Page 9 | The loss of an individuals personal allowance (for earners over £100,000) should increase each year with inflation.

Itsthedifference · 2025-09-28T05:01:05+00:00

If the personal allowance is raised from £12,570 to £20,000 (Great): Then, by the same justification, shouldn’t the £100,000 “cap” be raised? (Where an individuals personal allowance is reduced by £1 for every £2 of income earned over £100,000) Surely the loss of your personal allowance should be increasing each year with inflation. Yet it’s been the same since 2010.

citygirl77 · 28/09/2025 06:23

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:10

People benefitting from the former will include those earning over £100,000 though won't it? So I don't necessarily think so. £100,000 is a huge salary. It's not breadline - although I do think it's the superrich that should be paying more which it obviously isn't.

No because once you start earning over 100k, you start losing your tax allowance. So one day, when we all earn over that ( a long way off), there won’t be a tax allowance.

Icanttakethisanymore · 28/09/2025 06:20

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:14

So they don't get any tax free earnings at all? Not the first £12570? well I didn't know that and I agree that doesn't seem on.

Show quote history

It’s on a taper so for every £2 you earn over 100k you lose £1 in tax free allowance so once you get your £125k you have no tax free earnjngs.

Original poster

Itsthedifference · 28/09/2025 06:18

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:10

People benefitting from the former will include those earning over £100,000 though won't it? So I don't necessarily think so. £100,000 is a huge salary. It's not breadline - although I do think it's the superrich that should be paying more which it obviously isn't.

No because individuals that earn over £100,000 will lose this tax free personal allowance. Therefore, actually they will be even worse off.

The following sounds far fetched but I’m trying to explain my point:
£100,000 in 2025 Is not equivalent to £100,000 in 2010 (when it was introduced). If this policy is kept indefinitely then £100,000 at some point in the future could be minimum wage. (With inflation). Therefore those on minimum wage will lose their personal allowance. Which obviously does not make sense. So when will the policy be changed?

ok far fetched but it gets my point across. In another 15 years inflation will mean that £100,000 is worth far less.

OP posts:

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:14

Readyforslippers · 28/09/2025 06:13

No, when you get £100k you lose the tax free allowance element. It also affects the entitlement to free childcare hours, which means for some the more they earn they less they actually get.

Show quote history

So they don't get any tax free earnings at all? Not the first £12570? well I didn't know that and I agree that doesn't seem on.

Emiliachonk · 28/09/2025 06:14

Itsthedifference · 28/09/2025 06:09

😂😂Yes maybe. But I read a headline and it annoyed me

Show quote history

source?

crunchylamp · 28/09/2025 06:13

I find it very hard to care - apologies.

Readyforslippers · 28/09/2025 06:13

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:10

People benefitting from the former will include those earning over £100,000 though won't it? So I don't necessarily think so. £100,000 is a huge salary. It's not breadline - although I do think it's the superrich that should be paying more which it obviously isn't.

No, when you get £100k you lose the tax free allowance element. It also affects the entitlement to free childcare hours, which means for some the more they earn they less they actually get.

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:12

TheaBrandt1 · 28/09/2025 06:10

Agree. Ridiculous. Stifles ambition. I know several late 40s professionals who get to that threshold and then down tools including consultant doctors. They are basically being asked to do stressful hard jobs for tiny remuneration if they earn above that.. Three day week and golf course it is then. Not great for economy (or NHS)

I work in the NHS and we don't have a single part time consultant in our department!

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:12

Roughly 4% of people earn this according to google.

TheaBrandt1 · 28/09/2025 06:10

Agree. Ridiculous. Stifles ambition. I know several late 40s professionals who get to that threshold and then down tools including consultant doctors. They are basically being asked to do stressful hard jobs for tiny remuneration if they earn above that.. Three day week and golf course it is then. Not great for economy (or NHS)

PaddlingSwan · 28/09/2025 06:10

Well, I think the personal allowance should be raised to £24k for everyone and everyone with income over that should pay flat-rate tax @20% like the Swiss model. Increasing the personal allowance should also cut a significant amount of spending on benefits.
In addtiton, the personal allowance should be transferable between spouses and those in civil partnerships, so £48k p.a. per couple before any tax is payable. Surely that would decrease childcare costs as 1 partner could stay at home?
The only downside is that businesses and landlords would probably adjust their pricing on the assumption that everyone had a certain amount of money a ailable.

dammit88 · 28/09/2025 06:10

People benefitting from the former will include those earning over £100,000 though won't it? So I don't necessarily think so. £100,000 is a huge salary. It's not breadline - although I do think it's the superrich that should be paying more which it obviously isn't.

Readyforslippers · 28/09/2025 06:10

Yes I agree, even though I earn nowhere near that it just seems like common sense.

Original poster

Itsthedifference · 28/09/2025 06:09

Emiliachonk · 28/09/2025 06:07

Oh it’s too early for this 😆

😂😂Yes maybe. But I read a headline and it annoyed me

OP posts:

Emiliachonk · 28/09/2025 06:07

Oh it’s too early for this 😆

Original poster

Itsthedifference · 28/09/2025 06:02

£100,000 is not worth the same as what it was in 2010.

This policy was ill thought out and unfair.

OP posts: