Is anyone paying tax?

partyguinness

A friend of mine (a mortgage broker) was telling me recently that when a taxi driver comes in to him about a mortgage he knows automatically the declared annual income will be between £11000- £12000 every time. He has had the odd taxi driver go "How did you know?" as if it takes a genius to work it out.

In the UK tax kicks in at £12500. Go figure.

hot buttered scones

ElJeffe wrote: »

No between us now. Did you read my posts at all. I'm not in a social house at present. I bought a house in early 2001 and have it fully paid off now. Two kids living with us still working away saving for their own place but with the cost of housing at present it's not easy. Would love some peace tbh

So basically, if I'm reading this all correctly, you started out in a council house as a younger person, worked and saved like a mofo and then purchased your own house when your situation improved thereby freeing up that council house for someone more in need of it at that time. (as in you no longer were in need of social housing as your situation had improved). Fair play, isn't that how the system should work? Make use of it when you need it, then move on when you don't?

I don't get all the hate for social housing here. Most of us need a leg up at some time or other in our lives. Sometimes we are net beneficiaries from the system and other times (mostly in my case) we are net contributors. I pay large amounts of tax. There are other members of my family for whom life hasn't been as good. I sleep very easy night knowing that in some way, my taxes are indirectly going to them.

To get back to the original topic - if, for example, I was getting an extension built by a contractor I would insist on it being all up front and above board and I probably wouldn't entertain a company that even hinted at being paid in cash. On the other hand, if I had a mate of mate coming round to do a quick foxer/nixer or whatever you call it round your way then yeah I'd have no issue paying in cash and have done. If a young fella is prepared to spend a couple of hours of a Saturday painting my ceilings for a few quid I'd encourage his industriousness. How far down do you go? Do you get a VAT receipt off the young fella you give a few quid too to cut the grass?

As for struggling at the start of your career and feeling taken advantage of because your less well off than others who earn less - your hard work will pay off in the long run while those you feel envious towards will possibly be in the same situation as they are now while you find yourself in much better situation.

sbsquarepants

Deleted User wrote: »

If thats the case, then its not a "lone parent" defrauding social welfare - its a couple defrauding social welfare.

Again, an example were both are responsible, but the blame is usually only laid on one half of the couple?

If you live with someone who is defrauding, then you are as complicit as they are.

Does that apply to all crimes committed by someone you live with or just welfare fraud?


I think the nonsense you've been spouting over the last number of pages is the perfect metaphor for both feminism and the public service!

Mules wrote: »

Ah here, this isn't the Soviet union. I'm not going to go around informing on people.

Me either - tradesmen doing nixers is not the problem. Tax loopholes for greedy corporations and a public service that throws money around like Elton John is the problem. Paddy the plumber is a convenient scapegoat and nothing else.
Pay cash, pocket the savings and don't be a fúcking snitch.

All very good advice!

Deleted User wrote: »

Jaysus it says a lot that someone asks for cash, most likely for their own security and to ensure they actually get paid & we all assume they’re dodging their taxes.

No - it's all about the tax. Anything else is just waffle!

TuringBot47 wrote: »

Anyways, the sooner we convert completely to a cashless society the better.

Most law abiding people will sacrifice privacy for a safer/fairer society.

Count me out!

2lazytogetup

if everyone plays the system, then its neutralised.

tradesmen doing cash in hand jobs
white collar employer companies using loopholes to pay a tiny percentage corporation tax
social welfare fraud- mother declares she is single even though boyfriend lives with her and she has a cash in hand job

If everyone played the game fairly, taxes will be less, and welfare would be higher. But to compensate, the govenrment raises taxes and lowers welfare

2lazytogetup

TuringBot47 wrote: »

A

Most law abiding people will sacrifice privacy for a safer/fairer society.

maybe they could come up with a new police force to keep watch. we could call them the Stasi.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

Sometimes a car isn't a good indicator of "success". A lot of people are driving around in flashy leased cars, sure why would you want to pay 300 quid a month for something that's going to depreciate as soon as you drive it home?

You make a decent point, however............

