Sure, some super-rich people (maybe even many) may be 'bad guys' by not paying what they are morally due to pay, but the 1% aren't quite big enough to get access to the top lawyers etc.

To be fair though, it's not just the rich that try to avoid paying taxes......any cash based industry (builders, old-style taxi drivers, plumbers, WG's etc etc) is open to abuse. In fact, you don't even have to earn money to screw the system - benefit fraud itself costs billions every year.

I'm not saying two-wrongs make a right, but tax avoidance is not the preserve of the rich and successful.

I just saw your post now. All valid points, sorry I took so long to reply I honestly did not see it.

[chrishornx]

Panorama  that's not biased in any way.
Simple fact is the rich contribute far more to any economy than the poor.
Hammering the wealthy with taxes has never worked anywhere.

totally agree

 the top 351,000 tax payers pay more than the next 20 million

and only the wealthy really get hit by IHT

[LLPunting]

Panorama  that's not biased in any way.
Simple fact is the rich contribute far more to any economy than the poor.
Hammering the wealthy with taxes has never worked anywhere.

The rich contribute to society by exploiting the needs and wants of the many, who are often far less wealthy, they do everything they can to avoid contributing anything from their accumulated wealth, they encourage the circulation of great sums of money through the businesses they operate, large lumps of which are the payroll for their employees who pay much higher effective rates of tax.
Very few of the "rich" would be able to genuinely claim the moral high ground or that they operate ethically sound practices regardless of how "law-abiding" they might claim to be.
No one has been "hammering" the rich with taxes, we'd all rather they paid the same level of taxation as us plebs rather than avoid and evade tax.  The fact they continue to accumulate wealth at an ever increasing rate shows incontrovertibly that they are not paying their fair share.

[Payyourwaymate]

totally agree

 the top 351,000 tax payers pay more than the next 20 million

and only the wealthy really get hit by IHT

Pretty sure you can avoid IHT with a trust set up if one is wealthy, they will not get hit by IHT. If the assets are in a trust they will not pay IHT. The trust is a separate entity so the individual offspring or plural will not technically be inheriting the assets to pay the tax really, there are loopholes to avoid it. In simple terms.

[Cullen]

Thank goodness for high earners when over 50% of the population pay no income tax at all. We need many more high earners - and we should appreciate the contribution they make.

The high earners contribute as much as they do because they are legally obliged to - a state of affairs that many of them complain about, lobby against and take often extreme lengths to avoid or evade. I've little doubt that, given a choice, these people referred to would pay zero taxes to contribute to the upkeep of the society they were raised in, live in and benefit from. Yes, society benefits from the taxes paid on high earners wealth, but on the other hand they benefit from living in a society that allows such wealth creation in the first instance.

[southcoastpunter]

it makes me smile when people go on about how unfair /disgraceful etc it is that the rich get away with not paying their taxes. No one likes paying taxes - not the rich, not the (so called) middle classes and not the ordinary working man (or women). We ALL try to reduce the tax we pay. How many of us have/had ISA's? - they were a legal way to pay less tax. But also, how many of us are tradesman and somtimes say something like "its £500 or £450 for cash"...... and how many of us say "Ok" knowing they won't declare the earning and therefore won't pay tax on it. And how many of us would say "no, i will pay the £500".

Tax evasion is tax evation no matter what the amount involved is. otherwise its like saying "its ok to seal something valued at £50 but not something valued at £1000".

The only difference is the amount of money/tax involved but the principle is the same. And most of the rich mainly/mostly use legal means to reduce their tax bill. That also applies to big business too. so the issue is, imo,  much more about reviewing the tax laws - like they have recently done for the likes of starbucks and that big company that begins with A (which it seeems we aren't allowed to mention on here?). And whether we like it or not, the tax aviodance (legal) sector employs a hell of a lot of people who pay their due taxes etc.

[mr small]

The only hope this country has of being debt free, with fully functioning public services - NHS, Police Education etc - would be a full reform of tax laws to remove the loopholes.

Unfortunately this will never happen as the majority of those who benefit from the current situation are in the houses of parliament / house of Lords or bankroll the political parties.

 

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

Accumulation of wealth in Britain: What the distribution of wealth tells us about preparedness for retirement.

This paper was published in 2019 but still has some relevance.  Just attaching some comments from the summary and the first part.

What is the distribution of wealth accumulation by age cohort?

