Privatised industries are not drivers of the economy.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:16 pmThe kind of person who looks at stuff and goes "thats privatised now and its s**t"?
Gary Lineker
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
It’s already been pointed out - the lockdown policy and keeping people at home is what triggered the sharp rise in unemployment.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 11:17 pmYeah, I wonder what else could have happened that has turned us into an economic basket case?
People came out of the workforce and they did not return.
Re: Gary Lineker
Didn't expect this thread to still be live this morning...
-
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:39 am
- Been Liked: 337 times
- Has Liked: 163 times
Re: Gary Lineker
The legislation regarding IR35 was setup for precisely the situation Gary Lineker finds himself in whereby companies hire contractors for prolonged periods.Big Vinny K wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 8:20 pmSo if that’s the only research you do need to do why do you keep on posting things about Lineker that are factually incorrect ?
Lineker has paid the same amount of tax (which will be a hell of a lot of tax btw) as any other director of a company who withdrew the amount of money he did. It will be a lot more than 19%.
You do realise that the personal income tax he pays on the dividend is in addition to the 19% corporation tax on the company profits ? Of course you don’t realise that - because you have zero clue what you are talking about.
Why is your criticism not with HMRC who have wasted tens of millions of pounds in the last few years unsuccessfully trying to take people to court for paying the taxes that their rules stipulate they should ? Which political party do you think have been urging these civil servants to try and pursue these cases ? Do you think it might be the same right wing party that you support ?
Try educating yourself a little bit on these matters before starting a thread.
It was to stop people working in lucrative jobs working for the same company over many years when they are really employees of the company.
If you are a supply teacher or similar etc. then you have to go onto PAYE even if you work for more than one school. And the same applies to many other jobs that pay low wages and people then get hit for PAYE, which makes a real difference.
Gary Lineker is an employee of the BBC and its the second time he has been caught up in tax avoidance issues.
And he gets away with it because he can afford to hire expensive lawyers to take on HMRC.
He is doing what rich people do and a few tweets doesn't make him any different.
This user liked this post: Damo
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
It’s true that most people wouldn’t have the resources to do what Gary lineker did.
-
- Posts: 753
- Joined: Sat Aug 13, 2022 10:18 pm
- Been Liked: 339 times
- Has Liked: 39 times
Re: Gary Lineker
They’re all too busy arguing on the Tickets thread
This user liked this post: Bosscat
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
Yes, that is a factor absolutely no doubt
Maybe its not just that though?
Maybe?
Possibly?
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
The mods are all double checking that they have enough points to qualify for the ballot that the club are going to announce to find "Burnleys Greatest Living fan"
This user liked this post: Bosscat
Re: Gary Lineker
Ha, this seems true at the moment but I suspect what you meant isn't how it reads to me.
This user liked this post: Rowls
-
- Posts: 7070
- Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2016 12:50 pm
- Been Liked: 2176 times
- Has Liked: 3110 times
- Location: Praha
- Contact:
Re: Gary Lineker
Good luck to him. Like the late Paul O'Grady, he seems to **** off all the right people, as far as i'm concerned. He'll do me.
This user liked this post: evensteadiereddie
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
No, of course not. It’s been discussed at length that the U.K. has been a high tax, low growth economy for 20+ years.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:54 amYes, that is a factor absolutely no doubt
Maybe its not just that though?
Maybe?
Possibly?
Stagnation really hit home after the 2008 crash and has never recovered.
It’s the same in the EU because they are also a high tax, low growth economic zone.
The thing they have in common is high tax and low growth.
We need an alternative and Gary Lineker has shown the way: say ‘no’ to excessive tax.
-
- Posts: 3604
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 10:05 am
- Been Liked: 2625 times
- Has Liked: 1 time
Re: Gary Lineker
If we can avoid the politics aspect of it for a moment, could someone who understands these things explain a little more how HMRC hope to prove someone like Linekar is an employee rather than a contractor? Seems like a very grey area, once it gets to court. Is there something in black and white, about how many consecutive weeks he'd need to work for the same company or, say, that's the only company he worked for. Obviously he - or his company - work for loads of different broadcasters over time.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
AmazingRowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:02 amNo, of course not. It’s been discussed at length that the U.K. has been a high tax, low growth economy for 20+ years.
Stagnation really hit home after the 2008 crash and has never recovered.
It’s the same in the EU because they are also a high tax, low growth economic zone.
