And the cuts just keep on coming !!

[aerospacemango]

The fact that the Indy states that " The biggest proportion (£5.8bn) was accounted for by individuals under-declaring on their tax self-assessment forms" and then goes on to state that "Companies underpaid £6.9bn in corporation tax, almost half of which was put down to deliberate avoidance by large firms" makes me wonder at the journo who wrote the piece.

 

Surely £6.9bn is BIGGER than £5.8bn, therefore, the biggest proportion is with Compnies not paying?

 

 

Shurely shome mishtake????

[teejay]

@aerospacemango Please, read the article again.

As stated in the article, there is an approximate cash economy of 14% GDP, which is over £200bn which goes untaxed, this economy is within the individual, sole trader and small business sphere, not large corporates. If you account for tax on that at roughly 40%, which is roughly the percentage of GDP the gov takes in taxes, that's £80bn.

The individual proportion is £5.8bn PLUS £1.3bn for ghost workers PLUS £1.8bn for undeclared second jobs, so £8.9bn.

The large corporation share of unpaid corporation tax is under 50% of the £6.9bn, so £3.45bn at most.

Even if we said all the unpaid VAT, NI, income tax, capital gains was not paid by large corporates, that's £26.9 bn. As all of these are also paid by sole traders and SME's, lets actually split it 50/50, so say £13.45bn each.

So, on the large corporate side we have £16.9bn, compared to a minimum of £25.8bn, going up to £105.8bn if you include the cash economy in lost revenue from individuals, sole traders and sme's.

[aerospacemango]

Private Eye | Official Site

 

I'd refer you to this link, to suggest that the £6.9bn figure is wrong. If that WAS the case, then I'm amazed to think that nearly ALL of it is due from Vodaphone.....

[teejay]

The £6bn from Vodafone was from over a decade ago when they bough Mannesmann, it's just they've been arguing for years over it. Yep, totally corrupt, I agree and they should've made an example out of them.

[Roberto]

These bonuses should be taxed at 65%+

 

Why should these people get HUGE bonuses, after nearly driving our country to the brink of bankruptcy? The toxic loan fiasco was driven by the major banks....some of which are STILL heavily in debt to the nation, for saving them, and yet at the first sign of profit, instead of paying us back, they whack out huge bonuses to their gamblers.

 

The bonuses, let's not forget, are on top of a six, and sometimes seven, figure salary. More gravy for the elitist express!

 

I dislike the bonuses going to these bankers too. Their open contempt for the rest of us is an awful thing, but like it or not it would be incredibly difficult to write a law forbidding payment of those bonuses without it having either far ranging and unintended consequences, or being thrown out of court on appeal the first time it was used due to it being overly discriminatory.

Edited November 26, 2010 by Roberto

[aerospacemango]

I dislike the bonuses going to these bankers too. Their open contempt for the rest of us is an awful thing, but like it or not it would be incredibly difficult to write a law forbidding payment of those bonuses without it having either far ranging and unintended consequences, or being thrown out of court on appeal the first time it was used due to it being overly discriminatory.

 

The point is not to outlaw them....but to tax them appropriately.

 

You are right about the difficulty of writing a law to forbid them, but taxing them at a punitive rate would go some way to restoring the balance between those who caused the crash, and those who are affected by it.

[Guest Guest]

The point is not to outlaw them....but to tax them appropriately.

 

You are right about the difficulty of writing a law to forbid them, but taxing them at a punitive rate would go some way to restoring the balance between those who caused the crash, and those who are affected by it.

 

The thing is though a big part of our economy relies on them. Lets face it, we have very few primary and secondary industries anymore, so the govt. arn't going to do anything to harm one of our main incomes.

Edited November 26, 2010 by Guest

[SpuffMonkey]

The thing is though a big part of our economy relies on them. Lets face it, we have very few primary and secondary industries anymore, so the govt. arn't going to do anything to harm one of our main incomes.

 

I'm sure I read that the net effect over the last 10 years was a loss after taking into account sorting out the mess they made...