€300 a month on 3 year PCP is €10,800 in payments........ assuming 0% PCP and minimum deposit of 10% that's a €22k ish car. You won't get much flash leased for €300/month

BTW my yoke depreciates by about 500 month I reckon but I need it for work and my customers pay for it anyway so I don't really have a problem with that particular cost.

sbsquarepants

2lazytogetup wrote: »

i
If everyone played the game fairly, taxes will be less, and welfare would be higher. But to compensate, the govenrment raises taxes and lowers welfare

The game can't be played fairly, it's hugely rigged in favour of the rich. Loopholes are for the wealthy.

If you have an apartment for example and rent it out - a situation thousands found themselves in after the crash, you pay tax just as if you got that rent in your wages, because that's only fair and decent and hospitals need bandages and orphans need gruel and bla bla bla.

If you have 1,000 apartments you can set up as a REIT and pay no tax on that rent - but what about the hospitals and the orphans? i hear you say - fúck them, let the plumbers and the hairdressers pay for the hospitals, the dirty thieving bastards, tax them till they bleed!

If you can keep your money from the tax man, then do so. If you see someone else doing so, turn a blind eye, try and learn something from them, don't snitch on them like a snivelling little weasel.

I'm all for a fairer society, less so for being milked like some fúcking prize heifer!

partyguinness

Many from the 'gig' ecomony in the UK have had their cash only lifestyle bite them hard this year.

A few hairdressers, nail technicians etc who only operate in cash got left out of the self employed payments as it was based on previous year's income tax returns.

One mother at the school- single mother, 2 kids, with two jobs (1 in her mother's tanning place and second job with a hairdresser). Now fair play she gets out and works. Lives in rented, fantastic holidays. In the last year she has taken the kids to Disneyland in Florida and few trips to Ibiza, 2016 BMW...BUT...all cash.

She got zero Government self employed grant during the lockdown as she has no declared income tax returns. Quite sure she gets all sorts of social welfare and housing benefits- well she must.

Karma's a bitch.

2lazytogetup

sbsquarepants wrote: »

The game can't be played fairly, it's hugely rigged in favour of the rich. Loopholes are for the wealthy.

If you have an apartment for example and rent it out - a situation thousands found themselves in after the crash, you pay tax just as if you got that rent in your wages, because that's only fair and decent and hospitals need bandages and orphans need gruel and bla bla bla.

If you have 1,000 apartments you can set up as a REIT and pay no tax on that rent - but what about the hospitals and the orphans? i hear you say - fúck them, let the plumbers and the hairdressers pay for the hospitals, the dirty thieving bastards, tax them till they bleed!

If you can keep your money from the tax man, then do so. If you see someone else doing so, turn a blind eye, try and learn something from them, don't snitch on them like a snivelling little weasel.

I'm all for a fairer society, less so for being milked like some fúcking prize heifer!

If you have or invest in a REIT, when you go to take dividends you pay income tax, there is also capital gains tax. even if you set it up in an offshore tax avoidance location like the Cayman Islands, as soon as you take money out of it, you pay tax on it.

Antares35

Augeo wrote: »

You make a decent point, however............

€300 a month on 3 year PCP is €10,800 in payments........ assuming 0% PCP and minimum deposit of 10% that's a €22k ish car. You won't get much flash leased for €300/month

BTW my yoke depreciates by about 500 month I reckon but I need it for work and my customers pay for it anyway so I don't really have a problem with that particular cost.

True enough, I can't say I gave it that much thought tbh, just it's something I wouldn't do. OH and I are saving for a house at the moment, so 22k for me would be a good chunk of deposit. Also, most people wouldn't own their car after only three years, they'd have an optiom to return or pay a lump sum to keep it or something?

Presumably if you need if for work you can also offset some as expenses? And if your customers pay for it then happy days, why wouldn't you have it

That's a far cry from the likes of my brother driving around a 33k car while in a 33k a year job, so that he can cut the eye out of people with his flash, even though he doesn't have a house yet, or the hundreds of yummy mummies driving around in Dusters that it'll take them years to pay off

sbsquarepants

2lazytogetup wrote: »

If you have or invest in a REIT, when you go to take dividends you pay income tax, there is also capital gains tax. even if you set it up in an offshore tax avoidance location like the Cayman Islands, as soon as you take money out of it, you pay tax on it.

