Gutted about NI rise

[CarryOnNurse20]

I know we need it and we have so much money to pay off. But we have been scrimping and saving after a hard couple of years. Every penny is accounted for from pay day to pay day. I’m a nurse and my pay has been capped/below inflation my whole career. And now the NI rise means any savings etc we have made will now be gone. I’m gutted.

And today from Dominic Cummings:

Dominic Cummings
@Dominic2306
"Tell your friends: the Tories are making the young - who can't get a house & working for average/below average income, already screwed by a decade of hapless Tory government - work harder to subsidise older richer people. They promised to do the opposite".

Not taxing wealth and property bit instead those who already who "work hard" yet still have nothing (for all reasons mentioned further back in thread) is wrong.

@NameChangeGoo

'Tell Dominic Cummings: that he is part responsible for helping the 'shopping trolley' be in power to pull this kind of shit'

Not sure that sentence went quite as he meant it too! Landlords pay tax on their rental income, the legislation around what can and cannot be claimed against costs is reducing year on year.

He’s spot on correct. Landlords won’t have to pay a penny more on their income from being a landlord as a result of yesterday’s announcement.

He’s spot on correct. Landlords won’t have to pay a penny more on their income from being a landlord as a result of yesterday’s announcement. nor will anyone else! It's not a tax!

That's the kind of think I mean, total lack of clarity. All sorts of people getting their voices heard by shouting odd headlines grabbing quotes and a turgid, dense set of proposals that defy clarity.

@Knittingupastorm I think you misunderstood me. I think they are all pack of fools - or are relying on all of us being so!

@Lunaduckdrop

They could have easily got landlords to pay on rental income by putting this on TAX instead of NI. Sheer madness and unfair to the lower paid.

I realised from a post upthread that had he done that, it could only have been applied to people taxed in England, as tax is devolved to the individual nations, whereas NI is not.

Re. the Starmer comment - landlords are now paying significant taxes, and are unable to apply anything like the costs against their properties as was the case just a few years ago. Different situation completely.

Yes. That was my post! You are right about the reduction in the expenditure which can be claimed against rental income. There are many people saying rental income should be taxed though. Trying to do that through NI would result in an even more complicated tax system.

Maybe we should just be using the money that Cummings and Johnson posted on the side of the their campaign bus at the last election!

He’s spot on correct. Landlords won’t have to pay a penny more on their income from being a landlord as a result of yesterday’s announcement. nor will anyone else! It's not a tax!

Oh please.

Two points that mean that's flat out incorrect:

• PAYE taxpayers eligible for NI will absolutely be paying more of their income from that PAYE activity as a result of yesterday's announcement.

• NI is absolutely a tax. You seem to have been sucked in by branding.

Re. the Starmer comment - landlords are now paying significant taxes, and are unable to apply anything like the costs against their properties as was the case just a few years ago. Different situation completely.

Not really. If they're making a profit, not a loss, from that activity, it's income. They'll be paying tax on it, if they earn enough from it. What makes that money somehow magically different from income, just because they can't make as much of it as they used to?

Not really. If they're making a profit, not a loss, from that activity, it's income. They'll be paying tax on it, if they earn enough from it. What makes that money somehow magically different from income, just because they can't make as much of it as they used to?

Sorry - should read 'magically different from PAYE income' - important distinction.

It really isn't different. Lots of changes mean lots of people's work and other activity isn't as lucrative as it once was. Landlords aren't particularly special, and their income shouldn't be sacrosanct just because they're more likely to vote Tory.

Yes. That was my post! You are right about the reduction in the expenditure which can be claimed against rental income. There are many people saying rental income should be taxed though. Trying to do that through NI would result in an even more complicated tax system.

Rental income is taxed.

And the argument of many of us is that this tax rise shouldn't be solely on those who pay NI - it should be more evenly spread through income tax so that landlords, wealthy pensioners and others also pay their fair share on those incomes.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

Just listening to Starmer talking about it

A landlord, owning a number of properties, won't have to pay a penny more 'tax'

But his tenants will

Not sure that sentence went quite as he meant it too! Landlords pay tax on their rental income, the legislation around what can and cannot be claimed against costs is reducing year on year.

i'm trying to find a free to view transcription, see whether I heard him right... because if he is going to stand against this he needs to get his facts right. Otherwise it just adds to the smoke and mirrors!

It's blindingly obvious that Starmer was talking about rental income here, which will not be subject to this new tax.

Sorry - should read 'magically different from PAYE income' - important distinction. That's the kind of obfuscation I am talking about. You may have made an error, I doubt a single on of the politicians or journalists have. Theya re being careful and are deleiberately stoking certain fires, tryin gto hide others.

