Tax Free Wage to Fight a War?

[L J R]

Has anyone come up with a good reason not to provide tax free wage to those British Forces who fight in Ops. I understand that many other countries [incl US and Australia] do not charge income tax to those who go in to battle.

The treasury recently announced that the UK would spend 'that which was required' to fight a future war in the ME. - me thinks that the tax of 40,000 UK mil personnel deployed in Gulf region should just about pay for it. Never mind the fact that most have spent some of their own hard earned dosh to deploy with the right stuff.

[Farfrompuken]

One good Reason?

Treasury are too tight fisted. Have to pay for a bunch of work-shy scroungers first, you know?

Look at the kit we get dumped with. Look at the manning levels.

Tax breaks my @rse. Surprised we don't pay extra after 28 days in theatre. Ah, I think they've even got that one covered!


:{

[TheWelshOne]

Take it up with the UN - they wont have much to debate over after next week and will be looking for work.

[vascodegama]

I remember there was a letter in Snippets issue 19 it went along the lines of we are paid more anyway and the overall package leaves us better off. That is b0ll0ck$, we earn more money than some for good reasons -it costs more to live in the UK. esp after the latest stealth taxes which will await our return. I cannot see for one minute that rank for rank we are better off than a US serviceman and lets face it that is who we spend most of our time with. If you want to look at a level playing field then compare a US exchange officer in the UK with uk eqivalent. When he has his version of LOA then his take home is about the same. He still has access to the BX and gets tax free on ops. Then there is hostile fire pay etc. We do get the marvellous OWP ie free soap powder, out of date newspapers and 20 min free call when the phones work. The LSSA hardly makes up for the US advantages at a fiver a day after tax. It might make the govt realize the strength of feeling if all the wives of those detached wrote to MPs asking for a real explanation not some treasurey drivel.

[Junior Jet Club]

Don't quote me on it, but I did hear that someone, somewhere is going to the courts to argue for a tax-free salary due the fact that they have spent so much time out of the country recently!

Would be interesting to hear if it is true, and what the outcome will be.

[DESPERADO]

I must have missed something when I joined up. I don't remember in my terms of service them saying that if we send you somewhere ****ty we will give you loads of extra dosh because it is dangerous, or sandy, or the seppo's get more money than us.

I realise that this is indeed a site for whinging, but I still feel that I am lucky to be allowed to fly 20mill jets. We do the best job in the world, bar none (except perhaps Anna Kournikova's oilboy).

I have heard this 'tax-free' one a few times over the years. If I add up my time in crap places on Ops it would be well over a year (thats a lot of tax). That money would obviously be nice, but I don't feel like a victim as some of you lot appear to do. I still am as proud (though a lot more cynical also) of doing the job as I was when I joined a long time ago. Are you lot proud of what you do, or is it just a job?

Get the f*&k on with it. If they give us more money then great, but you didn't sign up to be rich. If you did, then you are already in the wrong job. If you want to be rich, leave.

JJC, I have to ask, because I am dying to know, why do you wear a uniform. Your last thread was a pathetic complaint about a bit of noise in a tent somewhere (quickly deleted by you I presume, when you received no sympathy), now you have joined in here with more weasle words. I am sure that Eastern Airways have a spot just for you if you want it.

Boys & Girls, many of you appear not to have noticed that there is a war just around the corner (clearly some of you are deployed and should look out the window). If you can't focus on whats important in times like these, you will put yourself and your crew at risk.

I would add, that I do agree with you that it is piss-poor (my cynical side) that personnel have to buy their own essential kit. I do however, carry a few 'toys' of my own in the cockpit which I have paid for myself (tax deductable!). I don't believe that these are items that should necessarily be issued because they are personnel to me and might not be for everyone.

[swinging monkey]

I tried something similar tio this a few years ago regarding my car tax and insurance. At the time, I was spending 3 wks deployed and 2 wks back home (not too strenuous I know, but after a couple of years??)
I asked the department of transport if there was any way of getting a refund on my road tax, in view of the fact that I was spending more than 50% of my life out of the country.

Answer...NO
Reason...That's what you are paid for Sir, and don't you get something called an X factor in the forces??

Asked the same question to the Insurance Co and was told that as I was not driving in the UK 'regularly' they would look into it, but not for a refund, for an extra loading!!!
They claimed that 'people without regular driving experience in the UK are more likely to have an accident' So I dropped that one pretty quickly!

