Comments by "Curious Crow" (@CuriousCrow-mp4cx) on "Richard J Murphy" channel.

  1. Worse. Britain was charged a Moron Premium in the financial markets for her folly. The markets hated it. It almost collapsed the British pensions industry. And the Bank of England had to spend £67 billion bailing it out. It was the incident that killed the Conservative Party's reputation as the Party of Fiscal Responsibility. And she sacked the Treasury best Economist too. Thats how stupid Liz Truss' budget was. The biggest irony she wasnt a trained economist either. She was a Chartered Accountant who had worked for Shell, but had never even worked anywhere to do with Fiscal Policy. She was an deeply shallow ideologue of the Tufton Street genre. And deeply paranoid. In contrast, Rachel Reeves is just myopic. I honestly dont know who is advising her, but I would expect they're ideologues too. And she doesnt understand the knock-on effects. She has a Micawberish understanding of hat her job is, which is unfortunate, because no-one would turn to Voctorian England for advice how to extinguish poverty. They were too good at creating it. The most important thing to note is that both Truss and Reeves both were graduates of Oxford. Lord help us.
    1
  2. It's time to tell T. I. N. A. she's been lying. There is an alternative. 👍
    1
  3. Please read the Report then comment if you agree or disagree. Commenting before you've read it says much more about you than the proposals in question.
    1
  4. Firstly, who owes who exactly? And how is debt actually managed? You need to understand that liability-driven debt management is used to manage debt, and not all debt is bad. You buy a house you are in debt, but at least you have a roof over your head. And because of asset price inflation the value of the house increases beating cash saved in the bank is that good debt or bad debt? And if its bad, who for exactly? Likewise, Government debt is not a problem if it is invested in assets that generate a return. So then, what assets generate returns for government? And if they are generating returns for governments, then before that they must be generating returns for tax payers, because government overwhelmingly rely on tax revenues. So think about it carefully.
    1
  5. Please don't fall into the bipartisan fake dichotomy. You've just lost a huge chunk of your credibility, because such thinking is reductive and rarfied. I think you should actually study deeply what your opponents actually think instead of stereotyping them as a monolith. That's just bad sophistry.
    1
  6. You don't understand it either. But hey, you don't live here.
    1
  7. Oh dear, the bot farmers are up and at it today, with lots of frankly uninformed views. You are right Richard. Starmer must make a rational choice in regards to UK national security. And that has to be defined as a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush. Brexit was never going to be a rational solution to what ails us, and it's utterly ironic that those invading a sovereign country impose its will upon it, would then feel entitled to feed us nonsense about us losing our sovereignty by being in the EU. So, whatever this organ grinder or it's monkeys say
    1
  8. Please, don't be daft. Who lent them the money they wasted? The international financial markets borrowed them money in return for their sovereign debt. They malinvested it. Instead of repairing their economy, they spent it on staying in power. Sound familiar?
    1
  9. I think you are exaggerating some, as we have a global economy that is already moribund, and a global money market which is suboptimal. It's been that way since 2008. Why? Nobody trusts anybody any more. A replacement for the Eurocurrency markets is needed because of that, but also reasonable global regulation of that market is essential. Right now, the US is the cleanest shirt in the laundry basket. Accordingly, everybody's shirt needs a wash. What we need is a global form of international money that isn't controlled by any one country. But hey, it's only been nearly 80 years since that was suggested, and it still hasn't happened yet. It's the main reason that the Eurocurrency markets came into existence. But still no commonsense resolution exists.
    1
  10. Not really. You're thinking of firms like Dyson, but are companies like that actually agile as small businesses? Nope. A sole trader can respond personally and quickly to his customers, and build customer loyalty. Nobody's loyal to a corporation, and often their customer service isn't as personal. And being treated well is something everyone enjoys, and large corporations don't always work to prioritise that. And that's the crunch: whilst large corporations can produce new products, they don't always deliver them well and that matters to customers.
    1
  11. Because it would need granular data of people were actually earning individually, in order to calculate the employers contribution accurately. Just saying how many employees gives not even a good starting point because of how NI contributions are structured. It's not a flat rate tax. It's capped at a certain level of earnings. And a a heal are assistant, will earn less than a qualified nurse, who will earn less than a registrar, or a junior doctor, who will earn less than a consultant. If you research NHS pay, you will find it complicated not just by pay scales, but by grading as well, and depending on one's length of service at your grade, your pay will fall on or between the minimum and maximum on your pay scake
    1
  12. Sorry, but NHS pay is much more complex than that. There are many professions employed within the NHS, and their pay is impacted by their job, their grade, their length of service, location, and hours. It's highly individualised, so just the number of employees without access to payroll data isn't the way to make even a reasonable estimate. The Dept of Health and Socare will have that, but not members of the public.
