‘The fairest way’ or a ‘political disaster’? Readers split on whether Reeves should raise income tax

Independent Readers are sharply divided into Keir Starmer and Rachel Reeves as to whether there will be income tax to help fill the deficiency of £ 50 billion in public finances this fall.

Some see this as the most fair option and target the most. “One or two cents can only create wonders about income tax rates,” he said, and others argued that it has long been to comply with income tax rates or reform real estate taxes.

Competitors warn that increasing income tax can damage growth and dispose of the political advantage for the reform leader Nigel Farage. “The increase in income tax throughout the board of directors would be a political disaster for labor,” he warned.

Some prefer alternatives such as VAT, targeted reserve taxes or taxes before walking.

Many of them also pressured green infrastructure and bold investment in small enterprises, but they all acknowledged that the government should find a reliable way to finance public services.

Here is what you say:

What option is there?

Indeed, what option does it have? It is not surprising that the economy is very weak, and there are gaps to stem from a previous administration, which has a epidemic and limited options to be fair to them.

Among the solutions is to slaughter the sacred cow of putting income tax. One or two cents about income tax rates can only create wonders and can be the most fair way to earn income from those who can contribute best to the public interest.

Direct

Those with the widest shoulders

As always, the disabled are accused of criminals who upset Reeves’ books. Welfare climbing can only be associated with £ 5 billion when Reeves’ calculations are in £ 50 billion. O and Starmer need to put Covid Furlough from the evening, the problems caused by Ukraine and Trump, freezing allowances, increasing income tax and national insurance, equalizing the capital gain tax, making taxes on high -valuable properties.

Starmer and Reeves’ largest shoulders should make sure that the burden gets a fair share.

Sunflower seed

What do you think – Rachel Reeves should increase income tax or find the money elsewhere? Share Your Thoughts Comments under.

VAT is a better option

Why income tax? VAT is a much better option because it is consumer tax. It is easy to adjust-you increase the tax exemption threshold to compensate for the poorest in the society. It does not affect the work significantly. While CT consumption taxes, this promotes savings and investment.

Kwame

TAX UNNOVED INCOME

Tax income in accordance with the income tax brackets. This year it would be worth £ 16 billion. Stop completely subsidizing private companies. Apply space tax to all empty properties for more than six months. Renovation and so on. Some savings ideas – centralize all NHS supply and HR. Register for nurses and stop using expensive agencies (still the same salaries for temperature nurses).

A little drunk max

Align the capital earning tax with income tax

Why do you not make capital income tax rates in accordance with income tax rates as in Australia? This year it would bring about £ 8 billion.

In addition, replacing the parliamentary tax and stamp tax with a French-style real estate tax can generate £ 3 billion -4 billion per year with more potential under the land value tax framework. There is plenty of scope for a chancellor and a prime minister who is not afraid of his own shadows.

Pomerol95

Reduce waste before raising taxes

Currently, the government has no sign of decrease in wasted expenditures – now every month billions of billions. There is nothing that Starmer does not seem serious about income tax increases. He refuses to take action to prevent or make legislations for change!

Spck

Political disaster for labor

The increase in income tax throughout the Board will be a political disaster for labor. Farage, “never believe the promises of the Labor Party” with the ticket would enter the number 10.

Fastyellosaab

NO CHANGE IN THE EXPECTED BASIC RATE

The last chancellor, which increased the basic income tax rate, was Denis Healey in 1975. In fact, it is the most fair way to increase income, but do not expect any change at the rate.

Politically, “selling” is easier to deal with allowances and other tax measures.

Blackkbeard’s host

People are afraid of loss of jobs than tax increase

Really? Does everyone worry like that – income taxes may increase by 1 percent or can they have to pay a little more for gasoline? This is not the thing that makes it unnecessary at night and keeps people awake when there are much worse possibilities that may happen at any time.

Chrisw27

The necessary growth commitment

I’m sorry, but what does it mean to balance the economy? Works, SMEs, house prices fall as if there are no tomorrow. Extra taxes won’t make things better. We need a government -dependent government – great projects to achieve a new economy that will create business and prosperity for us. Support for faster growth of SMEs.

Talks about how to pay for NHS in a world with an aging population and where the care will come from. Instead, we continue a job as usual. If Rishi was in power, I am challenging myself to see a different policy than we had. I’m struggling.

Boring75

Taxes should be rising in the manifesto

Good news – there should be tax increases in the manifesto.

You cannot have good public services in the fresh air, and after fourteen years of destruction – considering that almost all of the Tora’s taxes are paid to their wives rather than public services, there is a lot of repair to do. Evidence? Just look at the condition of the water service and supply “industry”. Let’s see the people went back to control.

revive

High Taxes in the 1970s

In the 1970s, the Labor Party increased the income tax to 83 percent for the best winners; The rest paid 33 percent or more. The thousand men went on strike (like Birmingham today). Doctors asked for more payment. Train drivers shot. Is this starting to come to familiar?

Karl

Damage the poor

Just like educating employers, Nic will affect the poorer person, and will raise the VAT.

Wealthy people may afford to pay more; It is not important if you can’t do poor people – and if you get more than their fees or pay more for their goods, the result is the same for the poor.

Pen2030

Tinkering does not solve deep problems

Starmer and Reeves think that they set something here and there – a few billion taxes, a few billion less in welfare spending – they will list the financial situations and the economy of the UK. No. The problems are based deeply and require more positive actions than Starmer and Reeves want to do. Thus, the UK economy will continue to become stagnant. More and more voters will lose their faith and look elsewhere.

Chriscatthews

Find productivity before the tax rises

Why does Starmer not encourage a government productivity (Oxymoron, I know) – cutting waste in all departments? To sell unused state lands or buildings. Before making another U -turn on the promise of upgrading taxes, PM, try to look at other ways of filling the holes. All other tax increases since the labor was taken over to fill the black hole – Where did this increase income go? Acceptance, the British government has no idea.

Chuckiethhebrave

Some comments are arranged for shortness and clarity for this article.

Would you like to share your views? Just save your information below. Once you have registered, you can comment on the best stories of the day for a chance to stand out. Alternatively, click ‘login’ or ‘registration in the upper right corner to log in or sign.

Make sure you follow us Community Directiveswhich can be found Here. For a complete guide about how to comment Click here.