Freelancing legal question

This is general discussion, and i know many of us artists and programmers alike are doing our work true freelance.
Now i'm trying to find out how is freelance solved in US legaly? What you do, what are your legal obligations as freelancer?
I'm also trying to find out how it is in EU in other countries. And rest of the world, so feel free to comment. I'm in Croatia which is part of EU, but here freelance is not recognized by law. Some people say it is the same in rest of EU, but i think other countries have better solutions. Here i have choice will i use "author contracts", which is simple, no obligations. You fill them in when you earn something. If you don't earn, no problem. But i would need to pay 45% of what i earn in that case, which is unacceptable. Another option is, you would need to start small business. In which case you pay much less, but your legal status get's more complicated cause basically you are a business now and have many bureaucratic obligations. Including paying certain amount for mandatory health and retirement founds every month, regardless if you earned something that month or not. There are also some other bureaucratic paperwork regarding VAT which require hiring accountant. All of this drains my spirit and kills my soul. And i need my soul and spirit to be able to work.
With lack of proper solution for freelancers in my country, i'm trying to find out how it is in rest of the world. Goal is to compare it so i can write about it to proper authorities and together with freelance association ask for change for the better.

 

It's the same in SLO and Greece.

 

That's a complicated question when asking about the US because there are lots of ways to do it. As a true freelancer, you have the option of just reporting the income as "self-employment" income. You're still going to pay about 30% tax, which includes social security, etc. And that could vary depending on tax bracket, but it's a good rule of thumb.

The problem with the above approach is that it doesn't offer you any legal protection and if you were to get sued you could lose everything. So you can take the next step of setting up a business. The easiest and what probably offers the most protection as an individual freelancer is an LLC. You can set it up as a "disregarded entity", which means it still just counts as personal income and makes taxes much easier, but it offers you protections in that, if sued, they can only come after the business assets and not you or your home personally.

There are many other models like sole proprietorship (pretty much like the "self-employment" scenario except actually doing business as a business), s-corp, etc but for the most part, as a freelancer you're only going to be a sole proprietor or an LLC. The cost of setting up such business is in the range of $300 to $500 if you do it yourself. I had an attorney do mine, but he's also a friend so I get a really cheap rate.

 

Hm, interesting. Those legal questions are not an issue here. Someone can sue you? For what? 30% seams a bit high. But in business option you pay less? Is it easy to run it? You don't have much paperwork? You don't have VAT in US?

Sorry for so many questions

 

People sue for everything and nothing here. If you fail to deliver on a contract, or your product does something unintended. Or worse, a patent troll comes after you. Good contracts help with that.

In the business option you don't pay less. It's definitely different based on the business type. Corporations are more complex. They do have some tax benefits, but in that scenario you're an employee essentially of your own company, so there is a corporate tax and payroll taxes and they get complex. And there are quarterly reporting requirements, etc. I use an LLC and it's no different tax wise than if I were just charging as a contractor. It's super easy to run, I only have to give my state an update every 2 years (called a bi-annual update) and it's a simple one page form.

 

Here in sweden you can make almost close to zero without taxing it, I think its like 1000 EUR per year. Everything else it regarded as professional work and should be taxed there after.

In Sweden its much better to start a LLC and put the money in that company, then you can take out salary (at a crazy high tax off course, we are a socialist country after all), or you can let it sit in the company and reinvest or take it out as dividend since you are a major stock holder in the company. Here in sweden there are special laws for that, you cant take it all out as dividend, that would be way to beneficial (we are a socialist country after all), you either use the general flat rate rule which means 16k EUR max, or if you meet the rules you can take out 50% of the salary outtake the company did that year. Whats nice about dividens is that you only pay about 31% total tax (22% corporate tax plus 20% income tax) instead of roughly 50% tax

 

wooow.... And i thought we are the socialists here in ex Yugoslavia.. That is insane.

