Unpopular Opinion High Income Earners Pay too Much Tax

Trying2SaveABuck on 11/08/2022 - 12:48
Last edited 11/08/2022 - 13:17 by 1 other user

"3.6 per cent of Aussies account for more than 31 per cent of tax revenue.

The majority of tax revenue comes from those earning $90,001-$180,000 - which makes up 36.8 per cent of tax paid."

https://au.finance.yahoo.com/news/ato-reveals-how-much-tax-t…

According to the above source 2/3 of all tax collected come from 20% of the 'working' population. - that is an excessive amount of lifting from the top categorises and imho it is unfair but the media wont ever report it.

We need to change the system to tax 'wealth' and not 'earnings' no one should be paying more then 20-25 cents to a dollar of tax on money they earn to the ATO.

my unpopular opinion is higher income earners pay too much tax - change my mind?

Poll Options

617
High income earners pay too much tax (I agree)
654
I disagree with your opinion

Financial

Comments

brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 16:57

+1

Decreasing income tax and increasing GST, would increase taxation on those that can "avoid" paying income tax.
- Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:06
  
  Your theory is the rich who spend serious sums of money devising/working with special structures and schemes to "avoid" income tax wouldn't do exactly the same thing to GST if GST became "the new major tax"?
  - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 17:08
    
    +2
    
    How would they be avoiding a tax that is collected at the time of purchase?
    - Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:12
      
      I don't know, they've created international structures that artificially recreate where sales happen and income is earned (Double Irish Dutch Tax Sandwich please, hold the lettuce: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dutch_Sandwich ), you think there can't be some similarly convulted mechanism where purchases happen?
      - Kaz0551 on 11/08/2022 - 17:16
        
        @Crow K: If only you could nationalize companies actively participating in tax avoidance.
        
        Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:18
        
        @Kaz0551: You speak like it isn't a "this will make the economy shit the bed, sovereign risk" thing. "Ho hum, another private enterprise seized by the government".
        
        Kaz0551 on 11/08/2022 - 17:28
        
        +1
        
        @Crow K: The end of Swordfish
        
        Stanley : War? Who are we at war with?
        Gabriel : Anyone who impinges on America's freedom. Terrorist states, Stanley. Someone must bring their war to them. They bomb a church, we bomb ten. They hijack a plane, we take out an airport. They execute American tourists, we tactically nuke an entire city. Our job is to make terrorism so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to attack Americans.
        
        Our job is to make tax avoidance so horrific that it becomes unthinkable to avoid taxes.
        
        Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:45
        
        +3
        
        @Kaz0551: Well, when you're finished watching that piece of dystopian fiction about literally destroying your country's international business standing with maverick state-seized reappropriation of capital, let us know out in the real world with the existing tax system we have, right?
        
        In your wildest fantasies can you see 1. Australia actually doing this ["Hey Google, we now own your stuff"] and 2. It not causing every other multinational company in the world to abandon our backwater in a heartbeat ["Risk our entire branch over there for some couple million in sales? No thanks, good luck with doing your own thing"].
        
        But yeah, government tax models based off some philosophy from an action movie from 20 years ago. I've really seen it all.
        
        Kaz0551 on 11/08/2022 - 17:47
        
        @Crow K: =D
        
        Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:48
        
        @Kaz0551: NGL, I would have preferred anime villain sort of speech thing from the same era, but I'm coming up dry on what sort of series it would have been.
        
        ESEMCE on 12/08/2022 - 07:27
        
        @Crow K: This is literally a thread talking about "paying your fair share" and you disagree that International Conglomerates making Billions in Australia yet paying next to nothing in tax should not be chased for tax avoidance?
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 09:02
        
        @ESEMCE: That is exactly what I am not saying.
        
        Tax avoidance should absolutely be funded and pursued. It's probably the best return on government income we're going to get.
        
        "Nationalise the baddies" is the terrible nuclear option that is a lot of work and a lot of trouble. It is unrealistic to talk of it as a trivial, viable path.
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 16:29
        
        -1
        
        @Crow K:
        
        "Nationalise the baddies" is the terrible nuclear option
        
        Agree with you absolutely. Welcome to communist tyranny. Couldn’t believe what i was seeing today with nsw govt attacking our gas producers for getting the best price for their product. Now they are basically stealing their product by forcing them to sell their product for a lower price.
        