    1
  13. Just Rachel Reeves that Trickle Down Economics is a fantasy we can't afford.
    1
  14. Gobbledegook. Public sector workers pay NI as well, and do so the Self-employed, especially those running single trader and small enterprises. The idea that it is a tax on employment is absurd. It's the cost to provide social benefits far more cheaply at scale than relying on the less efficient private sector offerings. After all, where there is no mass healthcare, it is left to individuals to fund their benefits or to employers to offer them. And America shows how ineffective that is in prevent falls in life expectancy and bankruptcy from meeting medical costs. We in Europe avoid such preventable harms, and we know the impact of underinvestment in healthcare and other social benefits. Using economies of scale to keep costs down is a subsidy to employers. They are the beneficiaries of it. As long as we have it, we will never have such poverty in our midst that we cannot recruit enough healthy people to work. When we tried not to do that what happened. A long Covid epidemic, and life expectancy began to fall before the pandemic. Not paying taxes for those things is is a false economy for everyone.
    1
  15. Pink Floyd's "The Wall"?
    1
  16. Sorry, but you don't necessarily get back what you pay in at all. Definitely not the case in the US with exit fees and management fees. Investments entail risk, and if you don't know what your contributions are invested in, how do you know you'll get anything near what you put in back, especially as it would still be a poorly performing pension fund if you did. Inflation, erodes the purchasing power of the nominal amount invested, and you have to pay the fund managers a cut each year. So your returns have to beat inflation to stand still, nevermind grow
    1
  17. We all thought communism was about the people owning the means of production... Perhaps people everywhere just see and hear what they want to. But, reality goes on regardless.
    1
  18. Not true, by a long chalk. Please look at the poverty statistics when the UK used bullion, and was on the Gold Standard. We know we are much worse off now, because we are experiencing the return of diseases of poverty and deprivation now, than what we did before 1945. Our children grow less in height, more cases of malnutrition are being admitted to hospital, and our life expectancy has stalled - and that was before the pandemic. Attempts to stay on the Gold Standard in the 1920s led to economic disaster, which was not alleviated until we crashed out of it in 1931. If more people knew economic and financial history, we wouldn't keep believing bad ideas.
    1
  19. And aren't they people? They're human, aren't they? Democratic deficits reflect the society that created them. Over the last 5 decades we have changed, and what we have now is a result of that. So, we have to change again, or suffer the consequences.
    1
  20. No he wasn't. John Macdonalds was.
    1
  21. Money is not a proxy. It is money. A share is a proxy for money which you buy with money. But it is not a one-to-one equivalent. Try buying a coffee in Starbucks with a share certificate. A government is not a corporation. Corporations can't issue their own money that can be used by everyone. So your a ology is misleading. I understand that you are trying to look at the situation in terms of *credo*, or credit as faith or belief, which is the basis of money. But market sentiment is about profit that is denominated in money. And you are right, in that if people lose faith in money, the less people will use it. But, as a shareholder, I am very unlikely to try and buy anything with my share certificate, because I will fail. Money is not a share. And corporations never tax their shares. Governments do tax what extra money you get from your shares. And the credibility of a Governments money is its value that others will use it as a medium of exchange for goods and services. The difference lies in the power behind the currency. Taxation is a tool to control the amount of money in circulation, that isn't being productively used. But speculators don't like that. And the battle between governments and speculators about taxation has its own black propaganda about taxation. Because for speculators it's a numbers game. Bigger number in their bank account is everything. The government can't afford to see everything that way, because the consequences on the welfare of everyone and not just the rentierists, is their priority. It's not just about individuals. Human nature can be a danger to humanity, because it can be blind to consequences in pursuit of a goal. And none more so in matters of power and wealth. In americal, ever since 1917, the Debt Ceiling has climbed in real terms. And now the new administration wants to increase it. And to cut taxes. And implement more tariffs, and these are by nature, are inflationary policies. But are you worried about the value of USD? If not, why not? I answering that question, you'll have to look at money as money, and why price inflation is important. Corporations worry about that as it could kill their business. But price inflation doesn't kill governments. it kills those who don't have enough money. Governments have as much money as the people controlling them want. That's why the debt ceiling is not a ceiling; it's an elevator.