 

Personally I can't see why there should be any bonuses until all the money that bailed them out has been repaid - given the bonus pots in the big banks are 7-10 billion - I can't see that this would be too terrible.

[Rydra]

Ok, so I'm 26, and a NM.

 

I have no A levels, having dropped out of 6th form before completion. I am married, and have a 35 year mortgage on a house, and between me and the wife we earn circa £40k per year. we do not live badly by any means, but things like my new bathroom i need will take me 6-8 months or more to save for, I cannot afford a car bigger than a 1.2l 10 year old Corsa, because of the insurance etc etc.

 

I have no relevant IT qualifications to my name at all, just my experience of 7 years of working in the IT industry.

And you know what, I need one! I have had 3 interviews in the last 18 months and some 60-80 job offers, 20 of them gone beyond first phone call. Every single one, except for my current position, i was trumped by someone "More qualified"

 

Now i've studied with the Open University on and off since I was 19. 2-3 years was spent studying Chemistry, and i've spent the last year or so picking up my first IT courses, mostly just starter stuff, and the plan is to do the 'proper' level/year 2 course next year.

 

I am in the situation, where I have a choice of having something of a life, and i'm not talking about going out clubbing every night.... I mean spending time with my wife, scouting, or even doing some of the DIY/housework my house desperately needs. God forbid i then find time for myself...

OR, I work on my courses.

I just don't have the time otherwise to do both. And with evening study such as the OU, I am looking at another 4 years for 'an open mixed degree' or 5-6 years for a full BSC honours in Computing of some sort, and stuck in the same job/salary/work until completion.

 

Why do I want a degree? Because I have proved time and again, that the jobs that will pay me more, in my line of work REQUIRE it. Without it, I will be trumped by someone with a degree every time.

 

For me to goto university under the new fee's, I would need approximately £50,000 (since my earning right now is ~£20k, my outgoings are 15-18k or more per year, plus tuition fee's, and no i cannot move as my wife's job is only available here, and it's a specialist field.)

 

Do I think degree's are undervalued? No. The problem lies deeper than that.

2 candidates for a job, one has a relevant degree + 5 years experience, the other has no degree and 7-8 years experience. One has a document proving he has the skills, the other just has his word that he can do the job.

From my experience, employers, 80-90% of the time will pick the degree student.

 

WHY? Because it's less risk. A person who has a relevant degree, will have the requirements to do the job you require, and you know it because they have a document to prove it. The other candidate MIGHT have more hands-on experience, MIGHT be better at the job.... But would you risk your high priority job on a MIGHT?

 

There should be less funding on degree's for the masses, more funding for apprenticeships and the like, more vocational courses for the skilled (but not "high tech") work. And push for more WORK EXPERIENCE! A degree should mark that you are specialised in your field, and good at it.

 

One possible solution should/could be that you cannot attend university without relevant work experience and a reference from an employer, and if a degree is offered by a university, there should be incentives for companies to hire graduates. And all courses should include some sort of work placement.

[Guest Guest]

A person who has a relevant degree, will have the requirements to do the job you require, and you know it because they have a document to prove it.

 

The thing is though thats no longer true (not that it was ever 100% true). How many people with degrees do you know who are absolutely useless? I don't know if its because the course material is not relevant or if they are making it easier to pass or what. I do know your pain though as alot of employers, especially in the public sector, seem to be under the illusion that a degree does mean something. Maybe its because HR doesn't understand CCNA, CCNP, MCSA etc where as everyone knows what a degree is. Hopefully in future years they will start to move away from that mindset.

[maniac]

Rydra, you are in a simelar position to where I was at your age, I earnt a simelar amount doing a simelar job, but I still opted not to go down the qualification route to better myself and just kept applying for better jobs. Eventually one of those took me on and I now earn £10k more than I did 3 years ago just through pure hard work. It's nonsense that people always take on people with degrees over those that don't, because they took me on here and I happened to see some of the other applications after I started, people with loads of very good qualifications, but apparently no personality at interview so they picked lil old me because they liked me, it was that simple. Charisma really is the key to opportunity.