"The main message from this analysis is that patterns of wealth accumulation follow the lifetime savings model but that wealth is also very unevenly dispersed, both between cohorts and within cohorts. There are significant numbers of individuals in the older cohorts either in or close to retirement who have accumulated substantial wealth. In the wealthiest cohort - 60 to 69-year-olds – the median individual has total wealth of £280,000, the top quartile has approximately £630,000 and the top decile more than £1.25 million. But even within this group, there is evidence of hardship, with more than 10% of individuals having no private wealth. Looking at younger generations, half of all 20 to 29-year-old have no retirement resources, and of those aged 30 to 39, half have less than £30,000 saved."

How prepared financially are those closest to retirement?

"Focusing on those aged 60 to 65, who are closest to retirement, we are able to say something about how prepared they are in terms of savings. Our findings suggest this is something of a mixed picture. Based on the resources they have accumulated to date, the average individual might expect to achieve a gross annual retirement income of £14,200 to £17,000, but this varies greatly across individuals. For wealthier (less deprived) individuals, the majority can expect a modest or comfortable retirement. While at least half of poorer (more deprived) individuals are not expected to achieve the minimum income standard and are likely to be dependent on the state pension and benefits."

"Where individuals hold wealth, we typically observe that poorer individuals hold a larger share of their wealth in property and wealthier individuals hold a relatively larger share of their wealth in pension assets."

[Payyourwaymate]

Cont from previous post.

"Considering total wealth (and the components of wealth) separately, we observe that:

Total wealth peaks at 64 years of age, with the median individual accruing wealth of £340,000. At this point the wealthiest 25% have accumulated £740,000, while the bottom quartile has accrued less than £120,000. A particular concern is the very low levels of wealth accumulation amongst younger poorer cohorts. With 40 year-olds in the bottom quartile having accumulated less than £15,000 and individuals under the age of 35 typically having no wealth."

"Pension wealth is a more significant source of wealth for wealthier individuals, and the least significant for poorer individuals. Pension accumulation peaks on average at 63 years of age, with the median accumulation being £107,000. For the wealthiest 25%, the 25th percentile of individuals have total wealth of £34,000, the 50th percentile of individuals have total wealth of £140,000 and the 75th percentile have total wealth of £365,000. Pension wealth peaks at £415,000. The bottom quartile of individuals has accumulated no wealth in the form of pensions. This is the case for all cohorts irrespective of age."

"Property wealth accumulation peaks just before retirement with median individual wealth of £120,000. Beyond this point, property wealth remains broadly constant. A similar pattern is observed for wealthier individuals, where for the top quartile wealth peaks at £220,000. The fact that property wealth remains constant, even after the age of retirement, indicates little evidence of downsizing. Perhaps this is because using property wealth to fund retirement has its challenges. For instance, to use housing equity to part fund retirement, without sacrificing the benefits of rent-free living, requires the homeowners to either trade down – and purchase a small property - or purchase an equity release product. This is complex and will be easier for some groups of individuals to accomplish than others.

Among poorer individuals, property accumulation is less common, although there are strong cohort effects at play. For instance, amongst the bottom quartile under 60 years of age there is little evidence of property accumulation, but between individuals aged 60 and 70 there is modest accumulation of approximately £40,000. Property accumulation among poorer individuals may be a consequence of the introduction of the ‘right to buy’ policy in the 1980s."

"Net financial wealth 10 , is typically the smallest component of wealth for most ndividuals. Net financial wealth is strongly correlated with age and only becomes significant beyond the age of 60, which probably reflects the importance of the tax-free cash lump sum at retirement.11 For under 50-year olds, average net financial wealth is less than £1,000, with the top quartile having wealth of £15,000. Net financial wealth peaks in the late 60s, with average wealth of £22,500 (or £74,000 for the top quartile), but the bottom quartile having less than £2,500."

[Payyourwaymate]

"The IFS (2016) found that younger generations now have lower wealth than current older generations did at their same age. Individuals who were born in the early 1980s have accumulated approximately only half of the average wealth holdings of the 1970s cohort at the same age. The Resolution Foundation (2017) argue the younger generation face challenges which are significantly different from those who came before. Compared to older cohorts they have experienced prolonged weak earnings growth, a decline in home ownership and less generous private pension provision. This will have serious long-term consequences for the adequacy of their retirement provision."

[Marmalade]

A most informative thread, Payyourwaymate. 