    1
  22. It quite true. Sterling is still a reserve currency, mainly because it owns so many tax havens, whose clients rely on Gilts to fund their financing, along with US Treasuries, and German Bunds. It wasn't the fear of inflation. It was that she didn't tell them beforehand. Truss was paranoid, and it destroyed her credibility, especially as the Tories under Johnson was so much of a circus. Most policies are are quietly outlined to the people that need to support it beforehand. But Truss did not insert herself into such groups not did she share any information with them. It didn't matter that the people who nixed her plan, were the people who would have benefitted from it the most. They had to teach her who's boss. Why? no rules along. Truss didn't understand that key to power. So, by making a god almighty fuss, they killed one to warn a thousand. She was shredded because she didn't understand the rules. Whether we like to believe or not, no budget is a total surprise to the City. Donors don't give their money people they don't trust to deliver, and the City of London were the largest donors to the Tories by industrial sector. But Truss, naively sidelined them, and got rid of people the City liked, because they weren't yes men. The relationship between the Square Mile and the British Government is incestuous. No other chartered corporation has one of their number sit in the chamber in the House of Commons not in the Guest Gallery, but in a seat placed behind the chair of the Speaker. That right is written in the Royal Charter of the Corporation of the City of London. Moreover, the Foreign Office runs the Mayor of the City of London's calender. He goes off on many trips abroad to fly the flag for the City and the UK. Again, no other Royal Chartered Corporation gets that service from the government. And really, the Tory Party choosing Truss over Sunak would have irritated the City as well, as Sunak was a City insider, and an alumni of RBS and JP Morgan. She gave them the bullet with her name in it, by ignoring them. So, they ensured she would fail, by overreacting to her "unfunded expenditure", even though almost all government expenditure is unfunded, especially after Brexit. Second, Milton Friedman assertion that Inflation "is, and everywhere, a monetary phenomenon" isn't borne out by the evidence. Two things: Wage Price Spirals and the Kenyan Random-controlled Trial of helicopter money prove that not only did Friedman overgeneralised his axiom, but that wage Price spirals are rare, and are not persistent. Money & Macro channel reported the findings of the ongoing helicopter money trial that there was zero inflation in the first 2.5 years after the money - $10 million - was given to households chosen at random in a North Kenyan county. And the economic impact was tracked individually as well as regionally. Then, the IMF staff wrote up desk research study on Wage Price Spirals in 2022,where their evidences-based conclusion was that Wage Price Sprials were significant, but short-lived in their impact on the greater economy. Both these studies are a available online, and Money & Macro talks specifically to the reasons why Inflation did not appear. So, the orthodox models you relate are not to be consumed unquestioningly, because the evidence isn't there to support Friedman and no-one has contradicted the IMF paper punished in November 2021.
    1
  23. There is a different perspective. Democracy can only die not from an external threat, but from internal neglect. And the neglect emerges from a malaise that affects both the top-down technocrats and the bottom-up citizenry. It is at its heart a lack of attention to reality. Perception trumps reality everytime, and reality then kicks us until we pay attention to it. And the fish rots from the head, as they are supposedly the more intelligent and perceptive, right? The truth is that we keep getting bruised because we refuse to look at reality. Instead, we are like Dorian Grey staring into a picture that flatters us, but instead is showing our ugly side, that has been cultivated for years for power and profit. You'd think we'd have figured it out that our head is being filled by nonsense, but because it's flattering nonsense, it sticks like poop to a shoe. It's less about just or unjust desserts. It's just human nature being leveraged for profit. And it's not so much a stretch when you consider Divide and Rule is a political strategem with an ancient colonial pedigree. Our malaise is being encouraged to grow, so that certain people might profit from it. So, scapegoat after scapegoat will be wheeled out to deny and deflect from the reality we should be embracing. Because you can't fix a problem until you accept it exists. And until both those at the top and those at the bottom do that, they will not meet in the middle and start actually tackling the real causes of their worries. In fact, it's not until Reality takes a running kick at our collective bum, hard enough to shock us in to actually looking outside the cave and into the world beyond, will we get over our delusions. It will happen, but if we stopped gamifying everything, and just did what actually needed to be done, we might forestall of what's coming down the line, that we can't defeat or mitigate inside our heads, homes, or bubbles, but only deal with collectively with a shared vision of the future. That's what we lack, because the future we trying to live is unsustainable, but no spoonful of sugar can disguise that. So we throw scapegoats under the bus. All to ignore our complicity in the mess.
