To think the proposed NI increases for social care are unfair?

[shouldbeworkingmore]

I recognise that social care needs funding but think that this proposal unfairly targets the younger generations. Plus we already have income taxes by stealth as the thresh holds have been frozen & wage stagnation is likely to continue for the next decade.

You heard correctly - NI is treated like an extra tax.

@OhYouBadBadKitten I read about this on the BBC

"The Daily Telegraph reports that Downing Street favours a 1% rise in the national insurance rate, affecting about 25 million workers and self-employed people, as well as employers. But it says the Treasury is pushing for a 1.25% increase."

"For someone on average earnings of £29,536 a year, a 1% increase in national insurance would cost them £199.68 annually."

I think it's unfair to just target those working as that doesn't necessarily target wealth

Ah, I see - so it's perhaps just another envy post, with a hefty dollop of "somebody else should pay"

Maybe you've forgotten the % of total tax take which the wealthy already pay?

I don't think age is the real issue. The people it unfairly impacts are the working poor, irrespective of age.

The alternative is paying for it by increasing income tax, which wealthy pensioners will pay as well as earners. Increasing NI means wealthy pensioners won’t pay. This is what OP is pissed off about, and I agree. Tories just don’t want to hit rich pensioners as that’s their core vote.

I'm in my 40s so not that young & have a home & of course I think social care should be funded & am aware it's not just used by the elderly. However I still don't believe it's fair to just target NI.

The people it unfairly impacts are the working poor, irrespective of age.

Absolutely

Ah, I see - so it's perhaps just another envy post, with a hefty dollop of "somebody else should pay"

? I don't understand how you have made the leap. Why do you think it's a fair suggestion?

@shouldbeworkingmore

But it will come from everyone who's working, no matter what their age

I think it's unfair to just target those working as that doesn't necessarily target wealth. Plus it still impacts younger workers more.

I agree there should be higher inheritence taxes and fewer allowances on the winners in the house price lottery over the past few decades - people who bought houses 50 years ago for a few thousand that are now worth hundreds of thousands, if not £1M+.

However, that would be extremely unpopular despite it directly affecting nobody until after they die.

@Samcro

social care is not just about old people. my adult dc lives in a care home, very few people are above retirement age. just disabled. not all from birth.

Is it a private sector care home?

Listen I’m in Scotland, hammered for extra taxes by the in my case entirely unwanted and chocolate teapot Scottish Parliament already, this has infuriated me this morning.

I’m sure I’ll calm down eventually.

It unfairly impacts the young because no doubt the extra tax they’re paying won’t be funding care by the time they need it themselves. It unfairly impacts the poor who don’t benefit from having a threshold on care costs because they have no assets anyway. It unfairly impacts those in the north where houses are barely worth the £80k threshold, so if they spend £80k there’ll be nothing left. The only ones who benefit are wealthy families who can pay £80k and still have some assets left to pass down. And call me crazy but I don’t think we should be implementing taxes that only benefit the rich!

Exactly!

People no longer automatically retire at state pension age, but the quit paying NI if they keep working. This should be aligned.

NI should apply to everyone and all income whether active or passive whatever the age. That would be more fair.

I agree OP. It stinks. So much tax is wasted on wars etc.

Yabu.

Where do you want the money to come from? We need more money for social care.

@BarbaraofSeville I agree or higher CG taxes, but also agree that it's deeply unpopular. I'm not sure why though.

I still don't believe it's fair to just target NI

Now that I definitely agree with, hence the suggestions to target some of the "benefits" for already rich pensioners

However they use NI because they can pretend that's the fund that "pays for the NHS/care, etc", when anyone with sense realises it's just another tax

NI should apply to everyone and all income whether active or passive whatever the age. That would be more fair.

This would be a good starting point.

@Puzzledandpissedoff we agree then

I think maybe put tge increase on income tax so all ages earning enough have to pay.

Chances of their being a state pension by the time I retire in 40 plus years is pretty low. Especially for it to make up any significant proportion of my income.

I don't mind putting in towards social care for the disabled and elderly but the payment should be spread across all of society - young and old.

@Whycangirlsbesonasty

The alternative is paying for it by increasing income tax, which wealthy pensioners will pay as well as earners. Increasing NI means wealthy pensioners won’t pay. This is what OP is pissed off about, and I agree. Tories just don’t want to hit rich pensioners as that’s their core vote.

Democracy in action, eh ?

@averylongtimeago

You do know young people get older, don't you op? And that social care is not just for the elderly? How do you think social care should be funded? Only for those currently paying in? The basic state pension is a pittance: £179 per week. How much of that would you like to see deducted for social care? Pensioners who have other income taking them over the tax threshold are taxed just like everyone else and will have been paying NI all their working lives. The alternative to funding social care is either families picking up the tab or leaving the vulnerable to not cope and die.

Social care - and our NHS spending - is overwhelmingly spent on the elderly and those in their final years of life.

The state pension itself is tiny, but becomes far closer to those in other European countries once the various other benefits available are added in, including housing benefits for those in low incomes and winter fuel and free transport. There is absolutely an issue with some of the vulnerable not claiming all they could - but that's not the same

I find it obscene that the wait for mental health support for a child to get the assessment and support they need to access education is up to 2 years, while wealthy pensioners can still claim winter fuel payments and avoid NI, having benefited from free university and booming house prices. I know that the idea of a 'death tax" for care for things like dementia was shot down, but the only other option is expecting poorer younger people to pay for the old, who were far richer at the same age.

Stop these care homes being owned by rich stakeholders and companies putting profits before care.
My dad didn't have his own home ( many reasons why ) but had savings that were swallowed up in just over a year for just basic care. We reluctantly put him into care after trying to look after him for many years aged 96.
They were good there, but the employees are on min wage and work long hours with very complex residents.
I don't have the answers, but it's another ticking time bomb and meanwhile many do become rich off the back of others.
I've no idea what they can do , a tax hike may help but will it solve the other problems?

I really don't get the argument that pensioners aren't paying for social care. The money we pay is spent on the social care needed by others now. The people needing the care paid all their working lives and that paid for the care of those who needed it during that time.
When we are old and if we need care, it will be paid by those working and paying taxes at that point. We all pay for those older than us then in turn are paid for by those younger, who are then themselves paid for by the then young workforce.

We should all really be providing now for our own retirement if at all possible, that way reducing the costs to only those who genuinely cannot provide for themselves.

@flashbac

First of all social care SHOULD NOT be provided by profit seeking private sector companies. Then I might consider it fair to fork out more. Inheritance tax needs to rise first as well IMHO.

This with absolute bells on. Raising taxes to line the pockets of private sector who don’t look after their staff? No thanks. Any rise should come with a massive overhaul of the social care delivery system, bringing it back under public ownership and stewardship to ensure better working conditions and better quality care and value for money.