How should covid be paid for?

[KenDodd]

I think there should be a small wealth tax (up to 1%) and before anyone starts saying I'm just jealous or whatever, I would be in for thousands of pounds that I don't have and would have to owe. I feel really strongly that we can't just load yet more debt onto the young, they have it much worse than my generation did already (I'm 51).

Yabu - No to wealth tax
Yanbu - Yes to wealth tax

If you vote No, please suggest an alternative that you think would be fairer.

really not as easy as it sounds due to the global nature of business

That's why I think corporate tax avoidance needs to be tackled globally. Unfortunately I don't believe it will ever happen. It just takes one country to break ranks as say 'come here'. Look what happened when the EU wanted to stand together on corporate tax avoidance - we got Tory Brexit instead.

We need to look again at pensions and not just apply changes to future generations. When the state pension was introduced life expectancy was a lot lower. It's ridiculous that you can now effectively be on pension benefits for 30 or 40 years and contribute very little, especially when much of the wealth in this generation is held by the current pensioner generation.

I'd add a social care housing tax for anyone over the pension age whose property is worth more than x amount. It's not unreasonable to ask people to find their own social care.

Oh and before all the "but we've paid our stamp our entire working lives" crew jump on me: Very few people are net contributors to the state. Most people take more out in health care, education, public safety and other services than they pay in. So for most of you, what you've paid already is not enough to cover your social and health care after you retire.

Also I'd end all the tax loopholes that mean big businesses get away without paying tax, but that's a given.

This
Amazon, Starbucks and all the other big corp tax dodgers

‘They’ like to encourage in-fighting between the masses, but actually most people are just getting by - why should the careful saver who never goes on holiday be penalised while the frivolous spender who goes on holiday every year on credit card pays nothing?
To be honest, neither is wrong or right and the amount in £££ is tiny on a global economic scale.

Big corporations (so probably we need some pretty major tax restructuring), then top 1% billionaires (very difficult that one as assets are well hidden in tax havens I think), or finally I suppose failing that more tax against goods and services (extra vat on non essentials basically). I don’t really like the last option as we seem to have vat on loads of stuff so this would hit ‘ the poor’ consumers as hard as the wealthy.

There are no easy answers

It's not unreasonable to ask people to find their own social care

Everyone with more than £23.5k in the bank does already.

Everyone should pay in a bit imo.

And tax dodgers should be seriously looked at and the routes at least partially closed.

@SomewhereEast

That demography can start by accepting that selling your house to pay for your residential care in old age is completely legitimate & reasonable (and a lot better than placing the burden on younger taxpayers who may never be able to own a house at all). I honestly have no idea why that's so controversial.

Because if you get cancer, you get free treatment (in most cases, unless it's experimental and/or not covered by the NHS) but if you get dementia or Parkinsons it is different for some reason.

I don't agree with a wealth tax but I have no issue with reducing the threshold for inheritance tax - if people don't want their heirs to pay it they can give more away before they die.

I also think that the million or so people who own a second home in the UK can afford a tax.

Income tax could also rise. But people shouldn't have to sell their primary residence to pay a tax (or take out another loan to cover it).

This would just create more poverty in those already struggling.

But it's a tory government who like that kind of thing, so it will probably happen.

@TheClaws

... And this disgusting idea pops up again. Hit the elderly and vulnerable after they have suffered this, but not younger people, because apparently "they've suffered enough" (??) COVID affects the former groups disproportionately, but no, hit them again.

I disagree, the elderly don't have to go to work and have their pensions. It's the younger generations who've lost their jobs who've been disproportionately affected by covid.

Because if you get cancer, you get free treatment (in most cases, unless it's experimental and/or not covered by the NHS) but if you get dementia or Parkinsons it is different for some reason

(and this isn't age-related - my mum has a friend in her 90s who's received NHS treatment for cancer, but if she had Parkinsons she'd have to sell her home to pay for her care - to be fair this particular lady is very wealthy and could probably pay for care out of income, but that isn't the point)

Wouldn’t the super wealthy invest their money in property then so asset rich, money poor as such?

@contrmary

The Chinese should pay. Their deceit and cover-ups led to the pandemic spreading so rapidly and on the balance of probability their carelessness allowed it to escape from the lab in the first place. It would not be enough for a criminal conviction, but more than enough for a civil one.

@contrmary “escape from the lab”?

Take back all the money wasted given for failed government contracts and private profiteers and banks that did no checks on bounce back loans and companies that were fraudulent in furlough.

