The cost of saving
[Re: Fresh allegations overshadow welcome cultural shift in the City, yesterday]
As a higher rate tax payer I benefited enormously from the 40 per cent tax relief on my pension contribution. But I was struck by the discrepancy between my position and that of my wife. As a lower rate taxpayer, she only received 20 per cent relief. Why should those earning the most get twice as much relief? And it was especially noticeable at the 20 per cent tax rate how year-on-year fund charges ate into the pot. If there was a flat rate of relief, it would be both simpler and fairer. I also wonder whether this would provide an impetus to reduce pension fund charges to the levels enjoyed by Denmark and Netherlands.
[Re: It is shocking just how much tax most workers have to pay, Tuesday]
Any business owner can tell you who really pays corporation tax – if a business is to remain solvent, it is always the buyer of the product or service. And the ultimate buyer is the individual consumer, who spends with his or her own “after tax money”.
[Re: A radical proposal to rid Britain of its painful tax on jobs, Monday]
Merging income tax and national insurance makes sense. But we need to tax all income at the same rate. Separating dividends and pension income from labour income makes little sense if we want simplification.
A close look at UK borrowing is horrible. The budget deficit is up £10bn in 2012 on 2011. The Tories aren’t cutting spending enough.
A poll by Lord Ashcroft shows the tricky nature of deficit politics. If Labour took a hard line, it could secure 10 per cent more votes.
The coalition’s alleged healing of the UK economy is being subsidised by more borrowed money.
It’s unclear whether the Eurozone experiment can continue. It might survive, but only by losing a limb or two.