Gift Aid reform for charities

Gift Aid helped to transform voluntary giving. By replacing the legalistic Deed of Covenant system, it enabled millions more people to give donations to charity that were tax efficient and brought millions of more pounds into charities.

However, it is still an administrative headache for charities to operate and they still miss out on thousands of potential Gift Aided donations from people who, for whatever reason, fail to make a Gift Aid declaration.

Also, Gift Aid currently misses out the extra income that could come in from higher tax rate payers.

I propose two things, neither new, but both still waiting to be implemented:

1. That Gift Aid becomes an "opt out" system, rather than opt in. This will increase Gift Aid revenue for charities and make administering Gift Aid far simpler, thereby reducing charities' costs.

2. Charities can claim the Gift Aid for the higher rates, as well as the basic.

Why is this idea important?

Gift Aid helped to transform voluntary giving. By replacing the legalistic Deed of Covenant system, it enabled millions more people to give donations to charity that were tax efficient and brought millions of more pounds into charities.

However, it is still an administrative headache for charities to operate and they still miss out on thousands of potential Gift Aided donations from people who, for whatever reason, fail to make a Gift Aid declaration.

Also, Gift Aid currently misses out the extra income that could come in from higher tax rate payers.

I propose two things, neither new, but both still waiting to be implemented:

1. That Gift Aid becomes an "opt out" system, rather than opt in. This will increase Gift Aid revenue for charities and make administering Gift Aid far simpler, thereby reducing charities' costs.

2. Charities can claim the Gift Aid for the higher rates, as well as the basic.

Scrap Payment on Account

Payment on Account for small businesses is a killer. For instance if you had a better year last year than this, you still have to pay tax in advance based on last year's profits, and then claim it back the following year. It's madness – guilty until proven innocent!

Why is this idea important?

Payment on Account for small businesses is a killer. For instance if you had a better year last year than this, you still have to pay tax in advance based on last year's profits, and then claim it back the following year. It's madness – guilty until proven innocent!

Human rights in UK law

Repeal the" human rights " legislation incorporated into Uk law by the last government.

This law is only of use to criminals ,terrorists and lawyers using it to file frivolous law suites.

 

Repeal the tv licence fee -there is no need for a tax funded broadcaster in the 21st century.

Take out any wording in law that restricts homeowners protecting their property .

Why is this idea important?

Repeal the" human rights " legislation incorporated into Uk law by the last government.

This law is only of use to criminals ,terrorists and lawyers using it to file frivolous law suites.

 

Repeal the tv licence fee -there is no need for a tax funded broadcaster in the 21st century.

Take out any wording in law that restricts homeowners protecting their property .

The Reform of the Laws regarding Cannabis

Break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police
resources for higher priority tasks by:

– Retaining the classification of cannabis as a Class C drug, in line with the
recommendations of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which
the Government ignored.

– Adopting a policy of not prosecuting possession for own use, social supply to
adults or cultivation of cannabis plants for own use.

– Repealing Sections 8 (c) and (d) of the Misuse of Drugs Act so that it is no longer a
crime for the occupier or manager of premises to permit someone to use cannabis
on those premises.

– Permitting medical use of cannabis derivatives, subject to appropriate
pharmaceutical controls and the successful conclusion of current clinical trials.

– In the longer term, seeking to put the supply of cannabis on a legal, regulated
basis, subject to securing necessary renegotiation of the UN Conventions. The
Global Cannabis Commission report of September 20085, published as part of the
2009 UN drug policy review supports a policy of regulated availability to minimise
the harms associated with cannabis abuse, adding that much of this harm is a
result of prohibition itself.

This is taken from the Lib Dem`s own manifesto.

Why is this idea important?

Break the links between cannabis use and organised crime and release police
resources for higher priority tasks by:

– Retaining the classification of cannabis as a Class C drug, in line with the
recommendations of the Advisory Council on the Misuse of Drugs (ACMD), which
the Government ignored.

– Adopting a policy of not prosecuting possession for own use, social supply to
adults or cultivation of cannabis plants for own use.

– Repealing Sections 8 (c) and (d) of the Misuse of Drugs Act so that it is no longer a
crime for the occupier or manager of premises to permit someone to use cannabis
on those premises.

– Permitting medical use of cannabis derivatives, subject to appropriate
pharmaceutical controls and the successful conclusion of current clinical trials.

