Trivial things you don't understand/mildly annoy you

[Samdy Gray]

This definitely qualifies as don't understand/mildly annoying. Currently not impacted directly, but I will be as a result of my new job when my total taxable income just exceeds the lower threshold.

There are ways and means to get around it. Send me a PM if you want to discuss it.

[fatbasher]

Bad logic there. If you replaced one big company with lots of smaller ones a lot would be under the VAT threshold and therefore wouldn't pay any.

Not really, if you opened a coffee shop and your turnover was under the vat thresh hold it probably would not be woth running the business anyway....

[Shaw Rosso]

How are they supposed to deal with it?

Clamp down on bankers excessive bonuses, sell the 4g network and use the money for infrastructure, creating tens of thousands of new jobs and new taxpayers.

Failing that, they can resign.

[Coca Fola]

4 hours of sleep in 2 days. 

[nevillew]

Having a kidney stone removed tomorrow with the use of a telescope and a laser. Me thinks pissing will be a bit sore after.

Blimey! It's amazing what they can do from long range now.

[Batch]

Toyota recalling my 07 car for a steering shaft fault, at "minimum of inconvenience" to me. But won't provide a courtesy car to get me to work, and don't open Saturdays.

[Peter Gibbons]

This definitely qualifies as don't understand/mildly annoying. Currently not impacted directly, but I will be as a result of my new job when my total taxable income just exceeds the lower threshold.

As Shaw Rosso points out, I don't get the logic when I as the sole earner (my wife is a stay at home mum and full time carer for our son) will be impacted, albeit slightly, when other couples with joint incomes much higher than my single income (and who probably ship their kids off to childminders/grandparents all day to enable them to work) retain the full benefit.

I'm not for a minute blaming those parents; everyone has the right to make their own choices. Its the implementation of an ill thought out policy that I just don't get. Barking.

[tory apologist]Isn't it to do with being a lot cheaper/easier to administer by checking one person's wages using the same data already collected for PAYE than it would be to ask every household to complete a new form stating their combined income?  If so, that seems sensible to me.[/tory apologist]

[janaage]

This definitely qualifies as don't understand/mildly annoying. Currently not impacted directly, but I will be as a result of my new job when my total taxable income just exceeds the lower threshold.

As Shaw Rosso points out, I don't get the logic when I as the sole earner (my wife is a stay at home mum and full time carer for our son) will be impacted, albeit slightly, when other couples with joint incomes much higher than my single income (and who probably ship their kids off to childminders/grandparents all day to enable them to work) retain the full benefit.

I'm not for a minute blaming those parents; everyone has the right to make their own choices. Its the implementation of an ill thought out policy that I just don't get. Barking.

Cost of policing a joint income declaration prohibits it, so sole income taken into account. I think as someone affected by this change I'm about the only person I know that couldn't give a monkeys. Anyone on that kind of money shouldn't receive benefits, nor should others who have a vastly higher joint income, it isnt fair but then again whoever said tax is fair.

Having said that if you're only just over the limit, make a pension contribution or gift some to charity and you're basic rate tax band is effectively expanded, problem solved.

[Bennett]

Amazons interpretation of "guaranteed next day delivery" and the fact the cluster of cunts can't actually tell me when a laptop will be delivered

[Chubbs]

Toyota recalling my 07 car for a steering shaft fault, at "minimum of inconvenience" to me. But won't provide a courtesy car to get me to work, and don't open Saturdays.

faulty shaft. Teehee

[Batch]

faulty shaft. Teehee

Its subject to knocking which may lead to limited movement...

[Matchworn Shirts]

Its subject to knocking which may lead to limited movement...

usually caused by female drivers

[Coca Fola]

Fell asleep and ended up sleeping 15 hours, normally this is good but I had work due in today, so now I have to skive off.

[Coca Fola]

I can't stop sneezing either, been sneezing non stop for 20 minutes..

[Ardiles]

Having said that if you're only just over the limit, make a pension contribution or gift some to charity and you're basic rate tax band is effectively expanded, problem solved.

Agree with this.  The gradual withdrawal of child benefit over the £50k-£60k income range means that the marginal rate of tax someone with one child effectively pays would rise from 40% to 50.6% (and even more than this for earners with more than one child).  There is a similar effect for earners in the £100k-£116k bracket, who pay an effective rate of 60% over that range as the the Personal Allowance is gradually withdrawn.

As Fola says, if you're only just in to one of these brackets, you can take yourself out of it all together by making additional pension contributions (such as AVCs), thus reducing your taxable income to a level where the 'confiscatory' tax rate doesn't kick in.  With an effective marginal tax rate of 50.6% (mentioned above) you would, for example, be able to add £1,000 to you pension pot at a cost of just £494 to you (in terms of the reduction in your net income).