I'm disappointed with 30% tax rate. I would expect less taxation in the land of the free... That lawsuit culture is very bizarre for me. Friend of mine went to US, and he was surprised to see billboards and posters advertising lawyers on every corner. That is very bizarre.

 

It really depends on a lot of factors, such as tax bracket, etc. The 30% is really to be on the safe side, but you get to deduct things like business expenses. There are also different rules per state. About 25% goes the federal for me and about 5% to state. My effective tax rate is actually higher... but... I get to deduct things like advertising and operational expenses (such as website hosting, domain registration, etc).

Things will change a bit next year. This year, for a married-filing-jointly tax, there is a "standard deduction" of 12,500. That means, essentially, that if you don't have enough expenses you can take the standard deduction and basically $12,500 of your income is not taxed. There are also allowances for child care, business expenses, etc. I did not take the standard deduction because I was actually able to come up with $17,740 worth of allowances and deductible expenses. Next year, the standard deduction goes up to, I think, $25,000 so that'll be an even bigger deduction.

So yeah, 30% seems high, and it is... but our tax system is so convoluted and complex, chances are you don't end up actually paying that much.

 

I forgot to mention. The more favorable option tax wise here have a maximum limit. If you make more then 49 000$ per year, you must change your business model to "more serous" one. For that 49 K you pay approx 1000$ in taxes, and 2000$ for retirement and healthcare per year. Which is awesome if you are making that kind of money. Problem is, if you are making less, you are still paying the same amount for retirement. But i love this model cause it encourages you to work and make more. But on top of that we have those "parafiskalni nameti". It is hard to translate, cause i don't think any country have them. Paying for some entity called "obrtnička komora" 1000$ per year for example. Basically remnants from communist era. Then there is some board of tourism you also need to pay, same thing. We had to pay for board of forests, but for this year i don't see it, so hopefully they finally canceled it. Then you need to handle that VAT stuff with accounting, which you also need to pay. This is not our invention, this is our EU overlords doing. I'm still searching good accountant for myself. But the biggest problem is, everything is "open to interpretations". This is our Balkan lawlessness. Which can be great if you are lucky and person who handles you is normal human being. But if you come across some a****, he can find irregularities in your business, cause it is impossible not to have any do to reasons i mentioned. So you are constantly vulnerable. But unlike in US where you are vulnerable to lawsiuts, here the state is the one that can screw you

 

The state can screw you here too via the IRS. I almost never deduct all of the expenses I think are legitimate because I'm scared to death of accidentally deducting something I shouldn't. The IRS can audit you to make sure your taxes are accurate so you have to be careful to be very accurate with them. Some folks like to scam the system, but it's not worth the risk for me.

 

I think taxation is theft... But, i cant escape reality and i love living in civilized world. So there is no option but to develop Stockholm syndrome (hello Sweden, lol) for the government as such.

 

Did I forget to mention we have 25 procent VAT on goods? 12 procent on food? If you sell your house to buy a new one there is tax on that so you cant buy a new house for the same amount without pushing in more money, we have tax on almost everything. Oh and now they want to bring back the tax on saving, so if you have more than 80k EUR in the bank or in equity etc they want to tax you for that. So called rich man's tax. Money that already been taxed, no problem, then you buy something for it taxed again. Triple taxes, quadrouple tax,no problem

 

haha! we have 25% VAT on all goods including food from 2016! <3 They tried to bring property tax in 2016, but people rebelled. For most people here having some apartment or house is all they have. But they don't give up on that, they just postponed it. I hope people will remember when they try to do it again.

 

Here (Australia/NZ) you are just treated as self employed (ie a sole trader). If you earn above the tax threshold you need to pay personal income tax on it. But that's about it. You do need to get an ABN (Australian Business Number) and register for GST (Goods and Services Tax) once you hit the appropriate income thresholds.

There is also a hobby provision for especially small operators, which means you can basically ignore all of the tax paper work.

