[Football] Where now for football?

[essbee1]

We’ll never have a better chance.

If the Premier League does this mooted super summer training ground live stream **** fest whilst any type of lock down/distancing is still in effect then I for one will bow out. ( https://twitter.com/independent/status/1244590611916828673?s=21 )

Someone has to make a stand against the greed and bullshit we’re so often forced to swallow - VAR, kick off times, ticket prices etc - and if any chairmen/owners had an ounce of integrity they’d stand up against another vile showing of gluttony this represents.

If a single player gets injured and forces the health service to deflect from the greater good then it can sod the hell off. The article even talks about the need to take over an entire hospital of its own ffs. What complete and total bollocks.

Well said mate. I feel the same.

 

[GT49er]

i can see a short-term (3 years or so) Super-tax for anyone earning over say 250k to help the economy to recover. I think 66% would be fair...

Fair maybe - but wouldn't bring in enough extra revenue on its own, IMHO. 5% on basic rate might. Interesting times to come - for those of us who survive anyway.

 

[pauli cee]

Is no one thinking about Worthings promotion push amongst this national crisis!!!

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

i can see a short-term (3 years or so) Super-tax for anyone earning over say 250k to help the economy to recover. I think 66% would be fair...

The problem has always been this, charge the super rich 66% and they have enough wealth to stay out of the country for six months thus paying nothing or the bugger off altogether.

I think we should work harder to increase the tax free band at the bottom whilst taxing a reasonable amount for anyone earning above £45k, say that's the 40% band going to 42.5% and the above £150k band going to 47.5% move much above that and other countries will be more appealing.

People will say don't let them back in, don't let them use the NHS, they don't and won't care. What we don't want is for them to start investing elsewhere also otherwise we will have a long and deep recession.

 

[NooBHA]

The problem has always been this, charge the super rich 66% and they have enough wealth to stay out of the country for six months thus paying nothing or the bugger off altogether.

I think we should work harder to increase the tax free band at the bottom whilst taxing a reasonable amount for anyone earning above £45k, say that's the 40% band going to 42.5% and the above £150k band going to 47.5% move much above that and other countries will be more appealing.

People will say don't let them back in, don't let them use the NHS, they don't and won't care. What we don't want is for them to start investing elsewhere also otherwise we will have a long and deep recession.

They can't just stay out of the country for 6 months now and then come back. It used to be a full Fiscal year but not any more.

The Residency Tests are far more stringent now for people who leave and then Return.

 

[Springal]

Good on Spurs for cutting all non-playing staff wages by 20% for the next 2 months.

Playing staff still played in full

 

[NS Herald]

Good on Spurs for cutting all non-playing staff wages by 20% for the next 2 months.

Playing staff still played in full

Just seen the announcement of their Chairman ...... that's f***ing obscene ..... " to reduce the remuneration of all 550 non-playing directors and employees for April and May by 20% utilising, where appropriate, the Government’s furlough scheme"

Why the F*** should they look to utilise the furlough scheme when their players are earning millions!!

 

[sparkie]

I must say there is a moral question here for players to answer about covering the wages of club employees - without whom they couldn't do their jobs.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

They can't just stay out of the country for 6 months now and then come back. It used to be a full Fiscal year but not any more.

The Residency Tests are far more stringent now for people who leave and then Return.

For capital gains yes, but income tax?

 

[NooBHA]

For capital gains yes, but income tax?

Yes

You can't just pop off and do 18 months in Dubai earning Tax Free and then pop back without potential tax consequences now. They have ''Automatic Ties Tests'' in place now

https://www.gov.uk/government/publi...ce-note-for-statutory-residence-test-srt-rdr3

 

[Tony Towner's Fridge]

It's relegated to where it should be.....I for one haven't missed it a jot and hope that it doesn't come back until August at the earliest. We need to see this C-19 crisis through to a sensible (near) end game and then get the economy back up and running ASAP. Football will re-start some time, of that I have no doubt but the loss of many thousands of folk must realign our expectations and behaviours.


TNBA

TTF

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

The problem has always been this, charge the super rich 66% and they have enough wealth to stay out of the country for six months thus paying nothing or the bugger off altogether.

I think we should work harder to increase the tax free band at the bottom whilst taxing a reasonable amount for anyone earning above £45k, say that's the 40% band going to 42.5% and the above £150k band going to 47.5% move much above that and other countries will be more appealing.

People will say don't let them back in, don't let them use the NHS, they don't and won't care. What we don't want is for them to start investing elsewhere also otherwise we will have a long and deep recession.