The thing they have in common is high tax and low growth.
We need an alternative and Gary Lineker has shown the way: say ‘no’ to excessive tax.
Oh well, if you are just going to do full on Rowls then I'll leave you to it
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
They can't basicallyNottsClaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:03 amIf we can avoid the politics aspect of it for a moment, could someone who understands these things explain a little more how HMRC hope to prove someone like Linekar is an employee rather than a contractor? Seems like a very grey area, once it gets to court. Is there something in black and white, about how many consecutive weeks he'd need to work for the same company or, say, that's the only company he worked for. Obviously he - or his company - work for loads of different broadcasters over time.
If Rowls et al were being honest, they would have noticed that GL is just the latest in a line of TV personalities who have got off on this, and that includes people like Lorraine Kelly, who as far as I'm aware is only on one channel and one show
Re: Gary Lineker
Most supply teachers are employed by the local authority or an agency, not the school.ClaretPete001 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:35 amThe legislation regarding IR35 was setup for precisely the situation Gary Lineker finds himself in whereby companies hire contractors for prolonged periods.
It was to stop people working in lucrative jobs working for the same company over many years when they are really employees of the company.
If you are a supply teacher or similar etc. then you have to go onto PAYE even if you work for more than one school. And the same applies to many other jobs that pay low wages and people then get hit for PAYE, which makes a real difference.
Gary Lineker is an employee of the BBC and its the second time he has been caught up in tax avoidance issues.
And he gets away with it because he can afford to hire expensive lawyers to take on HMRC.
He is doing what rich people do and a few tweets doesn't make him any different.
If you look at lower paid people the argument is generally the other way, they want to be employed and the "employer" is trying to avoid that (uber, deliveroo, sports direct, etc). You'd be paying a higher marginal rate if you set up as Lineker has and wouldn't be getting sick days, paid holiday, NI contributions, etc.
IR35 is a mess. HMRC brings loads of these cases and wins and loses plenty of them so the case being heard isn't much of an indicator either way. Given the work he does of a very similar nature with other broadcasters there always seemed a pretty good chance that he wouldn't be classed as an employee.
This user liked this post: Lancasterclaret
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Lineker is not an employee of BBC - that’s just factually wrong.ClaretPete001 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:35 amThe legislation regarding IR35 was setup for precisely the situation Gary Lineker finds himself in whereby companies hire contractors for prolonged periods.
It was to stop people working in lucrative jobs working for the same company over many years when they are really employees of the company.
If you are a supply teacher or similar etc. then you have to go onto PAYE even if you work for more than one school. And the same applies to many other jobs that pay low wages and people then get hit for PAYE, which makes a real difference.
Gary Lineker is an employee of the BBC and its the second time he has been caught up in tax avoidance issues.
And he gets away with it because he can afford to hire expensive lawyers to take on HMRC.
He is doing what rich people do and a few tweets doesn't make him any different.
He also has work with many other companies - BT, Spanish TV, many sponsorship deals etc. That is why he set up his media company. He set up a company just like millions of people in this country did. And he’s paid his tax in the same way as millions of company directors do.
If you honestly think that the HMRC have failed in their case because Lineker has expensive lawyers then you do not have a clue as to what has been happening in the last decade with IR35. Check out how many one consultancies for example have had long term contracts for the major banks for years…..and most of them only do work for the one bank not for multiple organisations like Lineker did. It’s the same in lots of the public sector too. Are all these tens and thousands of consultancy businesses also employing expensive lawyers to get round IR35 ?
Re: Gary Lineker
I do love a “Rowls sh1ts himself in public” thread.
I wonder how long until he gets it locked / deleted.
I wonder how long until he gets it locked / deleted.
This user liked this post: Rowls
-
- Posts: 469
- Joined: Tue May 03, 2016 8:15 am
- Been Liked: 144 times
- Has Liked: 93 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Not entirely true BVK. As a contractor in Financial Services myself for many years, I can state categorically that I have never spent more than two years with the same client.Big Vinny K wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:32 amLineker is not an employee of BBC - that’s just factually wrong.
He also has work with many other companies - BT, Spanish TV, many sponsorship deals etc. That is why he set up his media company. He set up a company just like millions of people in this country did. And he’s paid his tax in the same way as millions of company directors do.