        We’re at a scary stage that is basically one step away from nationalising them and the tyranny that comes with it
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 16:40
        
        @Awoke: Perhaps, but recall the gas companies are only getting the NSW gas because of a deal the NSW government had with them. A renegotiation of "okay you're allowed this much gas, it will cost this much and nsw residents get first option to purchase it at an agreed price" is a natural evolution of the process.
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 16:43
        
        @Crow K:
        
        A renegotiation
        
        Right. With a gun to their head. Seems legit.
        
        Socialism disguised as negotiations.
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 16:45
        
        @Awoke: I think you're overstating things, but each to their own.
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 16:47
        
        @Crow K: You lefties are all the same.
        
        You know what they are doing is one step away from nationalising the private owners assets.
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 16:50
        
        +1
        
        @Awoke: Oh no, he's called me a leftie, well, before I burst into tears:
        
        "nationalising the private owners assets" is where you are going wrong. Is the gas the company's asset? No, it is not.
        
        Also remember, next time you walk on a footpath (that's not a private footpath) you are ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE SOCIALISMS
        
        now get out of my feed, you commie
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 16:56
        
        @Crow K: You do a deal and the government suddenly changes the rules on the deal you did. That’s not a market economy, that’s literally tyranny. Do you think that’s a good signal for investment? No, it’s literally what the greens want.
        
        Sure, vote green, and you’ll end up like bidens america where an ex president can get raided to investigate crimes. If they can do that to him, imagine what these lefties can do to us plebs.
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 16:59
        
        +1
        
        @Awoke:
        
        No, it’s literally what the greens want.
        Sure, vote green, and you’ll end up like bidens america where an ex president can get raided to investigate crimes. If they can do that to him, imagine what these lefties can do to us plebs.
        
        you've somehow found an excuse to link gas mining to the greens to then biden to then trump being issued a search warrant
        
        Thats a hell of a thought trail.
        You and SlavOz should make a Ted Talk duo on the problems with society. Would be a hit.
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 17:00
        
        @SBOB: And all you can do is attack me rather than my arguments coz you got nothing
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 17:05
        
        +3
        
        @Awoke:
        
        And all you can do is attack me rather than my arguments coz you got nothing
        
        sure.
        I find it amazing its always the brand new user accounts that seem to post the same far right wing content/complaints, trump related posts, anti vax posts etc
        Its like somehow their previous accounts ended up banned or something.
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 17:05
        
        +3
        
        @Awoke: "bidens america where an ex president can get raided to investigate crimes. If they can do that to him, imagine what these lefties can do to us plebs."
        
        Oh my God, you pretend to hate socialism and yet look at all the things you let live in your head rent free
        
        Imagine living in Australia and being this invested in all of that. This is an excellent opportunity to take a step back and start thinking for yourself.
        
        (also, Trump illegally took documents from the White House, and actively derailed the ongoing process between his lawyers and the US govt to send them back. The fact they had to resort to a search warrant to try to get some of them back is something that counts against Trump, not 'the system'. If you're a fan of law and order, then you would be condemning his behaviour, not seeing him as a marytr)
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 16:56
        
        +2
        
        @Crow K:
        
        Also remember, next time you walk on a footpath (that's not a private footpath) you are ACTIVELY PARTICIPATING IN THE SOCIALISMS
        
        wait till they twig that they are accessing the internet via hard wiring from the government supplied NBN or over the air via a government/ACMA controlled licensed spectrum frequency
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 16:53
        
        +1
        
        @Awoke:
        
        You lefties are all the same.
        
        quick…call them woke as well to really insult them
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 16:49
        
        +1
        
        @Awoke: true… we should just sell off all the finite one time resources that happen to reside in this country.
        There should be no benefit to the country that 'owns' those resources, and the company mining/extracting it should be the one that obtains all the benefits/profits, even if it means shortages or extreme price spikes in local markets due to limited 'local allocated' supplies.
        
        right :/
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 16:58
        
        @SBOB: We did a deal and now want to ‘renegotiate’. I’m sure that will be like a renegotiation that happens in china. The government gets to change the law and screw investors who did a deal in good faith. We should honour the deal we did and not just say ‘oh, nah, we want a better deal, coz we can’. Thats tyrannical behaviour no better than putin or xi
        