Apologies to slightly derail this discussion, but all would be simpler with a sensible taxation system. I have argued the toss before with people who don't understand what a percentage is, so forgive me for this very simple explanation....

If you own 20% of all shares in a company you would expect to take 20% of profits. If you own 1%, then your cut should be 1%. Fair? Indeed. And this is basically how it works.

Now, let us imagine.....if there are 5 people in the whole world, earning 50, 20, 10, 10 and 10% of the total world income, and it was agreed they would all pay tax according to income, you wouldn't expect all five to pay the same amount, would you? No. If total world income were £100, the bloke earning 50% of it would pay the most, right? Let's say 10% (£5 in his case). If everyone else paid 10% they would pay £2, £1, £1 and £1, right? Total tax take, £10. Fair? I think so.

So how is graduated tax fair? Why should the bloke on £20 pay 15% (£3) and the bloke on £50 pay 20% (£10)? That's already more than the total tax take when everyone pays the same %, so the three blokes on £1 need not pay any tax. Hooray for them. But that isn't fair.

The latter is our tax system and it is absurd. Especially when the bloke paying £10 (or, asked to pay £10) pays a tax avoidance expert £1 and the expert manages to 'avoid' him 8 of the £10 he would have had to pay in tax. Instead of happily paying £2 in the fair system, he ends up paying only £1 in tax, and £1 to his tax avoidance adviser, and the total tax take the government gets falls from £13 to £3. And that is what happens in our system.

The sooner we introduce a single % tax rate on income, no exceptions, no avoidance, no discounts for the poor, no need for tax advisors, no need for complicated and inefficient tax chasers in Revenue, the better. Total tax take would increase, it would seem fairer, and low income people would feel more enfranchised and less second class citizens. The bosses would also be able to give them all a pay rise.

The problem is people like my brother insist that this is not fair, and that the more you earn the more you should pay in tax as a % of your earnings. Earn £20K, pay 10% (£2K). Earn £50K, pay 15% (£7.5K). Earn £200K, pay 50% (£100K). ****ing bonkers. And yet this is our system used for 100 years or more by tories and labour alike to fiddle about with, for wooing target members of the electorate. A waste of time, energy and....money.

If we want to fix our economy after COVID we need to bin all this bollocks and introduce a flat % rate of tax, no exemptions.

 

[Sorrel]

The best thing football in general can do is agree to cancel the season, have no idiotic lawsuits, cut wages across the board for footballers - all clubs agreeing a percentage cut for all players and use that money to help other staff members - refuse to deal with agents anymore and realise when they come back it can't be the same as before.

 

[Live by the sea]

Clubs could lend their facilities, to people that need help. Like drs to nhs , cars to transport food etc .

 

[Leekbrookgull]

It seems that steps 1and 2 now suspended ?

 

[East Staffs Gull]

Apologies to slightly derail this discussion, but all would be simpler with a sensible taxation system. I have argued the toss before with people who don't understand what a percentage is, so forgive me for this very simple explanation....

If you own 20% of all shares in a company you would expect to take 20% of profits. If you own 1%, then your cut should be 1%. Fair? Indeed. And this is basically how it works.

Now, let us imagine.....if there are 5 people in the whole world, earning 50, 20, 10, 10 and 10% of the total world income, and it was agreed they would all pay tax according to income, you wouldn't expect all five to pay the same amount, would you? No. If total world income were £100, the bloke earning 50% of it would pay the most, right? Let's say 10% (£5 in his case). If everyone else paid 10% they would pay £2, £1, £1 and £1, right? Total tax take, £10. Fair? I think so.

So how is graduated tax fair? Why should the bloke on £20 pay 15% (£3) and the bloke on £50 pay 20% (£10)? That's already more than the total tax take when everyone pays the same %, so the three blokes on £1 need not pay any tax. Hooray for them. But that isn't fair.

The latter is our tax system and it is absurd. Especially when the bloke paying £10 (or, asked to pay £10) pays a tax avoidance expert £1 and the expert manages to 'avoid' him 8 of the £10 he would have had to pay in tax. Instead of happily paying £2 in the fair system, he ends up paying only £1 in tax, and £1 to his tax avoidance adviser, and the total tax take the government gets falls from £13 to £3. And that is what happens in our system.

The sooner we introduce a single % tax rate on income, no exceptions, no avoidance, no discounts for the poor, no need for tax advisors, no need for complicated and inefficient tax chasers in Revenue, the better. Total tax take would increase, it would seem fairer, and low income people would feel more enfranchised and less second class citizens. The bosses would also be able to give them all a pay rise.