If you honestly think that the HMRC have failed in their case because Lineker has expensive lawyers then you do not have a clue as to what has been happening in the last decade with IR35. Check out how many one consultancies for example have had long term contracts for the major banks for years…..and most of them only do work for the one bank not for multiple organisations like Lineker did. It’s the same in lots of the public sector too. Are all these tens and thousands of consultancy businesses also employing expensive lawyers to get round IR35 ?
Trading through a limited company was the most tax efficient (and legal) method available to me prior to the change of rules a couple of years back.
While the system was open to abuse by those who quit their employed roles on the Friday and returned on the following Monday as an independent contractor, I am sure that the vast majority of contractors did the role for one of two reasons, the flexibility offerer by contracting or just the fact that the chance if getting an employed role is limited by the vast competition out there. While there were positives to this, there were also many negatives, including no sick pay, no holiday pay and very little job security.
As a contractor now, I am obliged (in most cases) to work under an umbrella company, who charge for their 'service', I also have to pay the Employers NI out of my day rate and the levy fee. Despite this, we are being paid similar day rates to those on offer prior to the IR35 charges and we still get no sick pay, holiday pay or job security!
Re: Gary Lineker
Gary Lineker has several contracts from everywhere. The BBC employ him in as a specialist contractor. No issue with him.ClaretPete001 wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 9:35 amThe legislation regarding IR35 was setup for precisely the situation Gary Lineker finds himself in whereby companies hire contractors for prolonged periods.
It was to stop people working in lucrative jobs working for the same company over many years when they are really employees of the company.
If you are a supply teacher or similar etc. then you have to go onto PAYE even if you work for more than one school. And the same applies to many other jobs that pay low wages and people then get hit for PAYE, which makes a real difference.
Gary Lineker is an employee of the BBC and its the second time he has been caught up in tax avoidance issues.
And he gets away with it because he can afford to hire expensive lawyers to take on HMRC.
He is doing what rich people do and a few tweets doesn't make him any different.
You are correct though, to highlight that his job is 'regular'. That does confuse the issue. He does have time off though.
The other end of the spectrum it is not so easy to escape. For example Parish Clerk's were self employed and some work for several parishes. Nowadays, HMRC say paye. Not fair!
Re: Gary Lineker
My m8 has a private hire firm and takes business men to the Airport ... He is "a driver of industry"
This user liked this post: Rowls
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
"If Rowls was being honest" - Eh?Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:05 amThey can't basically
If Rowls et al were being honest, they would have noticed that GL is just the latest in a line of TV personalities who have got off on this, and that includes people like Lorraine Kelly, who as far as I'm aware is only on one channel and one show
HMRC are consistently trying and failing to get cases like this. We need the likes of Lineker and Kelly to challenge them so that little guys don't get picked on.
This is how precedential law works. I'm genuinely happy Lineker won his case and hope that it means regular workers who HMRC pick on a try to get to pay excess tax are empowered to challenge and win like Lineker has done.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Ah, back to Insult World.
Where Rowls' opinions aren't ever challenged but insults run around with gay abandon. The lack of originality in the insults is telling. It's always a copy & paste job from whatever insult is de rigeur on twitter or reddit or whichever.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Have you ever considered that people insulting others might be why threads get locked / shut down?
How about you stop the insults and abuse and try to debate me with some civility? Why don't we see if we can behave like adults and keep threads open longer?
This user liked this post: Exsus
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Rowls wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 8:02 pmIf the minimum wage and income tax were aligned then somebody working full time on minimum wage would be better off to the tune of £1437.80 per year. That's not the "tickle down" concept you were imagining.
That's wages that would go directly into the pay packets of the lowest paid. That is why I believe firmly in low taxation.
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Really depends as you know as there are tens of thousands of contractors. I worked for a major bank in Manchester and there was certain points where our work force was 40% contractors and we had 10,000 employees !!StuffyClaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 11:41 amNot entirely true BVK. As a contractor in Financial Services myself for many years, I can state categorically that I have never spent more than two years with the same client.
Trading through a limited company was the most tax efficient (and legal) method available to me prior to the change of rules a couple of years back.
While the system was open to abuse by those who quit their employed roles on the Friday and returned on the following Monday as an independent contractor, I am sure that the vast majority of contractors did the role for one of two reasons, the flexibility offerer by contracting or just the fact that the chance if getting an employed role is limited by the vast competition out there. While there were positives to this, there were also many negatives, including no sick pay, no holiday pay and very little job security.
