lol, I googled to see how bad it is in California - I pay 70%, and have for years - and I found a "study" by Forbes that claims California is the second-highest state at . . . 28.47%. How is that possible? Oh, here it is - they calculate it based on the average California annual income instead of the median renter income.
That's not that shocking. Here's an example in London.
Minimum wage at 40 hours a week nets you £1667, then you minus 20% for income tax so -337 = 1330, then roughly another £100 for council tax on your rented property so down to 1230.
Rents can vary depending on how many tenants are in, but unless you're living with friends, the shared houses can be a true nightmare. If you're anywhere near actual London rather than somewhere that's an actual Great Western train ride away (as opposed to the underground tube, which goes pretty far), then rent is going to be 700-900.
That leaves you with 300-500 quid, and you probably have to take the tube to work which has also gotten more expensive, so add 10 quid for every day you're going to work - that's roughly another 200 on travel, especially considering you're going to be living in the outskirts so your train has to go through a lot of zones to get to work.
So you take home 500 pounds a month if you're lucky and get a place for 700 (in a total shithole). If your rents at 900 (and possibly still in a shithole) then you've got a nice 300 quid left of your 1667 you started with. Plus, you probably spend two hours on the underground each day, and certain lines (Jubilee) are so loud that you'll get damaged hearing. Eat your slop, and work, peasant!
Sort of - if you earnt 13k then you would be taxed down to 10k.
If you earnt 12750, then you aren't taxed, but assuming rent at 800PCM you would have £3000 to live off for the year, which once you factor in heating bills if you use it, travel, council tax, London prices of goods, and so on, is not very much.
Sort of - if you earnt 13k then you would be taxed down to 10k.
If you earned 13k , then you'd only pay tax on the £250 you've earned above the personal allowance no?
As far as I understand it, it's not that you don't pay taxes so long as you make less than the personal allowance, it's that the first £12750 you make is untaxed regardless of how much you make until you make more than £100k.
What I mean is that you are not taxed on the first £12750 you earn if you are working minimum wage full time, you only pay it on the roughly £6000 you've made after that, which works out to only about £1700 in income tax and national insurance.
So in the example above, they'd have more income than suggested.
Meanwhile...
lol, I googled to see how bad it is in California - I pay 70%, and have for years - and I found a "study" by Forbes that claims California is the second-highest state at . . . 28.47%. How is that possible? Oh, here it is - they calculate it based on the average California annual income instead of the median renter income.
https://ktla.com/news/california/californians-spend-second-highest-percent-in-rent-study-says/
Here's a better one that shows that 28.8% of Californians are "severely cost-burdened" and pay more than 50% of their income on rent:
https://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/throughout-the-state-californians-pay-more-than-they-can-afford-for-housing/
you pay 70% of your income in rent? holy shit
That's not that shocking. Here's an example in London.
Minimum wage at 40 hours a week nets you £1667, then you minus 20% for income tax so -337 = 1330, then roughly another £100 for council tax on your rented property so down to 1230.
Rents can vary depending on how many tenants are in, but unless you're living with friends, the shared houses can be a true nightmare. If you're anywhere near actual London rather than somewhere that's an actual Great Western train ride away (as opposed to the underground tube, which goes pretty far), then rent is going to be 700-900.
That leaves you with 300-500 quid, and you probably have to take the tube to work which has also gotten more expensive, so add 10 quid for every day you're going to work - that's roughly another 200 on travel, especially considering you're going to be living in the outskirts so your train has to go through a lot of zones to get to work.
So you take home 500 pounds a month if you're lucky and get a place for 700 (in a total shithole). If your rents at 900 (and possibly still in a shithole) then you've got a nice 300 quid left of your 1667 you started with. Plus, you probably spend two hours on the underground each day, and certain lines (Jubilee) are so loud that you'll get damaged hearing. Eat your slop, and work, peasant!
Do you pay income tax on amounts lower than the personal allowance?
No, but the personal allowance is 12750, and with that amount of money you would struggle to rent
Still an extra £2400 spread across the year though no? Compared to taking 20% from the total income.
Sort of - if you earnt 13k then you would be taxed down to 10k.
If you earnt 12750, then you aren't taxed, but assuming rent at 800PCM you would have £3000 to live off for the year, which once you factor in heating bills if you use it, travel, council tax, London prices of goods, and so on, is not very much.
If you earned 13k , then you'd only pay tax on the £250 you've earned above the personal allowance no?
As far as I understand it, it's not that you don't pay taxes so long as you make less than the personal allowance, it's that the first £12750 you make is untaxed regardless of how much you make until you make more than £100k.
Oh shit yeah
So true
Yes, but you wouldn't be able to rent anywhere for that. If rent was cheaper, then it would be viable to live off 12750 for sure.
What I mean is that you are not taxed on the first £12750 you earn if you are working minimum wage full time, you only pay it on the roughly £6000 you've made after that, which works out to only about £1700 in income tax and national insurance.
So in the example above, they'd have more income than suggested.
You are very correct
Is that better than being a regular level of correct?
SSI . . . Max SSI amount is $1,113. A "fair-market" studio in California is $1,566.
Look it didn't go up as much this year. Bidenomics stays winning!
Why are you complaining?