Not been sucked in by anything, I understand why they added it to NI not IT.

But I can't decide if it is the fairest or least fair, or any point between, as no bugger will write it up in plain English! Which has been my only point.

@BeenAroundTheWorldAndIII Once upon a time politicians, people in general, managed to say precisely what they meant with little room for error, obfuscation.

Now it all seems to be about the soundbite, can be repaired, amended, denied, ignored at any point in the future. I can tell you bare faced lie today and simply say "oops, that wasn't what I meant" tomorrow, with no apparent detriment to my standing.

Not just Starmer, Johnson et al, journalists etc etc.

It's not fucking obfuscation at all. I accidentally left out a word which meant my comment didn't make sense. There are various forms of income, so clarity was important. Don't accuse me of bullshit, even if you're going to use fancy words to do it, when I made an honest mistake.

Only some categories of income (income earned by under-65s who pay certain forms of income tax) pay NI. Those are the people who have been targeted with this tax rise.

That lets out large categories of income tax payers from contributing on that income, and puts the burden disproportionately on others.

The only obfuscation is from the government in trying to pretend they've made it fair by cutting the triple lock for this year - when the impact will be pretty much nil on state pensions apart from not getting a windfall based on a statistical anomaly.

Which part of the announcement are you finding confusing? It's pretty clear on gov.uk.

@CuriousaboutSamphire

He’s spot on correct. Landlords won’t have to pay a penny more on their income from being a landlord as a result of yesterday’s announcement. nor will anyone else! It's not a tax!

That's the kind of think I mean, total lack of clarity. All sorts of people getting their voices heard by shouting odd headlines grabbing quotes and a turgid, dense set of proposals that defy clarity.

@Knittingupastorm I think you misunderstood me. I think they are all pack of fools - or are relying on all of us being so!

Where's the lack of clarity? It's pretty clear imo:

• NI is a form of taxation.
• NI is payable by workers and employers, but not workers over state pension age. It it not payable on any other form of income.
• From 2023 the increase will become a legally separate Health and Social Care Levy.
• The new HSC Levy will be payable by workers and employers (no exemptions for those over state pension age). The new levy will not be payable on any other form of income.

Poor pensioners who have to work will pay the HSC Levy. Wealthy pensioners who do not need to work will not, as investment income, rental income, pension income etc. will not be subject to it.

The fact that landlords are making lower profits than they were 10 years ago is neither here nor there in this conversation.

Meanwhile, you're saying that no one will pay a penny more on their income as a result of this announcement - what are you basing that on?

Thanks @BeenAsFarAsMercyAndGrand! There is really nothing unclear about the announcement. We know exactly who will be paying, and who won't, and when.

Jassy I didn't intend to have a pop at you, I was trying to point out that an error is one thing a deliberate obfuscation is another.

I won't apologise for using that word, or any other, but do apologise for having pissed you off.

Ok, thanks for that.

However I'm still not clear why you think that no one will be paying extra on their income, or that it isn't a tax?

There's only one direction the obfuscation is coming from here....

Income tax is a devolved issue - Boris could not change the law to increase the amount paid in Scotland, Wales or Ireland.

NI is not a devolved issue - Boris can increase this without needing the OK from Scotland, Wales or Ireland.

So an increase in NI was presumably the simplest way of collecting this 'levy' across all nations?

Of course, NI is a type of tax, but a type that is handled differently to Income Tax.

@JassyRadlett. Yes, that's exactly what I was saying. NI is a tax, but if you put this on tax(ie. Taxed income) instead of NI then landlords would pay and so would pensioners who are above the tax threshold. This would be fairer. The downside from Boris's point of view is that it would then only apply to England, as tax is devolved but NI is not. I think this may be one reason why he has chosen NI.

@JassyRadlett

Ok, thanks for that.

However I'm still not clear why you think that no one will be paying extra on their income, or that it isn't a tax?

I thought I had typed my thoughts on that. It's not tax like income tax. It's, partially, ringfenced, and doesn't increase the more you earn in the same way. It was probably never a really good idea, is based in more sleight of hand, but isn't an income tax, per se.

Between this, and the reasoning behind it, where the money will actually go, and the changes to payment for social care their is a lot of pratting around, hiding crap in plain sight going on at the moment. I just want one single politician to stand up and argue against it without all the faux rage, pfaffing and looking to camera for approbation.

Sadly I don't think such a person exists at the moment, so Boris will push through any number of half baked ideas.

I am sorry Been do I not agree with you?

Am I not pissed off in the right way?