As a contractor now, I am obliged (in most cases) to work under an umbrella company, who charge for their 'service', I also have to pay the Employers NI out of my day rate and the levy fee. Despite this, we are being paid similar day rates to those on offer prior to the IR35 charges and we still get no sick pay, holiday pay or job security!
We also had the 2 year internal rule but there were many exceptions. I had one contractor who was there for more than 25 years.
I know the downsides of being a contractor too so it’s not for everyone.
As you may know many / most of those journalists we see every day on the television are freelance and have set themselves up as limited companies.
IR35 was supposed to stop the practice of working for the same company for many years as a contractor but the law is far too complex and this why HMRC lose so many cases and waste millions every year doing so.
And as said Lineker has always had multiple contracts with multiple companies.
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Really depends as you know as there are tens of thousands of contractors. I worked for a major bank in Manchester and there was certain points where our work force was 40% contractors and we had 10,000 employees !!StuffyClaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 11:41 amNot entirely true BVK. As a contractor in Financial Services myself for many years, I can state categorically that I have never spent more than two years with the same client.
Trading through a limited company was the most tax efficient (and legal) method available to me prior to the change of rules a couple of years back.
While the system was open to abuse by those who quit their employed roles on the Friday and returned on the following Monday as an independent contractor, I am sure that the vast majority of contractors did the role for one of two reasons, the flexibility offerer by contracting or just the fact that the chance if getting an employed role is limited by the vast competition out there. While there were positives to this, there were also many negatives, including no sick pay, no holiday pay and very little job security.
As a contractor now, I am obliged (in most cases) to work under an umbrella company, who charge for their 'service', I also have to pay the Employers NI out of my day rate and the levy fee. Despite this, we are being paid similar day rates to those on offer prior to the IR35 charges and we still get no sick pay, holiday pay or job security!
We also had the 2 year internal rule but there were many exceptions. I had one contractor who was there for more than 25 years.
I know the downsides of being a contractor too so it’s not for everyone.
As you may know many / most of those journalists we see every day on the television are freelance and have set themselves up as limited companies.
IR35 was supposed to stop the practice of working for the same company for many years as a contractor but the law is far too complex and this why HMRC lose so many cases and waste millions every year doing so.
And as said Lineker has always had multiple contracts with multiple companies.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
I think to debate like adults you first have to be able to debate like an adult
You've had numerous chances on this thread to state what additional issue this country might be facing and you've decided to ignore that chance to prove to people that you are actually willing to engage in a fair and truthful debate
So far you have failed (again) to do that
You've had numerous chances on this thread to state what additional issue this country might be facing and you've decided to ignore that chance to prove to people that you are actually willing to engage in a fair and truthful debate
So far you have failed (again) to do that
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Presuming this is aimed at me.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:56 pmI think to debate like adults you first have to be able to debate like an adult
You've had numerous chances on this thread to state what additional issue this country might be facing and you've decided to ignore that chance to prove to people that you are actually willing to engage in a fair and truthful debate
So far you have failed (again) to do that
This is a thread about Gary Lineker, specifically about his tax win in the courts, more broadly about the subject of taxation.
If you want to widen that category then feel free to do so. If you think I'm being oblique then fair enough but let he who is without sin etc.
There's nothing stopping you talking about what you want to talk about but I don't think you've mentioned another subject explicitly? I'm not a great fan of guessing games. So go ahead, be my guest and say what you want to say.
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Ok for you to throw a few insults though is it Rowls ?
Shall we not bother wasting everybody's time in highlighting these ?
So you started this thread because you wanted to champion your hero Lineker for paying such a low amount of tax ? (all very genuine and sincere motives for starting the thread as they usually are from you Rowls)
And then you went off on one with your TrussEconomics batshit crazy nonsense of low taxation.
You got asked a simple question on a number of occasions about whether you thought GL paying upwards of 60% tax rate was in your view too high or too low in your utopian economy which you refused to answer……well you did answer it by saying “No” to a question with 2 options whilst reminding everyone how good your English is !!
So remind us all why did you really start this thread on a subject you very clearly know so little about ? And will you be starting a similar thread on Claudia Winkleman ?
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
It's one thing to mock somebody's viewpoint in order to make a rhetorical point. There's a blurry line where it crosses over into abuse that is difficult to define but easy to see.Big Vinny K wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:12 pmOk for you to throw a few insults though is it Rowls ?
