Mehdi Yasaee

@JonathanAy7481 @BladeoftheS Top 1% of tax payers does not mean top 1% of wealthy people. Wealthy don't have income and don't pay tax.

@BladeoftheS According to the latest HMRC statistics, the top 1% of UK income taxpayers pay 27.2% of all income tax collected. They receive about 12.4% of total pre-tax income, but contribute more than a quarter of income tax revenues because the tax system is progressive.

Mick Lynch wants a progressive wealth tax, which is a Green Party Policy, with the richest paying the same as everyone else on PAYE, 47%. That would bring in hundred of billions, it is time for the richest to pay what everyone else has been paying their whole lives. the richest to pay what everyone else has been paying their whole lives.

@DanielPriestley You're doing it wrong. You're still making profit. You need your operating costs to just match the revenue. Then presto, 0% tax. The £120 sunglasses is part of the PPE expense of working in sunny day!

A business owner wants to buy some sunglasses for £120… Step 1. Make a £1,320 sale Step 2. Pay the £1,056 of operating costs Step 3. You have £264 of pre-tax profit (20% margin) Step 4. Pay £66 corporation tax Step 5. Pay the £198 dividend Step 6. Now pay £78 dividend tax Step 7. £120 in your bank account to buy sunglasses of which £20 is VAT and £100 is the actual goods So for a business owner with 20% margins to buy £100 of goods they had to deliver £1320 of value and pay £164 of tax. … And then they call you greedy for not wanting to be taxed more.

@LBC @AnjuSolankiMEA Oh no. Billionaires and multimillionaires who are buying all the real estate will sell and move 😭

"We need to sort out the real problems in our country." Entrepreneur @AnjuSolankiMEA says a wealth tax won’t work and believes estimates it could raise £24 billion a year are 'completely wrong'.

@DanielPriestley No one wants to tax your wealth. We want to tax the return on the wealth which is not taxed currently. We tax peoples work but not the return of asset values. How is that fair.

One of the reasons I am so against wealth taxes is that they cross a line of giving government the power to seize property. Wealth is something people build with after-tax money. They earn, pay tax and then take a risk and invest their savings. That is the mechanism for creating wealth whether it be starting a business or buying and improving assets. Once you finally succeed, wealth taxes allow the government to simply reach into your life, put a value on what you own and take it. They are literally seizing your property. Property you own because of money you first earned and paid tax on. This is different in an important way from income tax. Income tax happens as you earn and … importantly…. you can choose to stop earning at any point if you want to. If a Government chose to tax income at 50% and you didn’t want to pay it, you could simply withhold your labour and choose not work. Not the same with a wealth tax - once you own it, it’s not actually yours… at any point the government can simply adjust the rate of wealth tax and remove it from you. Wealth tax is fundamental a breach in the principle of your right to own property. It’s also a slippery slope. Every tax is brought in as “only for the rich” and pretty soon it’s on everyone. There will be a situation whereby 51% of the population can simply vote to take everything away from the 49% who have more to take. Very reliably once there is a breach in the right to own property it descends into mob rule. The wealthy aren’t silly, they know this is the case and respond by removing all investment and wealth out of any country that breaches the principle of ownership of property. So @garyseconomics asks what I’m thinking? I’m thinking that a wealth tax is breach in the fundamental principle of the right to own property and a pathway to mob rule. If we are lucky it will do more harm to an economy than good. If it really takes off it will crash the economy.

@TaxJusticeUK Wealthy person uses their assets to get roughly 10% return annually. 2% is effectively a 20% tax on the return. They don't pay any other tax on these returns because it's "unrealized" yet it is leveraged to gain advantage.

A 2% tax on wealth over £10m IS a unifying policy. 99.97% of us wouldn't pay a penny, while the richest 0.03% would pay a modest amount they'd barely notice. But we'd all feel the difference £24billion could make. That's why 75% of people (incl. 75% of millionaires) back it.

Is it me or were England games more fun to watch. A bit boring this final #ESPARG

Has 5 at the back ever worked? 🤦‍♂️ #ENGARG

@tag4UK What did the Tories offer us before?