If you get bigger, want to take investment from other people, or want to employ people, then you can set up a company. Its more expensive to run, is more administratively complex, has mandatory reporting requirements, and actually owns any money it has. Companies provide full liability protection to its share holders, but only partial protection to its directors. Which means if you are running a company that you own, you don't really have any incentive to set up a company over a sole trader.

 

what is the threshold?

 

$18,200. You can see the effective tax rates for different tiers as well at the link below.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Income_tax_in_Australia#Individual_income_tax_rates_(residents)

 

Just a quick note though. Minimum wage is $18.29. That's $36,141. Almost double the income free tax range.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Minimum_wage_law#Australia

 

... Just to clarify, are those numbers US dollars or Australian dollars?

 

Australian. Wikipedia copied the chart from their government website.

https://www.ato.gov.au/Rates/Individual-income-tax-rates/

 

Ironically I find the Australian system quite restrictive compared to the NZ system I used to work in. NZ tax is simpler then in Australia. And in NZ there is no need to register for a business number.

But either way as small countries that are geographically isolated, the only real way to survive is to make entrepreneurship simple, cheap and profitable. Compliance costs hurt everybody.

 

And scandinavia is worst, and with all these high taxes you think you would get someting for it right? Sure we have cheap health care etc, but its long queues if you do not need a emergency operation, years some times to get something like a hip fixed for our elders.

Oh and we have progressive tax like I talked about before, so that we that have high salaries pay more, but when we need to use the public welfare system they have income roofs on everything. For example, when your home from work with a sick kid you get some allowance from the state, but its cut at like below half what I have in salary. So in our home its my wife thats home with the kids, even though I would like it to be more gender equal.

 

You don't have sick leave provisions? That's strange. I get ten days a year payed by my employer. Which is enough to cover all of the usual kids home sick stuff.

 

You do realise that in places without these systems, those systems you're complaining about are worse right? Like people get $0 in state allowance, or they spend loads of money on something as trivial as a broken ankle.

 

Not as freelancer i think

 

Sure. As a freelancer here you are responsible for your own sick and holiday pay. Which means that if you don't put money aside for it, you won't get any. But @AndersMalmgren used the words 'salary' and 'home from work', which both imply working as an employee, not a freelancer.

One of the whole points of freelancing is not having to go to work in the first place.

 

I run my own corporate business so its my money anyway. Not many companies compensate sick leave here btw, some compensate the parental leave allowance. The state have a crazy low roof for that allowance too so some companies compensate that, usually up to 80% of the employees salary. Not very common in the IT sector though. I have a very pretty high salary so the state welfare is almost negligible. I could lower the salary since I run my own company, but then i would just sit on a pile of money that i cant touch. Since the dividend is calculated on the companies total salary payments that year. So I guess I need to employ more people to be able to get that sweet low tax

 

Sure, but sweden's socialism isn't the answer to that. The problem is not the actual security it gives, thats a good thing, you dont want people to feel insecure, that creates criminals. the problem is the cost, the public sector is just too darn ineffective. Everytime the right wing parties get into power they fix or try to fix something but then 4 years later the lefties get power again and destroys what they built.

Also the swedish welfare as actually failed to deliver that security, its never been so insecure in sweden, with crime rates like rapes and beatings increasing, beggars everywhere etc. For example, they need to sanitize my two sons kindergarten playground every morning because the beggars are doing their toilet business there.

haha, never thought I would talk politics on a programming forum.. btw, I think talking politics is against the forum rules, so maybe we should take it down a notch.

 

This is only matter of personal preference. Do you want to give 50% of what you earn, and trust the goverment to provide all those things for you? Or you want to pay up to 30% in taxes or less, and take care of all those things by yourself? I would trust myself over the most benevolent idealistic government in the world. But, that is just my preference

 

Just think of all the headache you'd save not having to deal with the insurance company.

 

I must give our government cred here, everything, and I mean EVERYTHING is managed from the web these days in sweden. Also all major public organs have apps both for Android and iphone, for example, if you are home with a sick kid you just register it in the app, the money is transferred at the end of the month (The only problem being the money is close to zero). Same with the tax return declaration, its managed through a online service, etc.