Shall we not both wasting everybody's time in highlighting these ?
So you started this thread because you wanted to champion your hero Lineker for paying such a low amount of tax ? (all very genuine and sincere motives for starting the thread as they usually are from you Rowls)
And then you went off on one with your TrussEconomics batshit crazy nonsense of low taxation.
You got asked a simple question on a number of occasions about whether you thought GL paying upwards of 60% tax rate was in your view too high or too low in your utopian economy which you refused to answer……well you did answer it by saying “No” to a question with 2 options whilst reminding everyone how good your English is !!
So remind us all why did you really start this thread on a subject you very clearly know so little about ? And will you be starting a similar thread on Claudia Winkleman ?
If you think I've insulted somebody unreasonably then point it out to me. I'm not averse to returning an insult but I hope I rarely instigate them.
I once quoted all the insults aimed at me on a thread to make the point of what I put up with but people mitakenly took it to mean I was getting upset so I stopped doing that. You can look at all the insults thrown at me here simply for extolling how low taxation could help the lowest paid in society.
I find it bizarre that such vitriole should be aimed at an opinion like that.
-
- Posts: 9601
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 9:45 pm
- Been Liked: 3150 times
- Has Liked: 10260 times
- Location: Staffordshire
Re: Gary Lineker
Damo wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 1:32 amMillionaire tax avoider gets white knighted by people who hate tax avoiders because he tweets some stuff that they agree with shock horror.
Reminds me of the Gary Neville "I'm only getting paid a fortune to pundit in Qatar to highlight human rights violations" nonsense
Bizarre
Popular, well paid television presenter despises racism, pays his taxes AND hacks off this board's right wing nut jobs.
What's not to like?
This user liked this post: ŽižkovClaret
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
One poster, for example, gave a good account of the case for high taxation. It was all very polite and civilised.
I reposted with my case for low taxation. It was all very polite and civilised.
Then he called me a bigot.
Take Lancaster's post above. He accuses me of debating 'like a child' yet I don't think (from memory) he's put across his views on taxation or the Lineker case.
I reposted with my case for low taxation. It was all very polite and civilised.
Then he called me a bigot.
Take Lancaster's post above. He accuses me of debating 'like a child' yet I don't think (from memory) he's put across his views on taxation or the Lineker case.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
evensteadiereddie wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:18 pm
Popular, well paid television presenter despises racism, pays his taxes AND hacks off this board's right wing nut jobs.
What's not to like?
As somebody who is very open about my right wing views on the virtues of low taxation (especially for the lowest paid in society) I can confirm I'm delighted that Lineker won his case.
"Hacked off" is for Hugh Grant and Prince Harry.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Here's my post once again on why I support low taxation but especially for the lowest paid in society. I've calcaulated that if the starting point for income tax was set at the rate of the minumum wage then somebody working full time on min.wage would be better off by £1437.80 per year.
Rowls wrote: ↑Tue Mar 28, 2023 8:38 pmIf you offer my hypothetical £1437.80 to a millionaire, they'd take it, of course. It would be something to splash away on their next cruise.
But if you offered that same £1437.80 to somebody toiling away working 40 hours a week on minimum wage it would make a real difference to their lives. It would help buy kids clothing, some food, that repair for the car that you can't really afford, that bill that you're struggling to pay. You might be able to afford a modest family holiday, turn the heating on a few extra minutes or maybe just not have to worry about bailiffs or getting into debt.
Lower tax this way does would massively improve the life of the low paid.
And there's something else beyond the actual amount of money. The matter of self respect and how people feel when their pay packet is enough to look after themselves - they feel better in themselves. They have more pride and respect. It's their money. I find it appalling that people who are paid what is considered to be a "minimum" level are expected to then pay out of this "minimum". It completely undermines the concept of it being a "minimum".
Just imagine for a second how it feels to be earning minimum wage and still be seeing large chunks of your income being taken away by the government. It is truly dispiriting.
Now we're finally having an honest debate - you've set out the case for high taxation and I've set out the case for low taxation. Thank you, elwaclaret.
This user liked this post: bfcmik
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Probably a combination ofRowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:16 pmIt's one thing to mock somebody's viewpoint in order to make a rhetorical point. There's a blurry line where it crosses over into abuse that is difficult to define but easy to see.