        SBOB on 12/08/2022 - 17:01
        
        +2
        
        @Awoke:
        
        We did a deal and now want to ‘renegotiate
        
        I assume you're completely over the details of his 'deal'? You're aware of all the terms and conditions of the contract and any applicable on-going contract periods or adjustment periods.
        Thats impressive. As the content and quality of you're past posts don't generally indicate that you work in the legal department of the government or a partner in top tier law firm in this country.
        
        or you've got $5k of a gas companies shares and worried its going to hurt your P&L report.
        
        but sure, keep ranting about socialism and china. Definitely some quality rational discussion going on
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 17:05
        
        @SBOB: Honestly your and CrowReally would do just wondefully around a socialist bonfire singing praise to your dear leaders adam bandt and bob brown
        
        Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 17:11
        
        +2
        
        @Awoke: I think this is my first "conservatives threating liberals with a good time" spotted in the wild.
        
        Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 17:13
        
        @Crow K: I’ll lol at that one. Give adam and bob a kiss on sbob’s behalf
      - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 17:28
        
        @Crow K:
        
        you think there can't be some similarly convulted mechanism where purchases happen?
        
        What you've listed above affects a very large amount of money, and, once setup, would be basically "set and forget".
        
        A convoluted system for every single item purchased would be far harder to implement.
        
        Crow K on 11/08/2022 - 17:38
        
        @brendanm: Nah, it's the above crazy system, only it's Special Company X that's doing all the purchases, etc.
        
        They will research and set up the way to avoid The Current Big Tax and then go on with their lives.
    - AustriaBargain on 11/08/2022 - 20:55
      
      +1
      
      Luxury yachts for business purposes, meaning they can just get their GST credits back.
- Mechz on 11/08/2022 - 18:22
  
  This would penalise poor people more than the target audience.
  - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 18:26
    
    How so? Essentials are generally GST free.
    - Mechz on 11/08/2022 - 18:35
      
      So you're saying poor people should only afford essential groceries, but petrol, electricity, internet, clothes, healthcare, education etc etc should become more expensive?
      - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 19:42
        
        @Mechz: They are also paying less income tax. Healthcare is free. Education is free.
        
        Mechz on 11/08/2022 - 21:16
        
        +1
        
        @brendanm: Essential health care so you don't die might be free, but Dental isn't. Mandatory school uniforms and field trips aren't free.
        
        Paying less tax because you earn less doesn't mean you have more money for these things.
        
        Just give up already. You're bad at economics.
        
        brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 21:44
        
        +2
        
        @Mechz:
        
        Paying less tax because you earn less doesn't mean you have more money for these things.
        
        What? They may pay more in gst, but will also pay less in income tax.
        
        Just give up already. You're bad at economics.
        
        Ironic.
    - Crow K on 12/08/2022 - 09:05
      
      You can do 3 things with your money: Spend, Save and Invest.
      
      GST is a tax on Spending.
      
      The poor don't do a lot of Saving or Investing.
      
      If you're poor and you Spend 100% of your income, 100% of your income is open to GST.
      
      Yes, there are GST free items that are bare essentials, but that doesn't change any of the above logic. Also, "be happy we aren't taxing your essentials" is a line straight out of a Dickens novel.
      - brendanm on 12/08/2022 - 10:46
        
        @Crow K:
        
        Also, "be happy we aren't taxing your essentials" is a line straight out of a Dickens novel.
        
        Please refer to my comment elsewhere in this thread, where I say that taxing essentials would be a terrible idea. I have never said this should happen.
        
        The logic behind increasing the GST, is that it taxes those who normally dodge tax.
- seraphim2017 on 11/08/2022 - 20:38
  
  +6
  
  GST disproportionately impacts lower income households who have to spend a larger proportion of income on essential goods and services.
  
  Removing negative gearing will do more for social inequity than anything else and be "free" for government. But would lose them the next 50 elections.
  - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 20:40
    
    -2
    
    GST disproportionately impacts lower income households who have to spend a larger proportion of income on essential goods and services.
    
    Gst doesn't apply to essential goods though…
    
    Removing negative gearing will do more for social inequity than anything else
    
    Yes, instead of getting a tax break while making a loss, landlord's will up the rent, so they are no longer making a loss. Sounds like it will work well.
    - seraphim2017 on 11/08/2022 - 21:03
      
      +2
      
      I thought only real basics were exempt from GST?
      Anything with even a whiff of "luxury" gets GST added doesn't it?
      
