hotel service charge & tax advice

[andy50]

all(?) the hotels and guest houses charge 10% service charge, and 7% tax ,most, include this charge in their room price but not all! always check whether this extra 17% is included or not

[Mac]

I do find this quite irritating actually. Not so much for room rates but for menus and drinks. How much is a beer I ask. 120 Baht. Great, two beers then. That will be 280 Baht. Hmm.. You said 120 Baht for a beer. Ah yes but there is a 17% tax on top etc etc...

Now I say "How much will you charge me for a beer in your restaurant."

Still its not as bad as Americia where the supermarkets in Florida seemed to show all the prices without the sales tax and the check out bill was a bit of a shock the first time.

Mac

[JayBee]

Originally Posted by Mac

Still its not as bad as Americia where the supermarkets in Florida seemed to show all the prices without the sales tax and the check out bill was a bit of a shock the first time.
Mac

That is the normal way here. I didn't know they did it any other way elsewhere.

It is the same in all the stores, except they usually don't charge any tax at all on food, except if it is served to you or considered a luxury item. So tax is charged in all restaurants, but, usually, not on food in supermarkets, just on all other items in supermarkets. In Pennsylvania, and maybe a few other states, they don't charge tax on clothes, either.

In California, besides the regular 7 to 8.5 % sales tax(depending on which county), they also charge you a luxury tax on wine and liquor!! Oh, and in addition to all of that, there is also a tax on the bottle that the wine comes in. All beverage containers(beer, pepsi, water, etc.) are charge an extra tax called a recycling fee. I think that, theoretically, you can get the money back, if you bring the empty container back to the store, but I have never seen anyone actually bring a bottle or can back; they would probably be shocked and not know what to do if you did, 'cause it never happens!

Since we already pay 39% income tax(33% federal, 6% state) on income over the amount of $28,000 per annum. Self-employed people, such as myself, have to pay an additional 15% for Social Security tax, and medical benefits tax, which is weird, since we get no medical coverage, but have to pay it for the elderly who do get some medical coverage.

So when you consider the sales tax (7 to 8.5%), state and federal taxes, then people are paying an incredible amount of taxes here. And the self-employed get taxed an unbelievable amount! I never thought that the taxation would get so bad in this country, but it has!

But someone has go to pay for the world's biggest army, I guess. You Euros get public healthcare, and paid vacations. We get an awesome fighting machine. Somehow it seems unfair!

JayBee

[LivinLOS]

America has one of the lowerest overall business and personal taxation systems.. Constantly ranks up there in ease and transparency rankings every year (HK is doing well recently)..

Compare to the Euro (holland) 60% deductions on wages for social taxes along with 25 - 35 % from the employer.. 21% sales taxes.. etc etc etc

The European social welfare states are collapsing under these systems as everyone finds its not 'worth' going to work to support the medical and social scammers..

[JayBee]

Originally Posted by LivinLOS

Compare to the Euro (holland) 60% deductions on wages for social taxes along with 25 - 35 % from the employer.. 21% sales taxes.. etc etc etc .

That is f*cking amazing! How can people put up with it?

In 1986, Reagan got the Tax Simplification Act passed(didn't simplify things much and thye've been passing laws ever since to complicate it more). At that time, the rates were set at 28% on income over $28,000. Later, they added a surplus charge to boost it to 33% on income to $120K. Then you had state tax of 5 %, which is now 6%. That was a very fair system, because in those days, doctors and lawyers made 50 or 60 grand. The average guy made probably closer to 20 or 25 Gs, so he wasn't much affected and had a low tax rate.

But now incomes are way over double that. Doctors and lawyers make $125K to $300K or more. So now it is the average guy who is getting slammed! The rich people don't have to pay the 5% surcharge on income over $120K, and they don't have to chip in on Social Security or Medicare for income over $73K.

A system that was fair in 1986, and intended to put a larger percentage of the tax burden on wealthier people has become, by virtue of inflation, a system that totally screws the middle class. As if that wasn't bad enough, then Bush comes in and passes tax cuts for the rich people!!!

JayBee

[stevem]

When I was working back in Oz, my yearly income tax worked out at 42.5%. And what did I get for all this, delayed and cancelled bloody trains to and from work each day.

[Sirgezza]

As far as I know, the only time that tax is added to the price displayed is at the builders merchants. The idea being that builders can see what they will pay, as they are able to reclaim the VAT at a later stage. Unfortunately I'm an amateur DIY so I have to pay the full whack.

[Sirgezza]

In the uk, when you get to about £36k, the tax rate jumps up to 40%. In my case I also pay National Insurance and Company pension contributions, so at the top end of my earnings 55% is taken away. To me, that means it is not worth working, so I have agreed with my boss to work less and have more holidays. Phuket here I come.