The problem is people like my brother insist that this is not fair, and that the more you earn the more you should pay in tax as a % of your earnings. Earn £20K, pay 10% (£2K). Earn £50K, pay 15% (£7.5K). Earn £200K, pay 50% (£100K). ****ing bonkers. And yet this is our system used for 100 years or more by tories and labour alike to fiddle about with, for wooing target members of the electorate. A waste of time, energy and....money.

If we want to fix our economy after COVID we need to bin all this bollocks and introduce a flat % rate of tax, no exemptions.

Presumably you would also apply the same rationale to National Insurance contributions and also then combine NI and PAYE into a single tax? Would you care to hazard a guess at what the resultant single tax rate would be and how many people (mainly lower income and/or retired) would pay more tax as a consequence of the change?

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Presumably you would also apply the same rationale to National Insurance contributions and also then combine NI and PAYE into a single tax? Would you care to hazard a guess at what the resultant single tax rate would be and how many people (mainly lower income and/or retired) would pay more tax as a consequence of the change?

Yes.

No, and no.

I anticpate that more people would pay tax at the high and low end of earnings, many for the first time. I am also talking about INCOME tax here, only. I have views on other types of tax that are neither here nor there (albeit the system is too complicated and needs to be changed).

As for those at the low end of income, I must admit I am torn. I would like to see all earners pay income tax, at the same rate, but that would mean millions would pay income tax for the first time. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. But, as I said, perhaps the employer should shoulder the difference. It would be disruptive but we live in disruptive times.

I am not in favour of phasing in tax at the low end, or having an abrupt 'no need to pay income tax' threshold as this defeats the purpose of my reform. And reform is needed. We should all pay the same rate of income tax.

 

[East Staffs Gull]

Yes.

No, and no.

I anticpate that more people would pay tax at the high and low end of earnings, many for the first time. I am also talking about INCOME tax here, only. I have views on other types of tax that are neither here nor there (albeit the system is too complicated and needs to be changed).

As for those at the low end of income, I must admit I am torn. I would like to see all earners pay income tax, at the same rate, but that would mean millions would pay income tax for the first time. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. But, as I said, perhaps the employer should shoulder the difference. It would be disruptive but we live in disruptive times.

I am not in favour of phasing in tax at the low end, or having an abrupt 'no need to pay income tax' threshold as this defeats the purpose of my reform. And reform is needed. We should all pay the same rate of income tax.

At least the UK has fewer income tax rates than several EU countries! Personally, I think that we will see an amalgamation of the UK PAYE and NI arrangements into a single tax system before, if ever, we see a single tax rate.

Conscious that I’m in danger of derailing this thread, so will sign off at this point!

 

[Perfidious Albion]

" Football] It's relegated to where it should be.....I for one haven't missed it a jot and hope that it doesn't come back until August at the earliest"

Well, I bloomin well miss it! Every Saturday I really wish we had a game to get excited over. But do agree that we should not try and shoehorn in the remaining fixtures of this season .

As for the rest, I have been heartened by the warm hearted response of several players ,and no doubt others we don't know about, plus clubs like Albion doing their best to help the community.
Will things change in the future? I doubt it . As long as there is a tv audience for football the broadcasters will broadcast it . That puts shedloads of money in the top tier and everything else follows on. We would like it to be fairer but it won't be.

 

[Tim Over Whelmed]

Yes.

No, and no.

I anticpate that more people would pay tax at the high and low end of earnings, many for the first time. I am also talking about INCOME tax here, only. I have views on other types of tax that are neither here nor there (albeit the system is too complicated and needs to be changed).

As for those at the low end of income, I must admit I am torn. I would like to see all earners pay income tax, at the same rate, but that would mean millions would pay income tax for the first time. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas. But, as I said, perhaps the employer should shoulder the difference. It would be disruptive but we live in disruptive times.

I am not in favour of phasing in tax at the low end, or having an abrupt 'no need to pay income tax' threshold as this defeats the purpose of my reform. And reform is needed. We should all pay the same rate of income tax.

But HWT's right, at the moment we risk discouraging HNWI from staying in the UK as they'll see a better tax regime and have the ability to move around to find it.

If everyone paid 15% on all income I'd expect the take would be greater as you'd retain far more people with income of say £10-£50m a year paying 15% on it? The taxation system would be simpler because you couldn't or wouldn't manipulate so much?