Now before anyone jumps on me, i'm open to correction here and i'm in no way certain of the exact figures!



Is it not the case that the rental income itself is tax free, but a certain proportion of profits (3 quarters or thereabouts) must be paid in dividends to the shareholders, who then in turn must pay tax on that, the rest can be kept in the reit and used to purchase more property. So instead of paying about 40% of the total rent take in tax (even if the rent doesn't cover the mortgage) like you would as an individual, you instead pay something like 20% and even that's only on a portion of the profits.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

True enough, I can't say I gave it that much thought tbh, just it's something I wouldn't do. OH and I are saving for a house at the moment, so 22k for me would be a good chunk of deposit. Also, most people wouldn't own their car after only three years, they'd have an optiom to return or pay a lump sum to keep it or something?

Yes on a PCP when it comes to the end of the 3 years you either pay off the GFMV to own it, trade it in for another perhaps with some equity to cover next deposit or give it back and walk away having paid approx 60% of the price of the new car to drive it for 3 years.

Antares35 wrote: »

......Presumably if you need if for work you can also offset some as expenses? And if your customers pay for it then happy days, why wouldn't you have it ........

Yeah, it's a necessity for work. I'm as happy paying depreciation as I am maintaining an older yoke. I do lots of business miles that are unavoidable.

Antares35 wrote: »

That's a far cry from the likes of my brother driving around a 33k car while in a 33k a year job........

Yeah, not the best use of money

Antares35 wrote: »

..........or the hundreds of yummy mummies driving around in Dusters that it'll take them years to pay off

Dusters are cheap motoring to be fair, lots of folk with a nice few quid have them as the second car in the household.

Dual wheels

At least tradesmen are working it’s the single mothers that are scamming the system

Jinglejangle69

Stihl waters wrote: »

I priced a job today for 2 teachers, the job came to €3800 including vat, I just said €3800 not mentioning the vat, straight away the wife says to me will you do a cash price and I told her that's the cash price and a price for through the books was an extra 25%, 13.5% vat and a the rest for going through the books, all I'll do when I get paid is lodge the cash, write the invoice and keep it, as long as some people think they're getting a bargain they're happy

How can you write an invoice with no VAT?

Stihl waters

Jinglejangle69 wrote: »

How can you write an invoice with no VAT?

The vat is included in original price, when I give people the price the majority off them ask for a cash price, I then say it is a cash price and tell them vat is plus, if they agree to original price without asking for cash price I just let it roll and write my invoice, either way I'm covered, they think they're getting a deal and everyone is happy

KiKi III

Dual wheels wrote: »

At least tradesmen are working it’s the single mothers that are scamming the system

The greatest trick the right ever pulled was convincing poor people that a different type of poor person is the reason you are poor.

Any of ye see that court case last week where it was found Coca Cola paid 1.4% tax here between 2007-09?

If they - and all the other multinationals - paid anything close to the already low 12.5% headline rate of corporation tax it would seriously boost our coiffures.

KiKi III

KiKi III wrote: »

The greatest trick the right ever pulled was convincing poor people that a different type of poor person is the reason you are poor.

Any of ye see that court case last week where it was found Coca Cola paid 1.4% tax here between 2007-09?

If they - and all the other multinationals - paid anything close to the already low 12.5% headline rate of corporation tax it would seriously boost our coiffures.

While I agree that they should be paying more, 1% of their profits and the number of people they employ if a benefit to the state.

An electrician not paying tax is not a poor person, hes just another part of the problem.

Claw Hammer

lastusername wrote: »

I was wondering about this lately too. I am sure most tradies declare all (or most) of their income, but how would Revenue ever know if they did a job for a few hundred or a couple grand in cash and never declared it?

In most cases of fraud detection it generally happens because a pattern has developed and becomes visible.
In the case of tradesmen the Revenue have gone to builders providers and checked on the accounts. the find out where materials are going and follow up. If they find someone has been buying a lot of supplies and declaring a low or now income, they will gather information about that person. They will investigate their lifestyle bank accounts and movements. the person will then be interviewed and asked to show their business records. The digital footprint now means long forgotten items are discovered and known about.
Taking cash is one thing, making it melt away without leaving a trace is quite another.