If you are in a heavily taxed country, the public services should be better than if you live in a lower taxed country. However in the lower taxed country you end up paying for things privately (if you can afford it). One thing is for definite - if you work you end up paying for the scroungers who don't.

[Expat]

Originally Posted by gez

In the uk, when you get to about £36k, the tax rate jumps up to 40%. In my case I also pay National Insurance and Company pension contributions, so at the top end of my earnings 55% is taken away. To me, that means it is not worth working, so I have agreed with my boss to work less and have more holidays. Phuket here I come.

If you are in a heavily taxed country, the public services should be better than if you live in a lower taxed country. However in the lower taxed country you end up paying for things privately (if you can afford it). One thing is for definite - if you work you end up paying for the scroungers who don't.

Here in France I've been running my own business for the last 12 years & the state took 70% of what I made. I say "took" because I sold up in January & am in Phuket fulltime as of end of next month. :-D

[AJAXIED]

Originally Posted by LivinLOS

America has one of the lowerest overall business and personal taxation systems.. Constantly ranks up there in ease and transparency rankings every year (HK is doing well recently)..

Compare to the Euro (holland) 60% deductions on wages for social taxes along with 25 - 35 % from the employer.. 21% sales taxes.. etc etc etc

The European social welfare states are collapsing under these systems as everyone finds its not 'worth' going to work to support the medical and social scammers..

The 60% is only on the top income bracket, few people actually pay that

[JayBee]

Originally Posted by Expat

Here in France I've been running my own business for the last 12 years & the state took 70% of what I made. I say "took" because I sold up in January & am in Phuket fulltime as of end of next month. :-D

70% That's horrendous! There oughta be a law against it!

I can see that the Euros are heavily taxed! At 70%, why bother getting out of bed in the morning! May as well go on the dole! But at least you have health care. That costs me a chunk out of pocket.

I don't mind paying my fair share. But what burns me is that the people at the top end are paying a lesser percentage than me (39% v. 54% on top end of income, but not on all of it. Counting everything I pay a little over 30% of gross income). And the people at the bottom pay little or nothing. If you are under a certain amount(10K or 20K, I'm not sure), then not only do you pay nothing, but the govt. sends you a check!).

The people at the bottom, pay nothing or get paid. The people at the top pay a lesser percentage. The people in the middle get screwed royally! What a system!

JayBee

[LivinLOS]

Originally Posted by AJAXIED

The 60% is only on the top income bracket, few people actually pay that

I assume from your username you are Dutch ??? I am happily aware how much the dutch take as I ran a company employing more than 1000 men per year in Holland alone (high turnover 450 at once).. The tax fiddles were enormous..

70% That's horrendous! There oughta be a law against it!

I can see that the Euros are heavily taxed! At 70%, why bother getting out of bed in the morning! May as well go on the dole! But at least you have health care. That costs me a chunk out of pocket.

I don't mind paying my fair share. But what burns me is that the people at the top end are paying a lesser percentage than me (39% v. 54% on top end of income, but not on all of it. Counting everything I pay a little over 30% of gross income). And the people at the bottom pay little or nothing. If you are under a certain amount(10K or 20K, I'm not sure), then not only do you pay nothing, but the govt. sends you a check!).

The people at the bottom, pay nothing or get paid. The people at the top pay a lesser percentage. The people in the middle get screwed royally! What a system!

Thats the problem, it encourages lazyness and the social payments in Holland are large enough to live quite comfortably (run a car, have a family, etc) without working.. Also so many people are claiming (false) sick benefits and just skimming the system that its a mockery..

Also to the point of the rich paying less.. the really rich pay nearly none.. Using offshore corporate blinds is so simple and cheap these days and you simply bill everything to an offshore company that they cannot find the beneficial owner.. That company 'employs' you and provides a small income for pocket money that you can show the taxman, it also owns your cars, houses, etc and provides them free as perks of your 'employment' and a gold card for 'expenses'.. Shift your assets offshore and they then cannot grab them (niether can divorces etc).. I have been doing this for years..

[LivinLOS]

No

Paid literally millions (200k per month at various times) to various tax regimes for systems that I will never claim social security under, will never claim unemployment, will never claim old age pension etc.. I made the concious decision to look after myself and my family and feel I have paid enough for a lifetime.. From here on in I avoid any and every tax I can as I will reap no reward from any of them..

[Nicke]

In Sweden prices is often without VAT (25%) if Business to Business but Business to Consumer must show the price with VAT included. (E.g. normal shops)

Builder Merchants often show without tax, since mostly comapnies and professionals buy there, same with accessories and computer stuff cataloges sent to companies.

As for recycling, Sweden seems to be totally different to America. Most people recycle their cans or bottles in machines that can be found at most big shopping centers/super markets and you get a refund for the recycling fee.

