Burgon trying to dig himself out of a very deep hole.
He says when he was a solicitor he only earned 40k p.a. Crap solicitor, then.
I wish Burgon was in a hole and wrong on £80k income
However, Burgon proves Labour spending increase can't be funded by taxing what public sees as "the rich" when Labour's "the rich" includes MPs, Doctors, Biker Bloke, Senior Teachers, Military etc. Further, even >£80k isn't enough tax; >£30k will have to be hit too.
To deflect Burgon goes on a Billionaire rant, but finishes with "all here and watching are paying their fare share" - obviously not as Biker Bloke will be forced to pay more tax
Shame Biker bloke wrong
Shame - yes because individual aspiration and success disliked & punished by all parties
The latest breaking news, comment and features from The Independent.
The top 1% of income tax payers in the UK is made up of 310,000 individuals with a taxable income of at least £160,000 – but to be in the top 0.1%, that income must be nearly £650,000.
The highest 1% of income taxpayers account for 27% of all income tax. It’s a more top-heavy tax than both National Insurance Contributions (NICs) and VAT, although less so than Stamp Duty Land Tax and Inheritance Tax.
Of the 54 million adults in the UK in 2014-15, 31 million paid income tax – which means that around 43% of adults in the UK do not earn enough to pay income tax.
UK Top 1% taxable income is only >£160,000pa - I would have guessed it was at least >£1Million pa. A huge problem for Labour's "Tax the rich" - there aren't enough Rich
[/i]43% of adults pay no tax[/i]
Which begs the question: No representation without taxation; should those 43% have a vote?
Edit: improve clarity