The old X factor is the 'Official' answer to all of those little points chaps, and the bottom line is....We don't have a Hope!!

Never mind, keep smiling

:O :p :D :O

Regards
The Swinging Monkey
'Caruthers, is it time for a scotch yet?'

[lightbob]

In '96 there was a regular flight from Italy, via Zagreb into Tusla and Sarajevo that would run on 29/30th each month to drop off a number of high ranking American officers. They would do duty visists to the US Div and ARRC and then get picked up on 2/3rd of the next month. Reason = collect 2 months combat pay/tax allowances and then return to HQ Whereever. Do we want to encourage this?

[YakYak]

Desperado

Don't you think you're being a little short sighted? Take a moment to think of the wives and families that are left behind when you go off and play all around the world. Extra allowances are VERY important to pay for such things as extra phone calls (20 mins a week is pathetic to sustain a relationship over 6 or 12 months - plus the system hardly ever works), postage, flights home during 96 hour passes, etc. The government owes service families a little extra for the sacrifices we all have to make to protect politicians' careers:

"I'm sorry darling, but Daddy can't be here for this birthday, he's away clearing up the mess of some botched conflict that we should never have been involved with in the first place. Yes, I know he hasn't seen your last 2 birthdays either. Maybe next year"

You, like many others, might not have considered these things when you joined - but marriage and a family can change one's perspective. The allowances (although pathetic) are very much needed, and sorely missed when they have to be spent on kit that should be standard issue.

YY

[FOMere2eternity]

Desperado

I agree with the general gist of what you're saying - get it done and get back safely - and there are a lot of military tourists on the periphery who enjoy hotels, business class civair etc.

As for welfare as a whole, the British military are appalling at it.
Rather than a 'make money' scheme when we're away, how about looking at it as a compensation scheme for the austere environment we now expect wherever we go.

Bear in mind our taxes pay for all kinds of things back home that we only dream of in theatre and a lot of our people end up without electricity, water, showers, proper toilets etc. for considerable periods of their lives. (Although we should be grateful someone decided food is kind of essential).

Equally, watch the other forces (US in particular), with flat-pack McDonalds and Swimming Pools flown in on the 1st aircraft and tax-free pay. The Dutch and a few others I believe, even pay their guys bounties for going away. I also heard NATO (or could be UN) pays the UK for each serviceman on duty with them (ie. Bosnia) and, whilst other countries give it to the boys stuck there, our Govt pockets it because 'British Forces are not mercenaries'.

If we want to retain people - quality people - we simply have to do better and, in the absence of facilities, cash in the form of income tax refunds would be a nice gesture that might get the treasury spending on welfare facilities a little faster.

The other option is do nothing and b@llocks to the boys and girls in theatre - in the long term the cash saved might come in handy to pay to recruit and train their replacements !

[Whipping Boy's SATCO]

Because if we didn't pay our taxes, the Government couldn't afford to send us to war.

Does that mean we pay for the privilege?:confused:

I knew I loved this job.......................... :rolleyes:

[opso]

Desparado, if in all your years you have only spent a total of a year away, it may be a lot of tax, but it's not as much time as a lot of our people are being asked for. I changed branches because I was sick of spending about 7 months of the year away from home. Apart from the significant impact on my family and the likelihood of it leading to a breakdown of my marriage, it was also financially crippling! Allowances swing one way and then the other; the big allowances of old were being removed by my time and we swung to the point of sod all, such that it was routine to come back £100-200 out of pocket after a 16 day excursion. They have swung slightly back in some ways (at least the offer of 20 mins phonecalls is there, even if the phones aren't!), but other things have been sacrificed to pay for that (witness the penaltyu for being away for more than 28 days).

Please remember that there are plenty of people who are away for 5+ months of each year and it would appear that there are plenty of people who have spent more time away in 3 years that you have since you joined many years ago. Whilst the penalties of being OOA may not be that much of an issue for you, I can assure you that it is a significant reason for a lot of PVRs and requests for trade changes.

[Scud-U-Like]

I'm all for improving OOA conditions and welfare, but tax-free pay is a non-starter. As those who are paid from taxes, we in the armed forces are hardly in a position to opt-out of contributing our share. We might be abroad, but the country (to which we are so desperate to return) still has to be paid for.