I am married with a young daughter, both myself and my husband work. -We are not entitled to housing benefit, or any other benefit for that matter. -We do not get free eye tests, free dental care or free prescriptions. -Our daughter is not entitled to free school meals, or free breakfast clubs, or free wrap around care, no help with her uniform. -We don’t get council tax discount, or any other discount. -We don’t get help with our energy bills, or low cost broadband. -We don’t get help with the cost of going to the cinema, or days out at theme parks. -My daughter is unable to play outside unsupervised, because you have failed to secure our borders and the streets aren’t safe. -If I work more hours, I fall into the higher tax band. Why should someone like me, vote for someone like you? @UKLabour @andyburnham What are you offering my family?

@antonliubich Yes, so much reward in the UK for the past 20years. We have the most competitive energy, real estate, automotive, tech markets. Soooo much reward. Companies and individual trusts and llc are doing soooo much investing and good for society. /sarcasm

Are the richest 1% and the top 1% of taxpayers the same people? Largely — but not entirely. Why? The UK tax code runs over 10 million words — twelve Bibles’ worth of reliefs and exemptions, each designed to reward behaviour the state deems useful for the society. The wealthy respond to those incentives. That’s what incentives are for. Want to punish them for it? You can. But reliefs are granted for creating jobs, funding R&D, investing where nobody else will. Kill the reward, kill the behaviour. Have you thought about this?

@CutMyTaxUK Fascinating how corporations are all dealing with razor thin profits.

Andy Burnham's plan to tax warehouses more in order to fund a rates reduction for high street premises is basically unviable and will end up punishing ordinary shoppers far more. “Such a move would crucify the supermarkets because they operate on thin margins as it is,” he said. “Punishing ‘big boxes’ means they are punishing the customers of big boxes — which is pretty much everyone, because everyone uses their services. It will just feed straight into price inflation.” a FTSE 100 retail chief executive told the FT. Warehouses' business rates bills have already risen by 58% over the past 3 years. There are only 1,900 large warehouses in England that already pay the top business rate and only 129 of them are operated by online-only retailers. The top ten most valuable warehouses in the UK are those owned by Lidl, Tesco, Next, John Lewis, Sports Direct and Marks and Spencer while only 3 are Amazon's. Amazon paid £190mn last year in business rates so the idea that this policy can be financed by hiking Amazon's rates more is pure fantasy. Even a doubling in the top rate on warehouses would not raise sufficient sums to fund Burnham’s proposed cut, said experts at tax firm Ryan. Robert Taylor of real estate adviser DTRE, said: “The irony is that the warehouse is the engine of the modern high street — including for the independent retailers this policy wants to help. Taxing the one part of the property market that has consistently delivered development, jobs and rates of growth to subsidise another is a political trade."

@samuel_leeds @DanNeidle These German models. How good are their "models" at predicting productivity increase of the general public by changing the tax rates?

Gary Economics has just ruined its credibility and proven that it clearly knows very little about economics. The absolute tax legend @DanNeidle destroyed Gary in his own documentary. The very documentary just a compilation of Gary being proven wrong time and time again about his "solution" to economic inequality. Let me know if you have watched it. The Dan Neidle debate has gotta be one of the best moments in the show!! #garystevenson @Channel4 @garyseconomics

@AllFutbolMX Waaah 😭 why don't you come out of your box so I can score,waaaah😭

A £2.5B England squad full of Premier League players had to park the bus against Mexico. 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁥󠁮󠁧󠁿🇲🇽

England Players! Absolute Warriors! #MEXENG

@DanielPriestley If you look at it from 1980s it is indeed rising. So what Gary says is correct.

