It is time for a new government to take charge. The amount of tax people have to pay in the UK makes me wonder why more people are not homeless, maybe its because the middleclass pay all of the taxes and everyone else manages to get away with it. If it was not for the middleclass who knows how the government would continue to 'steel' money from the public.

SMatt, UK,

I've stopped giving to charities, now that the government does it for me. I've also stopped working full time. why bother when half of it just goes in tax and ni? I just work until i reach the start of the higher rate tax limit.

andrew, swindon, uk

I don't mind giving, I just have to question where the tax money spent to support those less fortunate goes. Only those that actually are less fortunate and deserving don't receive it as they often don't want to look for it. The government hires consultants for all its projects. Would have made sense in the old days when people remained in jobs for a long time and didn't travel but now transfer of skills and practice renders these consultants worse that useless beyond providing management with the excuse to do what they thought of in the first place. Money has become an end ito a means, not a means to end. I blame the increased mobility of people and the increasingly fractured relationships that seems to result.

John, Knutsford, UK

I was under the impression that a Socialist Government did everything that was necessary for everyone; that no one should be dependent on charity. It seems that that concept has gone out of the window unless you happen to be an MP. Then of course you are on the pig's back; all provided!
Since we are now in the EU lets leave it to them to provide for us poor Brits.

M. Cawdery, Portadown, Co. UK, EU

Mr. Reader may wish to note that Bill Gates has publicly announced his intention to give away 90% of his fortune during his lifetime, and that during at least one recent year he has given more for HIV relief in Massachusetts than the U.S. government.

David Cole, Medway MA, USA

David Watson: I think you'll find that if you add up

- Income Tax
- NI
- VAT
- Council Tax
- Car tax
- Fuel Duty
- Insurance Premium Tax
- Stamp Duty
- Duty on Alcohol and Cigarettes
- Vehicle Excise
- 'Green' taxes on Airline Tickets
- etc. etc. etc.

you might find that the total tax take out of your gross salary, if you are an average earner, isn't too far from 70%.

You have fallen into Gordon Brown's trap of having your attention distracted by the rate of Income Tax while a myriad of additional stealth taxes have been brought in behind your back.

From the productive sector of the economy as a whole, the government now takes nearly 55% in tax - figures published by the OECD. If you consider how many people pay little or no tax, then it is easy to see how those of us fortunate enough to earn a reasonable amount are paying a lot more than 40% of our income to compensate.

Francis, London, UK

Charity has be nationalized by the govt, its called the welfare state.

40% of my income is taken before i get it, more of i dare to spend it, so please forgive if i feel like not giving anymore away.

Gavin, London, UK

Wow Mr Jones, you pay 70% tax? And have to live with your parents at 28? The county you live in must have crazy council tax. I earn considerably less than median wage, pay about 30% tax (including student loan payment) and live in a large flat in London.

And I give to charity.

David Watson, London, UK

I used to give to two charities via direct debit but now I can't even afford to go to the DENTIST or buy prescription glasses, I've become the charity case and have cancelled my direct debits.

My old Aunt has to pay £3,200 per month for her care, having payed taxes all her life there's nothing left to give to charity.

VJB, LONDON,

I wouldn't wish to impune anyone's charitable motives, but. Is it likely that a robber baron like Andrew Carnegie, or someone like Bill Gates who, according to a DOJ ruling last year, chaired a company that bullied its operating system onto PCs would give away what they fought so hard to acquire?
That they had a Damascene moment where that killer gene turned into a giving gene. This sounds like evolution to me. The environment changes whereby significant tax advantages can be obtained from charitable trusts so approaches 'evolve' to attain the same end - namly the retention of wealth.

Eddie Reader, birmingham, england

If I understand the situation correctly the problem may lie more with the fact that HMRC have managed to get into the new law that all money brought in from outside is to be treated as income. So if she brings in money from the US (even if it's old capital savings) for a UK museum (say) she will lose 40% of it to the taxman. And then of course it's £30,000 for each family member not just for her.

