Should the top personal tax rate be lowered or should tax-free threshold be increased?
347598
The increase in tax-free threshold will clearly benefit low income owners.  It will lower the average taxable income and the benefit will be reaped by more taxpayers than it would've been if the former option is chosen (lowering of top personal tax rate).  Because, seriously, what percentage of the taxpayers are earning enough taxable income to fall into that top income bracket anyway?
798244
the tax threshold at present is £4895-00
1157144
It is just part of the typical liberal mantra... tax, tax, tax. Tax everyone else but me. Raising taxes is NEVER the answer. \n\nHowever, to counter the liberal "tax more" mindset, I think we should set up a volutary fund. Anyone who feels that they do not pay enough in taxes can voluntary contribute more. \n\nHow much do you think THAT would raise? LMAO.\n\n\nTo Answerbot:  Why should the "rich" have to supplement someone else's income? Why should they have to foot the bill for someone else who decided to not pursue education, or chose to have a couple of kids? This country is about OPPORTUNITY not forced obligations.\n\nTo Tamtam:  Uh, our education system gets SOOO much money every year. Instead of faulting the AMOUNT, fault the system. Our schools spend so much time teaching "tolerance" and "sex-ed" and "feelings" instead of teaching math, reading, writing, and geography. Again, thank your local liberal for that.
284629
It's a good idea. I feel a flat tax should be on all income with no exemptions. It should be imposed on all income above what is determined to be the poverty level plus 10%.
1165796
More progressive taxes means that tax rates would be higher at higher income than they are now.  \n\nIn theory, whatever you tax you discourage.  Thus, a more progressive tax would reduce the economic incentive for individuals and businesses to earn more taxable income.  As a result, national personal income should grow more slowly and so would GDP.  \n\nIn practice, it gets more complex.  During the Clinton years in the nineties, Clinton made the U.S. income tax a lot more progressive by raising the upper brackets significantly.  But, the U.S. economy actually did really well.  This was due in part to Greenspan's monetary policy being reasonably accomodating.  Also, labor productivity rose rapidly.  All those factors contributed to increasing GDP. \n\nIf you compare the U.S. vs Europe, the U.S. has a much less progressive tax structure.  And, the U.S. economy has steadily grown much faster than Europe's.  So, on an international standard you can easily argue that a less progressive tax structure contributes to a faster economic growth and vice versa.  \n\nDomestically, as mentioned the case is complex with the Clinton years showing strong performance despite an increase in the progressivity of the tax structure. \n\nIn economics there are so many different levers than can counteract each other that it is often difficult to forecast with much precision what will be the impact of a given fiscal policy (change in tax structure.  That's why economics is called the dismal science.  Does not mean it is not fascinating stuff.  It clearly is.
29163
I don't like high taxes, but if they come with good government service and infrastructure I don't mind. We want our money to be something we can enjoy. Pay less taxes and save more money but have bad government and infrastructure, doesn't sound enjoyable.
959498
In theory, to make the tax burden fairer on tax payers.\n\nPoor pay less and rich pay more. ie 0% on first c£5000, 10% on next c£2000, 22% on next c£25000 and 40% thereafter.
440989
If you are an employee, salary sacrifice your pay. Take some of your salary as a laptop, extra superannuation etc.\n\nIf you run a business, incorporate it, and make sure you have a Personal Services Business, in accordance with the Alienation of Personal Services Income legislation.\n\nCompanies only pay a tax rate of 30%, but if you provide personal services, you'll end up having that company income attributed to your personal tax.\n\nYou can also minimise personal tax by hiring a really expensive accountant. They come up with the most creative ideas.
1062180
Economics pure and simple.  For businesses it would cut into profits, for individuals it would mean higher taxes and for Governments higher spending.\n\nI know that there are many 'free' issues but to make a real difference will take sacrifice ... would you forego your holiday this year to save the plane fuel?\n\nADDITIONAL\n\nPanda ... how about not using "everyone" when you are actually referring to a minority.
298885
Depends on the total amount of earnings. Tax is calculated on all of your earnings added together. There is a personal allowance of around £4700 which is untaxed. Then some at 10%, some at 22% and anything else at 40%. you would generally be a high earner to have much tax at 40%.
1119780
I would personally put aside about 30% ... you'll never know what tax bracket you'll fall in at the end of the year.
124882
no tax is fair.\nhttp://www.philipdru.com/griffin_stream.html
463208
A. it's trillions, not billions\n\nB. you should vote for someone else... \n\n\nC. yes... I think it's time someone did something... but if you're making enough money to be taxed 30 percent... you probably won't like my ideas... hahahah
328718
All of your question was mindless dribble, none of what you claim is true. With some education in learning the facts you could have some hope. Redistribution of wealth is easy to check, you must be one of the tax payers earning over $400,000 a year and it was you who got the tax cut at the expense of the working class who have seen higher taxes. Look up the last Minimum wage increase and fine the facts, you will find there is no evidence to support your claim that it adds to higher prices. BTw, when I go all over the country I stay at the Hilton. I also play golf with Republicans every week at the Country club. I am a brick layer, now teach me about the real work you do in life.
378795
not if you are looking at as a "deduction"\nit's a flat rate up to a ceiling, based on taxable gross income. best way to reduce it is, pretax deductions (401, pretax med insurance, fsa, etc)
344978
Well, figure it out.  If someone makes $500,000 and pays 10%\nhe has $450,000. left after taxes.  If someone makes $50,000\nand pays 10% he has $45,000. after taxes.\n\nI think a sales or value added tax is fairer. If someone making the above amounts has money to spend on non essentials he can pay tax on the purchase.  If not, he has more for rent, food, clothing, health care, etc.
760651
we should raise the gas tax and lower the income tax