Meet the Other Phone. Flexible and made to last.

Meet the Other Phone.
Flexible and made to last.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

To reduce hours when labour win election

877 replies

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 01:40

I fall into the “60%” tax bracket. With the upcoming elections and knowing the government always hammer the middle ground….woudlnt it make more sense for me to cut my hours for a more relaxed life, eligibility for childcare, reduced tax?

OP posts:
Thread gallery
24
leafybrew · 24/05/2024 08:42

@Katemax82 yeah right.

HappiestSleeping · 24/05/2024 08:44

@Parttimeplay since the max tax bracket in the UK is 45%, I am assuming you are caught in the bit between 100k and 120k where you lose the personal allowance which feels like a higher tax rate?

If so, I've always been of the opinion that people who want to pay less tax should just earn less money, so reducing your hours is a good way to achieve this. Personally, I am the other way around and have aspired to paying £1m tax per year. I am still some way off sadly.

Ineffable23 · 24/05/2024 08:47

I'm not opposed to higher taxes.

I am also pro universal services. If people are paying in to the system, it is going to make them much less resentful if they also benefit from it. That benefits everyone.

I'm also very much opposed to these non-sensical cliff edges that create contrary logic in people's personal decision making.

So e.g. don't get rid of the allowance, it would make more sense to put the tax rate up then, otherwise combined with the removal of other services (childcare etc) you can create a situation where the effective tax rate on those areas is over 100% and that benefits absolutely no one, including the government.

Unfortunately "getting rid of the personal allowance" sounds a lot friendlier than "put the tax rate above 100k to 50%" or whatever alternative would make sense, in spite of the fact the latter would at least remove this cliff edge for workers.

IBelieveInFerries · 24/05/2024 08:48

I can't believe that someone would change their working hours before a single vote had been cast.

But this has happened because tax brackets has been frozen......Which happened under a tory government.

THIS ALL HAPPENED UNDER A TORY GOVERNMENT.

malificent7 · 24/05/2024 08:49

I can't stand it when people moan about paying taxes. Ok you can pay for private school and healthcare but unless you fly everywhere by private jet then you need roads right?
I think it's how taxpayers money is spent that counts. If tjere are loads of potholes in roads then it does leave us to wonder why we qre paying taxes.
I do agree that the benefit system needs an overhaul though.

spov · 24/05/2024 08:50

SaltySeaCat · 24/05/2024 05:49

I blame the conservatives for the likely VAT on school fees - it wouldn’t be possible without Brexit.

Well, David Cameron urged everyone to vote to remain.

but Corbyn didn’t urge labour supporters to vote remain

the blame lies jointly with:

-the Tory brexit attack dogs for most likely making their support for David Cameron conditional on having a referendum
-Jeremy corbyn for not getting up, leading and appealing to his supporters to vote remain
-the public, many of whom cast their leave vote to stick two fingers up at the sitting prime minister (admitted on telly!)

This triad of donkeys has really fucked us hard!

HowardTJMoon · 24/05/2024 08:50

Even weirder when you realise that this is the only thing the OP has ever posted on mumsnet. Almost seems... fake.

Dakotabluebell · 24/05/2024 08:51

Your current standard of living was created by the tories. They've destroyed this country. Thanks to Liz truss being an idiot my mortgage payments went up by hundreds of pounds for no reason. Go part time now if you want. That's nothing to do with labour. You speak about part time as if it's giving up. It's a valid choice for work life balance.

The key is not to to go chasing after things you can't afford (like private school or a nice house in a nice part of London) because if you're struggling to find £2k a month for nursery, it's unlikely you'll be able to afford private school.

frankentall · 24/05/2024 08:52

EasternStandard · 24/05/2024 08:35

Two non answers to your question

When you say reduce did you mean actually reduce, or increase to the highest level in 70 years but say they are a tax cutting party, like the Tories?

I expect the tax burden to be broadly similar under Labour rather than steadily increased as it has been for the last 14 years.