      Taxing a second domestic property heavily might release homes to the market? I don't know what the perfect answer is to reduce domestic housing supply being treated as a commodity but there is probably a mechanism that would work.
      - brendanm on 11/08/2022 - 21:07
        
        @seraphim2017:
        
        I thought only real basics were exempt from GST?
        Anything with even a whiff of "luxury" gets GST added doesn't it?
        
        You said essentials. You are welcome to look up exactly what this entails.
        
        Taxing a second domestic property heavily might release homes to the market?
        
        At prices that people can't afford to buy at? What if the people renting the house want to stay, but the buyers are not investors. They then have to try and find another place?
        
        I don't know what the perfect answer is to reduce domestic housing supply being treated as a commodity but there is probably a mechanism that would work.
        
        Limiting foreign ownership would be a good start. For the record, I don't actually have a problem with the removal of negative gearing, I just think that removing it isn't going to fix anything, contrary to the cries of "reeeeee remove negative gearing, greedy landlord's etc" from some people.
helpme on 11/08/2022 - 19:17

+9

1) Look at a game like monopoly, and what eventually happens in a random game of unchecked wealth funneling. You might think everyone should just be able to keep everything they own because they work for it, but then what happens. Even if you introduced a constant tax in monopoly, since it's constant, it doesn't actually do anything. Just like monopoly, so much of where you end up depends on luck, Veritasium did a video on this very pehenomenon.

2) We live in a society. Imagine currency was a singular food source, what happens if a few individuals hoards more than they consume in thousands of life times while others struggle to eat? Well, they'd probably end up eating the rich, so if you have more money than you can spend, it's probably in your best interest to give those in need a little bit just so they're comfortable enough not to revolt and society doesn't crumble and your money actually means something.

3) Some are hell bent on 'I eArN'T It So iT's MINE' which is fair, it's an appeal to natural rights. But I'd also argue two people putting in the same amount of work, contributing the same to society should be paid the same, that sounds fair right? Well that doesn't happen, so if you're earning enough to complain about the higher tax rate, you're pretty (profanity) well off if that's the only concern on your plate. The funny thing is, a lot of jobs that pay well don't actually contribute much to society. Think accountants who tries to minimise taxes for companies, employees for things like pokies, Casino executives, hedge fund managers, or what David Graeber refers to as 'bullshit jobs'. While those who actually contribute the most like nurses, teachers, cleaners, scientists etc. get paid almost nothing. Again, if this was the other way round, I'd almost agree with your post but how one gets to those figures these days isn't through hard work and contribution, it's through taking either from the middle class or the government. So here we have a group of people, probably working a high paying job that doesn't really add much value earning 3-10x as much as others, complaining about a higher tax to help maintain society which they took from in the first place. The amount of selfishness and narcissm on here is insane.

4) The system is rigged, so much nepotism in high paying roles and even something like medicine, where you can earn millions a year, are in favour of the wealthy who can send their kids to private schools, which are also funded by the government, while simultaneously eroding the quality of government schools. I bet it's these same people who argue how much they deserve their 6 or 7 figures while complaining about paying an extra 15% tax on every dollar over $180,000 to people earning 40k a year. Again, I'd almost agree with you if meritocracy was actually real, but we know it's not. If you want to talk about what's fair, we need to address this first because otherwise while you complain about having to give up more of 'what's yours', someone could make the argument that it was unfair they never had the opportunity to obtain what you did.

5) But hey, maybe you wouldn't have to pay so much if the government actually taxed multibillion dollar companies and nationalised our resources instead of giving them to private entities. So at the end of the day, who are you mad at? Those who earn 40-70k a year and struggle to get by or the politicians who (profanity) everyone over?

6) As others have pointed out, your wealth is probably a result of other peoples work who are often exploited. These people will cry free market but we also know that's a bullshit argument as it heavily relies so much on government policies. E.g. tradies in Asia don't earn anywhere near as much as here. But to even say that, is to disregard the hard work of others who got you to where you are, again, narcissism. I think I read somewhere a common trait among 'successful' people is that they overestimate how much of it was actually their own doing and hardwork.

