To be irritated by this £100k a year whiner

[Viviennemary]

On Question Time tonight they were talking about subsidised childcare and the new benefits for younger children. Then a woman came on with a boo hoo sad face and said she wouldn't be getting it. So I think Fiona Bruce said because your income is £100k a year plus Then she said that it wasnt fair as there was only one wage. And their household only had one earner.

Well tough. Folk on just over £12k a year are paying tax and this cheeky woman thinks her child care should be subsidised. It made me mad.

It's a fact that there a unfilled job vacancies in lots of areas. Why do you think you can't see a GP - most GP practices have unfilled GP vacancies! Same with NHS dental practices. Same with the trades - have you tried to get a GasSafe engineer or qualified electrician recently?? Lots of jobs actually need qualified/experienced people to do them!!

That’s a useful graph.

It also doesn’t factor in the effects of UC (particularly for the single parents with significant childcare costs in the £50-70k bracket).

It’s a very badly designed system.

Does this mean you don't have a source for your claim that anyone who left would be replaced?

You're right, and also lots of jobs don't need qualified or experienced people to do them, and are still vacant. We have a general labour shortage in the UK, which is why we simply can't afford cavalier attitudes to people withdrawing some or all of their labour in response to perverse incentives. People got very used to thinking someone else will always be available, and that mindset still persists now even as the labour market that created it has gone.

I guess you haven't heard of Value Added TAX, and other indirect taxes then... e.g. duty on fuel, alcohol, tobacco, imports etc. Also National Insurance. Income tax is not the only tax - low earners actually pay a lot of tax.

Not comparatively they don't. They are also net beneficiaries. This is in no way denigrating the jobs done by people on less than £41K, but it is just a fact. If you earn less than this you do not cover your own costs.

Didn't you even read the quoted post? Which implied that income tax is the only tax.

So even if they paid VAT on every penny of £12K ( which is impossible) that is still only £2400 pa- frankly that is peanuts. I pay more than that every single month in PAYE.

Yes indeed - the UK would not cope. Data attached - almost 50% of revenue from income tax and NI with high earners contributing the bulk of that.

They would have to entice in people from other countries (already happening and much needed) and borrow more. So yup

That rather depends, doesn’t it? A healthy working age person with no children earning less than £41k probably does cover their own costs, particularly taking into account taxes other than those paid via the payroll.

Marginal rates are even worse in Scotland 😩

So we are now effectively in a country dominated by the tyranny of the increasingly unproductive majority, that is now mostly looking to extract from the shrinking number of higher income productive folks

yes

We are indeed in such a cycle although our highest immigration in UK history at net immigration 740,000 will contain some people who work rather than just students or dependants so that probably helps although it also has the effect that wages stay lower than they would have been and we also steal good people from countries abroad which need their skills so it is not necessarily a morally good thing.

Labour and the Tories are high spending high tax parties (the Tories are slightly better than Labour) so voters in 2024 or 2025 in the Uk do not have a lot of choice on these issues of taxation and high spending.

I'm not a higher rate tax payer, my husband is but not near the £100k mark but over £60k so we don't get child benefit. We're out of the childcare years but we did get tax free childcare (and still do for holiday clubs) and my youngest got the 30 hours at 3.
Even though either of us is unlikely to reach the £100k mark I do think that the childcare help and child benefit should be universal as long as both parents or working or in the case of a single parent family. Also get rid of the silly loss of personal allowance rule too.
It stunts growth and I bet after all the admin it costs to police these policies, the costs wouldn't be too horrific to just make it universal
I don't care if it means people with much higher incomes than us benefit. They pay shed loads of tax and deserve something back. It will also stop people just putting any excess into pension and put that money back into the economy.
We only lost our child benefit last year due to my husband taking a new job. We had to repay a full year's which we knew about and planned for and we then cancelled it.
Yet our joint income is less than £100k and if our incomes were more equally split we would still get it. But then it's my choice to work part time. But I do so without any government help
I can't get worked up over higher earners getting something back not while there are so many hugely profitable companies using tax avoidance schemes to pay minimal amounts. And mps obtaining high payrises every year and having everything subsidised. Along with generations of families never having worked their whole lives. Don't tell me they don't exist as I know 3 just off the top of my head!

You don’t pay NIC on wages under 12570, it’s the same lower threshold as income tax.

Yes it was in 2022 that the much lower threshold over which you pay NI rose to be the same as that for income tax (for those who still get a single person tax free allowance that is)....

I think it is about 25% of us who are net payers into the system (from all sources - income tax, NI, VAT, insurance premium tax, taxes on fuel etc) and 75% who are not.

The cliff edges that even start with those not working who want to go into work have never been easy to manage in our system - IDS tried very hard with universal credit when he brought it in to try to make work pay. I was against the huge spending in the pandemic on furlough money which has left us with huge debts for a generation.

This chart says it all really.

If you have two kids this is what happens to your net income as your gross salary increases, including loss of childcare.

It drops off a cliff at £100k. You have to be earning £145k to have more in your pocket than you did when you made £99,999.99.

That is a very, very bad system and if anyone thinks it is defendable I would dearly like to know how!

The vitriol against the 'loaded' £100k worker is a diversion from the CGT position. Many are baffled as to how someone selling their assets doesn't eventually run out of things to sell - they're selling shares bought via options that give the right (though not the obligation) to purchase at a set price, they're not selling the family silver.
Both Starmer and Sunak paid around 25% of their income in tax, significantly less than a the 'loaded' £100k worker. The fact that most of us mix within our own tribes allows MPs to pit high paid and low paid wageslaves against each other, letting party donors off the hook.

This is apparently is not relevant to the discussion even though this is exactly why the discussion is taking place at all!

Thanks for the useful data - which is even more shocking than I remembered.
7 times as much taxation from humans rather than businesses. This brings with it behavioural consequences, while we need wealth creators, businesses get to deduct most of their costs when calculating their tax liabilities, whereas employees are taxed at source, irrespective of whether they have caring responsibilities or dependents.
In a rational world, children would be educated in these fundamentals at school and able to reason through politician's proposals, in reality, I suspect that the tax code is now about six feet thick - it was was three feet thick when Gordon Brown was PM and it has only grown since then. Dave Hartnett head of HMRC until 2012 was smug about it being too large for any single individual to understand it all.

In the here and now possibly, but statistically the last 2 years of life are the most expensive so they will never cover their lifetime health costs, never mind their pension.

Just make the “free hours” & child benefit universal.

100k in PAYE income tax is very different to income coming from other sources which is part of the problem.

Nail on the head. There simply shouldn't be different tax rates for different types of income/gains. There shouldn't be NIC on PAYE wages when NIC isn't charged on BTL rents, dividends, pensions, capital gains, etc. We shouldn't have different basic and higher rates for capital gains at all - should be the same as income tax. We can't keep forcing workers to shoulder most of the tax burden and let off landlords, pensioners, investors, etc.

''@Neurodiversitydoctor

Not comparatively they don't. They are also net beneficiaries. This is in no way denigrating the jobs done by people on less than £41K, but it is just a fact. If you earn less than this you do not cover your own costs.''

Daft.

I am single and I earn £30K and I do not get any benefits. I pay for: council tax, mortgage, prescriptions, public transport and of course income tax...

Nobody pays my 'costs'.

The ignorance on this thread is breathtaking.