« Freedom of Speech | Main | Cosmic Rays and Global Warming »

February 11, 2007

Peter Hain on Bonuses.

The man has quite clearly lost it:

"City high-fliers should lose two thirds of their bonuses to deprived communities, claims Peter Hain, a candidate for Labour's deputy leadership. Their firms could otherwise face heavier regulation and tax."

Lessee: two thirds is 66%. They already pay 40% tax on the dosh, so he's actually suggesting that they pay 106% for the privilege of working in The City. Yes, that's the way to encourage our largest net exporter, don't you think?

""There's a real problem of people on average incomes feeling there's a sort of super rich class right at the top," he said. "What is it? Four thousand city workers receiving more than a million pounds each in bonuses. People don't feel that's proportionate."

Actually, the City firms are doing precisely and exactly what many urge all companies to do. They're sharing the profits with the workers. Just like John Lewis does, just like a worker's co-op, this is what we all want companies to do, isn't it? Share the wealth with those who create it?

Anyway, this is internal politics in the Labour Party, he's running for Deputy Leader and there's enough people motivated by envy in his electorate for this to resonate.

February 11, 2007 in Taxes | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00d834e2ad3153ef

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Peter Hain on Bonuses.:

Comments

These bonus payments are taxed at ~55% already. The employee part of the bonus will be taxed @ 41% (40% income tax + 1% NI), the employer will then have to pay an additional 12.8% in employer NI on top.

Posted by: Joe Blow | Feb 11, 2007 11:10:22 AM

Yes, it was for internal consumption by his party. Is he really the best they can come up with, for God's sake?... if so, I'd rather see Harriet get the job.

Posted by: icedink | Feb 11, 2007 11:19:53 AM

I think giving to charity is an excellent idea: Gordon brown will get no tax from the donation and the donor can direct the money to truly worthy causes that spend it wisely (the next large bonus I get will be going to charity).

If all that 55% marginal rate tax on the £8B bonuses went to charity and not the tax payer, then the Government would have to fill the gap by putting up stealth taxes (VAT, council tax, various levies) which hits the poor disproportionately. Ah, the law of unintended consequences.

Posted by: Kay Tie | Feb 11, 2007 12:13:16 PM

I think giving to charity is an excellent idea: Gordon brown will get no tax from the donation and the donor can direct the money to truly worthy causes that spend it wisely (the next large bonus I get will be going to charity).

If all that 55% marginal rate tax on the £8B bonuses went to charity and not the tax payer, then the Government would have to fill the gap by putting up stealth taxes (VAT, council tax, various levies) which hits the poor disproportionately. Ah, the law of unintended consequences.

Posted by: Kay Tie | Feb 11, 2007 12:13:54 PM

What proportion of his over-generous pension will Hain give to charity? What proportion of the grace-and-favour residence that he expects soon?

Posted by: dearieme | Feb 11, 2007 5:04:01 PM

Soak the rich! Class war!

Ah, takes me back........

Posted by: Mark | Feb 11, 2007 8:52:02 PM

But they're only getting the cash because of an absurdly rapid general increase in the money supply - liquidity worldwide - which tends to reduce the value of Joe Normal's savings. Fiat currency being manipulated by Government, essentially.

Posted by: Mike Davies | Feb 12, 2007 2:23:57 AM