Hence, why we need to tax people who earn more, more. If you earn enough to be concerned about that, consider yourself lucky. You're living in one of the greatest ages of humanity where we have food, water, and entertainment on demand while being wealthy. To then turn around and complain that you're paying too much tax…well, be thankful that's the worse thing in your life…
- xdigger on 12/08/2022 - 08:44
  
  Does that mean we should pay more to ensure that the workers in Asia get their fair share of wages? Lots are still living below poverty line there, more than in Australia.
  - helpme on 12/08/2022 - 12:49
    
    +1
    
    To some degree I think we all need to strive to making the world a better place as others have done over the past few decades and centuries and if we can afford it, then why not. The problem is we struggle to look after our own, let alone thinking about others.
    
    My point is, I think it's quite disgusting people on 200, 300, 400 thousand dollars a year complain about being taxed too much… Especially when you're taxed the same for the first 100k.
  - jzdhgkd on 15/08/2022 - 16:10
    
    This is why charities exist after all.
Awoke on 11/08/2022 - 19:57

+1

What an attempt at underhanded posting.

That’s what a progressive tax scale does.

A wealth tax is simply a tax on success. And it’s ongoing on the same wealth that’s already been taxes.

Get rid of regressive taxes like the gst
Blitz001 on 11/08/2022 - 19:57

+1

Why Would You Say Something So Controversial Yet So Brave?
peterw1 on 11/08/2022 - 20:34

despite what you thought Australia doesn't always look after minorities (and 3.6% is a minority)
- misu p on 12/08/2022 - 08:30
  
  +1
  
  Do rich people need to be looked after now? It is quite easy for them to not be in the minority if they choose to.
pulpfiction on 11/08/2022 - 20:37

These higher brackets hit people feeding off the fruits of society. Mostly white middle aged entitled shits. Might be some of those here?

The poor contribute less and the breakout value creators (wealthy) contribute proportionally less. This is fair, although room to tax the high income earners more.

Taxing non-inherited wealth is a terrible idea. Value creators go to great lengths for wealth, not income.
Lord Fart Bucket on 11/08/2022 - 20:50

+6

change my mind?

A mind needs to open to accept change.
AustriaBargain on 11/08/2022 - 20:53

+4

Everyone gets taxed exactly the same. The first 19k you make gets taxed exactly the same as the first 19k Clive Palmer makes.
SlavOz on 11/08/2022 - 21:11

+1

There can be no discussion on wealth equality while the people elected to serve us consistently earn millions a year on the backs of their voters.

It's a pyramid scheme, and the workers are at the bottom. I say politician's pay should be voted on by the people. PM's retirement pension should be based on their approval ratings when leaving office, and proportionally docked for every campaign promise that was not delivered.

Put some actual risk of failure in their jobs and incentivize hard work. Maybe that will be enough to get them of their asses instead of standing around holding a broom and pretending to look busy.
- leiiv on 11/08/2022 - 22:10
  
  +1
  
  Politicians salary is peanut compared to their other direct and indirect "benefits", whether they are in the form of material or immaterial.
- netjock on 12/08/2022 - 02:12
  
  If a Ponzi scheme is workers at the bottom get compensated by those with middle incomes who pay more tax than they take out of the system
  
  Either you need to find a better label than Ponzi or you are just trying to put lipstick on a pig.
  - SlavOz on 12/08/2022 - 10:33
    
    lol are you kidding? The government literally prints fake money or "IOU"s and then hands it out to different groups, taking a portion of their income in exchange. It's a money cleaning scheme - they exchange printed money with real money from your earned income and hope it doesn't collapse. The risk of inflation or recession is 100% on the workers, while the politicians at the top are guaranteed to profit either way.
    
    We saw this during COVID. "Sorry about losing your job and your home, but we're all in this together, so here's $20 for lunch while I go to the bank and deposit my pay rise".
    
    A good rule of thumb is to imagime if a private organisation did the exact same thing. Would it be legal or legit? Probably not. The government has a monopoly on crime (and violence, but I digress).
    - Awoke on 12/08/2022 - 11:46
      
      -3
      
      I know right. Look at what they’re doing to trump. What a witch hunt. If they can raid an ex presidents house to investigate crimes, imagine what they will able to do to us. Thugs
    - netjock on 12/08/2022 - 12:18
      
      +1
      
      The government literally prints fake money or "IOU"s and then hands it out to different groups
      
      You have no idea do you. You show me a video of the printing warehouse where all the money is being printed and shipped to these interest groups?
      
