To not want my children to pay for tax cuts for the middle-class?

The whole Tory ethos is that to incentive the rich/ decent enough off, you have to give them more, ie tax cuts. To incentive the poor, you need to give them less ie cuts in UC..

I, personally don't believe either of these propositions to be true, neither do I believe in the "trickle down effect" of money going to those who already have it in the mistaken believe that, sooner or later, it will trickle down to those poorer.

Quite! Well put

My generation probably won't see a state pension. I'm also setting money aside for my care in the future so again, maybe everyone should stop digging into my pockets for what else I can sponsor you for.

Actually no, the reality is that I'll have to keep working past retirement age so in my retirement I will still be paying taxes and once again funding a shit load for kids and services that I have never and will never be able to use.

Add to that the fact that I have to be accepting of all the little darlings and 'oh aren't they just soooo cute and adorable' and 'won't someone think of the children' fucksake people were even getting taken out of the queue at passport control and moved to the front because of their crotch goblins. So you'll forgive me for not giving two shiny shits about little timmys future taxes after I've carked it. 💁😂

Btw earning 50k somewhere like London doesn't get you far these days.

Personally I'd think it would make more sense to reduce tax for everyone by increasing the personal allowance but I'm not opposed to the fact that we should stop expecting the middle earners to have high costs, more tax, no support from the gov in anyway and always be in the shit middle.

What has this got to do with class? Why do you assume working class people aren't high earners?

I wish someone would make carers allowance a benefit that isn’t considered income . That would make such a huge different to those struggling

@ScarlettOHaraHamiltonKennedyButler I understand how the economy works, thanks. I’d hasten to guess I’ve paid a lot more tax in my lifetime than you.

Sorry that you ‘grudge’ paying for NHS care for anyone that isn’t bright enough to understand how the economy works - does that include people that aren’t bright enough to understand smoking, drinking and being overweight isn’t healthy?

You guess more than me? How can you guess that?

And yes given that I don't smoke or drink and am not overweight I do grudge it very much.

I don’t disagree with you, but the threshold for higher rate has not changed to keep up with wage increases in a long time. When I was first working in 1980sonly director level type people in my industry would reach higher and, by 2000 I’d say 25% of workforce had been caught into the band.
id agree that I’d rather see nil band increase further…but the Tory view is to incentivise people to higher wages…

Health is a public issue so you do use health services indirectly. If TB is spreadiny for instances it doesnt really care you didnt want to pay for someone else not to get TB, only yourself because to stop yourself getting TB you kinda have to stop others getting it too.

Ditto education, we all 'use' state education whether or not we have children as we all benefit from an educated workforce. There are millions of things i benefit from such as the person who undestands chemistry that makes all the drinking water safe. It just does get set up once and left ticking over. The list of things i need done for me, most of which i'm not even aware of is endless.

And the people you are paying for these services will be the same age as you will they?

I agree with only borrowing for long term investment. It is why I hate the new energy policy this is blatantly borrowing for short term gain with no investment.

I would also support increasing the lifetime allowance for pensions. We need to encourage people to save for their retirement.

Most tradesmen can easily earn £750-£1000 a day when they are self employed, £70 an hour is low, that’s why I don’t understand the push for everyone to have a degree.
If they raise the 40% tax limit to £80k, surely they need to raise the VAT registration threshold to £100k as well.
DH could theoretically earn £80K by working 20 hours a week servicing peoples’ boilers at £80 a time, it takes 45 mins. His day rate for, say fitting a new boiler will be £750 and that will be cheap.

@Travis1 Crotch goblin! The people on the train are now wondering why there is a lone traveller laughing uncontrollably!

Tax people till the pips squeak and those that can will take their money elsewhere.
I wasn't born in world war 2 but I have been contributing to pay off the debt we owed for WW2 which was only settled about 15 or so years ago . Nobody asked me and all the rest but we didn't have a choice. You are very naive OP and need to do some research before you post your shit . Your kids will pay tax for a lot of stuff they don't pick and choose!!

All generations pay the debts of the generation before them.