[DESPERADO]

Opso,
Before we get into an argument about who's is the biggest, and 'get some time in etc', my 'over a year away' was on ops, i.e. where I am in harms way, I thought that is what this discussion was about. I do appreciate that there are many out there, especially in the helo world who will have done a lot more than me, but I don't think that it makes my opinion any less valid. If I added up all the time away from home over my time in the RAF it would be several years, and a significant percentage of my service.

YakYak,
I have a wife and children like many others. I don't want you to get the impression that I am not sympathetic to the issues, but what I want is significant improvements in the things that you talk about, welfare issues matter more than money in our pockets. I agree that the current system, which is supposed to be an improvement over what we used to have, is wholly inadequate, underfunded and unfair. I also agree, as I said in my previous post that people should not have to buy their own basic kit, but I will repeat also, that I carry items in the cockpit with me, that are comercially available, personal to me, and I don't expect the govt to pay for them.

I don't agree that tax-free is the way to go. I believe in welfare improvements for everyone. If it were tax free, then the amount of 'welfare' you got would be dependant on your rank! I, like most aircrew officers, am in the 40% bracket, is it fair that I get more money whilst I am away on ops than an SAC when it is supposed to be 'welfare' that you are talking about.

My previous point still stands, if you want tax free because you want more money, good luck to you, I wouldn't turn it down either, but whinging about it, complaining about the terms that you signed up for is pretty unconvincing to me. It does not hold you in good light to the people who read this, and your subordinates.

Get the welfare right for everyone. Issue each Squadron/Unit with several laptops computers with webcam's and let family use them whenever they want. Get webcams in theatre so that you can see and talk to family face to face. Many more phones in theatre, 20mins per day, not per week. That kind of stuff is priceless, and doesn't have rank.

Pay your taxes like everyone else and just think about what is truly important at this dangerous time.

To anyone out there thinking of joining the airforce, I can heartily recommend it, loved it, and still love it. Don't join without your eyes wide open though. However, now that the proverbial is about to hit the fan all I can think of is what a great bunch of people I am with at the moment, and in the words of Henry V (or Shakespeare):

"We few, we happy few, we band of brothers; for he today that sheds his blood with me shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile this day shall gentle his condition. And gentleman in England now a-bed shall think themselves accursed they were not here, and hold there manhoods cheap whiles any speaks that fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day"

Some may think it cheesey, but sums it up nicely for me. It is not about the money, and never has been. I say again, if you want to be rich, go do something else. We are paid a fair salary.

[Lowkey]

Desperado,

Thanks for a well reasoned reply to the initial criticisms. As someone who has been away for a large amount of time, I can honestly say the money does not mean anything any more. Whether I received £100 or £1000 a month whilst away, the fact that I am away from my wife and family will never be improved. Although maybe I could afford to pay for a Civ Air ticket home rather than a military flight.

I married my wife not the RAF. The people I work with are in the majority fantastic people, but I need to feel close to home and money will never substitute it. Contact through the Web, Text messages and phone cards will reduce that feeling of isolation. Additionally, the guarantee of a period of time off on the return home, rather than the possibility of another short notice task, would again provide a focus for your family.

The only answer of course is more people or less committments but after 11 years I have lost any hope of that type of solution

[Sloppy Link]

The present system puts all British servicemen on a level playing field financially speaking. If, on Ops, you became tax exempt, individuals would or could be seen to, deploy for the wrong reasons. I can picture it now at the AMC as the media machine comes for it's gloat,"I'm going because I want more money". I am not happy with taxes but at the end the day, they rank alongside death and nurses. One of lifes certainties.

[vascodegama]

Yes the present system does put all servicemen on a level playing field financially. Then again why should it? The last year for which stats were available showed that less than half the RAF spent more than 3 weeks away. As for the tax-free system benefitting the highest ranks, the US system allows for that by capping the amount of salary that is tax free thereby preventing the best paid being better off. Although we did not join for the money it is the effect on morale of working next to Americans who are getting so much better treatment that is the problem.

[L J R]

Vasco, your hint on the morale aspect of this argument is, I think, the issue here. I would rather pay the full tax and remain with family etc. But looking at how a foreign Govt treats its fighting force shows a cultural difference in the world's militia.


Desperados points on better welfare, more phone calls etc... are also spot on, but realistically probably harder to implement [more admin types required to police and enforce etc..]

Nothing is worse than being out of pocket while on Ops. The Govt definately has its head in the sand on this issue.