      You people spread FUD to prop up dubious investment schemes (Celsius etc also the same stuff with gold holding funds where only people making a profit is the companies running it).
      
      Your money printing is government issuing bonds to willing buyers and then using that borrowed money to fund their spending. The bonds are backed by the government ability to levy taxes on the population.
      
      Even when people talk about US central banking or our RBA holding government bonds as a form of "money printing" it isn't because these liabilities for the government just don't get written off they are again backed up by ability to tax the population. Money has to be paid back it is just a matter of time, if government wants to pay it back quickly it just means deflation because you withdraw money from the economy and the economy shrinks really quickly. If the RBA or the US central bank wants to sell those bonds in the open market there is plenty of willing buyers. Investors were buying German government bonds at negative yields.
      
      The best part about all this is you helicopter money, money printers go burrr crowd keep on talking about the same thing like a broken clock. In 2009/10 a massive bail out for the banks. Guess what. No inflation for the next 10 years at the CPI level (yes property and shares went way up but that is explained by low interest rates means discount rates on future cash flows become lower). 2020 with COVID the government gives money directly to the people and CPI flies because people are spending like crazy. If you want to see who's fault it is, it is probably you, your family, your friends, your colleagues and neighbors. Regular people sending inflation to the moon and debasing all of our savings.
      
      If people want to raise taxes they better hope the government won't spend it because it will cause inflation elsewhere.
sjj89 on 11/08/2022 - 21:58

+7

I’m in the upper end of that bracket and I disagree with you
FlyingMiffy on 11/08/2022 - 22:12

+3

Yeap couldn't agree more. The income tax for individuals do nothing to encourage people into work. The more you work, the more you donate to others that don't. Bring on the Stage 3 tax cuts now!!
Shaddolf on 11/08/2022 - 22:19

+3

Ok so are you proposing that

a) we have less tax revenue than we do currently

Or

b) we increase tax on lower income earners to offset whatever saving you suggest for the wealthy

Both of the above seen like worse options than the status quo.
Randolph Duke on 11/08/2022 - 22:34

+1

I disagree, and I vehemently disagree with the incoming flattening of the tax brackets proposed by the Libs and matched by Labor. I’m not against the brackets moving yearly with CPI.
- netjock on 12/08/2022 - 01:58
  
  So called flattening is basically just a CPI adjustment dressed up as a tax cut.
  - Randolph Duke on 12/08/2022 - 09:46
    
    It’s more than that. The amount of tax high earners (I’m one) will no longer have to pay is substantial, I don’t see it as sustainable without further cuts in critical services.
Eeples on 11/08/2022 - 22:44

+1

There is a certain level of income required to live in this country due to the cost of shelter, food, and such.
A flat rate of tax could mean that many people's income falls below that certain level. Higher-income earners would not have that problem.

Another way to tax wealth is, of course, inheritance tax aka death duties. Settings death duties with brackets starting from 10million dollars would be fine with me. (Let's see how long it takes before someone says slippery slope or claims the sky is falling).

A review of the whole taxation system I think is needed (For example: Are we really happy with ppl receiving the full old-aged pension while living in a 5 million dollar house?). Covid19 would have been a good reason to do just that. Oh well.
- netjock on 12/08/2022 - 02:01
  
  Reducing the cost of living is better than a tax cut and benefits more people especially those in need.
  - Eeples on 12/08/2022 - 07:31
    
    +1
    
    How do you reduce the cost of living ?
Dsquall on 11/08/2022 - 22:52

+5

I have a high paying job and work hard, had a think about the whole incentivising hard work etc.

Paying a different tax rate would not make me work any differently. I work hard because to get to where I am, I’ve always had to work hard and will continue to do so. What paying high taxes does make me consider, is moving overseas to countries with lower taxation.
- netjock on 12/08/2022 - 02:03
  
  Which countries and why not for each I would be most interested in.
  - xdigger on 12/08/2022 - 08:47
    
    +1
    
    I mentioned in another post, US/Singapore/HK, the latter two are 10-15% flat no deductions I believe. I have really smart mates who work in those economies and their technical contributions are lost to Australia.
    - netjock on 12/08/2022 - 09:15
      
      First point of clarification. Not everyone can work in those countries. Also not all skills are required. You need to be in the required niche. Also you might need to be of the right demographic.
      
