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.

State pension is less than £10k a year. You start paying income tax and NI currently when you earn more than this. Those living on state pension alone won’t be hit by an increase in income tax or NI (if pensioners were to pay NI).

Caller on LBC right now saying that no one should be complaining about this ‘because the older generation fought in the war and were evacuated and were all sexually abused, and the younger generations just don’t get it’.

My parents will both be 60 in February. They were born in 1962. Even my aunt who is now officially a pensioner (66) was born in 1955, a whole ten years after the war ended. The oldest person in my family is 74, even they weren't alive when WW2 ended.

@MrKlaw

NI is the easy option - almost a stealth tax which enables the government to say 'oh we have one of the lowest income tax rates' blah blah. Yes but you add on NI it starts to get pretty damn high.

And its not just young - its disproportionate to lower earners too as it ramps down at high earner rates.

low earner? Pay 20% income tax...
oh thats good.

...and 12% NI
wait - so I'm really paying 32%?

Higher earner? 40% income tax for you...
Ouch.
...but only 2% NI
so 42% in total? OK not that much worse than lower earners.

Its a suprisingly flat tax rate when you calculate the actual reductions to your gross pay

It’s not 32% though is it because of tax free allowance etc.

Ive just worked it out as 3 people with incomes of 30k,50k and 70k. Each with a plan 2 student loan.

30k person pays 21%, 50k person pays 29% 70k person pays 41%.

Who do you think will pay for social care when you need it?

@CuriousaboutSamphire

I quoted upthread from the BBC article

"Downing Street did not deny reports of an increase of at least 1% to improve social care and tackle the NHS backlog."

"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."

I think we need to pay more for social care but just don't agree with this proposal.

In 2009 Labour wrote a white paper proposing something like 5% social care tax on a person’s estate. This money would go into a national care fund to provide social care for all who needed it. I thought it was a good proposal.

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.

I agree. We should stop being so squeamish about targeting wealth. We are a relatively wealthy household and quite frankly we should be paying more tax.

@GintyMcGinty

Who do you think will pay for social care when you need it?

Me for my care

I favour someone sort of insurance policy, like Theresa May suggested (and then had to withdraw as the Tory pensioners were livid)!

In 2009 Labour wrote a white paper proposing something like 5% social care tax on a person’s estate. This money would go into a national care fund to provide social care for all who needed it. I thought it was a good proposal.

That actually sounds quite good

If it were down to me I would halve the personal allowance (the £12,570 tax free part) and put 2% on the basic rate of income tax. Much of Europe has no tax free allowance or it is a few thousand Euros.

If you compare us to the EU the bottom two thirds of earners have the lowest effective rate of income taxation in the EU, in Germany or France they would pay two or more times the tax, in Norway nearly four times as much. Where as the top third of earners in the UK have the sixth highest effective rate of income taxation in the EU. We also have the lowest rate of net contributors in the EU.

Many people in the UK seem to think that they can contribute little or nothing to the exchequer, yet have world class education, healthcare, roads, social services etc. The reality is most people are a net burden on the state and the majority of tax is paid by a small group of people. If we want a better country then we all need to contribute, until the majority recognise that then things will not improve.

Its swings and roundabouts, when the economy picks up then young people will be the ones to benefit as they have longevity.

I don't want an older generation to suffer.

That said it needs to be carefully done as we know what the tories are like with their stealth ways of benefitting the rich.

But older people do pay. Of social care isn't funded the money they have worked for all of their lives is used to pay for their care. Which is right but if there is a deficit it needs to be coming from those of working age.

I don't want an older generation to suffer.

I don't anyone is advocating for that

In fact every potential tax policy ought to be assessed to see whether it would piss off wealthy Tory pensioners, and if it does then it’s probably a good, fair tax.

@Whycangirlsbesonasty

So what if council tax is high and only one person lives in the property. Perhaps they are living in too big a property for them and ought to downsize abd free up Lily h needed housing stock for families? Too many oldies rattling around in big houses where I live.

But council tax isn’t uniform across the country. My 2 bed house up north is worth £180k but I pay more council tax than my relatives house in London which is 4 bed and worth £1.2m

Perhaps the extra money can come from international megaliths like Amazon, google, facebook starbucks etc who find ways to minimise their tax lability.