– In the longer term, seeking to put the supply of cannabis on a legal, regulated
basis, subject to securing necessary renegotiation of the UN Conventions. The
Global Cannabis Commission report of September 20085, published as part of the
2009 UN drug policy review supports a policy of regulated availability to minimise
the harms associated with cannabis abuse, adding that much of this harm is a
result of prohibition itself.

This is taken from the Lib Dem`s own manifesto.

Flat rate of tax for contractors

There are nearly 1.5 million independent consultants in the IT industry and many more in other industries who spend a lot of time and money trying to keep up with the ever changing and ever more complex tax system.  I believe that it is time to simplify matters for all concerned.

I believe that this could be achieved by introducing a flat rate of taxation for all independent consultants earning under the large company threshold.  This could be set at 22% (with a guarantee of no increase for 3 years and a maximum tax level to be preset) on all income (no personal allowances) to include NI up to a threshold of £300,000 (at which they would be adjudged a large company).

Make it deductible at source (by the agencies through which they contract or by the client if on a direct contract).

Why is this idea important?

There are nearly 1.5 million independent consultants in the IT industry and many more in other industries who spend a lot of time and money trying to keep up with the ever changing and ever more complex tax system.  I believe that it is time to simplify matters for all concerned.

I believe that this could be achieved by introducing a flat rate of taxation for all independent consultants earning under the large company threshold.  This could be set at 22% (with a guarantee of no increase for 3 years and a maximum tax level to be preset) on all income (no personal allowances) to include NI up to a threshold of £300,000 (at which they would be adjudged a large company).

Make it deductible at source (by the agencies through which they contract or by the client if on a direct contract).

abolish income tax

I think there are better ways to have someone to contribute to society than to tax them on there income. The current system is unfair as it punishes success and effort. One person is taking on benefits the other is getting taxed more than half of their income. As someone young it seems the path of least resistance to forget my potential and just say "oh well i am useless now give me a house, benefits and all the other hand outs and not have to give anything back".

It also makes the government needy on people working as much as possible. It encourages It a unbalance in some people lives.

 

ricky

Why is this idea important?

I think there are better ways to have someone to contribute to society than to tax them on there income. The current system is unfair as it punishes success and effort. One person is taking on benefits the other is getting taxed more than half of their income. As someone young it seems the path of least resistance to forget my potential and just say "oh well i am useless now give me a house, benefits and all the other hand outs and not have to give anything back".

It also makes the government needy on people working as much as possible. It encourages It a unbalance in some people lives.

 

ricky

Remove all speed limits on motorways

The current 70mph limit on our motorways is woefully outdated,
in the real world how many drivers actually abide by it?

I suggest a removal of the motorway speed limit, to be replaced by more charges of careless or dangerous driving.
Consider this,

Person A is driving on a motorway at 6am on clear dry Sunday morning,very few vehicles on the road.
They are travelling at 100mph.

Person B is driving on the same motorway in winter at a busy period,
weaving in and out of traffic at 70mph.

Who is more dangerous?

We need less arbitary rules and a move towards common sense allowing police to exercise their judgement.
 

Why is this idea important?

The current 70mph limit on our motorways is woefully outdated,
in the real world how many drivers actually abide by it?

I suggest a removal of the motorway speed limit, to be replaced by more charges of careless or dangerous driving.
Consider this,

Person A is driving on a motorway at 6am on clear dry Sunday morning,very few vehicles on the road.
They are travelling at 100mph.

Person B is driving on the same motorway in winter at a busy period,
weaving in and out of traffic at 70mph.

Who is more dangerous?

We need less arbitary rules and a move towards common sense allowing police to exercise their judgement.
 

Replace Dangerous Dog Act With Dog Ownership Test

Replace the flawed and outdated 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act with a national, compulsory dog ownership scheme, designed to raise standards of dog ownership and animal welfare, reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries as a result of dog attack and to rid the tax payer of the heavy burden of having to pay for irresponsible dog ownership.

Why is this idea important?

Replace the flawed and outdated 1991 Dangerous Dogs Act with a national, compulsory dog ownership scheme, designed to raise standards of dog ownership and animal welfare, reduce the number of deaths and serious injuries as a result of dog attack and to rid the tax payer of the heavy burden of having to pay for irresponsible dog ownership.

Pension at 50

The last government introduced tax laws (2004 finance act) which prevent people from accessing private pensions before the age of 55. This should be change to allow people to access a pension which they have planned for their future

I am a member of a pension scheme which is well organised, well funded and has for many years paid a pension from the age of 50 to people forced to leave work because of redundancy. The trustees have been forced by current legislation to change the minimum pension age to 55. As this is a private scheme there is no cost to the public when people draw a pension from this scheme.