      I did 10 years in London. It was good because I was in banking and the tax system favored contractors. Contractor tax arrangements reigned in and with Brexit less work in financial services. Apparently those that came before me had it even better!
    - helpme on 12/08/2022 - 22:05
      
      They also have some of the largest inequalities in the world…
baker bob on 11/08/2022 - 22:56

+1

It's too much tax either way. High income tax punishes people that work hard building careers and taxing wealth punishes people that didn't piss their money up the wall. The tax system is suited to people who half ass life.
TrulyUnicorn on 12/08/2022 - 00:59

Worth mentioning majority of Ozbargainers are quite "well off"and probably feel they pay too much tax lol.
- netjock on 12/08/2022 - 02:09
  
  Probably.
  
  My major question is always: sure you want to raise taxes for this (Medicare, dental, school teachers, nurses, doctors, public hospitals) so what is the end rate when you add it all up? 50% tax for everyone? Only people that need to balance the budget is high income earners (whether that be people living in $1m homes or $150k/200k, never a constant baseline here just people drawing a cut off to further their argument)
- cashless on 12/08/2022 - 17:59
  
  majority of Ozbargainers are quite "well off"
  
  Citation & proof please. Constantly read this BS in forums. Of course there’ll be some well off OzBargainers, some have posted on this thread, but to just blindly state that the majority are well off is ignorance.
  My hunch is that “most OzBargainers” are average people on average incomes. Disprove that
  - Quantumcat on 12/08/2022 - 19:57
    
    +1
    
    It's a meme, everyone on OzBargain earning 250+k etc. He doesn't really believe it just making a joke.
- Shorium on 12/08/2022 - 21:47
  
  Nah OzB is full of temporarily embarrassed millionaires.
Waltervp on 12/08/2022 - 07:47

+1

It's not that simple….as you can see people all have different opinions as well. Trouble is we need to keep an equitable happy working society. And that means the rich must carry the burden for the poor. If the rich weren't taxed more then there wouldn't be enough in the system for the sick and the poor to be catered for and then there will be civil unrest, more crime, less peace, and noone would be happy.

There have to be incentives to work though, and that may cost money too (job creation projects….), we don't want life on handouts to be too comfortable or noone would want to work for under $xxx and there would be no checkout staff, taxi drivers, or other low paying professions like… teachers.. as people prefer to stay home. But seriously we do rely on the rich to carry the bulk of the cost, like it or lump it. Also, the rich are able to get deals like the poor can't afford - buying in bulk, getting good accountants, company perks like cars and holidays, putting $$ away in super, driving reliable economical modern cars, healthy food, good clothing that lasts…
Widget on 12/08/2022 - 08:03

+3

Problem I see with income tax is, the harder you work, the more you're punished (taxed). If someone's in the lower bracket (not tax free threshold) and decide they need more money (family, house, starting business) and decide to get a 2nd job, or invest in education to get a better paying job, you move up a tax bracket, you get punished for working harder.

Personally, I don't think people should be hit harder just because they bring in more money. Tbh, I think people should be able to enjoy the fruits of their labor and if they work harder, get more money, good on them. Get rid of income tax, rework corporate, sales, import taxes. Aussies are taxed too much as it is.
imurgod on 12/08/2022 - 08:21

Today, $90 - $180K isn't the extraordinary income it was, say 10 years ago.

If you have a mortgage in any decent suburb in Sydney or Melbourne, it'd barely touch the sides.

No doubt that "high income earners" should pay their share of tax, but to carry the other 96% is crazy.

Also, 3.6% seems low. I thought that number would be higher.
- jv on 12/08/2022 - 12:07
  
  +1
  
  No doubt that "high income earners" should pay their share of tax
  
  As tax is paid as a % of income, they already pay more than their fair share. Disproportionally more…
  - imurgod on 12/08/2022 - 13:10
    
    -1
    
    Agree.
    
