B770 - Support our Startups Bill 2015 Watch

This discussion is closed.
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#21
Report 4 years ago
#21
(Original post by James Milibanter)
Yes you could, and this would be an incentive to do so. You'd be making a load of profit which would then be taken in by tax and passed on to shareholders and you'd do well for yourself and the country.

Instead of thinking of it as giving people £500000, think of it as taking £500000 less away from the people that earned it. The money that isn't taken by the state will then be invested back into the economy inspiring growth. I quite like this bill.
Not for the country if the company is sold to out of the UK...

Actually it's £500,000,000 in their life time. Half a billion:eek: and that money with that you could train up 2,000 doctors!!!!
0
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#22
Report 4 years ago
#22
(Original post by Aph)
Not for the country if the company is sold to out of the UK...

Actually it's £500,000,000 in their life time. Half a billion:eek: and that money with that you could train up 2,000 doctors!!!!
Even if all that money was sitting in a bank account or a trust fund it would then be invested into the global economy. Other than the black market economy and money hidden in mattresses, legitimate income is always being invested. With ample investment (I only have a very basic knowledge of economics, I didn't even have the choice of doing it at GCSE) I am sure that the way it works is that rather than the money being held hostage by the state, it then flows into various markets which all benefit. The more profits that a company makes the more the government can take in taxes, so that £500 million would, if invested properly, multiply to a large extent.
(Original post by The Financier)
X
You probably have a better understanding of economics than I, am I correct in assuming that this is the case?
0
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#23
Report 4 years ago
#23
(Original post by Aph)
You could if you were a capital investor and pay other people to handle the day to day.

I think the figure is about 60% of all British businesses are sold to foreign investors. So I'd hardly say small. And is this money only if they set up another?
Yeah...how many people do you know of who do that? Richard Branson is one notable example but if you follow the startups scene there is a very distinct lack of successful companies that are just run by people who handle day to day things. For a business to succeed, you need employees to trust in the vision and leadership of the founder which isn't something a delegate will inspire.

Source?

I want to reiterate that this is a TAX RELIEF measure. We are not handing people money (we leave that to you greens ) for free. The allowance refers to the maximum amount of money annually that would be tax-free (think of an ISA) but it is unlikely that people will fill it (in the same way that it is unlikely most people use all of their annual ISA allowance) every year given the environment of setting up a business, the probability of significant success (VERY low) and that Entrepreneur Relief applies on Capital Gains Tax which only applies on the sale of shareholding. So yes, to take full advantage they will need to set up another firm. I am willing to amend this into an allowance over a longer time frame (3 years?) but I think it's important to encourage domestic angel investors and entrepreneurs to not sit in a nice countryside house after they have finished with one firm.

(Original post by James Milibanter)
Even if all that money was sitting in a bank account or a trust fund it would then be invested into the global economy. Other than the black market economy and money hidden in mattresses, legitimate income is always being invested. With ample investment (I only have a very basic knowledge of economics, I didn't even have the choice of doing it at GCSE) I am sure that the way it works is that rather than the money being held hostage by the state, it then flows into various markets which all benefit. The more profits that a company makes the more the government can take in taxes, so that £500 million would, if invested properly, multiply to a large extent.
In essence, yes. The relief provides incentives to create startups that are ambitious and capable of disrupting established players (as these are what command higher valuations). To do so will require a lot of talented individuals in the UK, reducing unemployment. They'll also provide corporation tax, VAT etc. whilst they're running. Thus in the long term we gain tax revenue and this would be very beneficial to the UK economy.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#24
Report 4 years ago
#24
(Original post by The Financier)
Yeah...how many people do you know of who do that? Richard Branson is one notable example but if you follow the startups scene there is a very distinct lack of successful companies that are just run by people who handle day to day things. For a business to succeed, you need employees to trust in the vision and leadership of the founder which isn't something a delegate will inspire.
ok! but still would you want to give Richard Branson another £500M? And I don't really see what you mean, McDonalds is successful and I doubt it's emplyees belive in it's vision.

Source?
was on the 'selling britan' program a few days ago.

I want to reiterate that this is a TAX RELIEF measure. We are not handing people money (we leave that to you greens ) for free. The allowance refers to the maximum amount of money annually that would be tax-free (think of an ISA) but it is unlikely that people will fill it (in the same way that it is unlikely most people use all of their annual ISA allowance) every year given the environment of setting up a business, the probability of significant success (VERY low) and that Entrepreneur Relief applies on Capital Gains Tax which only applies on the sale of shareholding. So yes, to take full advantage they will need to set up another firm. I am willing to amend this into an allowance over a longer time frame (3 years?) but I think it's important to encourage domestic angel investors and entrepreneurs to not sit in a nice countryside house after they have finished with one firm.
yes and we should tax more. Not less. Wait so this is about sale of shares?? So each year I could buy millions in shrares sell them on quickly make a massive profit and not have them taxed???
0
James Milibanter
  • Political Ambassador
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#25
Report 4 years ago
#25
(Original post by The Financier)
In essence, yes. The relief provides incentives to create startups that are ambitious and capable of disrupting established players (as these are what command higher valuations). To do so will require a lot of talented individuals in the UK, reducing unemployment. They'll also provide corporation tax, VAT etc. whilst they're running. Thus in the long term we gain tax revenue and this would be very beneficial to the UK economy.
Ah okay, so I have the right idea.}
There's a common saying used by libertarians and it's that "if the left wing understood economics then they wouldn't be left wing".
0
TeeEff
Badges: 21
Rep:
?
#26
Report 4 years ago
#26
(Original post by Aph)
ok! but still would you want to give Richard Branson another £500M? And I don't really see what you mean, McDonalds is successful and I doubt it's emplyees belive in it's vision.

was on the 'selling britan' program a few days ago.

yes and we should tax more. Not less. Wait so this is about sale of shares?? So each year I could buy millions in shrares sell them on quickly make a massive profit and not have them taxed???
This is designed for start-up growth, not the maintaining of established firms. At an early stage, the belief of the employee matters especially as they're taking a risk as well.

Ah yes, I just remembered you were one of the people who wanted to pay 100% of their income in tax in Rakas' poll. This won't appeal to you then.

These are private limited companies (who don't have public listed shares) we're talking about, which can't be just bought and sold like that.
0
Aph
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#27
Report 4 years ago
#27
(Original post by The Financier)
This is designed for start-up growth, not the maintaining of established firms. At an early stage, the belief of the employee matters especially as they're taking a risk as well.

Ah yes, I just remembered you were one of the people who wanted to pay 100% of their income in tax in Rakas' poll.

These are private limited companies (who don't have public listed shares) we're talking about, which can't be just bought and sold like that.
Well I've changed my mind on that, I see how a 100% tax and centralised money isn't helpful. Well in that case (I take it you mean like my local chippy) if you did change it to 3 I would be happier. (5 and you have one happy green)
0
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#28
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#28
This is in cessation.
0
Birchington
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#29
Report Thread starter 4 years ago
#29
This has gone to second reading.
0
X
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Would you turn to a teacher if you were being bullied?

Yes (73)
23.93%
No (232)
76.07%

Watched Threads

View All