Free Markets, Free People

UK: Tax man to become paymaster?

In our apparent rush to be just like Europe, I wonder if our leaders would think this was a good idea:

The UK’s tax collection agency is putting forth a proposal that all employers send employee paychecks to the government, after which the government would deduct what it deems as the appropriate tax and pay the employees by bank transfer.

You know, George Orwell was an Englishman and, it seems, knowing their proclivities, he was right on target with "1984". Not the year, the outcome.

Besides the practical reasons for not doing this, the premise under which it operates is horrifying. It says, "the government has first claim on all money earned in this nation." That may indeed by true by law, but this would make it true in fact. It would essentially turn the government into your paymaster.

Never mind the huge and assuredly bloated and inefficient bureaucracy that would grow up around this, or the cost to taxpayers (who ironically, would then get less in their pay check than previously because of it), just what in the world would cause anyone to offer such a suggestion except the belief that government owns all the money anyway?

The proposal by Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs (HMRC) stresses the need for employers to provide real-time information to the government so that it can monitor all payments and make a better assessment of whether the correct tax is being paid.

You see, per the suggestion, it would be better for the government if this was implemented. Not you, government. You would pay for it of course and it would most likely cost you a pretty penny, but then you’re there to support government and make things easier for the bureaucrats – don’t you see?

Move a long citizen, nothing to see here.  Just report to work early or we’ll dock you paycheck.



Tweet about this on TwitterShare on FacebookShare on Google+Share on TumblrShare on StumbleUponShare on RedditPin on PinterestEmail this to someone

19 Responses to UK: Tax man to become paymaster?

  • Wow – off the scale terrible, on every level.

    The fact they can feel comfortable proposing it – if true – suggests a society gone very, very wrong.

    • It’s scary because it is a reminder that the deeper you invest into a nationalized economy, the easier it becomes to sink ever further into it.  Abandoning the idea means that you’ll have to go through a rough and painful stretch as you clean up your mess, and too few people want to make that sacrifice.  Better to continue to dig and dig in some sort of insane hope that by digging more and more, you might wind up in a shallower pit.

  • If Obama tried this, he would be throwing businessmen in front of the “pitchforks”

  • On a more positive note, you won’t need to worry about being audited.

  • Thatcher gave them one last chance. They blew it.

    • And yet so many of them feel so comfy dumping on her, even now.

      They deserve what they get.  Time to write them off.

  • How did such a once great and proud nation sink into a rabble of mindless, spineless sheep?

  • Don’t forget that this is the same HMRC that came up with the ruling (later supported by the courts) that they could tax people’s world wide income based on their revenue in Great Britain.  This applies mostly to athletes, but the ruling was that if an athlete earns 10% of his winnings in a given year in Britain, then Britain is entitled to tax his worldwide revenue – endorsements, appearance fees, equipment brands, etc – at the same rate.

  • Her Majesty and her govt. could suck my doodle.
    Prepare (if this is approved) for an influx of productive Brits.

  • If they tried that here, there wouldn’t be a harbor big enough.

  • The National Fair Taxation Act of 2011 will:

    — Save or create thousands of jobs

    — Reduce the tax accounting cost to businesses, especially small businesses, by up to 3000%

    — Ensure that every American, especially the rich, pays his fair share

    — Reduce the budget deficit

    — Put our economy on a sustainable footing for the 21st century

    Did I miss anything?


    • doc, please grant me two small quibbles…
      1. please, never adopt “saved or created” respecting jobs.  It is a perversion of reality;
      2. you can’t reduce something more than 100% (unless you assume it goes to a negative…in your case, a subsidy to business for accounting).

  • Isn’t this just a cousin of our version of taking taxes out before we even get our paychecks.

    I mean I have direct deposit. The government takes what it believes it is owed and then the rest goes to my bank account.

    And this particular congress seems to believe that my paycheck is their revenue and I should get just get over it.

    Yea, I realize that our way doesn’t “deem the appropriate tax,” but it isn’t that far off. Ask the rich.