If you think I've insulted somebody unreasonably then point it out to me. I'm not averse to returning an insult but I hope I rarely instigate them.
I once quoted all the insults aimed at me on a thread to make the point of what I put up with but people mitakenly took it to mean I was getting upset so I stopped doing that. You can look at all the insults thrown at me here simply for extolling how low taxation could help the lowest paid in society.
I find it bizarre that such vitriole should be aimed at an opinion like that.
1) how much damage Truss and her cronies did to the economy and to peoples lives. There are probably people on this board who have been directly impacted by the very policy you are advocating or who have seen friends and family suffer. So no real surprise if people are critical of what you are saying.
2) but probably more than the first one above my guess would be it’s because of who you are Rowls and the things you have posted on this board in the past…..again no real point dancing around the truth is there ?
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
You mean Lancaster said you debated like a child ?Rowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:19 pmOne poster, for example, gave a good account of the case for high taxation. It was all very polite and civilised.
I reposted with my case for low taxation. It was all very polite and civilised.
Then he called me a bigot.
Take Lancaster's post above. He accuses me of debating 'like a child' yet I don't think (from memory) he's put across his views on taxation or the Lineker case.
Is that like saying someone needs to go to bed so they can get up for school in the morning ?
You wouldn’t say that would you Rowls - you are far too sincere, genuine and all the rest of it to make a comment like that !
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
I'm sure this makes you giggle Rowls, but its also why you get called outRowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:06 pmPresuming this is aimed at me.
This is a thread about Gary Lineker, specifically about his tax win in the courts, more broadly about the subject of taxation.
If you want to widen that category then feel free to do so. If you think I'm being oblique then fair enough but let he who is without sin etc.
There's nothing stopping you talking about what you want to talk about but I don't think you've mentioned another subject explicitly? I'm not a great fan of guessing games. So go ahead, be my guest and say what you want to say.
Like I said, its up to you
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
1. Just because Truss implemented things badly does not mean the idea is wrong. Low taxation has been proven time after time after time to grow economies. If you put up a fence and it gets blown down in high winds you don't declare "That's it! Fences don't work!" You simply do a better job next time.Big Vinny K wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:26 pmProbably a combination of
1) how much damage Truss and her cronies did to the economy and to peoples lives. There are probably people on this board who have been directly impacted by the very policy you are advocating or who have seen friends and family suffer. So no real surprise if people are critical of what you are saying.
2) but probably more than the first one above my guess would be it’s because of who you are Rowls and the things you have posted on this board in the past…..again no real point dancing around the truth is there ?
2. "it’s because of who you are Rowls" - quoted without comment.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
I do have a giggle at times, yes. We both know what you're alluding to but don't want to mention.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:37 pmI'm sure this makes you giggle Rowls, but its also why you get called out
Like I said, its up to you
But there's nothing stopping you mentioning the B word if you want to. Fair enough, but you want to castigate myself for doing what you're doing?
This is akin to dancing in the dark, Lancaster. I'm happy to tango so all I can say is to stop if you're not.
-
- Posts: 10171
- Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2018 1:59 pm
- Been Liked: 4188 times
- Has Liked: 57 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Hasn't "Ballot" been mentioned enough
These 2 users liked this post: Lancasterclaret Rowls
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
You can't have a debate about economic growth in the UK without mentioning itRowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:40 pmI do have a giggle at times, yes. We both know what you're alluding to but don't want to mention.
But there's nothing stopping you mentioning the B word if you want to. Fair enough, but you want to castigate myself for doing what you're doing?
This is akin to dancing in the dark, Lancaster. I'm happy to tango so all I can say is to stop if you're not.
But you have failed to mention it repeatedly
I won't hesitate to agree when something is obvious, why do you find it so hard?
-
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
- Been Liked: 897 times
- Has Liked: 1104 times
- Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre
Re: Gary Lineker
I, (gulp), agree with Rowls on this. If you wish to 'trickle feed' the economy the best way to do it is for all tax allowance increases to be targeted primarily at the poorest end of the society. This year's freezing of tax thresholds means that my new basic state pension is now greater than my tax free allowance, how can that be considered right? Yet a person who earns hundreds of thousands, or more, pounds per annum needs tax cuts to 'incentivise' them.