    It's literally a tax on people who work harder / smarter which, somewhat ironically, is partly used to fund the lifestyles of lazy people.
    - Eeples on 12/08/2022 - 20:10
      
      …such as old-aged pensioners in million-dollar homes.
      - imurgod on 12/08/2022 - 20:13
        
        @Eeples: And those who can't read……
        
        Eeples on 13/08/2022 - 11:09
        
        @imurgod: Indeed.
        
        Lazy old-aged pensioners. These are bottom feeders living in multimillion-dollar homes.
        Welfare spent on such ppl is way more than on younger welfare beneficiaries.
tabitha731 on 12/08/2022 - 08:28

Why do high income earners (including myself) ALWAYS have to compensate for the incompetence of the general public who claim to be on a lower income. I pushed myself to get to this income bracket, by doing the studies, and putting in the hours tolerating work non-ideal conditions. Not my fault you chise to be in a low income and expect to be on a higher income, without any real work to get to where the income justifies what your doing!
- misu p on 12/08/2022 - 08:42
  
  +8
  
  ya ya…. you "pulled yourself by your bootstraps"…. "I worked hard for my money", "the other just do not work as hard as I do"…. "it is their fault they are poor"…. you hit all the old tunes… or did you have well off parents that afforded to send you to study in a good place? Where exactly were you in percentages country-wise growing up?
  
  I mean I can at least admit it… I was lucky too while growing up. I never had to go hungry, I had a stable home… somebody exactly as smart as me and hard working as me could very well be much worse off just by luck alone.
- dvsbastard on 12/08/2022 - 12:01
  
  +4
  
  The "just work harder" is such a bad take. I work as hard today as I did when I started my first full time job, although I now earn 5x the amount. It isn't the hard work, but the specialised skill and experience that earns me the big bucks.
  
  There are many low skill, low specialisation jobs out there that require hard work but will rarely get you to a high income - you need good circumstances, good support and a bit of good luck no matter how hard you work if you want to escape being a low income earner for your working life.
- HangryCakeStore on 12/08/2022 - 20:21
  
  Money is power, with great power comes responsibilities.. something top ceos and top income earners get away with with too much privileges and ignorance
sashatheman on 12/08/2022 - 08:31

+6

Disagree, as someone who earns within that higher bracket, as long as the taxes are there to support a strong safety net, provide benefits to its citizens such as free healthcare i am all for it. I don't ever want to be like the US, where the wealth inequality is rampant, and huge amount of its citizens are living is dire poverty facing bankruptcy.
Yes reform and improvement is encouraged within the tax system e.g Stamp Duty vs Land tax, but I don't want to see the rich politicians keep lowering the tax breaks, with less and less revenue coming in for the governement which forces these social programs to be scrapped.
AlanHB on 12/08/2022 - 08:35

+2

The whole argument that higher wage earners pay more tax than others is a bit redundant. They make more money, of course they pay more tax. Even if you had a flat tax rate across all income barriers, I still wouldn't be surprised if people in the $90k-$170k range still paid more tax than others. There's a lot of people making that amount of money, and they make more money than the average income.
npnp on 12/08/2022 - 08:35

+4

There should be a third option for the poll,

"Some of high income earners pay more tax than they should have BUT some billionaires and top tier companies pay way too little tax and know their way around the subject of getting away paying little to no tax. While I'm okay with reducing the tax for those high income earners who don't try to pool the system and pay their tax, I strongly oppose of the cunning ways of the next level up people/firms getting away paying next to nothing but still maintaining their big brand names and wealth". I think most of the crowd here, regardless of the poll result would be similarly minded.
- xdigger on 12/08/2022 - 08:53
  
  +3
  
  Correct, billionaires and their politician lackeys like to turn the tax debate to those on minimum wages vs salaried employees on $300k, when the true debate should be why billionaires like Gina Rinehart are making huge profits off mining instead of those profits flowing back to Australia government coffers.
Tonyh87 on 12/08/2022 - 08:37

+1

I think we all pay too much income tax. People need to look back at history and realise that income tax is not the only option for raising revenue. In Australia, federal income tax was introduced during WW1 as a temporary measure to fund the war effort. The tax rates were between 3% and 25%, with most people paying no tax due to a high tax free threshold. The government raised most of it's revenue through customs and excise duties.

Unpopular Opinion High Income Earners Pay too Much Tax

Poll Options

Comments

New Forum Topics