Chancellor Preparing To Cut 50p Tax Rate In Budget

Posted: 16/03/2012 06:38 Updated: 17/03/2012 17:12

George Osborne
The chancellor is considering ditching the top tax rate

George Osborne is putting the finishing touches to his Budget amid claims he is prepared to cut the 50p top rate of tax.

Downing Street insisted the claims that the levy on earners over £150,000 would be reduced to 40p were "speculation" but government sources have confirmed the chancellor is set to introduce a "Downton Abbey" tax break for the television industry.

According to The Guardian, Osborne is set to push ahead with a reduction in the 50p rate after analysis found the levy is reaping far less for the Exchequer than expected.

A preliminary study, due to be published next week, is to show the tax on the highest earners is bringing in hundreds of millions, not the £2.6 billion predicted, the newspaper said.

Osborne has come under intense pressure from business leaders, as well as many in his own party, to slash the top rate of income tax amid claims it deters money-makers from being based in the UK. But some senior figures fear it would be politically dangerous to cut levies on the highest earners at a time of austerity.

Keep up to date with the Budget rumours..

David Cameron is set to meet Osborne, Nick Clegg and the Lib Dem chief secretary of the Treasury Danny Alexander today to thrash out the final details of Wednesday's budget.

The four men, known as the Quad, will need to finalise the speech as the details of the government's statement are set to go to the Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) to allow the independent body to work out its official forecasts.

Clegg and Alexander may push for the introduction of a 'mansion tax' on homes worth over £2m by way of compensation.

According to The Times Lib Dem sources have said the party is not “ideologically opposed” to getting rid of the 50p rate.

Leading Lib Dems warned Osborne that any cut to the top rate of tax must be matched by new taxes targeting the wealthy.

More than 100 Lib Dem council leaders and council group leaders have signed a letter to the Chancellor insisting the priority should be to help the poor by raising tax thresholds.

Similar letters have been sent by the Lib Dem leaders in the Scottish Parliament and the Welsh Assembly.

In their letter, the councillors say: "One choice the Government should make is to ensure the wealthy pay their fair share and speed up the plan for the burden to be lifted on the poorest.

"This also means that if there is ever any reduction in the 50p top rate of income tax then new taxes that target the rich must be introduced so the wealthy pay their share."

Quick Poll

Will Cutting The Top Rate Of Tax Boost The Economy?

VOTE

One industry that is set to benefit from next week's statement is high-end television production. Shows like Downton Abbey could benefit from a tax break worth tens of millions of pounds a year under plans expected to be announced in the 21 March Budget, the Press Association reported.

The chancellor is expected to announce a consultation on extending to cinematic-style TV production the existing tax relief worth £100 million a year to the UK film industry. TV companies could see their corporation tax burden reduced by around 20%-25% as a result of the changes being considered.

Osborne hopes to help British companies compete in the increasingly popular market for film-standard TV series, until now dominated by US hits like Mad Men and The Wire.

It is understood the relief will be aimed at "culturally British" programming to help support shows distinctive to the UK for export to the rest of the world.

Lord Fellowes welcomed the tax break proposal, saying: "British television is second to none but unfortunately, time and time again, great British programmes are being made overseas where the tax climate is more favourable.

"If the Budget can address this, it would be a fantastic move forward for our industry and the country as a whole, as a host of new productions would undoubtedly be produced here, as they certainly should be."