And we have a national standard for electronic signing, so all banks and also public institutions use this, so its always just a faceid or thumbprint away to sign the tax return.

 

Done well, the government can access economies of scale that simply aren't possible for individuals.

Some examples:

- It would be ineffective for me to build a road system everywhere I want to travel.
- A justice system that's user pays would be subject to abuse by those who pay for it.
- Countries with private health systems tend to spend more per capita on health then countries with private health systems.

One can go on. Ultimately while one can trust oneself to operate in self interest, one can't trust all of the other people out there to operate in your self interest. Governments tend to cover that gap.

 

I agree with you completely, though you are from an old commonwealth country, most of those have sensible governments that have not gone full left

 

The only issue is usage of force to collect the money for that. If they catch you not paying taxes (and with today's tracking and technology it is much easier for them) you get fined. If you fail to pay the fine and taxes you owe, you get to court. There they can forecfully take away your property to cover for unpaid tax and interest. Basically they have the power to destroy our lives and of our families to pay for the roads.
That is the issue.
We went political here, but it is part of life.
Taxes exsist from ancient times. Historians would probably know since when. But i am sure we had it in ancient Rome, Greece and Persia. At same time we also had slavery. Today many people will say "but how can civilization function without taxes, it is impossible". Same arguments ancient philosophers had for slavery. With all their wisdom, when they pictured world without slavery, they saw anarchy and disaster.
Now we understand how evil slavery was. I think, and i know i'm being utopian now, but i believe this remnant of our ancient past, which taxation is, will need to be abolished in the future. Future generations will look on our times and taxation in this way we have now (by force) with same disgust we view times of slavery today. I think we will find the way to make civilization function without application of force in taking money from people who worked for it very hard. I am for civilization, im not for anarchy... But now, we are basically still slaves. All of us (except few very rich people in the world) need to work to survive. From that work they take money from us by force. There is no choice not to pay. That is slavery. Isn't it? It's certainly not freedom.

 

It's ultimately the tragedy of the commons. If you allow individuals a choice on paying taxes, it's in their advantage not to pay. Which defeats the point of the system.

I honestly think we will do away with money before we do away with taxes.

A post scarcity world sounds nice. But currently we are still inventing new resources to be scarce as fast as we are solving scarcity on old resources.

 

Its not the tax thats the problem, its the black hole they go into. I think most people want to help society be secure, most people wants a society were gated communities is not needed etc. But my problem at least with the Swedish public sector is the crazy waste of the taxpayers money. And they only want more money, never think that might the problem lay in the efficiency of the public sector. That and the progressive tax makes me mad

 

No. I would not be so crass as to compare the modern position of a worker in a capitalist society to that of a slave. Its an apples to oranges comparison.

We don't get a choice about a few things, like paying taxes and obeying a few laws. But that's the extent that our freedom is limited. The slave didn't get a choice in anything.

 

First i need to describe my face when im writing all of this. I'm calm. This is just a philosophical conversation of opinions we have. I must specify this, cause often in online discussions people tend to think someone is attacking you are being angry if you disagree and so on. This is not the case here. This is civilized discussion with glass of vine... Something what slaves didn't had luxury to do, so you made valid point. But, then we are only half slaves?

 

Partial slaves we can agree on. We certainly don't have full freedom to do whatever we like. But I would like to say we have something close to optimal freedom. Add too much more and we will descend into anarchy. Take away too much and we will end up as slaves in reality.

That's the basic role of any system of government, to walk the line between too much freedom and anarchy on the one hand, and too much restriction and slavery on the other.

 

So you do not think individuals are capable of making decisions, beneficial to whole society.
Why then, do you think, a few individuals should be in charge of it?

