How to return EV UK to the 1970s

Stay in view of the free updates

Simply subscribe to UK tax Myft Digest – it is delivered directly to your inbox.

It is my fault. Last year, the Financial Times made a new salary sacrifice plan, Tamkeen Employees to rent and drive an electric car Cheap. Scheme It is a savings “up to 40 percent.” I love the deal, and although I do not really need EV now, I was optimistic about the offer.

After registration, I connected a lot of different fake salaries in the system, changing my life and changing my address to identify the basic planning dynamics, which also included car insurance. Of course, this activity made me look very interested, and then I was afflicted with the EV provider trying to make me expect the dotted line.

After doing mathematics, the deal was already good, although the examples that you looked at were barely worth it if you were a natural average or a higher taxpayer. The offer provides a lot of money if your salary is at 100,000 pounds to 125140 pounds, where people in the United Kingdom lose personal taxes and pay income tax combined and the national employee insurance rate (the social security tax in the United Kingdom) of 62 percent. For someone who needs to get his salary to less than 100,000 pounds to be able to do so Get more value in caring for free childrenSalary sacrifices like this there is no thinking.

FT 15 percent will provide national insurance contributions to the employer, and there are also some The benefits of value -added tax. Fees will be imposed on employees by 3 percent of the delicate tax on the implicit value of the benefit they receive instead of wages.

I sent an email to one representative of the provider, and asked me why they were unable to provide lower prices when there were huge possibilities to avoid taxes. It is not surprising that I did not get a lot of joy and was told, correctly, that I will remain better if I registered instead of renting EV from my tax salary.

what is going on? Employers provide some money in salary statements, and employees get something from the deal depending on their circumstances, service providers have possible profitable work, and this complex network that EVS provides is supported greatly by other taxpayers.

This is a very bad example of public policy. Governments have a very legitimate desire to accelerate EVS, but they should only provide simple discounts, not transparent and huge subsidies for employers who take advantage of car tax bases and very high marginal rates in the UK income system available only for specific individuals.

Although EVS is largely the technique of the future, the UK’s support scheme is a bounce in the 1970s. Then, the highest marginal income tax rate was 83 percent on the acquired income. This was imposed on the levels of wages that reach 120,000 pounds in today’s prices. But no one paid these tax prices.

in Modern analysisDan Nidel highlighted the non -profit tax policy partners. There were tax rules for dirt to get the advantages. Rotally took the sponsors of the sponsors in other forms, whether the company’s cars, lunch vouchers, club membership, or very generous pensions are very generous.

For decades, governments that have passed on the gaps have witnessed, allowing them to collect more of those in high income at much lower tax rates.

But in recent years, severe tax rates have declined with Pulling both to benefit from the childsand Personal allowances in the amount of 100,000 poundsAnd also a Edge of the abyss To care for the supported child.

It is not environmental, but the tax that pays the appearance of sacrifices for EV, which encourages the tax avoiding industry that does nothing to produce Britain or public financial.

There are colleagues with young children who will be better if they subscribe to the electric vehicle scheme, driving the car to their parents and stopping it for three years. These are nuts.

[email protected]