Or from high net worth individuals who are able to again minimised their tax through international loopholes, stashing funds in tax free havens, and registering companies abroad.

Or by not giving away billions of contracts to their buddies to provide overpriced PPE etc.

Or from the billions made by arm dealers who lobby for conflict and war and make huge financial gains.

The rich have got richer during the pandemic, massively richer. But no, we'll squeeze some more cash out of the lower echelons as usual.

Russel Brand has some interesting you tube videos detailing how the rich elite are screwing us.

YABU

Young people aren’t immune from care responsibilities, they have families who are effected by this, they themselves will get old and will not have the safety net in place. It’s time to address this situation, at least a third of us will develop dementia and we need to have a system in place to respond to this. I’m glad they are finally doing something, no doubt it will developing.

Clearly OP you come from a family that has not been effected by dementia or other progressive debilitating illnesses of age. Right now families in the worst position are being exploited and driven to poverty, including the young people.

Clearly OP you come from a family that has not been effected by dementia or other progressive debilitating illnesses of age. Right now families in the worst position are being exploited and driven to poverty, including the young people.

A close relative had early onset dementia aged 70 & died of covid last yr in a care home so I have some experience.

Young people have always felt hard done by when paying for the elderly.

In 1975, when I was 20, the basic tax rate was 35% and NI was 5.5%.

I’ve paid tax and NI from age 16 to 66. Moved away from home and was self sufficient from age 17. Never claimed a benefit (no children, not by choice) and only been in hospital once for a minor op.

As my mother didn’t qualify for funding when she needed to go into a care home we had to sell her house to cover it.

I have a work pension (which I paid for) and State Pension. I pay tax on the amount over my allowance.

I don’t mind, I’m happy to contribute but I know that when (if) my turn comes I’ll get no help because I have a house that they will be able to take.

Not all pensioners are parasites.

I favour someone sort of insurance policy, like Theresa May suggested (and then had to withdraw as the Tory pensioners were livid

I agree and would have supported this idea. Seems to work fairly well in other European countries. But once it was dubbed ‘the Dementia Tax’ it and Mrs May were done for.

@NoBetterthanSheShouldBe

Most pensioners did not have the benefit of going to university, including myself. Many of the younger generation are in the same position - you pays your money and you takes your choice.

I’m not yet state pension age and pay voluntary NI for the day my pension finally arrives. In my mind NI is your government pension contribution so it doesn’t make sense to deduct it when that pension is in payment - same principle as employer pensions.

I would like to see NI paid at the same rate across the board, not dropping to 2% when it reaches the upper limit. It’s just a sneaky way of lowering the high-income tax rate.

Why didn’t they go to uni- it was free

@MatildaIThink

If it were down to me I would halve the personal allowance (the £12,570 tax free part) and put 2% on the basic rate of income tax. Much of Europe has no tax free allowance or it is a few thousand Euros.

If you compare us to the EU the bottom two thirds of earners have the lowest effective rate of income taxation in the EU, in Germany or France they would pay two or more times the tax, in Norway nearly four times as much. Where as the top third of earners in the UK have the sixth highest effective rate of income taxation in the EU. We also have the lowest rate of net contributors in the EU.

Many people in the UK seem to think that they can contribute little or nothing to the exchequer, yet have world class education, healthcare, roads, social services etc. The reality is most people are a net burden on the state and the majority of tax is paid by a small group of people. If we want a better country then we all need to contribute, until the majority recognise that then things will not improve.

We are already subsidising people’s wages with UC. If you take away some of the personal allowance you push more people into this poverty bracket which means you have all the admin costs or adding them to the UC pot. Taxing someone to then give them it back through UC is inefficient. It’s something we already do but why do more?

@Whycangirlsbesonasty

In fact every potential tax policy ought to be assessed to see whether it would piss off wealthy Tory pensioners, and if it does then it’s probably a good, fair tax.

Totally agree!

An increase in NI will fall disproportionally on the lower paid, for whom it is a larger proportion of their income.

Income tends to rise with age, so it is younger people who tend to be lower paid snd do are more impacted.

People over retirement ages do not paid NI, regardless of income.