    1
  24. Lol. Good luck with that. When you sup with the Devil, you need to use a long spoon, and that usually means cold food. And don't be surprised if people see horns in your head.
    1
  25. And who is the World Bank but a Bank? Try harder.
    1
  26. Economics as a discipline was at first grounded in human behaviour, but as time went by fell into the trap of trying hard to be a natural science rather than a social science. It wanted to find universal laws that could both describe and predict unfortunately for us. Human beings in their behaviour and motivations defy such ambitions, and we are left with a discipline that is dominated by mathematical models, rather than human welfare. And arguably are ignoring key factors that would help human welfare. By doing so, orthodox economics is complicit in the consequences, to the extent our economies are unsustainable if we don't prevent damage to ourselves and our home planet earth. So, I have more hope from economists who might want to tackle the lived experience rather than just the theoretical. And also to adopt the scientific method of testing theories before condemning whole populations to live out untenable models. The latest generation are managing to push for that. And that has borne some fruit. Let's go for evidence-based economic policy, rather than ideologically-druven. Please.
    1
  27. Yeah, right... The DMO are just selling them hand over fist because... ?
    1
  28. Lol. Nope. The Presidency is only a place for him to avoid bankruptcy and jail. Biden's hubris was to think he could control the Broligarchs because he thought they respected democratic institutions. He was wrong. They say that if you sup with the Devil, it's best you use a long spoon. That principle in politics and life, is ignored because of hubris. Trump knows how to get out of jail. How nice would be to have people in charge who shouldn't be behind bars, or whom I could allow them to give my very attractive daughter a ride home without worrying they might get assaulted. Instead, look at what you've got instead. The Slippery slope on legs. And I get it - magpies love nice shiny things, or operate in crowds where juicy insider info is easy to get, and politicians and law givers can't or won't resist temptation. But if we put up with that, then that's on us.
    1
  29. You obviously don't recognise that Economics is a Social Science, but you like good economies, right? Or history? Or psychology? Prejudices are no proxy for real knowledge or wisdom. They run contrary to the dictum of the Delphic Oracle "Know Thyself", which is the the Dictum of the Social Sciences. Why? In anyone's life, there is only ever one person who is always present: oneself. By understanding better who we are as humans, and what shapes our collective and individual action, we are nothing but Bulls in a China Shop, or hairless apes. We are the source of civilisation and studying it and analysing how we are as a species and as societies is the key to the lock of our true potential. Not understanding ourselves fully has bought us to yet another Bull in A China episode in human history. The paralells are clear. We have bern here before, and we'll probably wreck the joint yet again until we all acknowledge that we are still hairless apes who haven't evolved that much, and perhaps should pay attention to the limitations that imposes on us indivudualky abd collectively. That knowledge and hopefulky wisdom is our true legacy to those whi might follow us, if we can stop being cadidates for a Darwin Award. Have a nice day.
    1
  30. Almost every central bank is going to have to cut interest rates because their all refusing to tax the capital gains of the asset wealthy, i.e. commercial "investors" who hoard wealth by buying more financial assets instead of investing it into the real economy. They're not investing in assets that produce jobs for the asset-limited workers.
    1
  31. BIS can also categories poop as a Tier 1 asset. As you don't KNOW - I mean have no cited evidence for the exact reason why BIS voluntarily designates gold as a Tier 1 asset - the answer to your own question, perhaps you should ask BIS? It could be nothing more than tradition, rather than any economic or financial benefit. But you don't know that do you?
    1
  32. Trump picking the pockets of everyone who isn't wealthy.
    1
  33. And that's all your bothered about? You're not worried by the fact that they may not have a planet fit to live on, but you worry about your financial legacy? No wonder the world is what it is.
    1
  34. This is so sad. Disabled people have a future. It is you who are short-sighted and perhaps ignorant. Only 4% of all estates are liable for Inheritance Tax. If you haven't worked that out by now, it makes me wonder how you managed to accumulate any money at all.
