AIBU that working people should be rewarded in the Budget?

[DistingusedSocialCommentator]

As above by way of increasing the tax threshold which has been on ice for a while.

The lower paid will benefit the most as those earning about 125k I think it is dont get any tax reliefe. 2 of the 3 children of ours pay 40% or more in tax plus NI. Therefore, the lower paid will benefit the most

We left worl in our early 50's and yet to reach state pension age.

I've read that many pensioners will soon be paying taxes as many are also being paid a few quid in private pensions they contributed to

so rather than a penny or two cut, raise the threshold of income tax

The gov must also do away with IHT but that is a different subject.

So if you agree with me, then it is I am being reasonable

Tax burden by its very nature can only ever possibly fall on individuals. Even if the economic incidence of a tax is placed on a corporation then the actual burden will fall on one or a combination of its staff, its customers or its owners.

If you increase employer NI contributions then you've increased the cost of employing staff. It's then up to the corporation how to deal with that. Its choices will be to pay staff less / employ fewer staff, increase its prices or have smaller profits / dividends. Realistically most won't choose the third unless they absolutely have to.

When the problem is business owners then it's better to tackle them more directly so they can't shift the burden away from themselves.

There is no “nature” to taxes. It is all political decisions by political leaders who just happen, coincidentally, to legislate a tax structure that benefits them/their class the most. How else do these individuals have the lowest tax burden of all? Rishi Sunak pays a lower effective tax rate than a secretary on less than £30k a year.

Businesses have hoarded the profits from increased productivity for the last 55years. It is well researched that instead of sharing profits by increasing wages, U.K. businesses have chosen to funnel that profit to shareholders (the wealthy) and instead create a system where the government tops up their artificially suppressed low wages.

The U.K. is all about being attractive to businesses by having low wages, low corporate taxes and low regulation.

I certainly don't envy younger people as house prices are ridiculously high and so are childcare costs.
I haven't all the answers and I've struggled with both ( in the past) but it is much harder these days and I do feel sorry for them to be honest
Many are not bothering to have children and I don't blame them
My point below was badly worded ( sorry ) but there is also an elder bashing element to anything to do with tax and I was making the point that we do pay in and and follow the rules to pay whatever the government tells us to
Some can hide it away , but I certainly haven't

That is how i read it too

Nonsense.

Thank you. We are not more than ok as you said. We are still careful, ie sont eat out as dont like it and only eat out when on hols or in hotels for weddings etc. I've never travelled business class let alone first class, nor do we stay in 5 star hotels - as our incomes have been massively reduced since we left work and with hyper inflation, we are careful

Anyway, back to the tax

As I said, those that don't want IHT abolished or as per my suggestion, capped at 3/5millions, often do not have a penny to their name or often worth less than 500k.

I agree with you re tax brackets and I'm also for tax allowance increases as this helps all of those earinng low wages and up to 100k I think

I was staggared when we were talking about tax threasholds and allwanaces when our son told me he and his siblign did not get the allwance - i actually had to look it up

Look at Labour, if mem serves me well, when i was at school, they had a upper tax rate of 88% and a lot of the people that were paying towards ruing the country via their taxes f'd off out of the country and it went belly up

No tax rises required and cuts must be prudent
What needs to happen is our clowns in gov must stop spending billions on far away wars and ensure the hospiltas are streamlined like some in the EU and money is used effectively and we need less managers in the NHS. We also need less managers in council workers and more outsourcing of work from them as it is cheaper.

No, you're not.

@the80sweregreat thanks for clarifying, and apologies for not following the meaning of your first message.

I'm sorry that you feel there is elder bashing when taxes are discussed. I think it's a really hard subject to debate properly as when discussing age groups there are so many generalisations and averages, which naturally don't apply to everyone in that age group, but it can feel very personal when that's not always the intention.

Personally I do think we need to tackle the tricky fact that life expectancy increases mean that post-working-age population is ever increasing and this also increases spending on taxes and health care for this age group. I'm not sure what the answer is, but sadly I'm not sure the current government (or the next!) will do enough to come up with a good plan and (most crucially) help people to understand why change is necessary.

Definitely not.

Most small businesses ( which employ 61% of privately-employed) workers) are on their knees with spiralling rent, energy etc costs. Adding to the tax burden might well be the straw that breaks the camel's back. Then they would employ no one.
Employers are an easy target with their imaginary magic money trees, but cause and effect comes into play here.

I don't want to see any tax cuts. I don't understand how they could be justified whilst simultaneously claiming public services are underfunded and underresoured. Maybe when all schools can afford to buy the materials they need and hospitals are safely and sufficiently staffed we can revisit things.

