Please or to access all these features

Add post

Watch this thread

Save thread

Start a new thread

Flip thread

Hide thread

My feed

Active Unanswered threads

Getting started FAQ's

Unanswered threads Acronyms Talk guidelines

Hide shortcut buttons

Talk

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Flip

1 2 ··· 22 23 24 ··· 38 39

Original poster

to hope the government has the guts to tax WEALTHY pensioners more

953 replies

ReallyTired · 22/04/2013 09:12

The Fabian society has suggested that wealthy pensioners pay more tax.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-22220345

Some how I can't see a conservative wanting to tax wealthy pensioners more when they all vote Tory.

I find it unfair that pensioners with an income more the average family's income get free bus buses, winter fuel allowance, TV licence as well as paying less tax and national insurance. It is about time that the the wealthy pensioners took their share of the pain of the cuts.

I am in favour of well off pensioners having free bus passes, winter fuel allowance as these things encourage independence and improve health. I would like to see the money for these things clawed back by WEALTHY pensioners paying more income tax.

OP posts:

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 13:53

Oh and I'd be happy to give up my CB if it was done fairly and wealthy pensioners gave up their benefits.

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 13:55

Jesus dog/ bone.Can we give all the pensioners on here 50 questions you sound obsessed.

He didn't want to go.

FasterStronger · 24/04/2013 13:56

wealthy pensioners gave up their benefits.

what their free bus passes, tv licence and WFA?

FasterStronger · 24/04/2013 13:57

Jesus dog/ bone no just examining your 'points'.

ihategeorgeosborne · 24/04/2013 13:57

Handcream, 30 years ago an electricians salary would have allowed one parent to stay at home. I was talking to a retired chap up the road the other day and he was saying it was a shame that families like ours couldn't afford to buy a modest family home. He said he was a carpet fitter and they bought their first house, the one they still live in (a nice 3 bed semi) on his salary. He said his wife always stayed at home.

FasterStronger · 24/04/2013 13:59

He said his wife always stayed at home.

well i am glad that is no longer possible.

Xenia · 24/04/2013 14:00

The troubkle is most pensioners do not have much money so there is not a gold mine out there of old people from whom we can obtain a lot of money. It is the same with the very very rich. The 50% tax rate yielded very little. Most people earn about £25k - £40k. If you want to raise more tax sadly you have to hit those people. No point in hitting the 0.001% of the population or whatever it is who earn over £500k whether of working or older age.

I would certainly favour removing for everyone the free bus pass and winter fuel allowance until they turn 85 and gradually move the state pension age to 75.

Pensions do not pay any more national insurance as they have paid it for 40 years and are not drawing out what they paid in for their state pension. I would ike NI abolished and merged into tax however so that may be one way in a sense pensioners pay more if we did that. We shoudl also be rid of contributory benefits as they do not make sense in a welfare state.

ihategeorgeosborne · 24/04/2013 14:01

The child benefit thing does grate though. The fact that the government think that a family with one earner on 50k are wealthy enough to lose it, but a pensioner on 50k is not wealthy enough to lose WFA is double standards. Also, the young family will have rent/ mortgage to pay and dc to bring up. It is likely (though not always I appreciate) that the pensioner on that salary will not have a mortgage to pay or young dc to feed and clothe.

ihategeorgeosborne · 24/04/2013 14:02

Why are you glad this is no longer possible faster?. Do you not think babies and young children should be at home with their mothers if at all possible?

jacks365 · 24/04/2013 14:03

Square do they use the free bus passes? If not then assuming they are over 75 get benefits totalling £550 a year and will already be paying the same tax (will be over threshold) no they don't need them but targeting them would cost more unless you tied it into pc. Buying a house when i was 24 took far more of our weekly income due to high interest but yes deposits were lower due to house prices being less. My daughter gets more help with uni than my sister did all those years ago. Things change over time some better some worse. A mortgage payer now is benefiting from low interest rates anyone with savings us losing out, 20 years ago the reverse was true. Who knows where we'll be in 10 years.

