Logically I would expect the same though I do not know what was the tax system like in 1999, but it actually doesn't change much:

http://imgur.com/JzUziar

The only key impact of taxes is to cancel the revenue increase of the upper class. Even the top 1%.

From ~1932 to 1987, the top tax rate wasn't less than 50%. For more than 10 years it was above 90%. Basically it was a way to keep a handful of people from getting all of the marbles. If you don't like how the government spends money, grow a business or start a business, those expenses are all tax deductible. The idea is to keep money moving.

And this perfect system culminated with the UK going nearly bust. And if Thatcher didn't end that, you just need to look at the other side of the Channel to see what the UK would have become.

I'm looking at the U.S. and it thrived and built major infrastructure because it could afford to.

A country could tax the crap out of the rich and misspend. No matter what, we should expect and insist on competency. Not this Reaganesque idea that the government is shit no matter what.

That spreadsheet includes tables for effective income before + after tax.

As he's quoting the £160k, which is from the table before tax, he must have used the before tax figures so that's not relevant.