The very uneven distribution of wealth seems lamentable; yet the “quick fix” of taxing the very wealthy more is clearly no fix at all, given that they already seem to contribute the massive share of revenue which allows the government to spend, theoretically to the advantage of everyone.

Scaring off the highest earners (to countries with lower taxation) could be disastrous but we are caught in the ‘American dilemma’: the difference, it seems to me, is that while Americans revel in the accomplishment of wealth, in the U.K. it is considered impolite to do so, with the result, so ably demonstrated in the article mentioned, that most people are ignorant of the situation.

While the disparity is great, it would appear that the U.K. is not the worst which, of richer countries, includes both the USA and Russia. External Link/Members Only

By what measures should a country aim?

1. One must surely be the freedom of the individual to seek their own good in their own way as long as they don’t restrict the freedoms of anyone else. Underlying this would be reform of the education system.
2. Another should be a commitment to scientific progress for the benefit of humanity, for that is how we evolve.
3. A third would in my view be how a country treats its most disadvantaged.

Ideas?

[Payyourwaymate]

A most informative thread, Payyourwaymate. 

The very uneven distribution of wealth seems lamentable; yet the “quick fix” of taxing the very wealthy more is clearly no fix at all, given that they already seem to contribute the massive share of revenue which allows the government to spend, theoretically to the advantage of everyone.

Scaring off the highest earners (to countries with lower taxation) could be disastrous but we are caught in the ‘American dilemma’: the difference, it seems to me, is that while Americans revel in the accomplishment of wealth, in the U.K. it is considered impolite to do so, with the result, so ably demonstrated in the article mentioned, that most people are ignorant of the situation.

While the disparity is great, it would appear that the U.K. is not the worst which, of richer countries, includes both the USA and Russia. External Link/Members Only

By what measures should a country aim?

1. One must surely be the freedom of the individual to seek their own good in their own way as long as they don’t restrict the freedoms of anyone else. Underlying this would be reform of the education system.
2. Another should be a commitment to scientific progress for the benefit of humanity, for that is how we evolve.
3. A third would in my view be how a country treats its most disadvantaged.

Ideas?

In terms of taxation there has been propositions in relation to levying a unilateral tax across international jurisdictions to prevent the super rich and corps from avoiding tax and I think there was a breakthrough this year with the EU passing a bill (I'll have to search it out). In terms of the three aims you mention, I am not sure, these ideas in terms of talking points, go back centuries in how a society can be governed for example, Platos republic discusses such ideas and even till this day there is still no breakthrough in terms of how ideologically a society can be run for the best of human kind and many wars have been fought over ideologies on how people should live and society to be governed. I do not know the answer to that I'm afraid, I'm nowhere well read enough to discuss that comprehensively.

[Marmalade]

In terms of taxation there has been propositions in relation to levying a unilateral tax across international jurisdictions to prevent the super rich and corps from avoiding tax and I think there was a breakthrough this year with the EU passing a bill (I'll have to search it out). In terms of the three aims you mention, I am not sure, these ideas in terms of talking points, go back centuries in how a society can be governed for example, Platos republic discusses such ideas and even till this day there is still no breakthrough in terms of how ideologically a society can be run for the best of human kind and many wars have been fought over ideologies on how people should live and society to be governed. I do not know the answer to that I'm afraid, I'm nowhere well read enough to discuss that comprehensively.

As I think you suggest, no quick answers and certainly not on a forum discussion here. I saw the EU thing about international taxation, though it was followed up almost immediately with an article (possibly in The Conversation, I don't remember) about how, if such a law is passed, the companies involved could get round round it technically. It clearly needs much more than a 'law' to defeat the likes of Axxxxxx. Cooperation might be better, even a tax break in return for distributing some percentage cash to their underpaid employees perhaps. That would be a step to help the disadvantaged.

Respect for freedom clearly is at odds with totalitarian religions. This is one of the biggest problems in the world with extremist nutters forming power units in both the main religions. The religion market could be monetised and state-run.

The Repub was a nice think tank but of course, he didn't claim it was anything more (and although I haven't read his later book, The Laws, I understand he changed his mind on a lot of things to do with running a country). The idea of experts at the top, if we take it in the broadest sense has merit (his, of course, were without salaries). The only 'well-trained people in government seem to be those with degrees in economics, politics or law. Not a single medically-trained person in Whitehall. No-one with a degree in military science. One or two with a brush in philosophy but probably not with much inclusion of formal logic. Most have zero experience in business (unlike the people running major international companies that are clever enough to avoid tax and run rings round governments). And, rather pointedly, not a single person with any, much less high expertise, in computer technology and data science. It is inefficient, unscientific, and doesn't promote the best interests of the whole or of the disadvantaged.