And anarchy doesn't mean absolute freedom and absence of rules, it means common understanding and upholding of the non-aggression principle and absence of rulers.
I can't walk up to your door with a gun every month and unconditionally request a percent of your income for unclear purposes that would be illegal as I'm not a ruler, I don't make the rules. But the state can. It is the ruler. It imposes rules on everyone but itself. My point here isn't that I should to be able to do such a thing without consequence. My point is that nobody should be able to.

The only functions of government and their institutions are:

• reserving the exclusive right to use the initiation of force against its subjects,
• increasing its power.

The purpose of any action they take is to further those goals, at the expense of everyone else, if need be.

Of course you can argue that the state provides roads and water and social benefits.
Well, farmers provide their livestock with food, water and a place to live, protected from predators. It's not out of benevolence. It's to increase milk, egg, fur and meat output.
State cares about the subject's liberties about as much as farmer cares about livestock's freedom.
End goal is always the collection of profit from taxpayer or, in case of debt, taxpayer's children.

 

Who is to provide consequences if not the state? If you take away the state, then anybody can come up to my door with a gun and demand income. That's pretty much the way things have worked whenever states have broken down.

You are in tinfoil hat territory here. Sure, there are some states that have functioned this way. But that's not really the way modern states have worked out. Heck, its not even the standard way ancient states worked either.

 

Private protection companies who's programs you can choose to opt into and pay for.

* after mentioned states have, through its actions, drained population of its productivity and facilitated a situation wherein taking neighbor's property at gunpoint is the only way to survive. I don't see how such circumstances are not consequences of state's actions.

Not an argument.

All modern states work with this model.

Correct. Current (fourth stage) of human farming is magnitudes more profitable and destructive then the older models.
First stage. Slavery in ancient Egypt. Slaves were unproductive and required massive systems just to control them and keep then working at minimum effort.
Second stage. Slavery in Roman Empire. Slaves were allowed some freedom, which greatly increased their productivity.
Third stage. Feudal serfdom. Concepts of serf-owned livestock and taxation introduced.
Fourth stage. The Democratic model. This is where we stand. Shortly after birth we are indoctrinated with public school system. After indoctrination we are given the right to vote, the illusion of choice. Then we are divided into those who are productive and those who are dependent on the state. This is the way state defends itself. "Oh! You don't want to pay taxes?! But then your fellow humans who are dependent on us will suffer! You're not EVIL, ARE YOU?!". Of course the state continuously gives them just enough of your tax money that they stay dependent, facilitating an inescapable hostage situation. And final phase of the state is to continuously invent external threats to keep your population compliant under belief that state's power is there to protect it.

 

Correct. Consider it a deliberate insult. Its an ad hominem attack because I think your arguments are too ridiculous for further consideration.

But since I'm bored:

So what stops these private protection companies from degenerating into states? Or at the very least protection rackets. Its a classic question of who will watch the watchers. You haven't fixed any of the problems you proposed with states. You've just moved them around.

Incorrect. There are a couple of modern states that take this approach. But the vast majority simply want to continue their business in relative peace and stability. For the most part governments are just collections of regular people that have families and kids the same as everyone else. There is no grand conspiracy of people out to keep you down.

And we are back with the tinfoil hats. Find me a reputable scholar that supports this model of human history, and I might pay you some attention.

 

This is one of better Stefan's videos. But, he is not proposing solution to this problem. Cause it is to difficult to find solution. Just like i mentioned before. Kiwasi and i agreed, we are half slaves. So Stefan is right about that... But what to do about that? If we want civilization and not anarchy. Cause human nature is tricky. We tend to strive for dominance. Even unconsciously. Even here in this conversation. Each one of us is trying to look smarter form another, probably unconsciously. In totally free society we would inevitably had same strive for dominance. And some people have zero morals, zero empathy and will do what ever it takes to reach the top. So, i'm afraid if we abolish the government, in the end we would again ended up with another government, just like Kiwasi said. We can't change human nature...