 

Mike.

[Rydra]

Rydra, you are in a simelar position to where I was at your age, I earnt a simelar amount doing a simelar job, but I still opted not to go down the qualification route to better myself and just kept applying for better jobs. Eventually one of those took me on and I now earn £10k more than I did 3 years ago just through pure hard work. It's nonsense that people always take on people with degrees over those that don't, because they took me on here and I happened to see some of the other applications after I started, people with loads of very good qualifications, but apparently no personality at interview so they picked lil old me because they liked me, it was that simple. Charisma really is the key to opportunity.

 

Mike.

 

Funny really, I've been turned down on 4 jobs with them saying "We really liked you and your personality, but the other guy had more experience/qualifications"

[maniac]

Funny really, I've been turned down on 4 jobs with them saying "We really liked you and your personality, but the other guy had more experience/qualifications"

 

Yes, I got turned down for lots of jobs for that reason as well, but it doesn't mean they all will. I have no ICT qualifications what-so-ever, all my skills are learnt on the job and the highest qualification I have in any subject is 'A' level, but I have progressed my way to where I am now off the back of my expeience and hard work. I only started working in IT at the age of 23 after I got bored with Retail. Every school I've ever worked at has tried to keep me as well by offering me more money to stay (although they never succeed) so I must be doing something right. All I'm saying is qualifications are not the only way, they really aren't.

[Rydra]

Then again, i've also by the same employer been turned down for being too shy and young (then hiring a person 3 weeks older than me!), then 9 months later they turned me down again for being overconfident!

[maniac]

Then again, i've also by the same employer been turned down for being too shy and young (then hiring a person 3 weeks older than me!), then 9 months later they turned me down again for being overconfident!

 

Tut tut, I believe discriminating on age is actually illegal!

[GrumbleDook]

I've previously said how poor my IT Qualifications are so no need to repeat ... but hard work, demonstration of experience and good references do you a world of good.

 

A degree shows that you have the ability to learn and adapt. That is the main reason people want it.

 

Then again I have failed to make even the initial cut of some darned good jobs over the years through not having a degree because it is school/college/institute policy that to work at a particular level you have to have a degree or equivalent. That is why I am still trying to do some OU studying (now going for an Open Degree instead of a specific one) but have also gotten things like PRINCE2 done. I'm still trying to get round to sorting out CITP status too.

[jcollings]

@Rydra - I don't want to quote your whole post as it is quite long but I have to say I totally disagree. I've interviewed and appointed many technical staff over my years in IT management and having or not having a degree has never played a part in it. That's appointing trainee technicians to network managers and above. It isn't something that I can recall making the difference between getting shortlisted or being appointed even once in that time.

 

I also don't have a degree and again I haven't ever felt the impact when job hunting. I have beaten many better qualified people in many job interviews and again I am confident that not having the degree hasn't overly disadvanteged me.

 

To be honest I think when employers say things like "more experience/qualifications" it's often just a cop out and a quick way to fob you off.

 

Personally, as a manager I'd take solid experience (backed up with references) over a degree most days of the week.

[gshaw]

I'm with Grumbledook and jcollings on this one, I went down the work route rather than degree and would say the experience, skills and contacts gained in that time have been much more valuable thus far

 

Through work I've also got training in various areas and although I've not gone down the MCSE route I've got ITIL and a few Learning Tree course passes that show the theory and practical sides are there. That's where I say degrees fall down.. often it's a case of all talk and no do from some of the people I've seen.

 

I do interviews for our technician posts and as yet each time the non-degree people tend to be the ones that are more dynamic and have a better understanding of actually getting the job done compared to those that look great on paper but fail at the first sight of an open PC case

 

Some jobs you will always need degrees for; Doctors, Law etc that's just how it is but it all got a bit silly in other areas imo. In the last few years the words "or equivalent experience" were finding their way back onto job adverts and these cuts might actually bring some sense back and see that the entire population doesn't need a degree for the hell of it...