STEM subjects – science, technology, engineering and mathematics seem completely foreign to the corridors of power, not just Whitehall. Yet it's the laws studied in these things are immutable, natural laws that exist whether we like it or not.

What's the point of having SAGE or any other group of experts if there's no-one with sufficient training to follow their logic – much less make rational decisions based on it?

About the only 'qualification' needed to get into politics is being able to sound off convincingly enough to sway a large or sufficient majority of the great unwashed. A few words of more than two syllables helps to keep The Telegraph happy and a posh background, preferably at Oxbridge, is a bonus, and then get into verbal scraps with a chance of winning. Not exactly an efficient way to form a government though.

(Just thoughts off the top of my head...)

[Pillowtalk]

It's worth saying, the vast majority of very well paid people and paid for doing jobs in companies, as I was for many years. I paid huge amounts of income tax (worth saying the highest rate is 60% which I paid for many years), national insurance and the rest. Just because you earn a lot of money does not mean you have magical loopholes available to avoid tax - its a myth for most.
I now run my own company, I earn less, but with careful planning I can maximise my net income, but no great fiddles I'm afraid.

That's not to say there aren't those who fiddle and avoid, but the number is likely to be smaller than the popular press would have us believe.

[Payyourwaymate]

In terms of taxation there has been propositions in relation to levying a unilateral tax across international jurisdictions to prevent the super rich and corps from avoiding tax and I think there was a breakthrough this year with the EU passing a bill (I'll have to search it out).

Went on the official EU commisions website but could not find it maybe someone else would have better luck.

External Link/Members Only

I did find a press release and a reaction article to the deal.

EU lawmakers strike milestone deal for corporate tax transparency

External Link/Members Only


NGOs blast EU tax transparency bill as ‘almost meaningless’

External Link/Members Only

[anyfucker]

Went on the official EU commisions website but could not find it maybe someone else would have better luck.

External Link/Members Only

I did find a press release and a reaction article to the deal.

EU lawmakers strike milestone deal for corporate tax transparency

External Link/Members Only


NGOs blast EU tax transparency bill as ‘almost meaningless’

External Link/Members Only

Global tax reform: 130 countries commit to minimum corporate rate
External Link/Members Only

[Payyourwaymate]

Global tax reform: 130 countries commit to minimum corporate rate
External Link/Members Only

Thank you.

[lamboman]

I was not disputing that the rich do not contribute at all. I was disputing that he stated the rich are not the bad guys, like say they are all hard working successful and an upright group. I said there are multiple sources apart from just panorama aswell that can disprove his statement.

Regarding your second point, that's only because where there have been tax implementations trying to tax wealth or high income, it has led to capital flight from said countries to countries with more lax tax regulations or none what so ever in the past.

Firstly you think lower paid workers aren't adverse to avoiding taxes and are all nice people?
As for the second you are just parroting the facts,the rich either avoid tax or fuck off when they are taxed heavily so I'm not sure what your point is.

[Payyourwaymate]

Firstly you think lower paid workers aren't adverse to avoiding taxes and are all nice people?
As for the second you are just parroting the facts,the rich either avoid tax or fuck off when they are taxed heavily so I'm not sure what your point is.

I have never said that anywhere that lower paid workers do not avoid taxes and are all nice people.

My second point was responding to your point as to why hammering the wealthy with taxes does not work and now you are saying I am parroting the facts when you initially brought it up? Do you have comprehension issues? Have you even bothered to read the whole thread or do you just like to interject without trying to understand the whole picture  .

[Payyourwaymate]

Global Wage Report 2020-21

External Link/Members Only

"Globally, an estimated 327 million wage earners are paid at or below the applicable hourly minimum wage (figure 7.5). This is equivalent to 19 per cent of all wage earners, and includes 152 million women. These estimates are based on microdata for a sample of 72 countries, covering an estimated 73 per cent of all the wage employees in the world.

Excluding the Arab States, for which insufficient data are available to generate reliable estimates, it may be seen that the proportion of wage earners below or at the minimum wage is highest in Africa and lowest in Europe and Central Asia.