[YakYak]

Here is probably a good place to ask this question - looking at where the thread is going:

Post deployment leave:

I've heard rumours that when my other half returns from his 6 month OOA stint, his PODL may be cancelled because of the Iraq situation - ie: he'll come home, pack some more kit, and leave AGAIN. :*

Is this possible? Or likely?

YY

(:( )

[Mad_Mark]

Yak Yak,

Oh yes, it's very possible. Since 'Options for Change' drastically reduced the size of the UK Armed Forces we have seen the number of commitments increase. We now have fewer people to do more work! Hence the need to call up so many reservists all the time.

Make the most of your partners return, it may not be for long! However, he may end up in the UK, but away from home anyway, fighting fires for those lazy, greedy b'stards we actually employ to do the job 4 days a week! I am sure that there are many, many troops that dream about 16% spread over 3 years for 4 days on, 4 days off :*

MadMark!!! :mad:

[opso]

YayYak. Yes, it is possible and depending on his job, it may even be probable. Whilst it is fashionable hereabouts to point out that the aircrew retention measures are simply inadequate and that RAF personnel without brevets are pedantic rules-slaves that have no idea what the RAF is about, the fact is that for the expeditionary warfare that we are engaging upon, the critical shortfall has been revealed to be Movs staff. If your hubby is a muppet, the chance is that he will be back in country for about 7-10 days maximum (less if he is commissioned) before being sent out again. If he is a cook or medic, the timings are currently similar. If he is RW aircrew, he should get a couple of weeks and if he is other aircrew, he is likely to get more.

And Mad_Mark, I hope that you weren't showing contempt over the incredibly professional and dedicated heroes that we call 'firefighters' when they turned down their latest pay offer.:rolleyes: You imply that the union rejected 16% over 3 years and this is flatly not true. It was 16% over the next 16 months! With the initial rise back-dated to Nov 02. And the end to a union-imposed overtime ban. So before you accuse them of being 'lazy, greedy b'stards' you really should review the facts more accurately.

Then you'd see that they're INCREDIBLY lazy, greedy b'stards!:(

[BEagle]

The RAF 'Total Force Concept' relies upon our regulars being augmented when necessary by auxiliaries first - and then by reservists bring called-out. Those 'reservists' are people who've left the RAF for a new career, but whose terms of service include a 'reserve liability'. When the S of S for Def makes an Order under the appropriate section of the Reserve Forces Act, folk of the appropriate trade then get an envelope through the post.....

The smaller the regular force and the more demands placed upon it, the greater then becomes the need to call-out reservists. Whether this is reasonable, I leave for others to debate. However, someone must have decided what level of conflict our regular forces should be expected to cope with when they were reduced to their current size. Similarly, it doesn't take the brains of a rocket scientist to work out which are the trades which have been 'contractorised' the most - and which, as a result, will need to rely upon ex-regular reservists more and more as the number of conflicts increases.

I seem to remember that we once had a government which ended our 'East of Suez' policies..........

YY - I do hope that your time with himself will be more than brief when he gets back from his current OOA stint!

[PPRuNeUser0172]

If deployed troops didn't pay income tax, how would the treasury find the money for the really important things in life like giving Andy Gil(anti)christ's whinging, half baked malingerers their utterly deserved 40% payrise they keep harping on about.

Makes me blood boil!! When i were a lad......

If American troops get it then there should be no reason why we don't. Oh yeah we're skint.

[Unmissable]

I have it on good authority that the US Department of Defence have to cough up the equivalent of all the tax free breaks that the US servicemen are entitled to. Therefore, it comes out of the defence budget. If we were to use the same system then we would lose out in some other area, eg equipment or the meagre allowances we already have. Furthermore, the take home pay of a US Serviceman has a much larger proportion of numerous allowances which do not count towards a pension, so when you come down to it, I would rather be in the UK system.

I think that it is far better to pursue a better 'deployment package' whether it be more separation allowance for family left at home or phonecalls (that can actually be used) and then make it one allowance for all. After all, tax breaks favour the well paid and who has the right to say that a senior officer needs compensating more for being apart from his family than an SAC. I heard it recently from a very senior officer recently that out of an air force of approx 50,000, there are an estimated 33,000 OOA deployments to be filled in the next 12 months. You don't need A'level maths to work out that the result is that some poor souls spending more time away than at home. (How many Gp Capts and above are part of the 33,000????)

We should press for better separation packages for all; tax breaks are always clawed back in some other way.