Originally Posted by gez

As far as I know, the only time that tax is added to the price displayed is at the builders merchants. The idea being that builders can see what they will pay, as they are able to reclaim the VAT at a later stage. Unfortunately I'm an amateur DIY so I have to pay the full whack.

[andy50]

some years ago in the uk, the upper tax rate was 90%!this was when the beatles and stones were at their height ,thats why all the top people left the uk ,and went to america

[JayBee]

Originally Posted by andy50

some years ago in the uk, the upper tax rate was 90%!this was when the beatles and stones were at their height ,thats why all the top people left the uk ,and went to america

They may have lived in America, but they weren't paying taxes here! They were technically residents of some low-tax country, with the possible exception of Lennon.

[LivinLOS]

I know many registered in Ireland becuase (at the ime ??) they had a 0% tax for artists..

[Devman]

This may be a prudent analogy relating to a recent tax cut for the "Wealthy" in Australia.

Here is the REAL story to lighten the Budget discussion! You've heard the cry from across Australia in the last couple of weeks: "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" - and then it’s accepted as fact. But what does that statement really mean?

The following explanation may help.
Suppose that every night, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. They decide to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, and it goes like this:
* The first four men (the poorest) paid nothing.
* The fifth paid $1.
* The sixth $3.
* The seventh $7.
* The eighth $12.
* The ninth $18.
* The tenth man (the richest) paid $59.
All 10 are quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner says: "Since you are all such good customers, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."
So now their dinner for ten only costs $80.
The group still decides to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
The first four men are unaffected. They will still eat for free.
But how should the other six, the paying customers, divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share"?
They realise that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtract that from everybody's share, then the fifth and sixth men would each end up being paid to eat. The restaurateur suggests reducing each man's bill by roughly the same percentage, thus:
* The fifth man pays nothing (like the first four) instead of $1 (100%saving).
* The sixth pays $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
* The seventh pays $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
* The eighth pays $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
* The ninth pays $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
* The tenth pays $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six are better off, and the first four continue to eat for free, as now does the fifth - but outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man "but he got $10!"
"That's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men then surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner. The nine sat down and ate without him, but when they came to pay the bill, they discovered that they didn't have enough money between all of them to meet even half of the bill!
That is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.
There are lots of good restaurants in Monaco and the Caribbean.

[Expat]

Originally Posted by Devman

This may be a prudent analogy relating to a recent tax cut for the "Wealthy" in Australia.

Here is the REAL story to lighten the Budget discussion! You've heard the cry from across Australia in the last couple of weeks: "It's just a tax cut for the rich!" - and then it’s accepted as fact. But what does that statement really mean?

The following explanation may help.
Suppose that every night, ten men go out for dinner. The bill for all ten comes to $100. They decide to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes, and it goes like this:
* The first four men (the poorest) paid nothing.
* The fifth paid $1.
* The sixth $3.
* The seventh $7.
* The eighth $12.
* The ninth $18.
* The tenth man (the richest) paid $59.
All 10 are quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner says: "Since you are all such good customers, I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20."
So now their dinner for ten only costs $80.
The group still decides to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes.
The first four men are unaffected. They will still eat for free.
But how should the other six, the paying customers, divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share"?
They realise that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtract that from everybody's share, then the fifth and sixth men would each end up being paid to eat. The restaurateur suggests reducing each man's bill by roughly the same percentage, thus:
* The fifth man pays nothing (like the first four) instead of $1 (100%saving).
* The sixth pays $2 instead of $3 (33% saving).
* The seventh pays $5 instead of $7 (28% saving).
* The eighth pays $9 instead of $12 (25% saving).
* The ninth pays $14 instead of $18 (22% saving).
* The tenth pays $49 instead of $59 (16% saving).
Each of the six are better off, and the first four continue to eat for free, as now does the fifth - but outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.
"I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man "but he got $10!"
"That's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than me!"
"That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $10 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!"
"Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!"
The nine men then surrounded the tenth and beat him up.
The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner. The nine sat down and ate without him, but when they came to pay the bill, they discovered that they didn't have enough money between all of them to meet even half of the bill!
That is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up at the table anymore.
There are lots of good restaurants in Monaco and the Caribbean.

Great explanation - I wish all taxes could be explained to us like that.
In France the meal goes up in price every few days, the restaurant throws most of it's food away & has gold covered menus.

[Sirgezza]

People who don't work get to go to the restaurant for free. The people who do work pay for all the restaurants and get the same menu as the people who don't work. The restaurants generally can't cope with the amount of customers. The people who can afford to (the workers), pay the restaurant owners a ''backhander'' and jump the queue, in essence paying twice.

However I feel fortunate to live in a country where our restaurants are much better than those in poorer countries.