Personally I don't think the threshold should be raised because I think there are bigger priorities.

But I also don't agree that to do so, 'saddles' the next generation in ways that previous generations haven't been.

The current basic tax rate is about the lowest it ever has been. It could get a lot higher yet before we're asking more of tomorrow's earners than we asked of yesterday's - iysim.

What DOES need to happen is to keep wages rises in line with inflation. They have stagnated for the last decade or so and that leaves people trying to stretch their money futher each month. The answer isn't to lower tax, it's to keep wages moving in line with the cost of living.

@ScarlettOHaraHamiltonKennedyButler you can hold a grudge or you can begrudge someone.

I don’t know why you’ve assumed I don’t have children? Or that yours will be funding my retirement? (They won’t.)

I didn’t say the country doesn’t need children or that I don’t understand how tax works, I was bemused at the OPs annoyance that her children might be paying tax for something they don’t directly benefit from, and the assumption that the ‘middle classes’ are the ones to benefit.

you are someones crotch goblin are you not? did you not go to school? see a doctor? no? you're parents must have been incredibly wealthy.

My parents/grandparents taxes paid for you.

and you have no intentions of ever seeing a doctor (who was once a child at school) or using any other public service ever? I applaud your utter selflessness. You will be one less burden on my DC when they are adults.

Oh ok, we’ll all just do that then🙄

But the younger generation will fund all of our elderly years how can anyone honestly not see that?

In fact 'hey that tax systems for you'! If your kids don't pay tax they are not funding anyone. If they do pay tax they are for the most part funding schools, NHS, police, armed forces etc., all things most people thing are jolly useful. If you are a lower earner with kids you are probably close to being a net receiver of benefit from the tax/spend system. If you're a higher earner then you are benefiting from the tax cut you are talking about. You seem to be making yourself angry without thinking this through OP.

Incentivisation and aspiration is a good thing. Grumbling about different classes of people is a bit 20th century.

Truss and co want to pay the 'credit card bill' by growing the economy and growing tax receipts that way. You may disagree with that or think it won't work, (fair enough); you may think raising taxes on the rich and windfall taxes on companies will benefit the poorest in the economy and would rather have that system (not much international evidence that that works, but fair enough, vote Labour) but class based grumbling is just a bit weird.

I believe that children are our future ... and those children will inherit a share of a nation with a rather complex mix of liabilities and hard and soft assets, a workforce with a skills base and an economy formed of an ecosystem of companies. If someone thinks they can judge one year's tax policy and understand its effects on the future national debt taking into account how the additional untaxed income will be spent and saved and possibly keep firm afloat that would otherwise go under and then they think they have enough of a view of the consequences of the counterfactual of not making that tax cut then perhaps they might want to consider the limits of their knowledge.

At the moment, people take actions to avoid paying higher rate tax (and of course losing child benefit). They increase their pension contributions (so HMRC get less tax). Or they refuse to do extra shifts, or take promotions, or reduce their working hours (so HMRC get less tax). There are literally hundreds of threads on various web forums from people asking how they can avoid HR tax and how to avoid losing child benefit when their wages go over £50k - the evidence is there in black and white that people take action to avoid it. The result is that HMRC get less tax because people either take steps to earn less or take steps to put more into pensions, so overall HMRC loses out and gets less tax than they would if people could earn more without the higher rate tax kicking in or losing child benefit.

For years, the HR tax threshold and the £50k child benefit claw back threshold hasn;t changed, so people have been hit by "fiscal drag" i.e. pay inflation etc not being matched by increases in these thresholds.

Maybe £80k is too high, but it needs to be increased to reflect pay inflation since it was last changed!

@ScarlettOHaraHamiltonKennedyButler I no longer live in the UK, so no. Your children will not be directly funding anything for me, despite me paying tax all my working life and that really doesn’t bother me.

The OP has limited understanding of the economy and came across as having a serious chip on their shoulder about the ‘middle classes’. And other posters were trying to point out ways that everyone has contributed tax to things that they can’t directly see the benefit of.