But saying the truth is important. I don't think anything bad can come from it, only good. For start, topic of this thread. There is consensus most of us would love to work in system where you pay least amount of taxes, yet to have all benefits from civilized society like security, healthcare, roads, etc. No one want't to pay more and get less. Yet, there are countries you get exactly that. You pay more and get less. It is important to point that out by saying the truth.

 

Very well. Noted.

Their existence isn't absolute. They always have competition. If they partake in unsavory activities and unprovoked violations of the non-aggression principle, they lose reputation as a source of protection, which will lead to people creating or subscribing to a better alternative company. You have no option to not be subject to state agents. State will escalate until you comply or get shot. And as for protection racketing subgroup, I don't know anyone who would willfully pay/employ common muggers to defend them.

If you think that only a minority of states is run by this model, then could you please tell me which ones so that I can examine those cases in more detail?

Examples of these as well, please.
Don't take these two as requests to provide evidence. I'm not trying to be fallacious, I just want to see which you would consider to be in group 1 or group 2, specifically.
I'm the one making the initial statement, after all.
That being: No state is interested in it's citizens' liberties out of benevolence.

Except that they are part of a system that coerces and entraps the less fortunate, while extracting funds from productive population at gunpoint. The fact that they can sleep at night and tell their children they love them does not convince me they are not unknowingly evil. If they can, indeed, with pure conscience, partake in state's actions, they are either evil or they are too incompetent/willfully ignorant/unaware to know what they're doing.

Not while you comply. I don't think there is a conspiracy, it's just that state agents (knowingly or unknowingly) profit greatly from it's subjects' lack of awareness and knowledge on the topic.

But look here. I'm suggesting an alternative to coercive regimes and you're attacking me with ad-hominems("You are in tinfoil hat territory here.", "And we are back with the tinfoil hats. ") and downplaying my arguments ("I think your arguments are too ridiculous for further consideration"). So IF this is indeed a conspiracy, would that not make you a conspirator? You are, after all, defending state argument "who would defend you if not the state".

Of course, populous must not be aware of the fact that they're being kept down. If they were, their productivity would decline. And farmer can't have his cows produce less milk.

Let me get this straight, also. Political papers/articles are MAINLY written by political researchers, who are employed at state-funded political research institutes. Just keep that in mind when you request a scholarly source on political topics.
And what do you mean by a model of human history? Are there alternative models of history? I'm asking because I was sure history is just history. This is how things happened in currently widely accepted recorded history.
Egypt had slaves, Romans had slaves with some freedom, In feudal ages, in Europe, majority of non-city populations consisted of freerange slaves, referred to as serfs.
And since the industrial revolution we have the "free" taxpayer (who is not even free not to pay taxes) model.

He is proposing a solution, just not in that video. His stance (I believe and I will eat my words if I got that wrong), as well as mine, is that anarcho-capitalism is a better solution than any centralized government.

Again, "anarchy" is not an antonym of "civilization" (outside of young-adult fiction).
Anarchism advocates stateless societies based on voluntary associations.

Then you are free, in anarcho-capitalism, to be dominant. But only as long as you do not violate the non-aggression principle. Be dominant in your business field, by all means.
The only thing I care about regarding dominance or any kind of one-upmanship is: "Is non-aggression principle being violated?".

And those people would need to adjust themselves because nobody in their right mind will opt in to protected them, benefit them or be protected by them. They are only able to rise to the top because there is already a system in place to unconditionally extract resources from people. Namely, state.

Do we know this for a fact? Has this ever been tried in a country that was not prior ravaged by it's government's decisions? Or is it just something the state spits out to defend the status quo and its absolute presence?

No. I want to pay NO taxes and voluntarily pay for services which I am then allowed to use (e.g.: water, roads, healthcare, etc.). This is why I really like the way highways are handled in my country. You can choose to pay for highway permit which is calculated based on your vehicle's class, weight and size. You then receive a RFID(?) type sticker, which you put on the inside of your car's windshield. You can use highways without interruption / limitation as long as you have that sticker. My point is that it's voluntary. You don't have to pay if you're not going to use the highway. State propaganda television, on the other hand, taxes every household for the equivalent of $13 a month regardless if you even own a TV.

