To think the UK unfairly taxes families?

Nail on the head. Those of identical incomes (from whatever source) should pay the same amount of tax, regardless of age, working status etc. Scrap NIC and raise income tax accordingly. NIC is a relic of a bygone time that has morphed into just another tax and is completely unnecessary. Especially seeing as so many get "NIC credits" towards state pensions without actually paying NIC, such as low income part time workers, child responsibility, carers, unemployed, disabled etc. There is no link between the NIC you pay and the benefits you receive - it's all about "credits" which for some people are "earned" without paying NIC!

In addition, with the sharp change in demographics since the 50,s the current pension structure is not fiscally sustainable. Factually, we will run out of money to fund it. Something needs to change, surely the majority of broad minded folks believe that. You can’t have a working population funding pensions/social care/NHS to the exclusion of everything else.

But you quickly by passed the addition of 20% VAT. Everyone should face the same income tax. If you are on a low income or lack physical or mental capacity there should be mechanisms to support you - there is no good reason why wealthy healthy pensioners should have preferential tax treatment and I say that as someone who will be a wealthy pensioner!

How about me then? Can i complain? Have never received free childcare, also don't receive child benefit because DH earns above the threshold (even though our combined income is less than some others who do receive it but whatever) been working 31 years so far with another 20 to go till I can retire. Paying back a student loan (for studying that I couldn't afford to do full time as a teen so had to do in evenings wholst working) and still paying a higher rate of tax for a smaller income and with higher costs than a lot of the pensioners my taxes are paying for.
To be fair I don't resent paying for others pensions. I do resent them paying a lower rate of tax on their income than I do though.

Who has said that the past was some kind of economic idyll? You have just made that up. It's a figment of your own imagination.

I understand something of the problems in the 70s but the fact is that housing was FAR cheaper relative to wages and wages rose hugely during that period. Neither apply now. Income tax may be lower for the majority but their essential outgoings are far higher. The boomer generation is the wealthiest that have ever lived or will live in the future. There is no reason why they should pay less tax than younger people. It's an ageist policy.

Oh maybe. I was just trying to “translate” what I thought the other poster was saying but might be as well to have kept out of that!

Maybe true!

I think the best we can do is to make sure being single isn’t in itself penalised - regardless of whether childfree or a parent.

I thought if you were claiming out of work benefits you got your NI paid too.

I think they could reasonably change council tax so that it’s per adult (or give SAHs a 50% reduction which still leaves the three or more income houses better off).

The one that really needs changing is CB - with couples each on £59,000 getting the full amount - so just under £120,000 household income. Where as a single parent on 60,000 begins to lose CB, and over £80.000 gets nothing at all.

Now you could say a person earning £80,000 doesn’t need it but that has to cut both ways - so a couple earning the same amount (and remembering their two personal allowances) wouldn’t need it any more than the single parent. And I think we know that a single parent is usually more in need than a couple, including being likely to have additional childcare expenses in order to work, as no one to share childcare with.

Single childfree earners are the cash cows of most systems. It’s so unfair.

well said.

the whining of the present generation and their spiteful delusions about how “easy” previous generations had it has become so tiresome.

Hesitate to jump into a conversation that involves people calling each other ridiculous- but I think their point is that SAHMs can get their NI paid for them, in a way that others who are out of paid work can’t.

So a govt could decide not to do that.

Of course I’m smart enough to realise that but it’s complete bollocks to say people are crippled with taxes when they’re currently lower than they’ve been for over 50 years. The cost of living was a massive issue in the 70s, by the way, inflation was in double digits for the entire decade, it reached 25% at one point.

The only people who see the past as some kind of economic idyll are too young to remember it.

Your arguments are ridiculous. Everyone should be charged the same rate on their INCOME. So if a SAHM has no income what are you taxing?

I agree with both your points.

1971 was nearly 55 years ago! Things have changed considerably since then. I'm sure you are smart enough to realise this.
Perhaps it's not precise or even accurate to say 'crippled by taxes' because many earners pay less income tax now, although some other taxes are higher. The main, blatantly obvious differences though are the huge increases in the cost of living, particularly housing, the stagnant wages in the last 20 years and the huge escalation in private deb.

Barely anyone went to university in 1971. Inflation was running at 10%. And stamp duty is really scraping the barrel - it’s hardly every day expenditure. Surely you can do better than that?

I think we all agree the tax system is not fair and it needs to be reformed- will Labour have the courage to- I doubt it.

It’s not just income tax though is it? No VAT in 1971, no student loans in 1971, stamp duty was significantly lower too.

You know who’s unfairly taxed? Single adult households.

Council tax by household, with the measly 25% reduction for SAHs, but tax personal allowance is by person - so households with a couple both earning get two, whilst a single parent (or other single adult) gets one. And similarly with the threshold for higher rate tax.

Child benefit? Oh we’ll do that one on per person too, so couples can each earn just under the threshold and receive it - but a single person, nope you can only earn up to the threshold once and receive it.

Seems unfair that household next door has almost twice your income with 2 x personal allowance and tax thresholds in the mix to give them more take home as a family, and they receive CB? Tough.

(Edit - I know about the. CB taper and that it’s not a cliff edge benefit but it’s still unfair that it isn’t household income)

Please explain.

Then I think @BritHoward has made her point!

1971

What year was that?

I’m not buying “crippled with taxes”. When I started work the basic rate of income tax was 33% with 9% NI on top. Contrast that with 20% with 8% NI. Essentially basic rate tax payers then paid the same percentage as higher rate tax payers do now.