Tax at 14.5%, no NI!

@1 – No NHS, no state schools, no…

Typical Tory.

“Under the by-line of Pippa Crerar, readers are told: ‘Give London back its cash: Boris Johnson demands return on cash that capital makes for Britain‘

What Boris is pitching for is, ultimately, more and bigger piles of money for himself. This might mean better public services, but given the Johnson penchant for spraying money up the wall on vanity bikes, vanity buses and a vanity cable car, alarms should be sounding.”

Whereas Ken Livingstone, if he were elected, would never ask central Government for “more and bigger piles of money” to be spent by the Mayor of London, and certainly would never “spray it up the wall” on wasteful things like buses, but would only spend it on front-line services like, er, Lee Jasper’s ‘community groups’.

Let Londoners keep their tax receipts, they can use it to bail out those London-based banks and return what they’ve already previously benefited from.

And there you are folks, you heard it from Leon here on Liberal Conspiracy first…

At 14.5% and no NI, KEN LIVINGSTONE IS A TYPICAL TORY!

Perhaps Boris and the Evening Standard could tell us where exactly in the City an incinerator could be built capable of burning London’s rubbish. I’m sure they wouldn’t want anybody else to be responsible for it and just think of all the ‘free energy’.
Then there’s domestic water………….
Joking aside, what a tragedy that a city they would have us believe to be one of the most significant in the world has amongst it’s mayorial candidates such a pair as Ken and Boris.

They are getting worried that Boris is going to lose!

@6. Barrie J: “Joking aside, what a tragedy that a city they would have us believe to be one of the most significant in the world has amongst it’s mayorial candidates such a pair as Ken and Boris.”

I am not a Londoner so I don’t understand everything about this election.

I must therefore ask whether the role of Mayor is symbolic? S/he is just a city Mayor, not a foreign policy ambassador. The Mayor cannot create new powers unless Parliament permits. Thus the Mayor is an administrator of centrally determined services.

Barrie J raises the point that K and B don’t have much to say for themselves. They quibble and they are boring.

I would argue to make London Mayor a serious job. Give the man or woman a job.

Nota bene: Mayor for London is OK but Mayor for Leicester, where I live, is not OK. Leicester is too small for an authoritarian; London is big enough to fight back.

@8 – Unfortunately, the mayor of London does indeed have the power to do a lot of damage based on his dogma. His powers and budget make him more powerful than any individual normal MP, for instance.

Boris maxing out his borrowing capacity for vanity projects this year is a case in point – over 100 million wasted!

@5 – Calm down, dear. I’m no Labourite, and won’t be voting for Ken.

@9. Leon Wolfeson: “Unfortunately, the mayor of London does indeed have the power to do a lot of damage based on his dogma. His powers and budget make him more powerful than any individual normal MP, for instance.”

Sort it out at the next elections then. I am not convinced by the proposition that the Mayor has power; s/he may have money to spend but expenditure is controlled.

“Boris maxing out his borrowing capacity for vanity projects this year is a case in point – over 100 million wasted!”

I am not a Londoner. I have to assume that his expenditure is controlled.

I am not a Londoner. I am glad that I am not; in my town I am respected, and people are polite. I must be more polite.

@10 – Why are you making those assumptions? They’re not good ones.

Moreover, the choice is, well, Ken. Not someone I can vote for.

@11. Leon Wolfeson: “Why are you making those assumptions?”

They are not assumptions, merely questions.

I have to go back to Lancashire for mental and spiritual health. To Chorley Cakes and old fart liberalism.

What could be more hypocritical than the Mayoral candidate for the workers party paying an effective tax rate of 14.5% which is lower than a cleaner at City Hall?

@13 – Workers party? Erm no, he’s a Labour candidate.

“What could be more hypocritical than the Mayoral candidate for the workers party paying an effective tax rate of 14.5% which is lower than a cleaner at City Hall?”

Making something like that up about someone after calling him a liar?

What could be more hypocritical than the Mayoral candidate for the workers party paying an effective tax rate of 14.5%

If that were actually true you may have a point. but citing bullshit figures from Guido Fawkes blog isn’t a sign of intelligence

Take a look at the articles here.