    1
  35. Interesting argument, because the messiness of geopolitics makes everything associated with it messy too. Yet, there is another perspective and it is a pragmatic one. Another commenter argued that justice and peace are mutually exclusive in the context of war. You can't have both at the same time. To bring peace, it may be impossible to give justice in any meaningful sense. To bring justice to Ukraine, no amount of money will make up for what has been lost, even if Russia returns to its 1991 boundaries. And Justice doesn't matter to Russia, because "might is right", right? Since that is the case, the money is a sunk cost in a venture that needs no reward. A gamble, which was lost. But we should be aware that certain Russian elites won't stop gambling with money they didn't earn, or with lives they do not value, until it costs them a price which they themselves must pay. In this context, Mother Russia, or any motherland is mostly in danger from its elites, if they exist within bubbles, cut off from realities, that they ignore, or make no effort to understand.
    1
  36. People want what they want, and being an MP gives you no more expertise than the public, as the only qualification required to be an MP is to get selected and elected. For goodness sake, look how many are clueless.
    1
  37. ​ @ScruffyTubbles You are a bot, or your consuming the fatuous nonsense on Twitter. NGOs? You obviously have no idea what an NGO is. The Tressel Fund feeding people every day is an NGO. Save the Children, Oxfam, the Red Cross, Age UK, MIND, The Big Issue, and all charities working in the UK are NGOs. Any organisation regulated by the Charity Commission is an NGO. So are Think Tanks. Universities, and Private Foundations. You are what you eat. Please consume your information more discerningly. Get outside your bubble, and check things before you believe what you are being told.
    1
  38. You're obviously new here, comrade. There hasn't been use of google auto generated subtitles for years. 😁
    1
  39. I think there's something weird going on with the bots commenting on Richard's videos, with conspiratorial tones, but nothing more. Are we supposed to be fearful about paying tax?
    1
  40. A favourite saying of the ancient Greek philosophical school of The Stoics was 'momento mori' - "remember that you will die." The sad thing is that few people think very little of leaving a legacy other than material, because most people are encouraged to focus on it for most of their lives. Some people think that's enough. Frankly, it isn't. Leaving good memories behind is as important.
    1
  41. I think it needs to be said, that the transfer of wealth to the asset wealthy from everyone else is a feature of Neoliberalism and not a bug. And it's time that our class-obsessed society realised that. Any economy that chooses debt to drive the economy increases wealth inequality every year. The emergence of populism is the response to that fact, and once people wake up to the reality that there are no political parties in the UK that have realised that neoliberalism is no longer economically tenable - and that includes Reform UK - the UK economy will continue to impoverish everyone who isn't asset wealthy. And that includes homeowners too, who are trapped in the illusion of nominally increasing house prices making them think they are building real savings, when their spending power is being eroded by the purchasing power of their money being eroded. The fact that their are anti-MMT bots on this channel, is proof that the wealthy are scared that people will wake up to that reality. The truth is that every 50 or 60 years or so, the economic system reaches its structural limits, and this is happening now. The bots are proof that the rich who fund them are running scared. And they should be, because the political horses they have backed so far will accelerate the break-up with neoliberalism within the next generation. They hope this dysfunctional economy can continue, but it can't. And not letting it evolve to a fairer and more sustainable model will cause more damage. And that will be true, even if Reform UK - who is yet another neoliberal mouthpiece - get into power. The economic model doesn't work anymore and is economically unsustainable. Until that nettle is grasped, the pain will continue.
    1
  42. No; read the book "England's Cross of Gold" by Ashley James Morrison to see why not even gold is useful as international money. Without considering how taxation is required to control inflation in any system of international money, any metalist notion of it is half baked in a financial system that is global and interconnected. Gold is just a token. It is not money. It has nothing behind it except cultural sentiment, and limited industrial applications. In a modern economy, that would be worse than fiat. Uts lije mercury in a thermometer - out of date, and as monetary technology, very much less useful than other thermometer technology. We need a form of international money that operates beyond national economies. The technology is there with the advent of block chain. But without complete independence in the international form of money, there will be no peace. But theres always some smart aleck who want to control everybody else. And Gold is no different. It is we who have to change.
    1
  43. And you don't understand that of the vast amount of money in the world 95% of that is being created by banks in the private sector issuing loans; 3% by central banks creating Reserve credits, and 2% as cash. So whose printer has run out of ink exactly? That's right: those money printing memes showing Jerome Powell printing money are misrepresenting the facts. They should be showing Jamie Dimon printing out the dollar notes. But you never see that. Why I wonder?
