To think they should have increased tax rather than NI?

[needabreak5]

So those who earn below the threshold cumulatively across the don't have to pay more?

Eg students who only work in the summer, people on maternity pay, people who lose jobs, or reduce during the tax year. Anyone whose income massively fluctuates. If it was tax then they'd be able to claim it back. With NI they'll just be more out of pocket as you can't claim back in the next pay period or from HMRC :(

And besides, why do they need to do this at all? Where the fucks the 350 million a week we were promised?

@canary1

Totally agree. It’s a disgrace that some people like wealthy OAPs are not sharing the burden

What about wealthy non OAPs? Surely it is the wealth that is relevant not age.

I feel this is very unfair aswell.

It’s a tax that focuses directly on earnings rather than income or wealth. Those with income from sources other than working or those with amassed wealth are not affected. This is unfair.

If you want to raise taxes, how about hitting the one vast source of untaxed income many wealthy pensioners have - capital gains made on their main residential property?

It's not just "wealthy" pensioners who pay tax. I pay tax pro rata compared to my earnings prior to retirement . I pay no NI. No idea what the thinking behind that is. I cost, for example, the NHS much more the older I get.

I totally agree that the raise should be on income tax, not NI.
It's ridiculous, I "earn" way above the minimum wage, and I live mortgage free. So my disposable income is way for than when I actually worked.

There's an argument I've heard that I've worked for 40+ years, so it's ok. To my mind, it isn't fine. I'm financially able to contribute more, but I now give to various charities instead of paying my way.

I'm in no way suggesting those pensioners who live only on RP and pension credit should pay more tax, but just that retired people like me, who are quite financially comfortable should.

Why should I dodge this "tax" increase while working families pay for it?

It just seems wrong.

@Kendodd

And besides, why do they need to do this at all? Where the fucks the 350 million a week we were promised?

Farage denied ever making that promise the morning after the referendum. Despite posters on buses, etc.

And that money has effectively been spent on all the negotiations, Covid, etc.

It was never really there, it was just a soundbite to reel people in to the Leave side.

I expect this was the discussion in Cabinet:

1. What will raise money without any of us sitting round this table having to pay anything noticeable?
2. What will raise money in such a way that people who may vote for us will know that we have put their interests before the interests of those who are unlikely to vote for us? I imagine that's how most decisions are reached.

"Plenty of pensioners on really high incomes still relative to the working population. Why don’t they have to pay when someone earning 12k does?!"

Because it is an insurance that pays out when you are eligible. Pensioners pay in for 40 or 50 years and then claim their state pension.

Pensioners who work will pay the social care levy though I think.

I think it's to tax the workforce only, as a way of getting back sine if the costs of furlough

Not everyone got furlough, of course, but the reason it existed was to preserve jobs (preventing lay offs, keeping employers afloat), which was in the interests of the whole workforce. Who are now starting to pay for it

@Mountaingoat12

It’s a tax that focuses directly on earnings rather than income or wealth. Those with income from sources other than working or those with amassed wealth are not affected. This is unfair.

If you want to raise taxes, how about hitting the one vast source of untaxed income many wealthy pensioners have - capital gains made on their main residential property?

Do you mean capital gains when they sell up? Surely that couldn't be introduced just for pensioners, shouldn't anyone making capital gains pay?