Charlie2121 · 24/05/2024 08:53

Elizo · 24/05/2024 08:37

Private schools get 3-4 times the per pupil funding that state do. State schools have been forced to make savings over the years, can private not do the same? That way fees don't need to go up. I was a governor of a state school and we had to make all sorts of savings to keep costs down and that is from a much lower starting point.

75% of the costs are staff.

That means the answer is to make some staff redundant and stop all new bursaries.

Great plan!

Motheroffourdragons · 24/05/2024 08:54

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

malificent7 · 24/05/2024 08:55

Sorry for typos.

Dakotabluebell · 24/05/2024 08:56

Katemax82 · 24/05/2024 08:39

My stepson earns over 100k self employed and is really worried he is going to be fleeced under a labour government

My heart bleeds.

EveningSpread · 24/05/2024 08:56

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 03:16

It’s not just the increased tax, it’s loss of benefits as well. Sub 100 l I am entitled to tax free childcare.
vat on private schools is not a Tory policy

Why don't you work out what would be better: reduce your hours so you take home under £100k and qualify for free childcare, or earn over £100k and pay it yourself? Either way you're in a great position to do whatever benefits you most.

Can anyone clarify something for me? I'm pretty sure that if you earn more, you take home more, regardless of the rate of tax. So nobody is going to take home less by getting paid more.

If I'm right about that, talking about reducing hours to avoid top rates of tax still means taking home less money. Which is anyone's choice of course but unless you want the free time it's cutting your nose off to spite your face.

(I'm sure we'd all be happier paying taxes if they obviously made the country better, removed the need for private schools, etc.)

PasstheMaple · 24/05/2024 08:58

@Parttimeplay my goals 20 years ago were similar to yours, but Im heavily motivated by ‘making a difference’ (not being judgemental - we’re all wired differently and this just happens to be my main motivation) so I went to work in the public sector. What I’ve seen over the last 14 years is truly heartbreaking - services being broken down for ideological reasons, people being failed, staff facing real time pay cut after pay cut, leading to burnout and mass resignations.

needless to say I cannot even afford a 3 bed semi in a ‘grimy’ part of London and am raising my family in the equivalent of 1/5 of the space I had growing up.

sometimes I wish I had chosen to work in the private sector and to concentrate on earning well, because then I wouldn’t have to know how bad things really are for the majority, and perhaps I could buy myself out of the systems. Sadly, my experience looking after elderly relatives in the private care/ healthcare systems, and friends’ experiences with private schools makes me think those systems are broken too - perhaps without a robust alternative, the profit motivation of the private sector leads to a race to the bottom?

in any case, I think this lot have had their chance in govt and they have royally effed it all up - the economy, our political standing internationally, living standards, state support, etc etc. I cant wait for something to change.

GiantCousCous · 24/05/2024 08:59

Ginmonkeyagain · 24/05/2024 08:41

@Katemax82 how so? He's worried a Labour government are going to overcharge or swindle him?

I get fiscal drag is a thing - as a higher rate tax layer I get caught too, especially at our (very modest) annual bonus time. However a lot of this griping shows why it is beneficial for most people to support the development of a wider tax base and tax capital, capital gains and inheritance more and burden income less. However people seem curiously opposed to such policies.

There is a curious lack of imagination for many voters when it comes to tax.

Edited

I completely agree with this.

My biggest gripe is that the biggest asset that most people have is their home and the capital gains they make on it are entirely TAX FREE.

I simply cannot fathom any rational explanation for this at all, especially as yet again it is another policy that benefits the rich more than the poor. But no one will even entertain the idea of changing it because it’s too politically difficult.

Zonder · 24/05/2024 09:00

Elizo · 24/05/2024 08:37

Private schools get 3-4 times the per pupil funding that state do. State schools have been forced to make savings over the years, can private not do the same? That way fees don't need to go up. I was a governor of a state school and we had to make all sorts of savings to keep costs down and that is from a much lower starting point.