Gary’s theory is that the cause of wealth inequality is wealth inequality. In his Oxford thesis he claims that wealthy people become rich, buy assets and then use their passive income to buy more and more assets. He also claims that the rich don’t pay taxes like the rest of us. If his theory was correct and the UK was experiencing a wealth inequality crisis the share of wealth held by the top 1% would be rising. It’s not - it’s been stable for decades. The two reasons we are seeing issues at the bottom of the economic pyramid is because of technology and low skilled migration. Technology is replacing entry level jobs and to the degree that there are entry level jobs the UK now has a large population of low skilled migrants competing for these jobs. Those two factors put massive downward pressure on people at the lower end of the economy. What we are seeing is millions of young people who are economically inactive. Millions of people whose only economic opportunity is to claim any available government benefits. It has nothing to do with the rich. The cost of housing has also risen. It’s not because a tiny group of elites buy up houses. It’s because the government had a decade of low interest rates and stimulus and an aging population don’t want to sell their homes and pay stamp duty on a smaller place. We actually have over 9M homes with 2+ spare rooms. Rich people are not interested in owning a 3BR terraced home in the midlands. It’s easy to blame the rich for the problems we see but the truth is hard to hear… The UK is only surviving because we still have about 3M high earners who are paying historically high taxes. Actually just 300,000 people (1 in 100) are paying a third of the taxes and 30,000 of them (1 in 1000) are paying 10% of the tax bill. In a country with 70M people a few football stadiums of hard working, responsible, enterprising people are paying disproportionate taxes and demonising them isn’t helpful or based on any accurate data.

@DanielPriestley @grok Number 5. This is theoretical tax for ultra rich. Reality is, most ultra rich, actually keep making losses or minimal profits.

@grok Create a comparison of the typical taxes paid by 5 people: 1. An office cleaner in London 2. An average office worker on median wage 3. A very high earner who makes base + bonuses and can claim some of their income as dividends 4. An ultra-high earner making base plus capital gains and dividends 5. An ultra-rich person who makes money mainly from dividends but also pays capital gains and stamp duty. In this example share the corresponding corporation tax paid in order for them to receive the dividends. Think longer and do real research. In each example share the effective tax rate and the total taxes paid. Use real data and real tax rates for the UK.

Is it possible that the massive outrage Gary and his crew feel is down to a complete misunderstanding of how tax on a wealthy individual works? When I spoke to Gary, it certainly appeared that way… Gary was unaware that: - there a different types of tax that layer on top of each other. - all the same taxes that apply to an individual also apply to a Duke. - theres a huge difference between taxing individuals, their companies, the revenues they make or the value of their assets. - income and asset values are different things.

@TheSalesBull1 It's as if there is no incentive for marriage and all the incentives for separated parents.

One parent earns £60,000 while mum stays home with the kids £14,643 gone in tax and NI Two £30,000 earners lose £9,761 Same money coming into the house £4,882 fine for your wife staying home

@CutMyTaxUK Now do the same calculations for corporate coffee shops and you will notice they pay much less tax.

The Times highlights the growing tax burden on a Walthamstow bakery run by Jenny Moseley. Increasing taxes are making the business uneconomic. Moseley’s business rates bill now is 219% higher than the amount she paid in 2024-25. The rises in the minimum wage & the London living wage, & the increase in employer national insurance have put up staff costs by 16%. "Electricity bills have gone up a lot as well. ” said. “We get to the end of each month and it’s like, are we going to be able to pay everyone? In January I had to take money out of my personal savings to pay my team because the costs have just become incredibly high and we’re not making any profit."

I'll be happy with the CGT or inheritance being reduced to 20% if my income tax of 45% gets reduced to 20% as well. Fair is fair.

@DanielPriestley Didn't Elon leverage Tesla stocks to buy twitter? So these 'unrealised gains' did gain him an advantage. Count me skeptical when companies self report loss or marginal profits yet revenue remains solid and ever increasing.

Gary reveals the error in his understanding on wealth. He assumes all wealth generates a 5% passive income. For Elon Musk the opposite is true. Elons companies have huge potential but lose billions. He recently sold 4% of SpaceX for $75B. On paper he’s worth a trillion but only because of the calculation of what the remaining 96% is worth if he sold it for the same price. In reality, SpaceX is not generating passive income. The raised money will be spent hiring armies of engineers to build and deploy new technology. Elon can’t easily sell his stake. He’s subject to locking clauses and if he started selling his stock it would cause the share price to tank. It’s the opposite of what Gary imagines wealth to be like - it’s not passive income it’s an overwhelming commitment to near impossible outcomes within punishing timescales. Somewhere along the way Gary must have met a rare wealthy individual who had his net worth tied up in bonds and then he assumed all wealth was the same. I’ve met many billionaires and none of them seemed to be enjoying passive income. All of them were running big businesses that employ thousands of people and delivering difficult outcomes at scale.