There is however considerable cost to the benefit system when a 50 year old member with a young family is made redundant, and now must rely on state support for 15 years as the pension he has paid into for 32 years is no longer accessible.

Why is this idea important?

The last government introduced tax laws (2004 finance act) which prevent people from accessing private pensions before the age of 55. This should be change to allow people to access a pension which they have planned for their future

I am a member of a pension scheme which is well organised, well funded and has for many years paid a pension from the age of 50 to people forced to leave work because of redundancy. The trustees have been forced by current legislation to change the minimum pension age to 55. As this is a private scheme there is no cost to the public when people draw a pension from this scheme.

There is however considerable cost to the benefit system when a 50 year old member with a young family is made redundant, and now must rely on state support for 15 years as the pension he has paid into for 32 years is no longer accessible.

International Business

Open Britain as an International Tax friendly business centre. Allow companies outside the UK to register having only to pay on revenues generated inside the UK otherwise pay an annual fee of say £500.00

Why is this idea important?

Open Britain as an International Tax friendly business centre. Allow companies outside the UK to register having only to pay on revenues generated inside the UK otherwise pay an annual fee of say £500.00

The TV License re-evaluated

Understandably, there is a growing amount of hostility towards the TV license. Many see the License fee as just another tax and, perhaps, do not recognise the important part it plays in maintaining high quality and cheap broadcasting in Britain.

Britain has the best television and radio in the world and one of the most economical. The unique way broadcasting is funded through the TV license is a fundamental reason for this. Although the public may feel like they are paying twice to watch television and have no choice in the matter, in fact the license fee actually sets the price point for TV in Britain. Just look across the ocean to our neighbours in North America who have fully commercial television. A typical cable bill is $100 per month and the service is riddled with advertising every eight minutes.

The TV license is not a “BBC-TV tax”, yes it funds BBC television but also national and local radio services. The so-called “freeview” channels also benefit from it.

However, the BBC has changed over the last decade and become too commercial. Celebrities are paid far too handsome salaries and private production companies profit from BBC programming. It seems a shake up at the Beeb and a re-evaluation of the license fee would be in the publics’ interested. The uniqueness of the license fee should be protected but its revenue used in a new way.

My proposal is that the TV license is replaced with a “Broadcasting License” to reflect that the financial contributions from the license fee not only support BBC television production but local and national radio services and other independent TV broadcasters. We also need to recognise the changing way the public access broadcasting. The Broadcasting License should also support the internet/network infrastructure across the UK. The new license, as well as supporting the BBC, should also contribute to the development of a national fibre optic network and supply every UK license fee payer with free high-speed broadband internet access. Profits from the commercial arm of the BBC should also be used to support the national broadcasting and network infrastructure.

The BBC also needs to get back to its roots. It should become a television producer again rather than a publisher. It should reinvest in its production and post-production facilities so that it can make its own programming once more. The BBC should be making a wide spectrum of programming not just cheap commercial reality-type shows. It should be the world leader in training broadcasting professionals and in research and development of broadcasting technology. Its back catalogue of vintage programming and radio productions should be made available online for the public to access freely. No more ridiculous salaries for celebrities. The BBC does not need to pay these high wages, there are plenty more upcoming actors and presenters ready waiting to take they place without requiring Hollywood contracts.

In summary my proposals are:

  1. Ditch the current TV license for a new “Broadcasting License”.
  2. The License to also fund a national high-speed fibre optic network.
  3. Free high-speed broadband internet access for all license fee payers.
  4. The BBC to make its own television programmers in house.
  5. The BBC should be a world leader in broadcasting staff training and R&D.
  6. No more celebrities on Hollywood salaries.
  7. The BBC should be making TV programmes for all from costume dramas, to documentaries, educational, special interest, comedies, etc. Cut the cheap commercial reality and quiz shows.
  8. BBC worldwide profits re-invested in the broadcasting/network infrastructure.

The downside – there has to be one right?
The new Broadcasting License would be payable by any residence owning a TV, radio, or with any other means of accessing “Freeview” channels either through terrestrial, satellite, cable or via the internet.

Why is this idea important?

Understandably, there is a growing amount of hostility towards the TV license. Many see the License fee as just another tax and, perhaps, do not recognise the important part it plays in maintaining high quality and cheap broadcasting in Britain.

Britain has the best television and radio in the world and one of the most economical. The unique way broadcasting is funded through the TV license is a fundamental reason for this. Although the public may feel like they are paying twice to watch television and have no choice in the matter, in fact the license fee actually sets the price point for TV in Britain. Just look across the ocean to our neighbours in North America who have fully commercial television. A typical cable bill is $100 per month and the service is riddled with advertising every eight minutes.