This. Lots of them don't pay their teachers any more so the money isn't going there.

mrsdineen2 · 24/05/2024 09:01

EveningSpread · 24/05/2024 08:56

Why don't you work out what would be better: reduce your hours so you take home under £100k and qualify for free childcare, or earn over £100k and pay it yourself? Either way you're in a great position to do whatever benefits you most.

Can anyone clarify something for me? I'm pretty sure that if you earn more, you take home more, regardless of the rate of tax. So nobody is going to take home less by getting paid more.

If I'm right about that, talking about reducing hours to avoid top rates of tax still means taking home less money. Which is anyone's choice of course but unless you want the free time it's cutting your nose off to spite your face.

(I'm sure we'd all be happier paying taxes if they obviously made the country better, removed the need for private schools, etc.)

No, the Conservative and Unionist Party introduced a policy whereby an increase in annual net pay from £99,999 to £100,001 cost working parents £2k per child.

Confession time - I'm an accountant and I still haven't figured out how to calculate that effective rate of taxation brought in by party who want to punish the middle classes.

YearsofYears · 24/05/2024 09:02

Spot on. If it's real, OP has bigger problems. Changing your working hours based on problems caused by this government that you're worried about because labour may win is ineffective life planning.
I've just dropped to 4 days and it was lifestyle and children related, nothing to do with government like most other people who do this!

MaryMaryVeryContrary · 24/05/2024 09:02

Lifesd · 24/05/2024 02:10

This is partly why the country is in such a mess and also why there may well be a huge brain drain out of it. Constantly hammering people for doing well is just not conducive for a well functioning economy. I totally get it OP - why bother I’d do the same. All the people crowing about Labour winning who do they think will fund all this amazing change that is set to come?

Agree

CelesteCunningham · 24/05/2024 09:03

mrsdineen2 · 24/05/2024 08:03

Good morning brand new account, created upon the announcement of a general election to blame the incoming Labour government for current taxation applied to you by a 14 year tory government. I enjoyed reading your completely organic posts made at a time when UK professionals earning £100k plus are all generally online.

In the interests of efficiencies - you may want to generalise this post slightly and create a shortcut to paste it.

It's going to be a loooooong six weeks.

GiantCousCous · 24/05/2024 09:05

This reply has been deleted

This has been withdrawn by MNHQ on behalf of the poster.

Actually you’ll find many of them have been doing this extensively for the past couple of years due to inflation and not wanting to pass on the full rises to parents… so they’ve taken a lot of hits to pass on around half the rate of increase they’ve seen in their costs.

As for school fees, as a private school parent, as long as schools are given eg 5 years (one parliament) to bring it in, I think it is doable without creating a cliff edge which is difficult for the state and private sectors to manage. It won’t raise as much money as people think anyway as so many more schools are making adjustments to be more tax efficient. Treat them like a business and they’ll act like a business, tough luck taxman!

Zonder · 24/05/2024 09:05

Good idea @CelesteCunningham that would come in handy!

Willyoujustbequiet · 24/05/2024 09:07

Katemax82 · 24/05/2024 08:39

My stepson earns over 100k self employed and is really worried he is going to be fleeced under a labour government

As opposed to dying in the back of an ambulance stacked up outside A&E under the tories?

Sausagedogs123 · 24/05/2024 09:07

Parttimeplay · 24/05/2024 01:40

I fall into the “60%” tax bracket. With the upcoming elections and knowing the government always hammer the middle ground….woudlnt it make more sense for me to cut my hours for a more relaxed life, eligibility for childcare, reduced tax?

Good luck getting this through your employer. I’ve asked for a 3 day week as my mother is dying and I have a 20 month old. I’m not superwoman and really can’t manage full time anymore. it has gone down soooo badly! There wasn’t any discussion on the positives, it was a hard no and all because of the business needs! So I’m now paying a lawyer to see me through an appeal and tribunal.