Is ending the triple lock to fund a care service fair....

[mids2019]

To me this is actually not a hugely left wing proposal as middle classes with occupational and private pensions will not notice the reduced increases in state pension significantly.

However poorer pensioners with little other pension provision may be impacted a lot to essentially fund a care service that will be disprotioanrly help the middle classes as their life expectancy is greater.

Is it fair that our poorest pensioners get less to support a care service which would mean a millionaire pensioner would not nèed to sell their assets to access it?

Plenty of people are contributing. But wages vs the cost of things is shit so taxes isn’t paying enough into the coffers and what’s there is mismanaged.

What about Grandparents paying school fees or any other costs for grandchildren, would you regard that as household income, Benefit in Kind?

Currently there is no limit or tax implications on gifts, (inheritance tax might kick in if gifter dies within 7 years)

I think trying to tax gifts would be a complete and utter disaster. Cost far more to calculate it than the amount of money the tax would raise.

I am talking about regular INCOME. At no point have i said gifts should be taxed. You are stretching what i said beyond recognition now!

What I'm trying to demonstrate to you is that the line between maintenance and gifts will be very blurry.

What about NRP paying music or dance classes for kid? Should that be counted towards what is or isn't maintance?

But what if NRP gives RP money to pay for music or dance, over and above what is set as maintance, is that maintance or a gift? Should the RP pay tax on it?

What if hes feeling flush there's a bit extra to help cover Christmas 🎄 is that a gift or regular maintenance?

Also if you calculate RPs UC top ups taking into account what maintenance is meant to be paid, what happens if the NRP defaults on the payments?
Should the RP go scrounging round the food banks?

To bw honest, i think i will leave it there. You are coming up with an entire suite of bespoke potential issues, none of which are relevant in terms of broad policy
All taxes we currently pay could be met with reason after reason why they don't work in a very specific set of circumstances. The ultimate scenario is we scrap all tax because because because.
Goodnight

The general principle of UK taxation is you don't pay tax on the same money twice.
You want the same money taxed twice.

And your unable to separate what is a gift and what is maintenance which demonstrates the point taxing maintenance would be as clear as mud and full of work arounds.

Not a word from Andy Burnham on the care system for disabled adults of working age? Why should the poorest pensioners be the ones, to shoulder the costs of that? (They won’t, because abolishing the triple lock won’t go anywhere near the costs of sorting out children’s and adults’ social care)

Yup, those contributing aren’t seeing value for money for their taxes, whilst those not contributing get the same (crap) public services etc. No wonder so many workers try to reduce the tax they pay - they’re getting nothing for it.

No that’s never been a principle. Money is taxed multiple times. Buy some petrol and you pay VAT on the fuel duty. Pay tax on your wages and then pay tax when you spend it on VAT and several other indirect taxes. Pay tax on your wages and then pay tax on the interest and dividends on your savings from the wages. Pay tax on your income and gains throughout your life and then IHT is due on your death.

Yes but people could increase the value and frequency of gifts and reduce the basic regular payments. It’s what happened with employment , ie bonuses paid in wine or gold or other assets or even just a low wage for 3 weeks with big bonus every fourth week, which caused years of legislation to close loopholes to get tax/nic payable on such clever gimmicks.