USC Charge - What should it really be called

Geuze

See section 3.6.4 here:

http://ec.europa.eu/economy_finance/publications/economic_paper/2013/pdf/ecp502_en.pdf

"The Universal Social Charge, like any tax increase, was not welcomed by the public.
Taxpayers experienced a drop in net income in Budget 2011. Many people thought the USC
was the reason for the reduction in their net income. This was not the case for many
taxpayers.

The reason many income earners saw reductions in their net income was due to the
reduction in income tax credits and bands that also occurred in Budget 2011. Most taxpayers
earning over €26,000 per annum would have benefited from the introduction of the USC all
other things being equal; particularly those earning between €26,000 and €35,000 who had
been suffering disproportionately from the sudden impact of the 4% Health Levy.

While many income earners would be better off under the USC than the Income Levy and
Health Levy combined, there are a significant number who will pay more tax as a result of
the introduction of the USC. This is due to the fact that there were many exemptions from the
Income Levy and Health Levy. The entry points to paying these charges were relatively high
and the numbers of exempt individuals were also high. For example, only 989,000 income
earners paid the Health Levy – this is less than half the total number of income earners on the
tax record and was due to the high exemption threshold to the levy as well as the different
types of income and income earners that were exempted from the levy."

Mint Sauce

Sh1tbag OToole wrote: »

Bargain! You'd almost be happy to see it go.

Anything in my pocket is better than in the tax mans, but my point is there must be something seriously amiss with ArtyC tax status if she is really paying what she claims she is.

wmpdd3

http://i39.tinypic.com/289dc13.jpg

The hiring a solicitor as an accountant tax