Only then will I pay more tax.

Can’t we use the weekly £350m we have now we’ve left the EU?

Lols.

I don’t think we should raise any taxes right now. I think we need to get out the other side and see where we are at.

The elderly don’t have to go to work

Some do, and depends on how old is ‘elderly’

The elderly have pensions
Some do, some don’t. State pension is hardly a king’s ransom

The younger people have suffered enough.

I’m the parent of a Millennial. Absolutely! But they have BEEN SHAFTED BY VARIOUS GOVERNMENTS not the elderly.

Every generation has suffered financially at some point apart from those who were young in the 60’s
The50’s had rationing and post war debt
The 70’s had stagnation
The 80’s had high interest rates and huge unemployment
The 90’s had recessions and the start of student fees
The 2010’s have just been horrible. Full stop. But look how the sick and disabled have also been shafted.

Bad times affect different age groups at different times. But the elderly haven’t stolen from the younger generation, it’s the government that have done that.

I disagree with assets minus debts.
Quite apart from it costing more in administration that it would raise!

Compare my XH and me. Same value property. Similar income.

Me: large private pension savings. Have also overpaid mortgage, so more equity than him. Why? Because I have no wealthy family - I lose my job, I’m on benefits and my savings.

Him: no mortgage overpayment, extremely expensive car on finance. Lots of other “toys”. Why? Because his mum is wealthy and even allowing for care home fees, he’s going to inherit a million pounds.

So as of today, I have less financial security than him - but I’d be taxed more

I would be penalised for trying to secure my future and not buying a Ferrari.

Not sure.

But information on bounce back loans adding to the huge amount of debt was depressing this morning.

So you want to tax people on assets bought with income already taxed? And before we get into the inherited wealth debate, the majority who would end up paying it do not fall into that category. Still it’s better than increase in income tax, but only in so far as being lesser of the two evils.

Can we stop MP’s having a pay rise this year? Nope!

Clamp down on second house expenses. Parasites claiming £100 for silk cushion covers and £300 for a toilet roll holder. I’d prefer a halls of residence for them all when they have to stay in London. Stop subsidising their meals and drinks when they are very well paid and can afford to pay full price.

Legalise weed and tax the hell out of it.

You're welcome

Agree that big businesses should pay taxes first such as Amazon. Govt contracts, and how they are given, how many millions have been wasted giving money to failing contractors repeatedly?

I think it would cause a separate issue, the very wealthy would invest in buying gold, diamonds (how would you check that?). Also as has already been pointed out those that are borderline for paying the tax could be those that a frugal and not spend all their money on 'frivolous' stuff. Seems a bit unfair that someone who is careful with money has to pay something. But all policies drive perverse behaviour and quite often it's those that should be paying are those that won't.

One thing that I hate though, is when people seem to blame a generation (and it’s only some of them!) for having - for example - a Final Salary pension. That’s their good luck! They didn’t personally sit down and collectively try to screw over younger generations. Lots of them are keeping the charity sector well supported via donations, and volunteering. Many provide unpaid childcare so their children can pay more tax and claim less benefits.

Yeah, there are some total dickheads (looking at you FIL!) that will not acknowledge their fortunate position and nothing to help others.

But most are just ordinary people who don’t want the young disadvantaged any more than you or me.

You are right that we should not be burden people not yet born with our debt.

But how about we just spend less money, for example, there was no debate on the Corona virus lockdown. If people actually realised how much the lockdown will be costing them and their children, they may have been more against it.

The Tories have really done a number on everyone haven’t they?
It’s not as if we have a national credit card.
It doesn’t work like that.
We are not saddling future generations with anything.
With that said, as part of the hated 50+ demographic with a mortgage, I’d gladly pay more tax towards more staff and better pay for the NHS, Police and other public services- which would have a beneficial knock on effect.

Legalise weed and tax the hell out of it.
Agree with this!

But older people have also lost out. Historically low interests rates has meant anyone who relies on investments as part of their income has seen the dividend almost disappear.
I have money in income bonds. This money was my late husbands life insurance payout not surplus cash we could save. I work a partime minimum wage job and am at least 10 years away from my state pension. The income on my bond took my total income to just over £1000pm. The new interest rate is 1% or just over and my income is now less than £1k pm
So although not every young person can buy a house but those who can and do are grouping their low interest rates at the expense of older savers.i accept that interest rates need to be low so that the housing market doesn’t crash and leave people homeless but that also means my not so great income becomes even less.