I definitely don't want to see any time spent on IHT because it's a complete non issue for the overwhelming majority and whether people agree or not, it IS wealth acquisition at that level so should be taxed.

Most small businesses employ people at below a living wage in the knowledge that those on PAYE will subsidise the wages.

Not sure I agree with the terminology, "Working people should be rewarded..."
They get their pay, and some of it is taxed. Lowering tax they pay is not a "Reward".

However, yes I think income tax should be lowered by both by the threshold being increased by inflation over the years it has been static, and the basic rate reduced. However the rate for the higher paid should be increased.

As I said, those that don't want IHT abolished or as per my suggestion, capped at 3/5millions, often do not have a penny to their name or often worth less than 500k.

where do you get these facts from @DistingusedSocialCommentator ? We're discussing this atm with FIL, who's house is now worth over £850k, after only paying £380k for it many years ago. We all know there will be IHT to pay, and although not overly happy with the current threshold (he believes an slight increase to £500k would be better due to the way the housing market is currently) he wholly accepts that he should pay tax on this unearned, untaxed income his family will have.

An aging population is a huge problem and one that you don't hear politicians mention that much.
It all adds to the problems and I'm aware in twenty years time I'll be another one adding when more to the tax burden
(Personally I hope I wont be!)

Of course it is the problem. We cannot have the solutions of forty years ago or even the same assumptions. You can just hear the angst as public services cannot accommodate old age in a dignified way. It can't happen. There is not the money unless a lot more tax is paid, and a lot of it is in property and assets held by older people. That has to be looked at. The income tax system is not fit for purpose. Both Labour and Conservative know the problem with the higher rate taxpayer. Labour have conspicuously said nothing on that. These are people the UK needs. That they are reducing their hours, deferring into pensions makes perfect sense. They are choosing to be less productive in the same way as other groups lower down the income chain. It is the same behaviour.

The workers they employ are also on PAYE, so I am not sure what you are getting at there.
So what's your big plan? Compulsory increasing of wages? Even if it forces the closure of businesses and the loss of jobs? It really isn;t that simple.,

And to add, where do you get the idea that most small businesses emply people at below the NLW?

We need a large inheritance tax and for people to continue to have to sell their properties to fund residential care. We also need large taxes on second homes and landlords.
We also need to get to grip with taxing internet businesses.
And we need to tackle corporate fraud which is very common. The civil service department that did this previously was cut massively. Look at current fraud with visas for sale. Pretty widespread and not even the most basic checks are happening.

However, yes I think income tax should be lowered by both by the threshold being increased by inflation over the years it has been static, and the basic rate reduced. However the rate for the higher paid should be increased

I'm paying 60% tax on part of my income. How much more exactly would you like me to pay? How about if I hand over 100% of my salary would that be enough for you? Or perhaps it wouldn't and you'd like to take my house and pension off me too?

FM's are wishing for a Labour gov and ignorant of the facts about the 88% tax they put on those in good jobs, careers and most of those epople started leaving England and Labour left the country belly up.

Sadly, many have not, never worked and many even on half-decent incomes eg around 45k always think tax thos earning more than XX. INO it is a forum of ignorance and envy. All govs are good at getting ordianry people to fight the other as that is the only way they keep in power, ie dived and rule and make promises you know you wont be able to keeep and then blame "world events."

Those working, worked their way up the ladder should never be unfairly penalised as that lot are paying 90% of the taxes.

I don't trust the Tories but I trust Labour less

FM's are wishing for a Labour gov and ignorant of the facts about the 88% tax they put on those in good jobs, careers and most of those epople started leaving England and Labour left the country belly up.

That simply isn’t true. The highest rate of tax under Thatcher was more than at any time under the last Labour government. Why don’t you check your facts?

In the 1970s, the highest rate of income tax on earned income was 83 per cent. Margaret Thatcher’s government reduced it to 60 per cent in 1980 and 40 per cent in 1989 (equal to the higher rate). From 1989 to 2010, the highest rate of income tax remained at 40 per cent and this was not a live political issue.

But the marked rise in income inequality in recent decades together with the deterioration of the public finances after the financial crisis led the Labour government to raise the top rate to 50 per cent (the ‘additional rate’) for those reporting taxable income in excess of £150,000 per annum, taking effect in April 2010 – this affected slightly under 1 per cent of taxpayers.

Look at Labour, if mem serves me well, when i was at school, they had a upper tax rate of 88% and a lot of the people that were paying towards ruing the country via their taxes f'd off out of the country and it went belly up
It doesn’t.

Do HMRC forcibly return the additional tax you try and pay every year?

Perhaps you can donate a kidney too while you are at it. After all no amount of other people’s money is ever enough for people like these