As for IR35, it was initially brought in to stop the widespread, some might say almost ubiquitous, practice in the construction and transport industries for all workers to be employed on a self-employed contract as it gave the employers the right to not make any NI contributions nor be liable for sickness, holiday or maternity pays and be able to lay people off when business was quiet. Highly paid entertainers, etc were simply a by-product of the rule rather than the target.
As for IR35, it was initially brought in to stop the widespread, some might say almost ubiquitous, practice in the construction and transport industries for all workers to be employed on a self-employed contract as it gave the employers the right to not make any NI contributions nor be liable for sickness, holiday or maternity pays and be able to lay people off when business was quiet. Highly paid entertainers, etc were simply a by-product of the rule rather than the target.
-
- Posts: 23343
- Joined: Thu Jan 21, 2016 2:09 pm
- Been Liked: 8058 times
- Has Liked: 4714 times
- Location: Riding the galactic winds in my X-wing
Re: Gary Lineker
Lots to be said for it btw, but you also need to balance that with a stronger state and services than we have at the momentbfcmik wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:57 pmI, (gulp), agree with Rowls on this. If you wish to 'trickle feed' the economy the best way to do it is for all tax allowance increases to be targeted primarily at the poorest end of the society. This year's freezing of tax thresholds means that my new basic state pension is now greater than my tax free allowance, how can that be considered right? Yet a person who earns hundreds of thousands, or more, pounds per annum needs tax cuts to 'incentivise' them.
As for IR35, it was initially brought in to stop the widespread, some might say almost ubiquitous, practice in the construction and transport industries for all workers to be employed on a self-employed contract as it gave the employers the right to not make any NI contributions nor be liable for sickness, holiday or maternity pays and be able to lay people off when business was quiet. Highly paid entertainers, etc were simply a by-product of the rule rather than the target.
-
- Posts: 3630
- Joined: Thu Jan 14, 2016 2:03 pm
- Been Liked: 897 times
- Has Liked: 1104 times
- Location: Solihull Geriatric Centre
Re: Gary Lineker
As for the B word. isn't it strange that the industries now suffering from a shortage of labour are the same ones that people used to say were filled with 'cheap East Europeans' keeping good WASP brits out of work?
-
- Posts: 2499
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2022 2:57 pm
- Been Liked: 1031 times
- Has Liked: 280 times
Re: Gary Lineker
1) well it’s a bit more complex than saying low taxation has worked in some countries so should work in the UK as it depends on a whole range of factors unique to that country like work force, health systems, demographics, geography, regulation, and many many more. So why do you think last year when this was muted by Truss to make a couple of small changes that the economy collapsed within minutes ? Do you think all the financial institutions, investment firms, markets etc said “I like that idea but go away and build me a new bigger fence and we’ll be right behind it” ?Rowls wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:38 pm1. Just because Truss implemented things badly does not mean the idea is wrong. Low taxation has been proven time after time after time to grow economies. If you put up a fence and it gets blown down in high winds you don't declare "That's it! Fences don't work!" You simply do a better job next time.
2. "it’s because of who you are Rowls" - quoted without comment.
But hey ho you are of course entitled to your opinion on this one - but let’s not pretend that’s why you started this thread.
2) you asked….i’m just pointing out the truth. It’s very difficult for people to ignore someone’s reputation or whatever they have said in the past even if it’s on a completely different subject. And that’s especially the case for someone with a history of your posting. Even you must admit that at the very least you can see how it would be perceived if a poster starts a thread on a subject he readily admits he has very little knowledge on about a person who has spoken out on a different subject that the poster fundamentally disagrees on and has stated those views several times on this message board.
-
- Posts: 7066
- Joined: Fri Sep 08, 2017 4:43 pm
- Been Liked: 2240 times
- Has Liked: 1618 times
- Location: Baxenden
Re: Gary Lineker
It’s brilliant mate. People arguing over matters that seemingly none of them really understand.
“Is this the right room for an argument?”
“I’ve told you once.”
This user liked this post: Bosscat
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
I think you can dbeate tax without needing to mention Brexit.Lancasterclaret wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 2:44 pmYou can't have a debate about economic growth in the UK without mentioning it
But you have failed to mention it repeatedly
I won't hesitate to agree when something is obvious, why do you find it so hard?
It's only if you believe that Brexit is somehow hampering the UK that you'd believe in its absolute necessity. I don't and so it's simple enough not to mention it.
We're not going to know the results of Brexit until at least another 5 years. That's a bare minimum. 20 years would be a better timescale.
