‘Why I think it is right wealthy pay more tax’

11:00am Tuesday 14th August 2012 in News Photograph of the Author By Rhianne Pope

Mark Haddon Mark Haddon

news@oxfordmail.co.uk

author Mark Haddon has sparked debate after saying he should pay more tax because he is wealthy.

Mr Haddon, who wrote international bestseller The Curious Incident of the Dog in the Night-Time, says he and other wealthy residents could save others from being hit by spending cuts.

The comments were made in a letter to his MP, Oxford West and Abingdon’s Nicola Blackwood, and made public this weekend.

The letter read: “I’m a wealthy person.

“Austerity measures introduced by the coalition have caused real suffering to many people, but my comfortable life hasn’t changed in the slightest.

“Why have I, and people like me, been asked to contribute nothing?”.

A person earning more than £150,000 a year currently pays 50 per cent tax on earnings over that amount.

Anyone earning under £34,370 pays 20 per cent income tax.

Talking yesterday, Mr Haddon, who lives in North Oxford and attended Oxford University , said: “As has become increasingly obvious over the recent months there are plenty of wealthy people who think that they should pay less tax while benefits to the poor and disabled should be cut.

Related links

“And those people are, in my opinion, beyond contempt.”

He added: “For all those who suggest that I simply send an extra cheque to the HMRC are missing the point.

“I am talking about a systematic, moral and political problem, not personal feelings of guilt.

“And, in point of fact, I do send an extra cheque but I send it to Oxfam.”

Oxfordshire MPs gave a mixed response to the author’s ideas yesterday.

Wantage and Didcot Conservative MP Ed Vaizey said: “I think a balance has to be struck. We want to reward people who are successful as entrepreneurs and create jobs and wealth for the country that way.

“We want to attract inward investors and keep taxes at a reasonable rate.”

Oxford East MP Andrew Smith said: “I think people are a bit sceptical about wealthy people saying they want to pay more tax.

“But he is right on the need for greater fairness in the tax system.”

The tax system came under scrutiny earlier this year, when celebrities including Jimmy Carr and Gary Barlow were revealed as using legal tax avoidance schemes.

Miss Blackwood said: “Of course it is right that the wealthiest should contribute the most. “That is why I have supported measures taken by this Government to introduce progressive taxes by, for example, increasing stamp duty on high value property. “It’s also why I support measures which will take two million people on the lowest incomes out of tax altogether, and, of course, it’s why I support measures to tackle abuse of the tax system so that everyone, including the wealthiest, pays their fair share.”

Witney MP and Prime Minister David Cameron and Banbury MP Sir Tony Baldry were both unavailable for comment.

What do you think? Let us know your thoughts by emailing news@oxfordmail.co.uk

Comments(21)

Lord Palmerstone says...
1:11pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Why I think it is right that if I come out with self righteous claptrap I shall appear more virtuous than you little people. Now eat my shorts

Report this post »

jockox3 says...
1:25pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Well, as someone who is not wealthy I appear to be in the minority in the poll saying they should not pay more tax. But what we ought to have is tax on the right things. Tax tends to decrease the demand for whatever it is that is taxed. So we should not tax labour and should tax land and rent.

However, I would make an exception for people like Mr Haddon. His wealth appears to have come from rent. Copyright is a form of state granted rent that prevents me doing whatever I choose with my own property - my copy of Mr Haddon's book for example. So yes, he should pay some more of that rent back to the people who granted him it!

Report this post »

Sid Hunt says...
1:59pm Tue 14 Aug 12

How would the tax on land and rent work?

Report this post »

ruskie says...
2:07pm Tue 14 Aug 12

i think if he wants to pay more tax he should but already the rich put alot into the tax pot.
Maybe the government would be better off looking to cut benefits to what people need to live off without luxurys. sky, mobile phones, cigarettes, beer, etc are not necessities!

Report this post »

jockox3 says...
2:13pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Oh dear - you probably don't want me to go off on one about Land Value Tax here! But basically it's like rates but based only on the value of land not buildings. The logic is that land (actually location but in economics terms that is "land" - a factor of production not either capital or labour) has value because of the community around a location - services and infrastructure, or restrictions or permissions on things you can do with it and so on - not because of the person who for the time being owns or occupies that location. And the supply of land is relatively inelastic (thanks to planning and so on) so taxing land is most likely to fall on landowners who benefit from these services and permissions.

It's done in a variety of ways around the world, and was the main point of contention in the famous Lloyd-George's "People's Budget" of 1909 which got him into the almighty set to with the House of Lords.

