Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Tax increases imminent

1000 replies

Iwishicouldflyhigh · 04/07/2025 11:28

Heavy hints that taxes will rise in the next Budget after the recent climb down (as the ‘taxes won’t rise again’ was based on a 5 billion saving in benefits).

I can’t lie, I’m so pissed off about this. I don’t think anyone wants to see someone who is genuinely unable to work to be further penalised, but we all know there are thousands of people who could work but don’t.

this country is going to absolute shit . We pay more and more for less and less.

OP posts:
Thread gallery
6
Livelovebehappy · 05/07/2025 09:20

IggleBiggle · 05/07/2025 09:00

What I want to see is this scheme that is supposed to help people on benefits get into work.

And taxing the ultra rich and more inheritance tax.

Good luck with that. The people on benefits don’t want help to get back into work. They’re happy with the status quo thank you very much. They want benefits for life.

Alexandra2001 · 05/07/2025 09:21

MightyDandelionEsq · 05/07/2025 09:13

I agree.

But a year of labour hasn’t started to fix it, objectively it’s gotten worse due to the flip flopping/incompetency of Starmer and Reeves.

In regard to the NHS, they have improved matters, my DD works in the NHS and tells me there has been positive improvements over the last few months.

...and in Devon starting to see larger resurfacing work to permanently fix some shocking roads, billions have been given to councils to do this work.

They have announced more social housing, the first for decades....

Just think that if you want more nurses, it takes a min of 3 years to get them.... same with planning officers or Police....

Alexandra2001 · 05/07/2025 09:28

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:11

But nothing on higher band council tax ? VAT on more luxury goods..... land taxes?

Well I think CT should be linked to house price value but a lot of older voters won't like that.

Just revalue the higher ones.

Why should a house worth 5m in Band G pay just 3x the CT a semi worth 350k pay?

Julen7 · 05/07/2025 09:32

Livelovebehappy · 05/07/2025 09:20

Good luck with that. The people on benefits don’t want help to get back into work. They’re happy with the status quo thank you very much. They want benefits for life.

This.

MyDadWasAnArse · 05/07/2025 09:33

WestwardHo1 · 04/07/2025 11:45

I think the NHS should stop spending money on very expensive treatments in order to preserve life for a few years, and introduce a £30 access fee for most minor appointments.

I agree with this.

The state pension being means tested is a tricky one.

You cannot means test the state pension. It's not a benefit. Many people have paid into it for 50 years via national insurance contributions.

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:33

It's not a benefit.

It is a benefit...

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:34

Many people have paid into it for 50 years via national insurance contributions

The majority won't have paid enough if you actually calculate it but that's not the issue. It's the changing demographics

Poynsettia · 05/07/2025 09:35

globalnomad25 · 05/07/2025 07:51

I think the problem is that Labour need to first identify exactly what they stand for, and give a clear purpose and outcome to any cutting or taxation.

Taxation without purpose or any discernible benefit has terrible optics to whomever is being taxed.

If I were Labour leader, I’d be focusing on (1) very, very clear communication about the overall strategy FIRST, then
(2) be very upfront that not everything can be afforded, and only THEN
(3) set out the cuts or taxes.

For example, if Labour clearly articulated that their core aims are around social justice, reducing child poverty, or building a resilient NHS, then they can frame every fiscal decision through that lens — even tough ones.

They also need to avoid being simplistic about the effects of taxation or cuts. For example, without careful implementation, the proposed non-dom reforms risk driving away high earners and investors — which could actually reduce tax receipts in the long run.

The same goes for windfall taxes or corporate levies: if they are perceived as unpredictable or punitive, they may scare off the very businesses Labour needs to fund its agenda.

That’s why the focus should be on a small number of strategic, clearly explained priorities, each backed by honest communication about trade-offs. In other words:

  • strategise,
  • think through,
  • communicate, communicate, communicate!

The public can handle difficult truths if they feel there’s a coherent plan and shared purpose behind them— but what won’t work is improvisation disguised as fairness.

Great in theory but the minute any Gov says everyone has to pay more tax they will lose votes. It's nice to think everyone would go along with a we all either get less or pay more tax for the greater good but OMG listen to the squeals already and almost no money has been raised.

