Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News Editorials & Other Articles General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Editorials & Other Articles

dipsydoodle

(42,239 posts)

5. No - there may be separate legislation to control directors salaries and bonuses.

Reply to yodermon (Reply #2)

Mon Jan 23, 2012, 04:47 PM

Jan 2012

The other oddity is if they simply gave money away before tax and the recipients paid any tax liability then overall tax receipts would still plummet.

In an extreme case of farcical proportion if they all said "fine, we'll go year without pay" the UK would be competely fucked.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

9 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Top 1% of UK wage-earners pay 25% of all income tax [View all] dipsydoodle Jan 2012 OP

"The rich are getting proportionately richer, and therefore are paying more tax" CJCRANE Jan 2012 #1

Marginal rate is actually 52% dipsydoodle Jan 2012 #3

what do you mean "if their earnings are lowered" ? yodermon Jan 2012 #2

No - there may be separate legislation to control directors salaries and bonuses. dipsydoodle Jan 2012 #5

But the money still exists. CJCRANE Jan 2012 #6

What would actually happen dipsydoodle Jan 2012 #8

"if their earnings are lowered then how is the shortfall made up elsewhere ?" CJCRANE Jan 2012 #4

I wondered how long it be before that came up. dipsydoodle Jan 2012 #7

Workers spend more of their income CJCRANE Jan 2012 #9