ESC

Click the "allow" button if you want to receive important news and updates from immigrationboards.com


Immigrationboards.com: Immigration, work visa and work permit discussion board

Welcome to immigrationboards.com!

Login Register Do not show

Is the Nick Boles surety a good idea?

General UK immigration & work permits; don't post job search or family related topics!

Please use this section of the board if there is no specific section for your query.

Moderators: Casa, push, JAJ, ca.funke, Amber, zimba, vinny, Obie, EUsmileWEallsmile, batleykhan, meself2, geriatrix, John, ChetanOjha, archigabe, Administrator

Locked
ArgieBee
Junior Member
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:22 am
Ireland

Is the Nick Boles surety a good idea?

Post by ArgieBee » Mon Oct 04, 2010 1:35 pm

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... vices.html

Would you pay £5000 if you could reclaim it once you had paid a certain amount of tax?

Most tier 1 would have paid many times that in tax and national insurance after a couple of years.

Finding the money at the start might be a problem and there would need to be some route for those that don't find a good job and leave to reclaim some of the money back.

ukswus
Senior Member
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:34 pm

Re: Is the Nick Boles surety a good idea?

Post by ukswus » Mon Oct 04, 2010 2:24 pm

ArgieBee wrote:http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article ... vices.html

Would you pay £5000 if you could reclaim it once you had paid a certain amount of tax?

Most tier 1 would have paid many times that in tax and national insurance after a couple of years.

Finding the money at the start might be a problem and there would need to be some route for those that don't find a good job and leave to reclaim some of the money back.
Is the question "do you support this idea", or is it "would you pay it, if pressed to do it, and assuming there are no other options"?

If the first- than absolutely NO. First of all, I am already paying for all the public services that I am entitled to (not that there are many of them, to speak of). I am paying all kinds of tax, NI etc. So, where is the justification for me to pay extra more (at least 15,000 for a family of 3?), besides the desire of the government to earn some extra money on the side? The only reasonable idea would be to link paying this sum to the promise that rules will not be changed in the future, but this is not on the table, as far as I can see.

If this is the second question from the list- then yes, I would probably have to shell out the sum. But the thing is, this prospect will surely push me harder to look for opportunities elsewhere. The only thing that keeps me here is the faint hope of getting a UK passport, but I keep asking myself: is it really worth the trouble to stay here, and be a second class citizen?

ArgieBee
Junior Member
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:22 am
Ireland

Post by ArgieBee » Mon Oct 04, 2010 2:39 pm

The interesting point is that it refunded after you pay taxes so in the long run it costs nothing but reassures Daily Mail readers that the people coming in are good taxpayers (like the vast majority of people on tier 1).

It is the reason why those on tier 1 should be encouraged and welcomed.

ukswus
Senior Member
Posts: 680
Joined: Fri Nov 27, 2009 4:34 pm

Post by ukswus » Mon Oct 04, 2010 4:16 pm

ArgieBee wrote:The interesting point is that it refunded after you pay taxes so in the long run it costs nothing but reassures Daily Mail readers that the people coming in are good taxpayers (like the vast majority of people on tier 1).

It is the reason why those on tier 1 should be encouraged and welcomed.
As I said, on principle, I don't mind paying it, as long as the hateful propaganda of "benefit scrounging, job stealing foreigners" is finished, and the constant harassment of Tier 1 holders with possible rule changes is no longer an option. However, my understanding is that paying this sum will do nothing to quell the anger towards immigrants (and Tier 1 and 2 holders in particular), so I see no real benefit in giving away a large sum of money.

PaperPusher
Respected Guru
Posts: 2038
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2007 4:47 pm
Location: London

Post by PaperPusher » Mon Oct 04, 2010 6:10 pm

Not all Tier 2 workers pay tax. I have in mind Indian workers poster on intra company transfers for less than two years who often pay no National Insurance or income tax on their earnings, just saying by the way. This group of people is very large and could in theory use a costly amount of public services, NHS, education for any children and so on.

T90
Junior Member
Posts: 62
Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 5:36 am

Post by T90 » Mon Oct 04, 2010 6:27 pm

'PaperPusher' you are right... ICT'es dont pay NI/tax and there is no limit proposed on number of such visas as well...

ArgieBee
Junior Member
Posts: 74
Joined: Wed Jun 03, 2009 10:22 am
Ireland

Post by ArgieBee » Tue Oct 05, 2010 7:15 am

The same person can work in UK under a tier 2 ICT visa and get a taxable salary of less £8 per hour (and conribute little tax); and then switch to tier 1, change employer and get paid over £40 per hour (and pay lots of tax).

Which is better for the UK and the person?
Which makes big profits for companies that spend lots on lobbying?
So which is capped and which is not?

letmec2006
Member
Posts: 178
Joined: Wed Apr 16, 2008 8:22 am

Sky News

Post by letmec2006 » Tue Oct 05, 2010 8:55 pm

In the sky news this evening:

Randall put the question to Gove and Goves answer was. Well business will lobby for what they want not what the country needs. He explicitly said their main concern was that the immigration cap applies to inter company transfers. Randal agreed with this.

Gove then said the govt positions is that they will listen but with millions of people unemployed they want to know why these people can not do the jobs because they country needs unemployment down to get the deficit down.

Intersting days ahead for ICTs...

Locked
cron