FOLLOW UK POLITICS

George Osborne is putting the finishing touches to his Budget amid claims he is prepared to cut the 50p top rate of tax. Downing Street insisted the claims that the levy on earners over £150,000 w...
George Osborne is putting the finishing touches to his Budget amid claims he is prepared to cut the 50p top rate of tax. Downing Street insisted the claims that the levy on earners over £150,000 w...
Filed by David Hobbs  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 254
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3 4 5  Next ›  Last »  (6 total)
09:54 on 17/03/2012
Hasn't he just given himself a pay rise?
09:11 on 17/03/2012
Will cutting the top rate of tax boost the British economy NO BUT IT WILL MAKE A LOT RICH PEOPLE RICHER !
09:06 on 17/03/2012
George Osborne = King Midus in reverse everything he touches turns to $-it for the people who actually work for a living,like regional salaries [18% cuts ] while he gives tax cuts to people on over £150,000 ,you can see mad Max just around the corner !
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
sioux01721
07:56 on 17/03/2012
This has been tried in the US for the past twelve years. Meanwhile the economy has continued to tank.
IT DOESN'T WORK.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
03:02 on 17/03/2012
Guess what i've got in my lovely red case ? Correct, a banana and an orange. ( its part of my 5 a day )... Don't forget... we're all in this together. If you didn't laugh, you'd cry.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
George McAulay
Delighted to meet you
20:40 on 16/03/2012
Giving tax cuts to the rich doesn't increase employment- just a better brand of champagne sold
22:41 on 16/03/2012
George McAulay - - it depends on what tax cuts you give to the rich .

If for example you say that any money you invest in a new start up business or in a small business employing no more than 100 or turnover max £ 5 million all profits wil be fre of Corporation Tax for 10 years and all dividends will be free of any income tax also for 10 years.


That way you would gets loads of capital for small businesses and all large businesses started out as small businesses at some point . There are only 4 ways to grow busines and create employment - Capital investment, increase R & D to develop new products and services, improve labour productivity to produce at lower unit costs and increase selling effort selling more to new and existing customers and selling new and improved products to them profitabily .


The only point of being in business is to create or find a customer and keep them happy so they return again and again - success is not guaranteed and is never compulsory - but profit comes from doing this successfully - business only can control its costs - markets determine prices .

There is no shortage of capital amongst the rich in the UK to invest - but it is much more profitable to invest it abroad as the post tax returns are better - simply make the conditions here competitive.
22:59 on 16/03/2012
that any money you invest in a new start up business or in a small business employing no more than 100 or turnover max £ 5 million all profits wil be fre of Corporation Tax for 10 years and all dividends will be free of any income tax also for 10 years.

Doesn't that sound a bit like those 'companies' set up by footballers and others into which they have their'fees' paid to aviod paying higher rate income tax?
Richard Britton
British Socialist Global Realist
20:07 on 16/03/2012
if it is "only hundreds of millions not billions" why is it so onerous for the many thousands who qualify to pay this tax?
20:02 on 16/03/2012
whatever the chancellor does,the rich can find a way round it.if he puts up income tax up for high earners,they will employ there best accountants to legally find ways of not paying it,thats partly the reason he is scrapping the 50p band,because all the rich just move there money off shore.its the really big companies who make billions in this country,who get away paying a small fraction in tax,because there accounts are off shore in places like switzerland,he needs to get more of that money in
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
George McAulay
Delighted to meet you
20:41 on 16/03/2012
F&F no 1 from Australia. Very true mate. Perhaps they need to close those loopholes somehow.
19:12 on 16/03/2012
He has done what all torys do look after there rich friends so if you have not much money this country will have you tax and leave there rich mates to get richer
19:13 on 16/03/2012
sorry your tax
18:44 on 16/03/2012
Typical Tory. Saving money for the rich and leaving the poor to pay as much as he can squeeze out of them. If he wants to really help people by changing tax he needs to double the bottom rate from £2,560 to £5,000 so more people with less than £20,000 a year earn more and pay less tax and he also needs to look at the next rate. When this rate was set around the current £35,000, that finger meant that you were a senior manager in an organisation or a very skilled artisan. Now quite a number of people earn this amount in there jobs such as lorry drivers, mobile salesmen, trainers, service managers etc. Anyone earning £30,000 - £35,000 has no incentive to move up the ladder or work extra hard as taking them over the £35K barrier means extra tax. This treshold needs to be brought into the 21st century.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
01:05 on 17/03/2012
As you so wisely state, this JOKER is protecting the interests of his own class at the expense of he working poor in society. These wealthy rogues never pay their fare share of taxes into society, as I found out when I was temporarily employed in a sheriff officers call centre to pursue non-paying poll tax and council tax payers. The biggest dodgers were of course those with bought houses and businesses?
13:06 on 17/03/2012
I know you are right. The is a need to re-write the laws pertaining to tax. There are so many loop holes in the tax laws that there are many consultants and firms being paid huge money to ensure the top 20% of society can eploit every loop hole available. It would be interesting if there were a charity set up to help the lower 20% of workers to help them seek the same avantages to see what the result would be.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Brethynda
My micro-bio is microbiotic.
18:21 on 16/03/2012
Of course Osborne will cut taxes for the rich. After all, if you can't do favors for your friends, who can you do them for? The help?
18:07 on 16/03/2012
This tax rate of 50% is on personal income, not profits made by a company. How much of this tax cut would be invested in the company they work for, can you see bank directors investing their tax gain back in to RBS for example, I cannot see how cutting this rate will create jobs a better way would be to look at ways to reduce tax directly on small company's as long as any tax saving is reinvested.
The arguement of cutting personal tax for people earning £150000 or more is going to create one job never mind the figures put about by those supporting a cut.
photo
TurnSeiki
Black Conservative
16:58 on 16/03/2012
Will it work? Well, let's just walk through that. It worked for Reagan & Clinton (with Newt's help). Obama's been doing it his way, or at least threatening to do it his way with the class warfare. How's his economy 4 years in? Reagan's sure was a lot better after "inheriting" Carter's debacle.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
Brethynda
My micro-bio is microbiotic.
18:21 on 16/03/2012
Debt. Debt. Debt. That was the Reagan legacy.
16:54 on 16/03/2012
Truth is the rich will never pay there fair share. The tax system was designed for the ordinary people and the people of this country accept it.
20:53 on 16/03/2012
alanfinddlay - the top 5% of earners actually pay 57% of all tax collected - the top 1% pay 30% of all tax collected ..

