|Inequality is perceived as class or race bias.|
However an analysis shows that the root cause is greed and corruption, in hierarchies of politics, law, finance and education.
These tax pages catalog UK's inequality problems in political finance (and `culture').
Laworjustice page does the same for policing and courts, where gender and age biases are subsets. Schools pages similarly expose education biases. Morals page examines the same problems - ever present, though covert in UK - in hierarchies of churches.
British Property Tax
The "Council Tax"
1. English Cabinet Minister C Parkinson defined it as a "fair property tax" - he lied.
If it was fair, everyone would pay the same percentage of their property value. This would also be the easiest and most economical way of raising all the necessary revenue.
2.But the tax is "Banded" so the richest pay least, the poorest pay most.
This is not only unfair but so inefficient and costs so much [below] that the tax _and_ its cost are amplified many times.
Here's how it works:- (using 1995-96 approximate figures for the county of Shropshire);
|Tax Band Code A-H||House/Property Value||Tax taken per year||Value taken in tax over 50 yrs|
|A||~ to £40K||£350||87.5%|
|B||£40K / £52K||£400||43.5%|
|C||£52K / £68K||£450||37.5%|
|D||£68 - £88K||£500||32%|
|E||£88 - £120K||£600||29%|
|F||£120 - £160K||£725||26%|
|G||£160 - £320K||£850||18%|
|H||£320K - 1 M||£1000||5%|
Note - Since then the tax has doubled (at the lower end) so the poorest folk now lose much more than the total value of their home - in 50 years.
However, a young couple link01 or elderly people renting accommodation (with furniture that a bailiff will sell for less than £10 and paying annually £350 'Council Tax'), will pay 17,500% of the value of their 'property' in 50 years.
1) A `fair' tax would be approx. 0.2% per year (ie. only 10% of property value in 50 years) but, due to the tax being wastefully and corruptly `banded', nearly everybody (especially the lower end), has to pay much more.
2) The only people profiting are those with property worth £1 million or more. They're taking money from everyone else because:-
a) they inflated the average tax cost for all poorer folk to 40% to 60% of their property's value - while
b) they themselves paid only a `nominal' tax of £1000 (less than 0.01%) - while
c) they take much more in policing costs, administration costs, council services and `favours'.
3) British Cabinet Ministers often have property worth £100M or more (on leaving the job).
[Oct. 2003 a Liberal Democrat MP reveals corrupt "Council Tax" set-up: it asks only half-a-day's earnings from Prime Minister Tony Blair, but rips-off two months' income from an already poor pensioner.]
The situation in Britain is outlined at "Inequality".
a) Aristocrats and rich agro-industrialists get huge amounts of tax-payers' money in immoral "subsidies" link02 - each taking approximately £20,000 per year from us poor taxpayers. They (less than 1% of population) own most of the land but pay no real taxes
We (remaining 99% of population) only rent or `buy' about 0.2 acres per family, but are forced to pay huge annual taxes (av. £550 pa `council tax') on that land. In addition, 70-80% taxes are taken directly and indirectly from our earnings!
Why don't the rich pay property taxes? Or, conversely, why don't we - renters, houseowners and tenant farmers - get subsidies? See "agro-ind"
Tax-money is stolen from middle-incomed, workers and the poor, then wasted by the corrupt bureaucracy link03 or taken by the rich (see Duke of Westminster)
More details are available in "Who Owns Britain" by Kevin Cahill
Nov. 2001 ISBN 086241 912 3
You can read an outline of "Who Owns Britain" at www.progress.org/revwob.htm
[ Note: Kevin has updated amount of subsidy taken (stolen) from us by each of the rich estate-owners - 30 March '02 - Kevin said it's now reached £20,000 pa]
Politicians and bureaucrats always lie about taxes
A politician (named Cecil) claimed that British Property Tax is "fair" !
Compare 50 years of payments:-
In the USA Bill Gates will pay around 50% of his home's value in Property Tax, over 50 years;
in UK the author (one of 'the poor') will pay 100% or maybe a lot more, over 50 years;
in UK a multi-millionaire politician will pay 2.5% or possibly less, over 50 years!
11 Jan 2001 - Children link01 of the poor are barred from school for not wearing expensive compulsory school uniforms their overtaxed parents can't afford.
1999 - Many councils link02 now charge fees for "public" services paid for by poor peoples' taxes - educational link03 & link04 facilities, museums, even "public" washrooms or lavatories.
So the poor and lower-incomed can't use them!
Now young mothers and anyone out-of-work, paying vastly higher real tax rates than the well-off councillors and their richer friends, are corruptly excluded from use of services (and grants) for which they (the poor) are paying so much.
Hypocrite councillors and rich senior civil servants are thus exposed as liars link07 and thieves. For the the middle-incomed and the poor - who pay the highest rates of local tax, are now excluded, by unfair costs, from the very services for which they are paying so highly.
The truth of Adam Smith's statement is born out by admissions of the Chancellor of the Exchequer - of the most corrupt government in recent British history - Norman Lamont:-
"reducing a tax or even abolishing one can bring in more revenue"
and, on the "Petroleum Revenue Tax"
"...because of its generous regime of reliefs it had become
a drain on the Treasury rather than a source of revenue"
[the Oil Companies complained when the tax was abolished]
[from p346 of "In Office" by Norman Lamont - ISBN 0-316-64707-1]