how will the government raise the money?

[thereiscustardinthejamtart]

I’m curious as to how the government are going to raise the money for the “£22b black hole”.

Presumably they can either cut spending or raise more money (either through taxation or growth).

They have said they aren’t going to raise income tax, VAT or NI.

They don’t seem to be going for a growth plan.

So what are we expecting to be cut, and what are we expecting to be taxed.

I assume they are looking at pensions (get rid of tax free lump sum, reduce or eliminate relief on contributions), inheritance tax, some kind of additional tax on corporations. They are already doing VAT on private education.

Cuts - winter fuel allowance. I assume reduction in university funding, arts funding. What else?

Oh, that’s an interesting one! I wonder how much it would raise if we seized the empty London properties bought to hide embezzled/laundered money.

Absolutely not

Young people can’t afford homes and are not having children because they are paying for pensioners triple lock pensions

we already have low birth rate

whos going to pay for future pensioners pensions if not enough kids are born

you think 220 is bad/low? Imagine how low and non existent future pensioners pension will be with these birth rates

and with generation rent not being able to buy a house and forever renting, what are we going to do with all future pensioners with no home??? How will pensions cover crazy private rents??

You're not explaining whether you include people with modest homes in the south East valued at £500k plus a pension valued at £500k as millionaires.

I'd also like to do something about all the luxury apartments that stay empty because people are just buying them as an investment in Central London.

Those flats were purchased to hide foreign wealth. Not from the UK Treasury but foreign countries. From the French, Italian, Russian and Chinese tax authorities. From the Nigerian tax authorities. From the Brazilians. It was an easy way to launder money from foreign jurisdictions. Property can be bought and sold in London with little scrutiny in the past - less so now. The Conservative government leveraged off the opportunity with higher SDLT. One of the fastest growing taxes in recent years. Price inelastic to a Nigerian prince.

No it’s not. It’s about how the £22b could be found. Taxing “the rich” is one way, but plenty of others have also been suggested.

People who earn millions. People with millions in the bank. Let's throw some billionaires in there too. Plus big corporation's that pay no tax.

So only people who earn over £1m pa? And people who have over £1m in liquid assets?

Personally what I would like to see is a law that says all domestic buildings (ie council tax qualifying ones) = 'dwellings'.

can only be owned by an individual (not a company at all) I would like to see all longer term rented property only owned by companies, on public record, licensed and with properly constituted boards where the directors are personally liable for redress for sub-standard letting.

'How' is what I said.

Anyone who has any money, or is considered to have any money, is going to get fucked.

Starmer has shown you what he considers to be a rich pensioner. Someone who receives a full state pension. So you need to extrapolate that to who is considered a rich citizen. Average salary is about £28k. So anyone earning over that can be considered rich using Starmer style logic. Anyone who is a homeowner as well.

What I want to know is how labour are getting the non dom money they said they'd get? I'd have jetted off to Monaco by now if I was one of those. And perhaps have opened a private school there.

Asking the bank of England to generate more funds? Do you know the difference between funding and finance? Clearly not. This isn't an option and discredits everything else you write.

People who earn millions. People with millions in the bank

not enough of them, you need to go after those with assets as well.

I'd say that most of that is a drop in the ocean. How many private jets are there really? So few that they're irrelevant.

You can tax toys like supercars, but if I was someone who had that kind of money and those kind of things, I'd be gone from this country. Again, there are so few of these anyway.

And then you have to ask - why? If someone earned the money to get a supercar and they love cars, why should they pay a load more tax? Just because everyone wants their money?

Companies will relocate.

There is always a limit to the taxation rates and policies you can apply before the total revenue decreases. Because people change their behaviour based on policy.

whos going to pay for future pensioners pensions if not enough kids are born

this is one reason why we are fucked, that ship has sailed as we have more over 65s than under 15s. Immigration is the only answer

And also, I know someone who has "millions in the bank". I put it like that as I guess you don't store millions in an ordinary bank. It resulted from them risking their house on a management buyout, that ended up paying off big time, after decades of hard work. I really think that they earned those millions and can't see any reason that they should pay any more tax, when they have already done all that stuff correctly.

Cut child benefit & UC….if pensioners are expected to live on £220 a week then anyone can do it!

So you would cut pension credit? Family allowance (the old child benefit) used to be universal. What about social housing? Kick people out of that?

A single person on UC without disability already does 'live' (hint: it's more barely surviving) on less than that. Unless it's the children of benefit claimants who 'rake in all the extras' you particularly resent?

No you wouldn’t normally keep millions just sitting in an ordinary bank.

There is always a limit to the taxation rates and policies you can apply before the total revenue decreases. Because people change their behaviour based on policy.

Exactly. There are two rates of tax that generate the same level of total revenue for the Exchequer. One is 100% and the other is 0%.

I disagree. They can easily afford to pay more tax.

There are over 2 million in the UK.

On what though?

They paid their taxes.

Would you actually tax their bank balance, by literally stealing it?

As I imagine they pay taxes on the interest already.

Yes they can afford it. But I still don't get why it's OK?

I’m elderly, a WASPI, just lost winter fuel allowance, receive reduced state pension, am concerned I’ll lose my bus pass, that my children might be affected by IHT and you propose medical treatment is considered?
What if I counter with maternity and paediatric services? Hmmm?

Presumbly you & your dc didn’t benefit from maternity & paediatric services? 🙄

Why should a career or NHS worker get low pay to protect your DCs inheritance?

You don't understand why people with a lot of money should pay more tax? They can afford to pay more tax. People with less money pay less tax.

Nobel prize winning economists know the difference between funding and finance, which from your previous statement you do not. Attempting to justify your arguments by suggesting that nobel prize winners would back them isn't convincing when you fail to understand basic economics.