The problem with the 50% rate ( it is actually 62% not 50% ) is that many people who were prepared to pay 40% now start to look at ways of avoiding the 50% , they re- organise their income or employment contract and as a result pay a maximium of 26% or it can be as little as 10% depending on how we organise their affairs .

It was ill thought out in the first place - same with the " mansion tax " the biggest victim would be the National Trust who own all these big houses for the nation - over 75% of London £2 million plus homes are owned by tax exempt " non domiciles " like Tony Blair or rented by companies - very few relatively are privately owned and therefore taxable assets

So not only do HMRC not get 50% they don't even get the 40% they were previously getting . In practice the only people who would be stuck with paying the 50% would be public sector employees ( and not all of them ) - certainly any private sector employee can get his employer to re - organise their financial or employment affairs to avoid it
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
jessjesskk
Benevolent Zombie Power
10:38 on 18/03/2012
the key question is to know what is the fair share... I would be much more aligned with a system where people can benefit from their income as long as it is theirs and not the benefit of their parents wealth... the real wealthy are not those who earn more than 150k a year but those who have billions... i am very happy for them when they have earned it (gates, Slim, ...) but why in hell would their children continue to benefit from this wealth that they have not earned? this is where the money should come from... tax inheritance at a punitive rate above a relatively high number (say 95% above 20m) and allocate the proceeds to investments in infrastructure and education and debt reduction... then there would be a true redistributive system while keeping the incentive to work and create
15:35 on 16/03/2012
He's consistent, takes benefits away from some of the most vulnerable people in society (and I am not talking about the leeches at the lower end of the economic scale) while at the same time taking away the 50% rate of the wealthy, including the super wealthy.

The economics of pure evil.
photo
casual agent
Advocate for social justice
16:22 on 16/03/2012
I agree'...But who exactly are"The Leeches at the lower end of the scale?..
16:31 on 16/03/2012
By the lower end of the scale I mean income scale, ie anyone the rest of society.

There are a small minority of people who do leech off society. The vast majority of people on benefits need all the help they can get. Then there are those who get benefits and in no way, shape, or form do they need any help. I'm talking about people who work normal jobs or do jobs that are not registered as working.

In other words those people who get benefits and have absolutely no genuine need for them.

The more people who don't need benefits who take benefits leaves less in the pot for the people in real need.

Similarly they should scrap universal child benefit for people who have large salaries and use child benefit as a savings pot.