JustinBsMum · 24/04/2013 14:05

But surely he is paying tax (a lot if his holiday spend is 20K)

FasterStronger · 24/04/2013 14:08

ihate, i was commenting on always stayed at home

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 14:09

Think is Jack they've saved buggar all from the CB changes so what is good for the goose should be good for the gander.

And to the parents shouldn't have a short break with their babies and toddlers comment.Not even worth responding to.

handcream · 24/04/2013 14:10

TBH - if he was a standard electrician with a non working wife. There is NO way he can afford to spend £20k on holidays unless he has some other form of income or inheirtance....

jacks365 · 24/04/2013 14:13

Square she's in halls so pays rent all utilities included that is just over £70 a week but she is only at uni approx 30 weeks of the year and so it is doable if they are careful. Couple of her friends parents moved abroad during their last year of A levels so the dc could claim full maintenance grants too as they were then classed as self supporting, bit cheeky if you ask me.

handcream · 24/04/2013 14:17

Its funny how when you lose CB you say the government hasnt really made any savings (especially if you have personally lost it!) and then when it is stated that the WFA will not save anything either you want it taken away!

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 14:17

Nope

They are mortgage free.Years of CB fir 3 kids,final salary pension and 2 state would help.Investments I suspect.Happy that they could afford to buy,have a parent at home and invest(nobody these days could do that on one salary) however they don't need benefits and could help with the deficit more.The deficit has been good to them.

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 14:20

And ditto hand on your last comment.

Jack £70 and £50 a week for food/travel sounds reasonable .

Wonder why they didn't broadcast it more.That is quite a relief.

jacks365 · 24/04/2013 14:23

Square i'm losing cb too but only once i do my tax return for this year. Yes it was a bit of a pointless exercise it was badly thought out and announced. They couldn't do it the way they wanted due to people like you and me. Its easy to get het up about things when people give half a story as the fabian society did re pensioners paying less tax, they don't its just they are not liable for ni but then neither are you or i. I like yourself choose to pay it.

Since the 80's we've been advised to live on credit, buy now pay later its time to pay. Increase tax, increase nmw so tax credits aren't needed and it might help but suggest raising tax and no one will vote for you.

ihategeorgeosborne · 24/04/2013 14:24

The point is handcream, you either take benefits away from EVERYONE at earnings over 50k or you don't. If it doesn't save money for one group of people, (i.e. the argument put forward for keeping WFA universal), then arguably, it won't save money for the other group of people either, i.e. child benefit losers. They won't save money from us, as we have decided that dh will pay the extra into his pension. He will therefore pay less tax and get tax relief on pension contributions. We will keep child benefit for 3 dc. Sadly, my husband doesn't see the point in getting a pay increase now, unless it takes him above 60k. As he will pay 4k extra in tax and lose 2.5k in CB, which before tax you would have to earn over 4k to recoup. Therefore, there is no difference for us whether he earns 50k or 60k. That to me is a huge disincentive to work harder. I wonder how many others in our situation will be doing this. It will be interesting to find out a few years down the line exactly how much they have saved from this measure.

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 14:28

I hate you've summarised our situation.

Also if Ihate and I were to go back to work part time which I would have to the state would be paying childcare x3 if my mum hadn't offered and I'll be paying no tax.

FasterStronger · 24/04/2013 14:29

so you havent even lost CB?

ihategeorgeosborne · 24/04/2013 14:31

The better option for us pebbles, would be for our dh's to get lower paid jobs and for us to earn the same as them. None of us then pay higher rate tax, we all keep child benefit, we all get child care paid and our dh's will see more of their dc. It's a shame my dh is such a workaholic

Squarepebbles · 24/04/2013 14:32

The bedroom tax situation is pretty unfair too.One part of a couple can still be working,as long as one is pensionable they're not penalised,rattling round in a house too big.How is that fair?

jacks365 · 24/04/2013 14:33

Ihategeorge the reason it is cost effective for cb and not wfa is simply due to relative values cb saves at least £1k a year but wfa only saves £200 but both cost money to do.

Flip

1 2 ··· 22 23 24 ··· 38 39

Swipe left for the next trending thread