Sure, you can read an article that says "this is better since Brexit" or "this is worse since Brexit" but it any of these articles go further than that and say "therefore Brexit is/isn't working" then it's hot air.
Brexit isn't in of itself a good or bad thing. It's what the country makes of it. If I thought the UK was going to be ruled by Socialism / Jeremy Corbyn for the next 20-30 years then I'd have been the biggest Remainer possible - because the success of Brexit will depend on how we interact with world markets.
The UK and EU economies have not diverged since Brexit. In the first four years the UK fared a few percentage points better. If you anyone claimed this "proved" Brexit was a roaring success they were wrong. In the next year, the reverse is predicted to be the case - the EU will fare a few percentage points better. If anyone claims this "proves" Brexit is a disaster they are wrong.
The UK and EU economies are still converged in their contractions and expansions.
The image below did not "prove" Bexit is brilliant:
The image below shows the UK and major EU economies are still converged. If anything, the steeper predicted curve for the UK hints that Brexit is set to benefit our economy overall but it's essentially 'no change'. It would be ballsy to read too much into this other than 'no significant change'
Here's a link to an interesting substack (four parts) that gives a good balanced view of some of the early Brexit impacts (both good and bad) written by an anonymous city trader:
https://konstantinkisin.substack.com/p/ ... dium=email
I think you're getting your Brexit news from too narrow a source TBH.
-
- Posts: 13269
- Joined: Wed Jan 20, 2016 11:00 pm
- Been Liked: 5102 times
- Has Liked: 5174 times
- Location: Montpellier, France
Re: Gary Lineker
Furthermore, the two major remaining economies in the EU (France and Germany) are both suffering from their own lockdown policies.
By printing money they have created financial instability.
In Germany it is causing major problems in the banking sector. In France it is forcing Macron to push through reforms to their pension schemes in order to save money.
These are both directly and indirectly the result of lockdown policies. Obviously nothing to do with Brexit as it's happening in France and Germany.
I don't need to provide links to these stories.
By printing money they have created financial instability.
In Germany it is causing major problems in the banking sector. In France it is forcing Macron to push through reforms to their pension schemes in order to save money.
These are both directly and indirectly the result of lockdown policies. Obviously nothing to do with Brexit as it's happening in France and Germany.
I don't need to provide links to these stories.
-
- Posts: 9474
- Joined: Sun Oct 16, 2016 10:47 pm
- Been Liked: 1185 times
- Has Liked: 779 times
Re: Gary Lineker
It's refreshing that's what forums should be about people airing different views & debating reasonably without suffocation or people who aren't interested in what's been said trying to shut the thread down. I'm not particularly interested in Gary lineker & his taxing arrangements but it's easy not to get involved & stay on the fringes or completely avoid the thread.
-
- Posts: 2124
- Joined: Wed Jan 12, 2022 11:39 am
- Been Liked: 337 times
- Has Liked: 163 times
Re: Gary Lineker
Big Vinny K wrote: ↑Wed Mar 29, 2023 10:32 amLineker is not an employee of BBC - that’s just factually wrong.
He also has work with many other companies - BT, Spanish TV, many sponsorship deals etc. That is why he set up his media company. He set up a company just like millions of people in this country did. And he’s paid his tax in the same way as millions of company directors do.
If you honestly think that the HMRC have failed in their case because Lineker has expensive lawyers then you do not have a clue as to what has been happening in the last decade with IR35. Check out how many one consultancies for example have had long term contracts for the major banks for years…..and most of them only do work for the one bank not for multiple organisations like Lineker did. It’s the same in lots of the public sector too. Are all these tens and thousands of consultancy businesses also employing expensive lawyers to get round IR35 ?
Comparing Consultancies to contractors is erroneous because the Consultancy employs the consultants who pay PAYE. It's quite possible the Consultancies are then employing consultants but most I know pay PAYE albeit I guess some will be self-employed.
Morally and ethically, Lineker is an employee of the BBC.
As I state above. Loads of people on very ordinary wages who work for different organisations are forced to pay PAYE. Even agency workers have to pay PAYE when working for lots of companies.
It's one law for ordinary workers and another for the well paid or those who are prepared to do it.
And yes lots of people get into hot water over their tax status. The HMRC is not a frivolous organisation it collects the money that pays for the schools and social care. If it takes legal action it will do so with some intent to win.
And if it loses then we are all poorer as a community...!