    1
  44. Bomber, that was another sortie that landed on target. You can have an economy which surpresses the income of the majority of consumers, and encourages rentierism in asset bubbles by the few asset wealthy, instead of productive investment in the real economy which produces jobs and raises income for the masses who rely on a wage for their living, and own few or no assets. That dog won't run. And Starmer doesn't understand that. I really don't know if he's even read a decent economics book. And listening to the class that socialised their losses onto the taxpayers, and still gepaid bonuses for mostly speculation in debt instruments is just naive. He's just blithely shuffling towards utter failure. And if that happens, politically it will open the door to more frustration translating into vote for people probably worse than Farage. And they'll turn everything over to the sociopathic asset strippers and vulture capitalists.
    1
  45. Yeah, ask Boeing, and numerous other failing companies about that. I mean your body isn't lean. I sure you could sustain similar treatment without any pain at all. Lol. Shareholder Primacy is hollowing out many businesses because it encourages "lean" as in anorexic management. We have less customer satisfaction with "lean" customer service that is so lean it serves no customers. We have such "lean" manufacturing that both in quality and content, we seem to sell fake food, with low nutritional content, but with a huge margin. Or, instead of supplying our people with clean safe water, we poison then instead, and being so lean it goes on for years. Need more be said? And let's not fool ourselves, these oligarchs are there to find out how to secure a chunk of that nice tax revenue. They couldn't give a damn about waste, especially when it's paid to them.
    1
  46. It is better to light a candle, than sit cursing the darkness. And not voting is just cursing the darkness. Nothing you want or need will happen unless you ask or work for it. Voting is not a sign of approval or satisfaction. Rather is showing that you recognise you have skin in the game, and whether the road to getting what you want is short or long, smooth or rough, you want something. You have to turn up to be counted, because not being counted means you don't matter, because everything that matters is counted.
    1
  47. Sorry, but some people who were depressed asked for it. And unfortunately, people who are depressed often end themselves without any interventiin from the state. I'd rather blame the state for providing something that some one wants - because they don't "invite" you for assisted dying. You have to go through an onerous process of approval for it to be done. And realistically, the once existence of the Liverpool Pathway emphasises that most people ended by doctors without their consent, were never asked to give it. That is completely different for those who ask for it, and these should not be conflated. That too is a disservice to those involved. Your approach is the slippery slope, and is reasonable. But in any case, safeguards to weed out the cases that need not suffer by staying alive - need to be clear and unambiguous.
    1
  48. Your assumption is that the IRS is efficient. It isn't. And that joke will be on the assetless and asset-limited in the US as the bonkers Republicans give into their sadistic fantasies. Why? Colonialism and imperialism doesn't pay so well any more. And the asset-wealthy parasites must find food. By putting most of the tax burden on the non-wealthy, as well as cutting their income in real terms, what will you get over time? A country fit only to turn suffering into gold for the asset wealthy.
    1
  49. Why should anyone be subsidising the energy companies?
    1
  50. "Who can claim You should use the RDEC scheme if your accounting period began before 1 April 2024 and you’re a: - large company; - small and medium-sized enterprise and you’re claiming for work that has been subcontracted to you; - small and medium-sized enterprise and you’ve received a notified State Aid for the project; - small and medium-sized enterprise and you’re claiming for costs that have been subsidised in some other way, such as a grant. If you do not meet these conditions you may be able to claim using the "Small and Medium-sized Enterprise Tax relief scheme." To claim your company must - be trading - be chargeable to Corporation Tax - have a project that meets the definition of R&D - have costs that qualify for the relief " — HMRC (2024)" "Guidance: R&D expenditure credit for large companies and small and medium-sized Enterprises" - Online Accessed 2025-01-14 13:08 GMT. I think you are conflating the Tax Credit scheme with the Tax Relief Scheme. On the tax credit scheme no-one gets 100%. The maximum tax credit for tax year 2023-2024 is 20%. It was 13% for the tax years 2020-2023. "The R&D tax relief for SMEs allows your company to: - deduct an extra 86% of your qualifying costs from your trading profit for tax purposes, as well as the normal 100% deduction, to make a total of 186% deduction - claim a payable tax credit if the company has claimed relief and made a loss The payable tax credit is worth up to: - 10% of the surrenderable loss - 14.5% of the surrenderable loss if the company meets the intensity condition for expenditure on or after 1 April 2023 (read how to meet the intensity condition section of this guide)." — HMRC (2024) "Research and Development tax relief for small and medium-sized enterprises" Online. Accessed 2025-01-14 13:26 GMT. No URLs as YT is removing links in comments to external sites, but if you Google them, you find two different schemes the first is the legacy tax credit only scheme, and the second tax relief scheme provides additional deductions and a tax credit. Of course, it's best to consult an accountant.
    1