The TV license is not a “BBC-TV tax”, yes it funds BBC television but also national and local radio services. The so-called “freeview” channels also benefit from it.

However, the BBC has changed over the last decade and become too commercial. Celebrities are paid far too handsome salaries and private production companies profit from BBC programming. It seems a shake up at the Beeb and a re-evaluation of the license fee would be in the publics’ interested. The uniqueness of the license fee should be protected but its revenue used in a new way.

My proposal is that the TV license is replaced with a “Broadcasting License” to reflect that the financial contributions from the license fee not only support BBC television production but local and national radio services and other independent TV broadcasters. We also need to recognise the changing way the public access broadcasting. The Broadcasting License should also support the internet/network infrastructure across the UK. The new license, as well as supporting the BBC, should also contribute to the development of a national fibre optic network and supply every UK license fee payer with free high-speed broadband internet access. Profits from the commercial arm of the BBC should also be used to support the national broadcasting and network infrastructure.

The BBC also needs to get back to its roots. It should become a television producer again rather than a publisher. It should reinvest in its production and post-production facilities so that it can make its own programming once more. The BBC should be making a wide spectrum of programming not just cheap commercial reality-type shows. It should be the world leader in training broadcasting professionals and in research and development of broadcasting technology. Its back catalogue of vintage programming and radio productions should be made available online for the public to access freely. No more ridiculous salaries for celebrities. The BBC does not need to pay these high wages, there are plenty more upcoming actors and presenters ready waiting to take they place without requiring Hollywood contracts.

In summary my proposals are:

  1. Ditch the current TV license for a new “Broadcasting License”.
  2. The License to also fund a national high-speed fibre optic network.
  3. Free high-speed broadband internet access for all license fee payers.
  4. The BBC to make its own television programmers in house.
  5. The BBC should be a world leader in broadcasting staff training and R&D.
  6. No more celebrities on Hollywood salaries.
  7. The BBC should be making TV programmes for all from costume dramas, to documentaries, educational, special interest, comedies, etc. Cut the cheap commercial reality and quiz shows.
  8. BBC worldwide profits re-invested in the broadcasting/network infrastructure.

The downside – there has to be one right?
The new Broadcasting License would be payable by any residence owning a TV, radio, or with any other means of accessing “Freeview” channels either through terrestrial, satellite, cable or via the internet.

Scrap council rates, as they do nothing to help us!

To scrap council business rates, I pay 9500 a year for nothing! It is a unfair tax, and a un fair law that we have to pay for it. May be understandable if the council actually did something for it.

Why is this idea important?

To scrap council business rates, I pay 9500 a year for nothing! It is a unfair tax, and a un fair law that we have to pay for it. May be understandable if the council actually did something for it.

Abolish the TV licence

I think it is time to abolish the TV licence. People should be allowed to choose what they wish to subscribe to & pay for ie Sky TV.

We should be allowed to choose if we want the BBC,not have it forced on us.

Why is this idea important?

I think it is time to abolish the TV licence. People should be allowed to choose what they wish to subscribe to & pay for ie Sky TV.

We should be allowed to choose if we want the BBC,not have it forced on us.

End IR35 immediately

IR35 was introduced to stop tax evasion and raise £300 million.  It did neither and just made it much more difficult for small business owners.  Many independent contractors have been caught up in expensive measures to demonstrate that they are not nor have any intention to be employees of the companies to whom they supply services.  They do not receive any of the benefits of being employees (holidays, sickness, benefits, pensions, training, expenses, etc,).

In addition, many badly worded confusing, often contradictory and regularly changed "questions" were put into PAYE and personal tax returns. 

Simply repeal IR35 and all references to service companies.  By all means make sure everyone pays the correct amount of tax, but  end this failed law.

Why is this idea important?

IR35 was introduced to stop tax evasion and raise £300 million.  It did neither and just made it much more difficult for small business owners.  Many independent contractors have been caught up in expensive measures to demonstrate that they are not nor have any intention to be employees of the companies to whom they supply services.  They do not receive any of the benefits of being employees (holidays, sickness, benefits, pensions, training, expenses, etc,).

In addition, many badly worded confusing, often contradictory and regularly changed "questions" were put into PAYE and personal tax returns. 

Simply repeal IR35 and all references to service companies.  By all means make sure everyone pays the correct amount of tax, but  end this failed law.