If she wants to avoid this she can surrender he non-dom status BUT she will have to open all her accounts to HMRC and they may not agree with US treatment of these and tax her extra again.

It's nasty; it's unpredictable and I don't blame her at all. She's just being prudent.

Chasseur, Church Stretton,

Magnus harks back to a fantasy golden age. The British have for ages generally been mean and self-centred apparently believing the world owes them a living. Margaret Thatcher tapped this spirit and made it socially acceptable. The pitiful per head contributions to telethons and the like that are trumpeted as examples of British generosity don't even match the money punted on the lottery each week in the hope of instant wealth for no effort. As for wealthy non doms (or well paid commenting doctors) who begrudge paying tax - further manifestations of the "I want something for nothing" brigade. Harrumph...

Brian Hughes, Cheltenham, UK

With an efective tax rate of over 70% in this country, we give enough it may not be to the right people and we may nto be giving it. But we are certainy living with out it, mabye if we where nto taxed to death people might give more.

but i doubt it as they would finaly be able to take tha holiday, or buy new clothes for their children, I am 28 in 3 weeks, and i still have to live with my pearents as i am priced out of this country, give to charity what a joke!

Mr W Jones, Liverpool, England

Ms. Hogel says she will go back to the US where her philanthropic work is more welcome, because she has to pay 30,000 pounds (about US-$60,000) in taxes now.

I am certainly not for high taxation. And maybe she is right in that her philanthropic work is more welcome in the States. And I am sure that Britain, especially London, has had a cultural and economic boost from all the foreigners who can spend their income in delightful ways that does not just profit them, but also the larger public.

But I'd be surprised if Ms. Hogel did not have to pay at least $60,000 in the US too -- unless her income is rather low (but why does she not choose to pay regular taxes in the UK in that case) or she has it all stashed away in offshore trusts, which the American authorities will certainly not appreciate, no matter how generous her charity work. Thus, I can't help to find her remark somewhat disingenuous.

But maybe Ms. Hogel found another way not to pay taxes. Then I'd like to know it too!

Wolfgang, Boulder, CO, USA

Become a Member of Parliament ! Then most of your living expenses are paid for by the taxpayer , leaving you pots of cash to send off to your favourite charities !

OZ, Perth, Western Australia

I'm not on a doctor's income even and work freelance as a translator with no regular income but even so I manage to have quarterly donations to two children's charities, sponsor two children in Africa and South America, sending them extra money, too, and I also managed to send an extra EUR 600 to the African school this year. If you want to give, you can give.

In the UK, however, people are all 'me, me, me'. If the people spent the amount of money they frittered away on alcohol every week and donated it to schemes that make a different to someone's life, then the world would be a much better place.

Tina, Dusseldorf, Germany

I'm not rich. I can't afford a house close to my job. As a Doctor I have no choice but to take the job I'm given.

But even so I pay over 30% of my earnings to the government. If I purchase certain goods another 17.5% goes.

Victorians never paid taxes like this, so they had spare money to donate. With the truely rich paying close to 40% on earnings, with more if they purchase other items perhaps they feel society is already takeing enough.

Richard, London, England

The lack of grand-scale giving these days is no surprise to me. In an age of manipulative radio and television adverts, charity muggers, a national lottery that gives "charity money" to some rather dubious enterprises and exposed fraud in public office, we extend only our contempt to those who claim to be rich and powerful. We see men and women doing jobs we don't understand, and call them of dubious value to their companies (you did see the profits that the big banks these guys work for pulled in?) In return, they will naturally reciprocate, and see general society as a dog that bites the hand that may feed...

Morgan Murray, Glasgow,

Good idea: let's introduce more loopholes for rich people to dodge tax, and get rid of the one trifling imposition we intend to place on super rich non-domiciled residents. I imagine that if we do that we will inevitably see a tidal wave of philanthropy the like of which we could never have imagined, as hordes of Russian oligarchs queue up to fund public art.

Laurence Davison, Sydney, Australia