Then she needs some help but it sounds like she needs more pension to me rather than a few more scraps off the table.
I agree it’s where we are now but we need to acknowledge that it’s through choice.
While the mother in law needs it, my mam is in the camp that certainly doesn’t.
It would be better to divert the money given to the well off pensioners to those who properly need it, that would be the socialist thing to do.
I think the main reason this didn’t happen originally was that it was determined that means testing it so only those that needed it got it would cost more than just giving the payment to all.
ProbablyI think the main reason this didn’t happen originally was that it was determined that means testing it so only those that needed it got it would cost more than just giving the payment to all.
Hence why I think after now taking it from those that need it, they’ll back track on that decision and means test it. Pishing more money away in the process than they were intending to save by cutting it.
Oh I get that 100%, like we've said those just getting in the 40% band are not rich, and this should be targeting those who are more, but I suppose this would be the second best option other than hammering the loaded. I think most governments get scared of hammering the loaded in case they clear off abroad, or use clever (dodgy) accounting to dodge tax even more than they do.
It's a legal tax dodge, but still a tax dodge. The main reason 40% payers pay into a pension is not to save, it's to doge tax. They can save anywhere, but chose the way which doges tax the best.
I think you're more on about those just going into the higher band and maybe at an older age. The thing is, those doing that when old have been around at the time of the property booms, so most have gained in other areas. Most higher rate payers now will have a mortgage or fully own a house I think.
Spot onIt's a legal tax dodge, but still a tax dodge. The main reason 40% payers pay into a pension is not to save, it's to doge tax. They can save anywhere, but chose the way which doges tax the best.
Yeah, we do need to shut down the tax avoidance schemes, there are plenty worse than the pension system.
My main view is that people who have more, should get less relief, and the difference then goes to those who need it most. 100% agree nobody should be choosing heat or eat etc, should have a roof and healthcare etc. We do chose not to afford these things, the public chose that by voting in Tories 2/3rds of the time, and when Labour get in they're just putting out fires.
Sometimes it's a bit difficult though as you can have two people on the same wage all their life and one could be responsible and one the complete opposite, and in that case it's a bit unfair for the responsible one to bail out the other.
I don't think you don't want a fair system, not in the slightest
Another problem is there are more in that 40% band now, and it doesn't go as far since the bands have not increased in line with inflation. Effectively every year they keep the bands the same, it's actually more tax everyone is paying, they should be going up each year to keep parity, which would take a lot out of that band.
Totally agree that those on more can put a much higher percentage in, as most have similar fixed costs. Like you say a 60k earner can probably afford 5-10%, but a 150k earner can chuck 50% in there if they really wanted to, they don't need the Ferrari, a BMW would be more than good enough.
Yeah, exactly, same here, I'm actually arguing against my own position massively. Problem is before my generation, the older and richer people get, the tighter/ more Tory they got, for me and my generation the opposite is more the case. This doesn't solve that the older folk have nearly all of the stored wealth though.
I'd love to see some numbers. What proportion of people in the 40k tax bracket are towards the lower end Vs how many towards the upper end. My instinct says there are way more people towards the bottom end than the top, but I don't know this.It's a legal tax dodge, but still a tax dodge. The main reason 40% payers pay into a pension is not to save, it's to doge tax. They can save anywhere, but chose the way which doges tax the best.
Yeah, we do need to shut down the tax avoidance schemes, there are plenty worse than the pension system.
My main view is that people who have more, should get less relief, and the difference then goes to those who need it most. 100% agree nobody should be choosing heat or eat etc, should have a roof and healthcare etc. We do chose not to afford these things, the public chose that by voting in Tories 2/3rds of the time, and when Labour get in they're just putting out fires.
Sometimes it's a bit difficult though as you can have two people on the same wage all their life and one could be responsible and one the complete opposite, and in that case it's a bit unfair for the responsible one to bail out the other.
I don't think you don't want a fair system, not in the slightest
Another problem is there are more in that 40% band now, and it doesn't go as far since the bands have not increased in line with inflation. Effectively every year they keep the bands the same, it's actually more tax everyone is paying, they should be going up each year to keep parity, which would take a lot out of that band.
Totally agree that those on more can put a much higher percentage in, as most have similar fixed costs. Like you say a 60k earner can probably afford 5-10%, but a 150k earner can chuck 50% in there if they really wanted to, they don't need the Ferrari, a BMW would be more than good enough.
Yeah, exactly, same here, I'm actually arguing against my own position massively. Problem is before my generation, the older and richer people get, the tighter/ more Tory they got, for me and my generation the opposite is more the case. This doesn't solve that the older folk have nearly all of the stored wealth though.
Yeah, tough to say without really digging into the nuts and bolts, it's probably a sliding slope downwards, the higher you go, but there will be more or equal people in 70k-125k + than 50-70k I would expect. Depends where you are too I suppose, 50k is probably not uncommon in London but up here it certainly will be.
I suppose hypothetically why would someone who has worked their socks off to earn 150k such as a doctor or a dentist or indeed a senior exec of a company want to give up 50%? What is the point of them giving up that percentage . They might as well a) not bother having gone through the challenges to earn that or b) b&gger off to another country .It's a legal tax dodge, but still a tax dodge. The main reason 40% payers pay into a pension is not to save, it's to doge tax. They can save anywhere, but chose the way which doges tax the best.
Yeah, we do need to shut down the tax avoidance schemes, there are plenty worse than the pension system.
My main view is that people who have more, should get less relief, and the difference then goes to those who need it most. 100% agree nobody should be choosing heat or eat etc, should have a roof and healthcare etc. We do chose not to afford these things, the public chose that by voting in Tories 2/3rds of the time, and when Labour get in they're just putting out fires.
Sometimes it's a bit difficult though as you can have two people on the same wage all their life and one could be responsible and one the complete opposite, and in that case it's a bit unfair for the responsible one to bail out the other.
I don't think you don't want a fair system, not in the slightest
Another problem is there are more in that 40% band now, and it doesn't go as far since the bands have not increased in line with inflation. Effectively every year they keep the bands the same, it's actually more tax everyone is paying, they should be going up each year to keep parity, which would take a lot out of that band.
Totally agree that those on more can put a much higher percentage in, as most have similar fixed costs. Like you say a 60k earner can probably afford 5-10%, but a 150k earner can chuck 50% in there if they really wanted to, they don't need the Ferrari, a BMW would be more than good enough.
Yeah, exactly, same here, I'm actually arguing against my own position massively. Problem is before my generation, the older and richer people get, the tighter/ more Tory they got, for me and my generation the opposite is more the case. This doesn't solve that the older folk have nearly all of the stored wealth though.
I tend to think 47% is the maximum direct tax rate we can realistically impose - after that most people I agree tend to look very seriously at avoiding it or leave the UK for tax purposes or just work much less. 47% I think is the current top rate 45% income tax plus 2% NI
Blf - make sure she has all the right grants for insulation. Make sure she has LED lights. I would ask her if you can go through her energy bills to make sure she is paying what she is using so its easier for her to see how much she is using. British Gas have just brought out a fixed price deal for the next 12 months. They have frozen prices at a bit below current standard level. I have signed up. It might be worth her too if she is on BG. No Smart meter is required
When I said 50%, I meant they can probably save 50% etc. Even someone on 150k is only really paying 40% tax overall worse case, but loads who get the same £7,500 in hand are paying far less tax than that.