TuringBot47

2lazytogetup wrote: »

maybe they could come up with a new police force to keep watch. we could call them the Stasi.

Your username speaks volumes on why you think that.

TuringBot47

KiKi III wrote: »

The greatest trick the right ever pulled was convincing poor people that a different type of poor person is the reason you are poor.

If you don't do any work and don't attempt to improve yourself to get work then you deserve to be poor.

Claw Hammer

partyguinness wrote: »

A friend of mine (a mortgage broker) was telling me recently that when a taxi driver comes in to him about a mortgage he knows automatically the declared annual income will be between £11000- £12000 every time. He has had the odd taxi driver go "How did you know?" as if it takes a genius to work it out.

In the UK tax kicks in at £12500. Go figure.

Taxi drivers in Dublin used to walk into a tax office in central Dublin and ask "what is the amount you can earn without paying tax?". When told, they would pull out a blank form 11 and write in a figure a fiver less and put in on the counter and say "see you next year".

wally1990

Claw Hammer wrote: »

Taxi drivers in Dublin used to walk into a tax office in central Dublin and ask "what is the amount you can earn without paying tax?". When told, they would pull out a blank form 11 and write in a figure a fiver less and put in on the counter and say "see you next year".

Had a taxi driver back in the Feb, nice guy and we were chit chatting and I asked was he on Freenow/Mytaxi given they have a lot of the market now and its useful both ways (consumer and taxi driver )

His immediate response was ''hell no, this is a cash game, tell um nothing ''(referring to Revenue)

Declaring very little obviously just to get by.

Dual wheels

KiKi III wrote: »

The greatest trick the right ever pulled was convincing poor people that a different type of poor person is the reason you are poor.

Any of ye see that court case last week where it was found Coca Cola paid 1.4% tax here between 2007-09?

If they - and all the other multinationals - paid anything close to the already low 12.5% headline rate of corporation tax it would seriously boost our coiffures.

Nope if they had to pay higher tax they wouldn’t be here

rdwight

screamer wrote: »

Cash work is not just about tax avoidance. You’d be shocked to know the number of people who get in trades to do something and think it’s fine to haggle with them over the price at the end cause they spent too much on something during the work, or worse, never pay them. It’s nigh on impossible to get paid, the trades people have no recourse and can’t enter the property and remove work. Cheques take time to clear, and people won’t pay upfront, it’s a catch 22.

Doubt this. But anyway, bank transfers can be as quick as handing over cash nowadays.

I always tell tradesmen when they quote for job that I prefer to pay VAT. I tell them it allows me sit in the pub giving out about the state of things without feeling like a hypocrite.

Last plumber I said this to said it wasn't worth his while doing the job if it was going through books. I paid cash.

Stihl waters

rdwight wrote: »

Last plumber I said this to said it wasn't worth his while doing the job if it was going through books. I paid cash.

Did you haggle on the price

I Am The Law

Culture.

Antares35

Antares35 wrote: »

Yes, they can and do, which is what I said. I didn't say it was routine. The courts option is there for anyone who needs to avail of it. Your mental gymnastics do not change that. Enforcement in the event of default is covered by my point about the courts. Do you want me to list every which mechanism by which relief can be availed of? Get off outta that if you need legal advice this isn't the place

I don't need legal advice, or misleading information.

Your original post was misleading and would give anyone reading the impression that "means testing and garnishing of wages at source" was routine in the making of maintenance orders. It's absolutey not. If only it were.

I've been through the Attachment of Earnings process, successfully won an Attachment of Earnings Order, and have first hand experience of exactly what's involved, thanks.

Antares35

[Deleted User] wrote: »

I don't need legal advice, especially not misleading advice, like the type you're giving.

I've been through the process, successfully won an Attachment of Earnings Order, and know whats involved, thanks.

And presumably you used the courts. Thank you for proving my point. Can we move on now please. Yawn.

BTW Nice edit, unfortunately I'm not responsible for you deciding to read in some meaning into my post that simply wasn't there.

Handbags at dawn

tdf7187

This thread makes a welcome change from the usual boards.ie "unemployed people are scum" from the extreme right wing.