Edited, I hate to say it but we need a Trump

Orangeoranges42 · 05/07/2025 09:36

an example, I’ve seen houses we could just about afford and give us and our children a better life, bigger garden bedroom each etc
but cannot due to the ever increasing council ax that will never go down or stop increasing.

the economy will not grow.

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:37

Just revalue the higher ones.

But many of the higher ones will be owned by older voters.

Livelovebehappy · 05/07/2025 09:46

Why do people always try to bring pensions into this? People these days are encouraged to pay into private pensions, and I expect that will eventually become compulsory and the state pension will decrease/pension age will rise. But a few decades ago, paying into private pensions wasn't a thing. So despite people seemingly wanting state pension to be reviewed, nothing can be done to fix that at this moment in time unless you propose sending out today’s 80 year olds to work. It will take time and a few years before there can be reforms brought in for future pensioners. And I’d rather my taxes went on paying pensioners than subsidising people who are fighting tooth and nail not to get help in getting back into work. The decreasing number of people actually working will come back to bite today’s future pensioners on the arse.

WideawakeinSanDiego · 05/07/2025 09:49

Pension credit - no need to have made any contributions plus you then get other freebies

State pension - you need approx 35 years contributions and it is taxable.

It has always been known that you need qualifying years for state pension. Carers and job seekers can also qualify for the necessary NI stamps.

Removing pension credit would be a step in the right direction.

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:49

Why do people always try to bring pensions into this?

It's because we have an ageing population. We already have more over 65 yr olds then under 25 yrs olds.

I read we need 1m immigrants a year to maintain the current status quo of 3 workers to 1 pensioner (in the 60s it was 5:1).

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:50

under 15 yr olds that should say

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:51

But a few decades ago, paying into private pensions wasn't a thing.

That isn't true. and private pension schemes were often far better a few decades than they are today.

70% of today's pensioners have a private pension..,

PandoraSocks · 05/07/2025 09:55

Havanananana · 04/07/2025 22:33

Stop worrying about the triple lock and disabled, and stop labelling people as "net contributors" and "takers/shirkers." It is all deliberate shit-stirring to distract people from the complete hash of public services that all parties have made over the last 40 years - and in particular the last Conservative government - because nobody will have the grown-up conversation about how vital public services need to be financed and managed. It is simply not possible to have good public services without the taxpayers - individuals, companies, employers - paying for them.

Other countries manage to do it. I've lived in Scandinavia, Germany and Austria and of course there are people whinging about "high taxes" - but they know that they are getting relatively good public services for their taxes. They are aghast when they hear about the waiting times for treatment in the UK or when they read about people waiting for hours in A&E, or who died waiting for an ambulance that never came. Rural areas have generally good public transport and in the cities, public transport infrastructure is generally excellent. Education is free or very low cost, from Kindergarten right up to University or technical college.

The American idea of low taxes creating wealth, the Laffer Curve and trickle-down economics, has been shown to be utterly false. It merely results in the wealthy getting wealthier and the poor getting poorer. And before anyone thinks that Farage and Reform are the answer, who want to introduce healthcare payments and American-style public services (i.e. little or no public services) in order to keep funding tax cuts to the wealthy, think about what that might cost. People are being bankrupted or they are suffering permanent health damage because they cannot afford the insulin or other vital drugs and treatments - things that in the UK and Europe are taken for granted. If the UK ever goes in this direction - and the American private healthcare providers are rubbing their hands in anticipation of taking a huge chunk of the billions that currently go to the NHS - then the country will be well and truly fucked. Upthread, someone quoted a family member paying $30,000 to give birth in the US - could you afford that, or afford thousands for treatment for a simple broken leg or arm, or for more serious issues like cancer? The claim that the UK cannot afford to spend more is false. Firstly, done correctly, funding of public services is an investment, not a cost. Secondly, the “hidden cost” to the economy of employee sickness reached £103bn in 2023 (Institute for Public Policy Research) so it is not a question of not being able to afford this healthcare investment, but rather, the country cannot afford not to invest.

Bumping this excellent post.