Report this post »

Darkforbid says...
2:27pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Let me think Mmm... NO I think its right the wealthy pay ALL the Tax,,,

Report this post »

Megs says...
3:14pm Tue 14 Aug 12

How did Ms Blackwood vote on the VAT increase? Presumably against?

Report this post »

Lord Palmerstone says...
3:28pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Mr Haddon must suffer from dreadfully low self -esteem if he thinks that the clowns who are on the public payroll e.g last night's TV about the South Wales Police and Job Centres , are capable of spending his money better than he is himself.Mr. Haddon, have a good drink, go to a casino. You'll be spending your money better than our leaders could. You might even buy a Big Issue from Darkforbid so's he could have a little drink.

Report this post »

Andrew:Oxford says...
3:51pm Tue 14 Aug 12

The wealthy could pay more tax - just spend more on British made items...

Alternatively, perhaps just for Oxford, there could be a charity fund - "The Oxford Common Good Fund". The wealthiest people of Oxford voluntarily pay into a fund to spend on those little extra things that could make living in Oxford that bit better. The top donor (or their nominated representative) being guaranteed chairman role, the next 4 a place for them (or their nominated representative) on the board. With the remaining 4 positions being elected by the city councillors.

No expenses, no nonsense. Just spend, spend, spend the income on "luxuries" that would be for the "common good" of Oxford.



*Luxuries could be:-

Safe, clean public loos.
Hanging baskets, flower beds
Specialist teachers
School books
Libraries/Librarians

Additional policing for troublesome areas
Tourist Information

Report this post »

jockox3 says...
3:53pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Why on earth would you want politicians on a privately financed trust's board? They've got plenty enough to fritter away of everyone's money!

Report this post »

Andrew:Oxford says...
3:57pm Tue 14 Aug 12

jockox3 wrote:
Why on earth would you want politicians on a privately financed trust's board? They've got plenty enough to fritter away of everyone's money!
Got to give people the *perception* of balance and some kind of input...

Glad that's the only negative you could find with the idea though!

Report this post »

jockox3 says...
4:05pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Well, the main issues with it is not with the idea but the practice. As Albert Jay Nock wrote in response to increasing the size and competencies of the state in the thirties, when the state takes over responsibility for a function civil society tends not only to stop doing that function but grow less inclined to do other things it thinks ought to be a state function.

Civil society tends to atrophy. Philanthropy tends to drift toward more personal interests of the givers (such as arts or sports, say). Which is not to say those aren't important but that if the state is *supposed* to be doing something why *should* people feel obliged voluntarily to contribute to the bits their taxes are already supposed to deliver.

But yeah, if it worked, that would be fine, and quite fun. But I *would* do without the politicians on its board.

Report this post »

sparky123456 says...
5:28pm Tue 14 Aug 12

why on earth should the wealthy pay more tax? they've worked hard to become wealthy, whether that's through honest hard work and education. to entreprenurial investment or acts to inheritence of business from their previous hard working families. So for all of their efforts they're penalised. They go to work for 9 hours and get paid for 4.5?! how does that encourage young people that going to uni and spend tens of thousands on an education that wealth and success awaits them. Whilst on the flip side you're suggesting that taxes are lowered for low income individuals and the additional tax paid by the wealthy plugs the gap in a faulty welfare state so the low earning lazy individuals in society get more handouts. perhaps a better system would be to look at the national average income. Anything under it should be flat taxed at say 10%. then have thresholds that are far more reasonable eg Average up to £60k 20% £60k - £200k 40% £200k + 50% the wealthy would be less inclined to hunt out loopholes.

Report this post »

Danny A says...
6:10pm Tue 14 Aug 12

Another vote for LVT here, just look at all the Russian millions pooring into Oxfordshire property (North Oxford popular). This is not "investment" is a sink for wealth and the gains that accrue are unearned and not properly taxed and all at the expense of the people who actually work in Oxford who are priced out.

Also Haddon would be insane to take a >£150,000 salary. I'm sure his accountant has advised him to incorporate himself, take a minimum salary, and up pension contributions, pay into trust fund, collect dividends, corp tax on profits less expenses etc etc. These are all options the wealthy have for controlling their tax bill that the majority of us don't have.

Report this post »

Whopper w/o Pickle Cornmarket St says...
7:44pm Tue 14 Aug 12

C'mon, the only people that pay the right amount of tax are wage slaves like me. Nobody in their right minds are going to pay more than they need, and it would be interesting to see the accountants bill for the two MP'S who declined to comment.