At the global level, although more men than women earn minimum wages or less, women are over-represented in this category: while women make up 39 per cent of the world’s employees paid above the minimum wage, they represent 47 per cent of the world’s sub‑minimum and minimum wage earners."

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

"People need a savings pot of £17k to feel 'financially secure' report claims while resilience to money shocks has IMPROVED in the last year"

Not really sure the methodology they used to arrive at the conclusion most people have 10K in savings....Especially when the lockdowns first started and there was pandemonia with people losing jobs and worried about funds. Read this article with a pinch of salt I guess.

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

Billionaires: What's wrong with wealth?

[Payyourwaymate]

Is a million pounds enough to retire on? | FT

External Link/Members Only

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

This is not based in the UK.

The One Percent - Documentary

"In this hard-hitting, but humorous documentary Jamie Johnson exploring the riches. He began documenting Born Rich-a little further. A percentage refers to the tiny percentage of Americans, which is almost half the wealth of the USA.

This wealth in the hands of so few people is to control a threat to our way of life. Johnson grabbed her story through personal interviews with Robert Reich, Adnan Khashoggi, Bill Gates Sr. and Steve Forbes. And he is not afraid to head with Milton Friedman, the economist who coined the term crush "domino effect".


It also shows how the other half lives, with real-world examples of the wealth gap: it takes a visit from a rundown housing project in Chicago, walks around with a  cab driver, and sees the human toll of the economy of unfair Florida sugar industry.

Johnson film is at its strongest when he shows how the work of the super-rich to preserve their own plutocracy. As a member of the family "Johnson & Johnson", he rarely gets access to exclusive wealth conference in which the overreaching learn strategies to maintain its assets, and if the personal management style of some of the richest agricultural employers. No large enterprises survived such a massive gap of wealth."

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

The Spider's Web: Britain's Second Empire (Documentary)

"Michael Oswald's film The Spider's Web reveals how at the demise of empire, City of London financial interests created a web of secrecy jurisdictions that captured wealth from across the globe and hid it in a web of offshore islands. Today, up to half of global offshore wealth is hidden in British jurisdictions and Britain and its dependencies are the largest global players in the world of international finance. "

[Payyourwaymate]

Nicholas Shaxson - Interview

External Link/Members Only


Full Circle & Nicholas Shaxson: Treasure Islands, tax havens and more

External Link/Members Only

"Dirty money, tax havens and the offshore system describe the ugliest
and most secretive chapter in the history of global economic affairs…
Hear about it straight from the source: a man who is ready to take on the global financial industry – single-handed.

Following his revealing book Treasure Islands, Nicholas Shaxson came to Full Circle to have a highly charged discussion with our members - among them some senior decision makers in finance and economics in the EU."

[Payyourwaymate]

Pension drawdown calculator example - Can I retire at 55 with £300K?

External Link/Members Only

The calculator is free to use.

External Link/Members Only

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

Who are the top 1% of income tax payers?

"The richest members of our society get a lot of attention. Much of the public conversation about economic inequality is concerned with, loosely, the top 1%, how different they are from the rest, how they got to where they are, and what – if anything – policy should do about it. It is also a fact that this group is extremely important for the funding of our public services and welfare system, because it pays a large portion of our tax revenues."

This video is related to a report I posted earlier on in this thread. This is UK based.

[chrishornx]

When you say rich, how rich? There has been various sources and documentaries over the years which show the richest in the world tax evade and avoid via various means with big 4 accountancies, banks and lawyers happy to help, depriving many countires of tax funds to put towards infrastructure and development.

can you demonstrate any big 4 accountant, bank or lawyer that helps their clients evade tax?

[Payyourwaymate]

can you demonstrate any big 4 accountant, bank or lawyer that helps their clients evade tax?

External Link/Members Only

The Spider's Web: Britain's Second Empire (Documentary)

"Michael Oswald's film The Spider's Web reveals how at the demise of empire, City of London financial interests created a web of secrecy jurisdictions that captured wealth from across the globe and hid it in a web of offshore islands. Today, up to half of global offshore wealth is hidden in British jurisdictions and Britain and its dependencies are the largest global players in the world of international finance. "

Nicholas Shaxson - Interview

External Link/Members Only


Full Circle & Nicholas Shaxson: Treasure Islands, tax havens and more

External Link/Members Only

"Dirty money, tax havens and the offshore system describe the ugliest
and most secretive chapter in the history of global economic affairs…
Hear about it straight from the source: a man who is ready to take on the global financial industry – single-handed.

Following his revealing book Treasure Islands, Nicholas Shaxson came to Full Circle to have a highly charged discussion with our members - among them some senior decision makers in finance and economics in the EU."

These will answer your questions.

[Payyourwaymate]

Rising in work poverty isn't just about low pay

External Link/Members Only

"In the UK, the proportion of people in relative poverty – having income below 60% of average income ­- has fluctuated between 21% and 23% since the turn of the century.

But there has one particular group where relative poverty has been clearly rising over the last 25 years. The relative poverty rate for people living in working households has risen substantially from 13% in the mid 1990s to 18% in 2017, the latest year of data. We have identified four key reasons for the rising in-work poverty rate, and it isn’t all just about low pay, as Jonathan Cribb explains."

[Payyourwaymate]

Inheritances and inequality over the lifecycle: what will they mean for younger generations?

External Link/Members Only

"Rising levels of wealth held by older generations, alongside slow growth in the earnings of younger generations, means that inheritance looks set to be an increasingly important source of income for today's working-age generations. What will this mean for inequalities in living standards and wealth, and for social mobility? If people are expecting to inherit in the future, might that already affect their living standards and inequalities today?

In this event, IFS researchers will share the findings from a new report, funded by the Nuffield foundation, that makes projections of the inheritances to be received by those born in the 1960, 1970s and 1980s in the UK, and examines the implications for living standards and economic inequalities both now and in future."


Keeping it in the family: inheritances and inequality | IFS Zooms In

External Link/Members Only

"Recent decades have seen rising wealth-to-income ratios. In England, increases in wealth have been concentrated among older generations.

Those born in the 1980s have accumulated no more wealth than those born in the 1970s had done by the same age, but the parents of those born in the 1980s hold 40% more wealth than the parents of those born in the 1970s held at the same age. One consequence is that inherited wealth is on course to be a much more important determinant of lifetime resources for today’s young than it was for previous generations."

[Payyourwaymate]

Geographical inequalities in the UK | IFS Zooms In


External Link/Members Only

"The COVID-19 crisis has brought to the fore increasing concerns about inequalities not only between different population groups – such as the gap between the rich and poor, young and old, and different ethnic groups – but also between people living in different places. Even prior to the crisis though, there was a sense that the UK is not only a highly geographically unequal country, but also an increasingly geographically unequal one. This week, we have gone into the archive to bring you an episode from last year exploring geographical inequalities with David Phillips, Associate Director at IFS and an expert on devolved and local government finance."

Is it time for a UK wealth tax?

External Link/Members Only

"The COVID-19 crisis has exposed growing inequalities and provoked a debate about the rebuilding of public finances. Capital incomes (that flow from wealth) are taxed less heavily than labour incomes and there are growing calls to address this. There is also interest, in many countries, in the idea of introducing a new wealth tax – a tax on ownership of wealth (net of debt).

This event will launch a new project investigating the desirability and feasibility of a wealth tax in the UK. The format will be short presentations setting out the evolution of UK wealth and the possible rationales and difficulties of introducing a wealth tax followed by a discussion."

[Payyourwaymate]

The state of social mobility | IFS Zooms In

External Link/Members Only

"This week, students across the country are getting back A Level and GCSE grades. Once a ticket to higher education, and thus higher paying jobs, many have recently questioned whether social mobility now has more to do with whether your parents are rich or poor, than with other factors.

Social mobility is never far from the front pages; education, geographic and intergenerational inequalities and jobs affect everyone.

This week we bring you a conversation from September last year, with Lindsey MacMillan, Director of the Centre for Education Policy and Equalising Opportunities and Anna Vignoles, Director of the Leverhulme Trust where we explore issues around social mobility."

[Payyourwaymate]

That's it from me for now.

[Payyourwaymate]

External Link/Members Only

Why do wealthy parents have wealthy children?

"Recent decades has seen rapid growth in the value of household wealth compared to incomes and slow earnings growth for younger generations.Whether and how younger adults' economic prospects are shaped by their parents' wealth is a question of increasing relevance. Why do the children of wealthy parents accumulate more wealth than their peers from poorer backgrounds? Does parental wealth have a role in determining young people's earnings, wealth accumulation and access to homeownership? What channels are involved in the persistence of wealth from one generation to the next?"

Starts at 5.40 mins.