BIossomtoes · 05/07/2025 10:00

bookdook · 05/07/2025 09:37

Just revalue the higher ones.

But many of the higher ones will be owned by older voters.

So what? They don’t vote Labour anyway.

bookdook · 05/07/2025 10:01

Other countries manage to do it. I've lived in Scandinavia, Germany and Austria and of course there are people whinging about "high taxes" - but they know that they are getting relatively good public services for their taxes. They are aghast when they hear about the waiting times for treatment in the UK or when they read about people waiting for hours in A&E, or who died waiting for an ambulance that never came. Rural areas have generally good public transport and in the cities, public transport infrastructure is generally excellent. Education is free or very low cost, from Kindergarten right up to University or technical college.

They do get relative decent public services though. They also often have a different tax system & have invested in services. Eg benefits are often linked to what you paid in.

bookdook · 05/07/2025 10:02

So what? They don’t vote Labour anyway.

still can't see labour suggesting it.

Alexandra2001 · 05/07/2025 10:15

bookdook · 05/07/2025 10:01

Other countries manage to do it. I've lived in Scandinavia, Germany and Austria and of course there are people whinging about "high taxes" - but they know that they are getting relatively good public services for their taxes. They are aghast when they hear about the waiting times for treatment in the UK or when they read about people waiting for hours in A&E, or who died waiting for an ambulance that never came. Rural areas have generally good public transport and in the cities, public transport infrastructure is generally excellent. Education is free or very low cost, from Kindergarten right up to University or technical college.

They do get relative decent public services though. They also often have a different tax system & have invested in services. Eg benefits are often linked to what you paid in.

They get far far better services simply because they have paid in more over decades plus a sense that Govt is there to improve the populations well being, something that govts in the UK aren't bothered about.

eg pretty much every town in France has a sports leisure complex, free to use, free to park, even their public swimming lakes are all free or most of them are.

Their health services are leagues ahead of the NHS too, again decades of paying more, not charging staff to train....

bookdook · 05/07/2025 10:21

@Alexandra2001 and this is why we are fucked because we now have to play catch up whilst dealing with changed demographics.

HPFA · 05/07/2025 10:21

Poynsettia · 05/07/2025 09:35

Great in theory but the minute any Gov says everyone has to pay more tax they will lose votes. It's nice to think everyone would go along with a we all either get less or pay more tax for the greater good but OMG listen to the squeals already and almost no money has been raised.

Edited, I hate to say it but we need a Trump

Edited

You want Trump?

Massive tax cuts but only for the wealthy at the cost of millions losing health care?

Even many conservatives are opposed to the massive rises in the deficit.

dontgetmestartedwillu · 05/07/2025 10:42

TwoFeralKids · 04/07/2025 14:35

Some might not be able to afford even a very small fee.

Well, in cases where people - seems an increasing amount from looking at stats - are receiving benefits and are absolutely can't pay, then perhaps their 'handler' should have vouchers to give out.

This in itself shouldn't be a barrier to charging for visits. And I'm not saying a huge amount, perhaps £10 - roughly the cost of 1.5 pints.

Araminta1003 · 05/07/2025 10:57

My guess is they will stick 1 per cent on VAT so everyone ends up paying.

Alexandra2001 · 05/07/2025 10:59

bookdook · 05/07/2025 10:21

@Alexandra2001 and this is why we are fucked because we now have to play catch up whilst dealing with changed demographics.

We aren't fucked, we can seek to undo Brexit - CU and possibly SM, we can introduce taxes that will be ring fenced for roads, health & denistry etc.... or any increases will be seen as going into the pot called "wasted on benefits"

Imagine if we could all see an NHS dentist again? Labours polling would improve rather dramatically.

We still have, overall, lower taxes than many countries in Europe.

So Council Tax changes, NI for higher rate pensioners, reverse some of Hunts NI cuts, with the money raised used to get private dentists back doing NHS work...

Labour have just 4 years, they have to start being bolder and have a lot more vision, atm their main rival is Reform, so they have a great chance to defeat them in 2029, the electorate have given up on the Tories.. for now!!

Please create an account

To comment on this thread you need to create a Mumsnet account.

This thread is not accepting new messages.
Swipe left for the next trending thread