I will argue that if middle man has to wave a gun to ensure his presence in any transaction of goods, he's not a good middle man and transaction would run smoother without his presence. I'm fine with someone bringing a gun-waving middle man to the transaction, just ffs keep it non-compulsory.

 

I'm not a huge fan of the concept of nation states. But I really like social welfare safety nets, universal rights and benefits, a healthcare system that does not charge at the point of use, wealth redistribution, free education, etc. I expect to pay my fair share, and I am happy to be taxed without demanding that the tax system takes account of my own personal opinions about where money is spent. There are many things in this world that I do not believe should be run for profit, should not be 'managed' by market forces or subject to the whims of private concerns. And if I ever increase my income by a considerable amount, I look forward to paying more tax. I didnt get where I am today on my own, it took resources to educate me and keep me safe and healthy and I'm only too happy to pay back via taxation.

As for the UK freelance picture, its very similar to what some people have already posted about in some other countries. I can simply register as self-employed 'sole trader', and freelance imcome = personal income, so pay personal income tax on it. The first £11000-ish is not taxed. If my turnover is above a certain level then I would need to register for VAT, and once the business reached a certain size it would also start to make more sense to setup a limited company, creating legal separation between me and the company.

 

Can you choose not to pay it? And because the answer is "no", your feelings on the matter are irrelevant.
I'm puzzled as to why you can be happy about paying a proverbial bully and giving him the exclusive right to shake down everyone else, whether they agree or not. Just morally.
Do you think private companies and charities would not be able to provide you equal or superior services, should you choose to opt in and pay for them?

 

Partly because I am interested in everyone else as well, not just me. And no, private companies and charities dont belong in that space as far as I'm concerned - we had that sort of model in the past, before the welfare state, and it was a disgrace that people struggled long and hard to replace with something else. They won that struggle, long before I was born, and I recognise their sacrifice and what was won.

Anyway, I recognise the endless nature of political debate and have said quite enough, I wont respond here again.

 

I see Commonwealth nations have superior systems at least on this matter. By letting 11K to be untaxed, the state shows some reason. Cause that is survival money in UK. Taxing that would be counterproductive for the state as well. But in Croatia, like in mentioned Sweden, untaxable amount you can make is ridiculously low. here is something close to 3000 Euro per year. But the system is, you still need to pay taxes even for that, then after one year they give you your money back with tax return. It is really horrible. It kills the will to work and be productive.
As for the services like healthcare. Here is example. My father had problems with his back. He was in severe pain, had to take sick leave from work. He went to doctor, and he subscribed MRI scan of the back. There is vaiting list for that. He was appointed in April 2019. This was in January. The man is in severe pain, cant work. Ulitimatelly he had to go private cause he cant wait that long. Which he paid... He also pays for that government healthcare system, for which he have no choice not to pay. There is no joy in paying taxes in system like this. It is criminal... Now, this might be the case only here in my country, cause communism etc. I do hope situation with your healthcare system is much better?

 

The personal tax allowance amount has increased here substantially over the last 10 years or so. When I first started working 22 years ago it was more like £3000, and rose quite slowly for years before policy changes caused it to increase more quickly.

Our healthcare system is far from perfect and suffers from demographic pressures (ageing population, baby boomer generation reaching old age). But it still has several advantages, and I dont support systems that may look better from the outside but are only 'efficient' because large swathes of the population have no meaningful access to it for financial reasons. Anyway, like I said in previous post, political discussions can go on forever and since I dont expect to convince anyone else that their dearly held positions are wrong and mine are right, I'm done.

As for the idea someone mentioned that my own opinion is irrelevant because I have no choice but to pay the tax, 'no taxation without representation' is a slogan that existed for a reason.

 

I agree, political discussion can take forever. And this forum is not for that... At least here with Unity we can be happy, cause we have the freedom to create what ever we want.