Livingstone is done.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/

Sunny, there is no getting round the fact that Ken organised his tax affairs to avoid tax. How else do you explain the salary that he was paid by his company?

Clearly Ken has been targeted by Gilligan and co, but this time they have their man by the balls. Ken has let down the Labour Party and all those who were hoping he would win in May. His now inevitable defeat will be gleefully seized on by those who oppose Ed Miliband’s leadership/.

You should be furious with Ken, not acting as an apologist.

In 2010/11, setting aside pension contributions, Ken Livingstone received 92% of his income – £63,333 – through dividends and just 8% or £5,700 through a normal salary where tax was deducted on a pay as you earn (PAYE) basis.

This approach is a standard and perfectly legal way of drawing down money from a company and is used by hundreds of thousands of people for one simple reason: it avoids national insurance contributions (NICs).

Dividends are not liable for NICs, so being paid principally through dividends reduces or completely removes NICs payments.

In 2010/11 the threshold to start paying NICs was £5,720 per year and as if by magic, Ken Livingstone’s PAYE income for the year was £20 below the level where any NICs would have to be paid.

Fancy that.

The only reason £5,700 was paid as PAYE income at all is that that there needs to be a level of PAYE earnings each year above a minimum threshold (£5,044 in 2010/11) to build eligibility for certain benefits. For example, the state pension, for which Ken Livingstone qualified, during 2010/11.

http://labour-uncut.co.uk/

Says all that needs to be said.

Enjoying Johnson being shown to be more ‘progressive’ and willing to pay his taxes at a fair rate?

Gotcha. It’s over, lefties.

@20 – What the frack does Livingston have to do with the left? He’s a Labourite!

@ Leon 9.

Oh Leon, the issue is not whether or not you are a Labourite Ken supporter, the issue is that you, in comment 2 wrote “Typical Tory” in response to my comment at 1 – as you did. As I was referring to Ken’s tax arrangements, a reasonable person could only assume that you were saying that a person who believed this was a reasonable way to behave is a “Typical Tory.”

Despite Sunny’s amusing protestations, it appears that Ken has been caught bang to rights, as those who write on the Labour Uncut blog are aware, and clearly state to their credit.

I find it sad that a non party aligned blog such as Liberal Conspiracy appears to be less objective in its view of Ken’s tax affairs than a party aligned blog such as Labour Uncut. Still, given that Labour Uncut wishes to improve the Labour Party as well as help them gain power, whereas Liberal Conspiracy on the other hand appears to be more interested in helping any party with a “left wing brand” – seemingly regardless of their actual policies – attain power, then I suppose it’s to be expected.

@22 – The arrangement is legal. It shouldn’t be, but it’s entirely legal under UK law.

Moreover, Boris is a reflection on the right, and Ken ain’t no reflection on the left.

@22: Boris is a reflection on the Right, but Ken isn’t on the Left?

I’m not sure how this works. Are you saying that, a) people of the left don’t do bad things, therefore, b) people that do do bad things are therefore of the right?

Rubbish surely?

I’d have thought that Ken’s actions are primarily a reflection on Ken, though Labour will be tainted by association. It’s difficult to see how they could have stopped him becoming the candidate though, particularly after the previous attempt.

Boris is a lost cause but that wont stop the tory press backing him.

quoting the Labour Uncut website, infamous home of unreconstructed Blairite Ultra traitors, and brainfart of that revolting quisling Dan Hodges, does not a good argument make. Thsoe guys hate Ken, and anyone else who had the temerity to stand up to their multimillionaire warmongering idol Anthony B, more than the tories do.

Sooner the decent part of labour finally disowns the cancerous enemy within the better. These monsters are far more dangerous to the country than the tories in my book.

Haha, a left wing publication accusing someone of being a hypocrite. That’s all just a bit rich.

@24 – I’m saying that saying Labour, at the current time, are on the left is equivalent to saying that the right are all racists. It’s a HUGE slur on the left.

(There’s a left-leaning FRINGE in Labour, but that’s not the same thing)

@27 – Ah yes, typical “if you’re not like me you’re eeevvvil”.