Report this post »

museli says...
8:00am Wed 15 Aug 12

I'm amazed that so many of you seem to think the wealthy have earned their money. Almost all of it is either inherited and reinvested or accumulated by lucky gambles with stocks and shares, gambles that society and the tax payer pay for when they fail. Hardly anyone with a million pounds plus actually works, they just accumulate.

Authors like Haddon, along with well paid musicians etc and the very few genuinely productive business people are amongst the tiny minority of the rich who could possibly be said to have actually earned some of their wealth.

Meanwhile we are being fed this bullsh*t about the country being so short of money we can't care for our old and sick properly or educate and train our youngsters. There's plenty of money there - it's just sitting in offshore accounts and similar devices.

Of course the wealthy should pay more tax and the system of loopholes that let them hide wealth should be closed. This won't be happening with likes of our current PM, the privileged product of inherited wealth, though!

Report this post »

sparky123456 says...
4:43pm Wed 15 Aug 12

museli.... tell me where phillip green, alan sugar, theo paphitis, richard branson, jamie oliver got their money?? it wasn't inheritance.

also if it wasn't for the wealthy investing (yes its a gamble but it's an investment too) on stock markets do you actually know what would happen to the global economy. Stocks exist to create money or funds for a company. People take a gamble on that company using that investment to grow and increase the value of their worth. without stocks and shares there'd be no global money markets and no corporations on a mass scale. So if nobody had taken a punt on Mr Branson back in the day of him flogging CD's we'd have no Virgin Trains, planes, credit cards, northern rock wouldn't have been bought, we wouldn't have virgin music group or virgin megastores.
Wonder how many staff salaries that group pays for, how many families live off the risk and gamble investors took off the back of Virgin floating? how many people are indirectly employed by Mr Branson - the people that make the parts for trains, the HGV drivers that take goods to stores and airports. Also wonder how much corporation tax an empire like his pays?? so he might live half his life in America or the Virgin Islands and avoid some tax. So what??? I bet the taxes of his businesses covers a hell of a lot.

Report this post »

museli says...
6:01pm Wed 15 Aug 12

What a good example you choose sparky!

Richard Branson. Privately educated son of a barrister and grandson of a right-honourable - bet he had to grovel before the bank manager to get his start-up capital. Well managed public image though the criminal conviction for tax evasion does tarnish it a bit, bet he'd be standing for Police Commissioner if it wasn't for that one. Virgin avoid paying UK tax by off-shoring their profits to Geneva, if you don't know how this works read the link below. He then has the audacity to moan about attempts to tax air travel, always profit before the environment with his sort. The sale of Northern Rock to Virgin was at an estimated loss of £13 per head to every UK tax payer.

Just another rich boy making out to be one of the lads while he leaches of the working man and stashes his wad abroad. You can touch your forelock and lick his boots if you want but I don't reckon the country would have been any worse off if he'd never been born!

The only good thing I can say about the bloke is I doubt quite as dodgy as this latest bunch of 'businessmen' the government has just handed the rail commuters wages to.

http://taxjustice.bl
ogspot.co.uk/2011/07
/virgin-enterprise-o
ff-to-geneva-to.html

Report this post »

Lord Palmerstone says...
8:15pm Wed 15 Aug 12

"but I don't reckon the country would have been any worse off if he'd never been born!"
But of course had not all the dolees been born we would all be so sad and bereft.The State likes people to be beholden to it; that's why welfare is index linked and my wages aren't.Let Hadden pay more for indigents; he'll endow us with plenty of them.Good Boy!

Report this post »

sparky123456 says...
6:30pm Thu 16 Aug 12

he still started his business and employs both directly and indirectly hundreds of thousands of people. do you? as for off-shoring. hey if it can be done. do it. don't like either close loopholes or stop taxing the hell out of everyone who has a go at making some money in life.
I'm fed up of seeing prime real estate going to social housing and knowing that 40-50% of my annual salary pays to basically keep single mums popping out kids before they hit 21 and useless layabouts drinking cheap booze all day whilst I sit in an office 10 hours a day, every day. this godforsaken jeremy kyle society needs a bomb dropping on it. Here's one to rile you. Why not discount the riches taxes?? afterall private medical, private schools, private everything isn't hurting the benefits lot.

Report this post »

Lord Palmerstone says...
8:18am Sat 18 Aug 12

“As has become increasingly obvious over the recent months there are plenty of wealthy people who think that they should pay less tax while benefits to the poor and disabled should be cut.And those people are, in my opinion, beyond contempt.”
Thus saying, he hitched up his Lederhosen, leapt on the table,roared "Ein Volk, Ein Reich,Ein Fuhrer" and drained his litre Stein of Munchener Weissbrau in one .

Report this post »

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree